Humans, Other Beings in/Relevant to the Quran, Part 43

 

234. SOLOMON

The third king of the Jews, and perhaps the wisest of them. There were many legends and fairy tales about him, and some of them are included in the Quran, pretending to be true stories.

Solomon was king from around 970 (967?) BC till likely 931 BC. He was reckoned to be very wise and very rich. He built a superb temple in Jerusalem.

¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤

*001 2/53b: “- - - We (Allah*) gave Moses the scripture - - -”. The books named after Moses (the 5 first in the Bible - the Torah) are not written by Moses and not even at the time of Moses. Moses lived (if he is not a fiction) around 1300-1200 BC (if the Exodus from Egypt really took place, it took place ca. 1235 BC during the reign of Pharaoh Ramses II according to science), and those books were written not earlier than ca. 800 BC - perhaps as late as 500 BC - also this according to science. (But remember there is a difference between writing down a story later, and falsifying a story, like Muslims claims - without and even against documentation. It also is likely there were written documents). What Moses got according to the Bible, were the 10 Commandments written in stone + he was told the law (parts of what later was called the Book (or Books) of Moses - in 2/53 called the Scriptures) which he himself wrote down afterward (this sometimes is called "the Book of Covenant" - f.x. 2. Mos. 24/7). A god had known this, whereas Muhammad knew nothing about their real age, and had to guess. (To be exact: The Bible says that Yahweh told Moses the law – nothing material except the two stone tablets where the ten Commandments were inscribed, were brought down from the mountain – and that he himself wrote down the laws afterward. OT also says that when Solomon moved the Ark of Covenant into the Temple in Jerusalem (1.Kings 8/9), it only contained the two stone tablets. There is nothing about “the Books of Moses”, though the OT makes it clear that the laws existed in writing and were found again later – but science is unanimous that the Books of Moses (you also see it written in singular) are written much later (between 800 and 500 BC). If Muslims claim something else, they will have to produce proofs.) The law really only is part of the Torah/Books of Moses, but the name often is used for the complete "books of Moses".

002 2/102c: "- - - Solomon - - -". Son of King David (king ca. 1010 - 970 BC) and following him as king over the Jews in the 900s BC (ca. 970 (967?) - 931). A time anomaly. See 4/13d below.

003 2/102d: "- - - teaching (Solomon's*) men magic - - -". This is not from the Bible.

004 2/248f: (When the Ark - a somewhat large chest (2.5 cubits long, 1.5 cubits wide, 1.5 cubits high - 2. Mos. 37/1 - and as 1 cubit was some 45 centimeters, this means some 112 cm by some 67 cm by some 67 cm) - will be brought, it will contain) "the relics left by the family of Moses and the family of Aaron". Wrong. Even if the only other source is the Bible, it is so extremely unlikely that the Jews put such things in the ultra-holy Ark of Covenant - this even more so as the Jews did not believe in saints - this Islam will have to produce very strong proofs to make us believe this. There also is the fact according to the Bible that when Solomon later brought the Ark of Covenance to his new temple, it is specified in the Bible that it only contained the two stone tablets with the 10 Commandments (1. Kings 8/9).

005 4/163e: "- - - We (Allah*) sent it (messages by inspiration*) to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and the (12 Jewish*) Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and to Solomon - - -". As Muhammad claimed he received his verses from Allah by inspiration, it was essential to "prove" that this was a normal way for prophets to receive information from the god. And NB: He used these claimed Muslim prophets as proofs for that "inspiration" was a normal way of communication. The word "inspiration" is not used anywhere in the Bible in such connections. Also it is nowhere in the Bible mentioned that Ishmael had a close enough connection to Yahweh to be a prophet.

006 6/8c: “They (people*) say: ‘Why is not an angel sent down to him?’ If We (Allah*) did send down an angel, the matter would be settled at once, and no respite would be granted them”. This question – a proof f.x. by means of an angel – arose frequently. Muhammad’s often used “explanation” was this: Allah will not send down an angel until The Last Day (the Day of Doom). That means that if he sends down angles, that day becomes the Last Day (“the matter will be settled at once, and no respite would be granted them”), and in that case the unbelievers would lose their chance to become believers (“- - - no respite would be granted them”.) This “explanation” is nonsense even according to the Quran. That book tells that the angel Gabriel visited Muhammad often, it tells that angels come down to fetch the souls of the dead, it tells that angels come down to fetch your soul when you fall asleep and to return it when you wakes up, it tells that angels surround you to note down your good and bad deeds – not to mention the thousands of angels Allah sends down to do battles together with Muslims time and again. And angels visiting f.x. Abraham, Lot, and Mary.

There was not one single reason why Allah could not use one of the myriads of angles he daily and frequently sends down, as a proof for Muhammad.

On the contrary: There were all reasons for Allah to prove himself and his claimed messenger - in stark contradiction to Muhammad's claim, it had given lots of followers. Proofs: 1) Human psychology. 2) The Pharaoh's sorcerers all became Muslims because Moses made a miracle (a story which proves Muhammad knew he was lying when he said miracles would convince no-one. 3) The same goes for Ramses II becoming a Muslim in 10/90 because he saw the miracle of a made flooding. 4) Jesus made miracles and got many followers from this, which Muhammad knew.

A very obvious bluff and a piece of fast-talk. Muhammad's knowledge of the sorcerers' reaction to Moses' miracle proves that he knew he was lying when he claimed that the reason why Allah did not prove his existence, was that it would not make anybody believe anyhow. How many other places in the Quran did Muhammad lie? - this even more so that the Quran makes it clear Muhammad believed in the use of dishonesty as a working tool.

007 6/17: "He (Allah*) hath power over all things." Well, that is Muhammad's many times repeated, but not documented claim - which Allah was totally unable (or unwilling ?) to prove, even if it obviously would have worked (in spite of Muhammad's words to the opposite - one of the scenes when Muhammad clearly knows he is lying in the Quran, as he was too intelligent to believe this himself. This even more so as he told about the sorcerers of the Pharaoh, about Ramses II becoming a Muslim in 10/90 because he saw a miracle of a made flooding, and about listeners to Jesus being influenced by miracles).

008 6/71c: "- - - things (other gods*) that can do us neither good nor harm - - -." It is clear that made up gods have no effect. What also is clear, is that Allah has never done anything which is documented, not one thing - there are lots of claims for him being a god, but not one single documentation. But "- - - it is in the nature of man to regard the beliefs which have been imprinted in him from childhood, and which he shares with his social environments, as the only true and possible ones - - -", to quote Islam (M.A. comment 6/93 to verse 6/108). So Muslims believe uncritically he is a god.

If Yahweh according to the Bible and to the Quran could let Jesus make proofs for connection to something supernatural, and if Allah = Yahweh like the Quran claims, it just is fast-talk outside any logic that Allah could not send proofs to Muhammad if Muhammad was his representative. This even more so as people believed in Jesus to a large part because his miracles - and Pharaoh's sorcerers came to believe because of a miracle Moses did, and the same goes for Ramses II becoming a Muslim in 10/90 because he saw the miracle of a made flooding - whereas Muhammad's excuse is that no-one would believe even if he made miracles. (To be very polite: Muhammad knew he was lying each time he used this excuse - he was too intelligent not to see this.) And: There has been proved not one single act of good or bad from Allah himself since he was launched by Muhammad 1400 years ago! He has himself never done any documented good or harm - the teaching about him, yes, he himself never (Muslims had told about it with letters made by fire and more if there had been even one single case). Allah personally has been able to "do neither good nor harm".

009 6/84d: "- - - Noah - - - David, Solomon, Job, Joseph, Moses, and Aaron - - -". 7 time anomalies. See 4/13d above.

**010 12/111c: “- - - a confirmation of what went before (the Bible) - - -”. When there are so many and so serious mistakes in a book, it is not to be expected that the reader can believe too much. Just the story about Josef is taken from the Bible (which “went before“). But the story is much changed (maybe he in reality has retold a local legend about Josef, slightly based on the Bible) - it is no confirmation. On the background of all the documented mistakes in the Quran, which one is easiest to believe, if any - the Quran or the Bible? Not to mention the fact that many of the stories in the Quran are easy to recognize from known legends, fairy tales, apocryphal (made up) books, etc, from the time of Muhammad. And at least some of the details in this story in the Quran are illogical - like Solomon listening to the speech of ants. More to the point: There are too many and too fundamental differences in the teachings - the Quran does not confirm the Bible.

011 13/38b: "We (Allah*) did send Messengers before thee (Muhammad*), and appointed for them wives and children - - -". We quote A1861: "All prophets of whom we have any detailed knowledge, except one (Jesus*), had wives and children (= Muhammad was a normal prophet also in this way - well, extra normal with 36 known women). But this claim needs a selective use of the expression "detailed knowledge". Not all prophets are known to have had wives - f.x. it is unlikely John the Baptist had a wife or children - and for many that situation simply is not mentioned in the Bible. Also the Quran does not mention any wives for the claimed Arab prophets Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb. Use the expression "detailed knowledge" selectively enough, and you get the answer you want.

But more dishonest her - a Kitman (lawful half-truth) - is that one does not mention that none - not one - of the prophets in the Bible had a big harem (beware that f.x. David and Solomon are kings, but not reckoned among the prophets in the Bible). Of claimed prophets only Muhammad had - science knows the name of 35 women who for shorter or longer time belonged to his harem (in addition there was Khadijah, but she died before he got a harem). Also in this way Muhammad does not belong in the line of Yahweh's prophets, not to mention Jesus, in Israel.

012 17/6-7: Unclear. We are now at the 2. punisher, which may have been Nebuchadnezzar. These two first ones were the Assyrians (722 BC, Northern Kingdom - Israel) and the Babylonians (586 BC, Southern Kingdom - Judah (from which the name Jews derive))- (Solomon's temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar in 586 BC. (Actually Jerusalem was taken in 597 BC - the rest of Judah in 586 BC and the Temple destroyed then.) And that was it according to the Quran = 2 times. But the Quran as so often has got history wrong. Because - still omitting the lesser stories - then came Alexander the Great (named Dhu'l Quarnayn in the Quran), though he was not too bad for the Jews - followed by the Romans (61 BC), revolt against the Romans (66 - 73 AD, and the new Temple destroyed 70 AD - remember this when you are told about Muhammad's trip to Heaven from "the Farthest Mosque - there was no mosque or temple there at the time of Moses), Persia (614 AD), Persia beaten (628 AD). Then the Muslims - Jerusalem fell in 637 AD (some sources say 638 AD), and the Muslims stole everything resulting in a hunger catastrophe, this in addition to lots of murdering in the land. Then the Muslim Fatimids - with destruction of f.x. churches and synagogues ("no compulsion in religion"?). The crusaders (1099 AD). The Mamelukes (Muslims) (1244 AD), The Ottomans (1517 AD). These are some. Plus pogroms in different parts of the world - Muslim and non-Muslim - and the Nazi not included.

#####As for the Crusaders: Muslims complain heavily about them - - - but boast about their own worse deeds. Strange and just, do you not think so?

013 21/78a: "- - - David and Solomon - - -". Historical anomalies.

014 21/78c: "- - - We (Allah*) did witness their (David/Solomon's*) judgment". If the story (see 21/78b just above) is a made up one - and there is no known source for it - this is a thought provoking statement.

015 21/79a: "To Solomon We (Allah*) inspired the (right) understanding of the matter (see verse 21/78) - - - it was We who did (all this things)". If the story 21/78 refers to, is a made up one - and there exists no source for it - also this is a thought provoking statement.

016 21/81b: "- - - the violent (unruly) wind flow (tamely) for Solomon, to his order - - -". This is one of the many stories in the Quran from legends - it is not in the Bible, and the Jews had not forgotten such a miracle connected to their great king. And we remind you: Science has long since proved beyond any even unreasonable doubt that the Bible is not falsified (but it was a necessary claim to save Muhammad's religion for him). Islam has even more thoroughly proved the same by being unable to find one single proved falsification. Not one.

017 21/82a: “And of the evil ones it was some who (worked for him = Solomon*) - - -“. Islam will have to bring strong proofs for this. There were plenty of legends and fairy tales in Arabia like this which Muhammad could “borrow” stories from, but never any proved case of any jinn really working for anyone. It also in no case had been omitted from the Bible if it had been true - it had glorified Solomon far too much to be left out of the book. UNLESS VERY STRONG PROOFS, THIS IS A MADE UP FAIRY TALE - "strong claims need strong proofs".<

018 21/82c: "- - - it was We (Allah*) who guarded them (the jinns claimed to be working for Solomon*)". What does it tell about the Quran that it states that Allah guarded jinns in a claimed true story obviously from a fairy tale?

019 23/44b: "- - - every time there came to a people their messenger, they accused him of falsehood - - -". Not correct according to the Bible - some were accepted. But a convenient way for Muhammad to "explain" away all the disbelievers and all the problems to his followers - he claimed his problems were normal for all prophets. (Even the Quran contradicts this - f.x. Solomon was not accused of falsehood, and in the Quran Solomon is a prophet).

020 27/15b: It is very little likely that King David or King Solomon praised Allah - Islam will have to bring a proof if they stand by their undocumented claim. And remember: Yahweh and Allah is not the same god - the teachings are too different. As we now are close enough to the times of written history (actually well inside it some places in "the Middle East"), we know there was no religion like Islam, and no god like Allah there - and no book like the Quran. Which means that the Quran's claims here are wrong, unless Islam proves - proves - the opposite.

021 27/15 - 28: The story about Solomon and the bird (hoopoe) has nothing to do with the Bible, but is "borrowed" from a "fairy tale" ("The second Targum of Ester"). If it had been true, you bet the Jews had not forgotten to include it in their books to praise their hero king Solomon. See 27/16-44 shortly below.

022 27/16b: “We (King Solomon*) have been thought the speech of the Birds.” Wrong. One thing is that there is not one bird “speech” but one for each of the some 2000 different kinds of birds on Earth, and actually even more, as some birds have different “languages” or “dialects” from one place to another – even if you were thought cockney English, you would not understand Italian or Arab or Swahili. More fundamental is the fact that the birds’ brains are too small for developing coherent speech. The last years science has found that birds brains may be more efficient that our, gram for gram, but that all the same they are far too small for coherent speech – the minimum size where it is theoretically possible for a brain to get faculties rudimentary similar to the human brain, is guessed to be a brain the size of a cat’s. Coherent, intelligent speech from birds simply is physically impossible. Also see 27/16-44 below.

023 27/16c: "- - - Grace manifest (from Allah*)". Incompatible with the Bible, which strongly tells that the god of both David and Solomon was Yahweh, not Allah.

*024 27/16 – 44: These stories – also repeated other places in the Quran - about King Solomon, the ants, the jinns slaving for him, the hoopoe, and not to mention the Queen of Sabah – are fantastic like were they from a fairy tale - - - which is what they are: They are “borrowed” from the made up - apocryphal, and hardly even apocryphal - scripture “Second Targum of Ester”. No god needs to steal old fairy tales and retell them with small – or big – twists to make them fit his religion/tales, and then call them facts. But Muhammad often did so. This is the reason why his contemporaries so often said that what he told just were old tales – they simply recognized the legends, fairy tales and stories.

025 27/17b: "- - - his (Solomon's*) hosts of Jinns and men and birds - - -". Believe this whoever wants to. But be 120% sure that if king Solomon had had command over jinns and/or birds, it had neither been forgotten in the Bible, nor falsified out of it - you do not reduce your greatest heroes, and neither does the Jews, who in case had done the falsification.

026 27/17c: "- - - his (Solomon's*) hosts of Jinns and men and birds - - -". There is nothing even remotely like this in the Bible.

027 27/17d: "- - - his (Solomon's*) hosts of Jinns and men and birds, and they were all kept in order and ranks". The next verse (27/18) implies they were on the march. How do you keep birds in "order and ranks"?

028 27/17-44: King Solomon and the Queen of Sabah (in Arab traditions her name was Bilqis). The Queen of Saba (Sheba) you also find in the Bible, but what is told here, is taken from the old made up book "The Second Targum of Esther", not from the Bible. Allah chooses what sources he will!

*029 27/18a: An ant spoke to other ants and in a way possible for King Solomon to hear. Wrong. Ants do not have the brainpower for composing complicated (for non-human terrestrial beings) sentences, and they do not have organs for pronouncing words - not even “ant-language” words. Not to mention that they lack the power to speak loud enough for humans to hear. A fairy tale. (It is worth mentioning that Islam to a degree admits this. “The Message of the Quran calls it a legend – comment A27/17. But if this is a legend told like a truth, how many more are there like that in the Quran? Similar claim in 27/19. Also see 27/16-44 above. The only place you normally meet talking ants, are in fairy tales.

##030 27/19a: “So he (Solomon) smiled at her (the ant's*) speech - - -”. Wrong. See 27/16b and 27/18a above. It would be impossible for Solomon to hear what the ant also could not pronounce – also because if it could speak and if it could speak loud enough for us to hear, the diminutive size of an ant also would make the words far too high-pitched for our ear to register. Besides ants do not have organs making it possible for them to vocalize - and not large enough brain to compose coherent speech.

031 27/19b: “So he (Solomon) smiled at her (the ant's*) speech - - -”. Anthropomorphism (the belief that inanimate things or animals can react, think and/or speak like humans) - normally found in primitive religions and in fairy tales.

032 27/19c: "- - - righteousness - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with to its own partly immoral moral code.

033 27/19e: "- - - the ranks of Thy (here indicated Allah*) righteous Servants". Muslims - according to the Quran both David and Solomon were good Muslims. Believe it if you are able to.

034 27/20b: "And he (Solomon*) took a muster of the Birds - - -". See 27/16b and 27/17b above.

##035 27/22-26: A bird - the hoopoe - making long, coherent speech/sentences of its own composition. No bird on Earth can do that - they do not have the brain capacity (see 27/16a and 27/17b - above). From a fairy tale - "The Second Targum of Ester". Allah chooses what sources he will!

This also is one more anthropomorphism in the Quran - (the belief that inanimate things or animals can react, think and/or speak like humans) - normally found in primitive religions and in fairy tales.

036 27/24b: “I (the hoopoe - anthropomorphism*) found her (the queen of Saba/Sheba*) worshipping the sun - - -“. Saba was at the southern end of the Arabian Peninsula – approximately Yemen today. In the old times this whole peninsula had a moon religion, not a sun religion – al-Lah or sometimes Allah (whom Muhammad later dressed up) originally was a moon god (the same was Hubal, but over time Il/al-Ilah/al-Lah/Allah took his place). It is documented that also in old Saba the main god was the moon god (source; “The Lunar Passion and the Daughters of Allah”). We may add that Muslims say that even if the moon religion was the dominant, there also may have been sun worshippers. That is true, but not for the ruler of the country – the ruler has to be very strong or be a member of the official and main religion, if not there will be problems.

Besides she – the queen – could not "worship the sun besides Allah", because that name was not created yet. Perhaps the moon god al-Lah (later as mentioned renamed by Muhammad to only Allah) or the older names al-Ilah or Il. Also see 25/18a above. But Muhammad had a tendency to claim that others had different gods "in addition to Allah". Partly because by a little twisting of the facts this could be said about Arabs - they believed in al-Lah, a name sounding nearly like Allah, even if al-Lah was a pagan, polytheistic god, and partly perhaps because it made Allah look bigger and universal.

037 27/28b: “Go thou (the hoopoe - a many-colored bird, some 30 cm long - and the national bird of Israel*), with this letter of mine (Solomon's*), and deliver it to them (in reality to the Queen of Sheba): then draw back from them, and (wait to) see what answer they return…” No bird is able to do this. Not even the carrier pigeon brings letters – it only is able to return home with a letter. (The pigeons have to be brought in cages from the one who is to receive the letter, to the one who is to send the message. Then when the bird is let loose, it simply wants to return home - - - and carries the letter to its nest, where the receiver can collect it. This is the only possible way for using birds for carrying a letter. Except in fairy tales.)

This also is one more anthropomorphism in the Quran - (the belief that inanimate things or animals can react, think and/or speak like humans) - normally found in primitive religions and in fairy tales.

038 27/28c: “Go thou (the hoopoe*), with this letter of mine, and deliver it to them: then draw back from them, and (wait to) see what answer they return…” This in any case is contradicting the Bible (but not certain fairy tales). The Bible makes it clear that the Queen of Sheba/Saba/Sabah visited Solomon on her own initiative, not after an invitation. (1. Kings 10/1).

039 27/30b: "In the name of Allah - - -". The chances that Solomon had started a letter to her (or anyone else) with this name are less than zero for more than one reason - f.x. that no traces of a god like Allah or a religion like Islam - or a book like the Quran - is found anywhere in the world until after 610 AD when Muhammad started his preaching. And if the Bible - here after all the most reliable source of these two according to normal scientific evaluations (written on a much stronger tradition and 1000 years closer to what happened) - is correct, no such letter even ever existed as she according to the Bible was not contacted by Solomon - the travel according to the Bible was her own idea.

040 27/31b: "- - - in submission (to the true Religion) - - -". It is indirectly, but clearly indicated in the Bible that the topic and the reason for her travel, was Solomon's knowledge and intelligence, not religion. (1. Kings 10/1 and 10/6-7). There also in the Bible is reported nothing about religious debates or tries for making her change her religion - the Mosaic religion never was a proselyting one (a historical and scientific fact which also collides with some of Muhammad's tales in the Quran). But Muhammad normally twisted his tales to make them fit his stereotype receipts for how tales in the Quran should be. Contradiction to the Bible.

#####041 27/31d: "- - - (- - - the true Religion (Islam*)) - - -". Omitting the fact that the god of Solomon was Yahweh, not Allah, according to the Bible, there still remains the fact that a religion based on a book where no god has been involved, and full of mistaken facts, etc., is no true religion.

(Actually there are so much wrong facts, etc. - included far too many central points - in the Quran, that it is difficult for a non-psychologist to understand how it is possible to explain away and/or overlook all the mistaken facts and other errors in the Quran, errors which documents that the book is not from a god, and thus that Islam is a made up religion. A pagan one simply.)

042 27/34c: "Kings, when they enter a country - - -". There nowhere was any talk of that Solomon should visit her, neither in the Bible and till now nor in the Quran. And neither in peace, nor in war (though there was a little later). This sentence is illogical according to the Biblical texts.

043 27/34d: "Kings, when they enter a country, despoil it - - -". The underlying meaning is that Solomon might attack the country. But for one thing there as said was no intention from Solomon to visit her according to the Bible, for another Solomon was a king of peace, not of war, and for a third there was little meaning in planning an attack on such a distant country for after all tiny Israel. Not to mention that all this part of the story is taken from a made up book as mentioned above and just below (The second Targum of Ester), not from the Bible. And made up stories from made up books are not the truth.

044 27/36b: "But what Allah has given me is better - - -". King Solomon is a good Muslim according to the Quran. Anyone is free to believe it if he wants to. Just this claim hardly is even from “Second Tar gum of Ester” – see 27/16-44 above.

##045 27/37a: King Solomon is offered gifts from the Queen of Saba/Sheba but answers with anger: “Go back to them (the rulers/queen of Saba*), and be sure we shall come to them with such hosts (armies*) as they will never be able to meet (= attack them*) - - -.” This answer has no logical reason or meaning, especially as the gifts were rich (“abundance of wealth”- 27/36) and thus no insult to a king. Also Islam agrees to that something is wrong here, as "a prophet could not answer good gifts with a war of aggression", but they do not have any good explanations – only rather lame speculations about perhaps it in reality is Allah who is speaking and threatening them with what he will do if they do not become Muslims (1500 years before Muhammad! – King Solomon ruled 961 – 922 BC give or take maximum 10 years according to Wikipedia). “Let there be no compulsion in religion”? THIS IS ONE OF THE PLACES WHERE MUSLIM SCHOLARS AGREE THAT SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH THE TEXT IN THE QURAN. It also contradicts the Bible - nothing even similar to this there.

046 27/37b: (A27/29): “Go back to them, and be sure we shall come to them (Saba/Sheba*) with such a host (army*) as they will never be able to meet: we shall expel them from there in disgrace, and they will feel humbled (indeed).” It is very clear from both the previous and the following verse that here it is Solomon speaking. But this is no logical answer to a peaceful embassy. The Quran also formally says that a war of attack is never permissible (though Muslims have found many ways around that formality.) So Muslim scholars have found it has another meaning: This is Allah warning the Sabeans to become Muslims – Solomon of course was a devout Muslim according to Islam and could not answer like this. In this case the second meaning clearly is made up – but it sounds real for Islam and its Muslims. And linguistically it is possible to twist the story like this. Also: "Let there be no compulsion in religion".

And a historical fact destroying this "explanation": The Mosaic religion never was a proselyting one - Solomon never could have said this for a religious reason. Another historical fact: Solomon was a king of peace, not one of war - also for this reason it is highly unlikely he said this, and even more so as Sheba was a country far off. (Sheba was a kingdom centered around the oasis of Marib in what today is Yemen = very far off (some 1400 miles/2200 km), and this even more so as Solomon had no camels - the Jews did not get camels until in the 8. century BC (Solomon lived in the 10. century BC).)

 

And 3 scientific facts: 1): There never was found any trace from a book similar to the Quran anywhere before 610 AD when Muhammad started his mission. 2): There never was found any trace from a god similar to Muhammad's Allah anywhere older than 610AD when Muhammad started his Mission. 3): There never was found any trace of a religion similar to Islam before 610 AD. Neither science nor Islam has been able to find anything - not in literature, not in history, not in archeology. The best proof for this is that if Islam had found even the smallest proof for Islam or Allah (Muhammad's version), or for the Quran older than 610 AD, they had told the world about it, and in BIG letters. Nobody has ever seen such letters. Another nearly as good proof is all the made up "proofs" Muslims and Islam are making. If they had had real proofs, they had not had to make up such hopeless claims (f.x. that Big Bang proves the creation in the Quran, etc., etc., etc.). The ones having to make up claims and "proofs" and twist facts, are the ones who have no real arguments to use.

047 27/38a: (A27/31): “Ye Chiefs! Which of you can bring me her (the Queen of Sheba's*) throne before they come to me in surrender.” There is no logical meaning for surrender at this stage of the story – and especially not for such a distant country. May be therefore – or may be to keep up the pretension that good Muslims like Solomon (!) never starts a war – Islam has found another meaning: It means surrender to Islam. Well, the explanation is not quite as impossible as in 27/37b above. But it is not what the book says. “Surrender” is a political and military word with a clear meaning. It also is used in other connection, but then it is made clear what connection – like “surrender to Allah”, or “she will surrender to me” which implicates further details, articulated or not, to the word “surrender”. That is not the case here. Also see 27/38b just below.

And also we are back to some historical facts: There was no religion like Islam and no god like Allah anywhere in the world at that time + another historical fact: The Mosaic religion never was a proselyting one.

The only possible conclusion is: The religious claims concerning the Queen of Sheba and Solomon are made up ones.

048 27/38b: “Ye Chiefs! Which of you can bring me her (the Queen of Sheba'.*) throne before they come to me in surrender.” Here we have a small tit-bit. As far as we can find out, this is the correct translation of the Arab text. But this is not logical - see 27/38a just above. A small change eliminates the problem in the "clear text in the Quran". Some instead use "surrender to Allah" even though "to Allah" is not in the Arab text, or "submission" - a word easier to associate with religion. Voila!!

"The Religion of Truth"! "The Religion of Honesty"!

049 27/38c: "- - - in submission - - -". Another contradiction to the Bible - nothing like neither submission nor surrender there for the Queen of Sheba. Actually this story is miles from the one in the Bible. You do not find it there (or in the old times anywhere else far from Arabian pagan religion and Arabian folklore and fairy tales).

050 27/39b: “- - - (one*) of the Jinns - - -”. Jinns are material, but invisible beings with a diffuse role in the Quran. They are “borrowed” from old Arab pagan religion, fairy tales and legends. Allah made them from fire, the Quran tells – or may be from the fire of a scorching wind, according to one place in the Quran. There is said little about their shape - perhaps roughly like humans, though it is indicated that there were several kinds of them. (But as there existed laws for marriage between humans and Jinns, they must have been believed to be roughly human of shape). They also have a diffuse role in the “pantheon” - they definitely do not belong in the heavens, but neither in hell. There simply is said nothing about where they belong. Neither is anything said about their role in the “life” of heaven and hell or their real connection to the “inhabitants” those two places - or to earthlings. As we said; much is diffuse concerning them and their life, except that they must be beings that can die - and end in hell mostly it seems. As said they are borrowed from old Arab folklore and fairy tales and mostly seem not really to belong in the religion, though they are mentioned quite frequently. Generally we feel they are a little suspect most of the time, but not always. Some were f.x. servants (or slaves) for King Solomon, and as mentioned; in the older times - not 100 years ago - there existed laws for marriage etc. between humans and Jinns, though no marriage ever took place!!

Do they really exist in the hidden world? - or are they in reality just something from fairy tales used for the mysterious effect?

Another mystery: If Islam is the main and original religion, one should meet the jinns many places – f.x. in the Bible. But you only meet them in Islam, and only in and around Arabia originally.

051 27/39c: "- - - Jinns - - -". Yet another contradiction to the Bible. There is nowhere in the Bible indicated that Solomon had Jinns or other supernatural beings in his service. And it had been included if it were true - it had been additional glory to a big hero of the Jews.

052 27/40a: (A17/32): “Said one who had knowledge of the Book - - -.” Who was this? Islam is unable to agree on it. Razi says it is Solomon himself – but the context clearly shows that this person speaks to Solomon. Clear text?

053 27/40b: "- - - the Book - - -". Here it must be meant the Bible/the old Jewish scriptures. Only that they did not exist at the time of Solomon, according to science, with the likely exception of the so-called "laws of Moses" in a naked form (also called "the Book of Covenant" sometimes) - this last according to the Bible (2. Mos. 24/4).

054 27/40d: "- - - To test me (Solomon*) - - -". See 8/28a above.

055 27/41b: "Transform her (Queen of Sheba's*) throne out of all recognition - - -". In addition to all the other points which contradict the Bible here, there is not one word in the Bible about Solomon or some of his men were able of this kind of sorcery - or any other kind of such. (Not strange as the story is "borrowed" from a fairy tale - "The Second Targum of Esther").

056 27/41c: "Transform her (Queen of Sheba's*) throne out of all recognition by her (the Queen of Sheba*): let us (Solomon*) see whether she is guided to the truth - - -". A rather obscure sentence for which you find some explanations from Muslim scholars - none of them very down-to-earth. But then a test for her ability to sense Islam may be intended. Believe it if you are able to that the Jewish king tested people to see if they could become good Muslims - 1500 years before Muhammad.

057 27/42d: "- - - knowledge - - -". This and similar words in the Quran normally refers to religious knowledge. Here it could refer to the knowledge about the throne, but it seems to refer to Islam as they had got "knowledge (about Islam) before her", they "had surrendered (to Allah)". (Anyone able to believe this about Solomon, is free to do so).

058 27/42e: "- - - we (Solomon*) had surrendered (to Allah)". The Quran claims Solomon was a devoted Muslim. Strongly contradicted by the Bible, which tells that Solomon's god was Yahweh, not Allah. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

059 27/42-43: One possible meaning of the Arab text: “- - - and we (the Queen of Saba/Sheba – in Arab tradition called Bilqis*) have submitted to Allah (in Islam). And he (Solomon*) diverted her from the worship of others besides Allah - - -.” The alternative possible meaning of the book that is clear and not possible to misunderstand: “And we (Solomon*) had knowledge of Allah’s Message and accepted it before her - - - and the worship of others besides Allah diverted her (from the true Religion).” Clear or confusing? – 2 very different meanings. In addition this verse simply has unclear text.

060 33/38e: "It was the practice (approved) of by Allah amongst (earlier prophets*) - - -" - - - to obey Allah. The same comment as to 33/38d just above.

Another fact: None of the Biblical prophets had a big harem. Most had just one wife, if any at all. (Remember here that in the Bible f.x. David and Solomon are not reckoned to be prophets, only kings. ####Also none of the Biblical prophets raped women like Muhammad did.)

061 34/12a: “And to Solomon (We (Allah*) made) - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells Yahweh was Solomon's god, not Allah. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

062 34/12b: “And to Solomon (We (Allah*) made) the Wind (obedient) - - -.” Islam will have to prove that this is not just one more storey “borrowed” from a legend/fairy tale. (It is not from the Bible, and is sure the Jews had mentioned this - to glorify their big king - if it had been true).

063 34/12d: “- - - and We (Allah*) made a Font of molten brass to flow for him (Solomon*) - - -“.

  1. To keep a fountain of molten brass running, was technical impossible at that time. (Also this is not from the Bible - see 34/12b above).
  2. If it had been running all the same, there is no chance at all for that it had been forgotten or omitted from the Bible - too mighty a wonder to omit.

The claim simply is a fairy tale, perhaps inspired by the temple's brass “sea” the Bible tells about – a round metal vessel filled with water, 10 cubits (4.5 m) diameter and 5 cubits (2.25 m) high (1. Kings 7/23).

064 34/12e: “- - - and We (Allah*) made a Font of molten brass to flow for him (Solomon*) - - -“. Here Yusuf Ali has an informative twist - informative about Muslim ways of explaining and explaining away. We quote from his "The Meaning of the Holy Quran" (YA3804): "(2. Chronicle 4/2 (says*)), "Also he (Solomon*) made a molten sea of 10 cubits (4.5 m*) from brim to brim, round in compass, and five cubits (2.25 m*)the height thereof - - -. The receptacle or "sea" or Font was made of molten brass - - -". Here the honorable Yusuf Ali - highly respected Muslim writer - is able to include most of the central words in the same piece in the Quran. Only the "fact" that the Quran says it was a running font of molten brass flowing for Solomon, is missing.

What the Bible in reality says (NIV) is: "He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring 10 cubits (ca. 5yds/ca. 4.5 m) from rim to rim and five cubits high".

There is a difference between a "Sea" of water - an artificial "pond" - and a running font of molten brass. There is a difference between being made from cast metal - melted when made, but then hardened - and being "molten brass to flow for him". There is a difference between an artificial pond and a font "presumably containing flowing water" as YA continue to be able to include the word "flowing". This even more so at flowing water on top of the Temple Mount was technically impossible at that time - a fact a learned man like Mr. YA well knew. Lead tubes existed. But to have running water, one had to have a source of water lying higher than the Temple Mount and the Temple - which did not exist within reasonable distance.

Solomon made an artificial "pond" for water. Islam needs to explain away "a font of molten brass to flow for him". Mr. YA really tries, ####and quite likely many Muslims believe him - the ones who strongly wants to believe in any explanation which seems to remove mistakes, the ones without enough knowledge to see the impossibilities, and the naive ones.

Actually this point is scientific nonsense - one did not have the technology making it possible to make molten brass flow like a font at the time of Solomon.

065 34/12f: "- - - there were Jinns working for him (Solomon*)." Not from the Bible - see 34/12b above.

066 34/13a: "They (Jinns¨*) worked for him as he (Solomon*) desired - - -". Not from the Bible - and you may bet large money on that the Jews had not omitted a miracle like this connected to the hero king Solomon, if there had been the slightest truth in it. Jinns are not even mentioned in the Bible, and also nothing which can be jinns under another name.

067 34/13c: "- - - Basins as large as Reservoirs - - -. The largest basin made by Solomon and mentioned in the Bible, was a round metal vessel filled with water, 10 cubits (4.5 m) diameter and 5 cubits (2.25 m) high (1. Kings 7/23). It was placed outside the Temple in Jerusalem.

##068 34/14a: “Then, when We (Allah*) decreed (Solomon’s) death, nothing showed them (the surroundings included jinns*) his death, except a little worm of the earth, which kept (slowly) gnawing away his staff - - -”. Wrong:

  1. In the castle of Solomon there would be no earth and then no worm from the earth. (This could not happen outside, as his servants would not leave the mighty king sitting outside through many days and nights).
  2. There exists no worm from the earth able to gnaw dry, hard wood like in a staff. Some Muslims wants this to have been a termite, but a termite is no worm, and a god knows that. And could one termite gnaw fast enough?
  3. See also 34/14b just below.

#############################################################

(This one counts because it is so obvious and easy to see that this is physically impossible and thus that the Quran is wrong.)

**085 34/14b: “Then, when We (Allah*) decreed (Solomon’s) death, nothing showed them (see 34/14a just above) his death, except a little worm from the earth, which kept (slowly) gnawing away his staff; so when he fell down - - -”. Wrong: It would take days or more for a small worm to weaken the staff enough for Solomon to fall - may be weeks.

  1. A mighty king sitting not mowing for too long would after some time be addressed by his servants.
  2. A mighty king not talking for a long enough while, would be addressed by his servants.
  3. A mighty king not taking care of his duties and his visitors for a long enough while, would be addressed by his servants.
  4. A mighty king not going to bed in the evening would be addressed by his servants.
  5. Rigor mortis (the only possible, but highly unlikely reason for the situation) takes time to start – and it disappears. If not for other reasons, he would fall because of that long before a small worm had the time to weaken the staff.
  6. In the climate of Jerusalem - even in winter (when there after all would be a fire) - his body would start decomposing. Everyone had to notice that.

Scientific nonsense and a fairy tale simply. Even Islam admits that this is from an Arab legend (A34/20).

############################################################

069 34/15e: "- - - (peoples'*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". The Quran here indicates that Sheba was Muslim. But Sheba was conquered from East Africa (Abyssinia - now part of Ethiopia - if we remember correctly) around 350 AD. The conquerors were Christians, and Sheba became mainly Christian during the next 300 years (till it was taken by the Muslims and more or less forcibly made Muslim). So at the time of Solomon they were pagans, and at the time of Muhammad their lord was Yahweh, not Allah.

070 37/114a: “Again (of old) We (Allah*) bestowed Our favor on Moses and Aaron - - -“. “The Message of the Quran” is quick to add that it was not because they were progeny of Abraham, but because of their own quality. What the Quran never mentions, what Islam never mentions, what Muslims never mention, is that Israel’s (belief in a) special contact with Yahweh, is not – repeat not - that they had an ancestor named Abraham some thousands of years ago - though it does not hurt. The reason was and is the covenant that was made between Israel and Yahweh according to OT – and renewed several times through the years. It is good propaganda to bully them for believing Abraham who lived some 4ooo years ago (if he ever lived) is a part-out card to Heaven. ######But it is pretty dishonest to make this lie, and to never mention the real reason for the Jew’s belief: The covenant – broken and maltreated, but never lifted or ended. It is dishonest to hide this - in the same way as it is pretty dishonest never to mention the “new covenant” made via Jesus in NT – but then Muslims are obliged to use al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) or “Kitman” (the lawful half-truth) if necessary, when it comes to defending or promoting Islam – no matter whether Islam is a false religion or not (for some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty)).

(Around 1000 BC - Saul was the first king, David the second (1007? - 970 BC?), and then Solomon - till perhaps 927 BC.

071 38/4d: "And the Unbelievers say, 'This is a sorcerer telling lies!". Already at that time there were many who saw that at least parts of the Quran could not be true.

072 38/21-24: This story is not from the Bible. But it is likely it is inspired by vague rumors about the story about David and Bathsheba (2. Sam. Ch. 11), or more correct the prophet Nathan's reaction to that story (2. Sam. Ch.12). Besides being differently told, the story in the Quran also is "hanging in the air", because it does not tell the background or reason for it, and thus not what it was all about (David had an affair with a married woman - in spite of all his own wives. When she became pregnant, he had her husband, Uriah, killed to avoid trouble. Nathan rebuked David strongly for this. By the way, that baby later became king Solomon.)

073 38/24e: "And David gathered that we had tried him - - -". But who not knowing the Bible can get heads or tails about why David was not only tried but judged, from what is told in verse 38/23-24? (this is the story of David with all his wives - and all the same he took Bathsheba, the only wife of his loyal soldier Uriah for himself, and saw to it that Uriah was killed in battle). (2. Sam. 11/2-16). Guess which book which is the best as literature - the Bible or the Quran.

Bathsheba became the mother of Solomon as mentioned.(2. Sam. 12/24).

074 38/30a: "To David We (Allah*) gave Solomon - - -". See 11/7a above. Besides: According to the Bible Allah was not involved - there instead was Yahweh.

075 38/30b: "To David We (Allah*) gave Solomon - - -". 2 time anomalies.

076 38/30c: "How excellent (was Solomon*) in Our (Allah's*) service. Ever did he turn to (Us)!" According to the Bible Yahweh was his god, not Allah. And when it comes to David and Solomon it will be difficult to make anyone but Muslims believe Allah was their god - too much is known about them and about the religion of the Jews at that time.

077 38/31: (YA4183): A. Yusuf Ali here tells straight out: “The passages about David and Solomon have been variously interpreted by the Commentators”. The language is so vague that various interpretations are possible. Is a god that vague when making his holy book – and the “mother book” to be revered in his own “home”? If not: Who made the Quran?

078 38/31-33a: Like so much "Biblical" stuff in the Quran, also this is not from the Bible. From where did Muhammad get it?

079 38/32a: (A38/29): “Truly do I (David or Solomon - likely Solomon*) love the love of good, with a view to the glory of my Lord (Allah according to the Quran*) - - -.” But the small Arab word “’an” is joking with any translator her, as it gives the expression “’an dhikri ‘llah” more possible meanings, f.x. “- - - the thought about my Lord has installed in me great love to - - -.” Clearly a clear language that is used in this book. And these variants as usual also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has/have more than one meaning. Allah (?) really uses a clear language in the Quran.

080 38/32b: (YA4185): “Truly do I (King David or king Solomon - likely Solomon*) love the love of good, with a view to the glory of my Lord - - -“. But it is as linguistically correct to follow other Muslim scholars who say that it means: “Truly did I prefer the good things (of this world) to the remembrance of your Lord”.

In the case of the last interpretation A. Yusuf Ali indicates that the reason for Solomon’s remorse may be that he had forgotten his Asr prayer (one of the 5 Muslims at least should pray each day). ####But how is that possible? – according to Hadiths it was Muhammad who made Allah decide on 5 prayers a day (Allah originally wanted 50). The rule of 5 prayers thus could not exist some 1600 years earlier (Solomon was king ca. 975 (971?) - 931(?) BC – give or take a few years).

#######It is very typical for Muslims to "solve" a problem by good claims, but forgetting that other aspects or facts are screaming that the claim or "explanation" cannot be true. You meet this time and again and again in Islam and from Muslims.

It also is a fact that we here are approaching the times of written history, and neither in history nor in another medium anybody has found traces from a god like Allah or a religion like Islam at the time of Solomon. On the contrary even the oldest reliable information about this, shows that the god of the believing Jews, was Yahweh, and the religion mainly like Jewism even today. And Yahweh never had fixed time prayers - not even Asr.

Claims like this are a bit too naive.

081 38/33: The meaning of this verse simply is unclear. It is about David or Solomon (likely Solomon) and horses, but what is the meaning and what is the context? Clear language in the Quran?

082 38/34a: "And We (Allah*) did try Solomon - - -". See 38/24c above.

083 38/34c: (A38/32): “And We (Allah*) did try Solomon: We placed on his throne a body (without life) - - -.” This story all Islam has hitherto been unable to explain in a good way. Most “explanations” are so far out that even Muslims skip them. And even the ones which remain, are far out in the shadowy realms of speculations, claims of allegories, etc. The description of what happened at Solomon's death also is physically and socially impossible.(It also is not from the Bible.) It simply is a made up story. No doubt: Allah uses a language impossible to misunderstand, and one which is crystal clear, in the Quran(?).

084 38/34d: "We (Allah*) placed on his (Solomon's*) throne a body (without life) - - -". This tale - like so many "Biblical" tales in the Quran - is not from the Bible, and as the Quran is not from any god - too much is wrong - from where did Muhammad get it?.

085 38/35b: "He (Solomon*) said, 'O my Lord (here indicated Allah*)!" Well, the Bible - and science - tells that Solomon's god was Yahweh, not Allah. (Around these times science starts to get better information on the religion of the Jews, and there is no Allah included.

086 38/35c: "- - - grant me (Solomon*) a kingdom which, (it may be), suits not another after me - - -". That was what according to the Bible happened (1. Kings 11/12-19), but you can bet against enormous odds that Solomon did not pray to his god that his son should lose most of the country.

087 38/36b: “Then We (Allah*) subjected the wind to his (Solomon’s*) power - - -”. This needs strong evidence - we hardly believe Solomon was able to regulate temperature and air pressure in the atmosphere in such a way as to be the director of the winds. Similar claim in 34/12.

This also is not mentioned in the Bible.

088 38/37: “- - - And also the Satans (including) every kind of builder and diver (had to work for King Solomon*) - - -“. To make us believe this, Islam has to produce very real proofs – this even more so as it had been such a boost to Solomon’s reputation, that it surely had not been forgotten in the Bible - - - and there it is not mentioned. Similar claim in 21/82. (Actually it is "borrowed" from a made up scripture, like so much of the "Biblical" stuff in the Quran).

089 38/37-38: This is not from the Bible - see 38/37 just above.

#090 87/19d: "The books of - - - Moses - - -". (YA6095): "The original Revelation of Moses, of which the Present Pentateuch (the 5 books of Moses*) is a surviving recension - - -". This deserves no comment, except that it is written by the same man who wrote the comment in 87/19b above. For your information: He is reckoned to be a top scholar and writer in Islam. When he writes things like this, how serious are then the lesser Muslim scholars?

###We may add that even the oldest copies and fragment of what often is called "the Books of Moses" or "the Pentateuch" are more or less identical to the present ones (there may be minimal differences a few places because they are copied by hand, and then such things can happen). And as essential: There never was found even one fragment from those books with contents close to that in the Quran - Muhammad claimed the Bible originally was similar to the Quran, but falsified by the bad Jews and Christians. (It was his only way to explain away the differences between what he told the Bible said - he took his material from verbal legends, fairy tales etc. - and what the Bible really said.) This never proved - very normal for Muhammad and for Islam - claim from Muhammad and from the Quran simply is wrong, unless Islam proves - proves - the opposite.

Facts according to science: Moses according to the Bible had one book - the so-called "Book of Covenance" - in practice the law. This one he had written himself, but from what Yahweh had told him. The Pentateuch - what we call "the Books of Moses" - were written centuries later and not earlier than around 800 BC and not later than around 500 BC (Moses lived around 1300-1200 BC). "The Book of Covenance" is mentioned a few times through the centuries in the Bible, but there never even is hinted that Moses had other books. There even is specified that when Solomon had the Ark of Covenance installed in his new temple, there were no books in it, only the 2 stone tablets (1. Kings 8/9). It is told that Book of the Law was refound (2. Kings 22/8) but no other relevant book is ever mentioned in the Bible - and no other place ever - - - except by Muhammad. And Muhammad like normal never was able to prove anything essential about his claims.

We add that these are so well-known facts, that there is no chance Abdullah Yusuf Ali did not know it. So much for the reliability of one of the absolute top Muslim scholars even in modern times (born 14. Apr. 1872, died 10. Dec. 1953). How reliable are then lesser Muslim scholars?

90 + 11.098 = 11.188 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

235.  SORCERERS

###### The serious point in this chapter all the same is not things like this or the fact that the Quran believes in superstition. THE REALLY SERIOUS POINT IS THAT MUHAMMAD TELLS THAT A MINOR MIRACLE MADE ALL THE SORCERERS BELIEVERS. THIS PROVES THAT HE KNEW HE WAS LYING EACH AND EVERY TIME HE CLAIMED THAT THE REASON WHY ALLAH DID NOT PROVE HIS EXISTENCE, WAS THAT IT WOULD NOT MAKE ANYONE BELIEVE ANYHOW.

HOW MANY OTHER PLACES IN THE QURAN DID HE LIE? - AFTER ALL THE QURAN MAKES IT VERY CLEAR THAT HE ACCEPTED AND HIMSELF PRACTISED THE USE OF DISHONESTY AS A WORKING TOOL. It is quite unbelievable, but tells a lot about human psychology that Muslims know very well - and boast about - that Muhammad accepted and promoted and himself practiced the use of dishonesty to reach ones goals, and at the same time are able be sure without checking that "even if he cheated most others to reach his goals, 'he would not cheat us'".

¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤

001 7/111b: "- - - they (the sorcerers*) said: "Keep him (Moses*) - - - (etc*)". See 7/88a above.

 

002 7/113a: "They (the sorcerers*) said - - -". A time anomaly. See 4/13d above.

003 7/113b: "They (the sorcerers*) said: "Of course we - - - (etc*)". See 7/88a above.

004 7/113c: "They (the sorcerers*) said: "Of course we shall have a (suitable) reward if we win!" This is something you simply do not say to such a mighty dictator like Ramses II.

005 7/114: “- - - ye (the sorcerers*) shall in that case be (raised to posts) nearest (to my person).” It needs strong proofs to certify that the mighty pharaoh Ramses II promised so incredibly much for so little - they were after all just sorcerers and Moses was no great danger to him as he saw it, and Ramses II likely was the mightiest pharaoh ever in the old Egypt.

006 7/115b: "They (the sorcerers*) said: "O Moses! - - - (etc*)". See 7/88a above.

###007 7/120a: After Moses made his miracle “the sorcerers fell down prostate in adoration” and were convinced that the god of Moses was a strong and real one. This is one of the proofs for that Muhammad knew he was lying when he time and again told his audiences that it would have no effect to perform miracles, because disbelievers would not believe anyhow; disbelievers - even sorcerers - became Muslims because of one small miracle in his own story about Moses(!), and thus "explained" away the fact that he (and his presumed god) was unable to make miracles. Here he tells just the opposite - a psychologically much more correct tale on just this one point. The same story in 20/69-70. That Muhammad told this story, also shows that he knew miracles works, and thus that he knew he was lying in the Quran when he told Allah did not send miracles because it would make nobody believe anyhow.

The same goes for Ramses II becoming a Muslim in 10/90 because he saw the miracle of a made flooding.

008 7/120b: After Moses made his miracle “the sorcerers fell down prostate in adoration” and convinced that the god of Moses was a strong and real one. This is not from the Bible, nor from any other known written source - like so much more "Biblical" stuff in the Quran.

009 7/120c: After Moses made his miracle “the sorcerers fell down prostate in adoration” and convinced that the god of Moses was a strong and real one. See 7/88a above.

010 7/120-22: "But the sorcerers fell down prostrate in adoration, saying: We believe in the Lord of the Worlds, the Lord of Moses and Aaron". This is not from the Bible. In the Bible there is not mentioned one word about clashes because of religion. The only subject was: Let the Jews leave Egypt.

011 7/121c: "We (the sorcerers*) believe in the Lord of the Worlds (Allah*) - - -". See 7/120a+b+c above.

012 7/123c: "Believe ye (the sorcerers*) in Him - - -". It here in reality is unclear to whom the word "Him" refers. YA has used a capital first letter, which shows he think it refers to Allah. But other Muslim scholars think it refers to Moses - f.x. in A7/89 - in the English 2008 edition A7/91. One meets similar expression - and the same uncertainty - in 20/71 and in 29/49. Like said many times before with reference to Islam's claim that the language in the Quran is so clear and easy to understand that it is a proof for that it is from a god: The language in the Quran in realty often is unclear and/or with more than one possible meaning.

013 7/125b: "They (the sorcerers*) said: 'For us, we are but sent back to our Lord (here claimed to be Allah*)". See 7/88a above.

014 10/80: "When the sorcerer came, Moses said to them - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

015 10/81a: "When they (the sorcerers*) had had their throw, Moses said - - -". A time anomaly. See 4/13d above.

016 10/81b: "Moses said: 'What ye (sorcerers*) have brought is sorcery. Allah will surely make it of no effect: for Allah prospereth not the work of those who make mischief". This and much more in this story is not from the Bible.

017 26/40b: "- - - that we (the Egyptians*) may follow the sorcerers (in religion) if they win?" Such a demand is nonsense compared to what we know about the religion of Egypt at that time. It also is psychological nonsense - it takes more than this to make the whole population of a country change religion (if the "wrong" part won). For one thing it had fundamental grips on the population - even a royal decree about changing to another religion would not work - see Akn-Aton's (pharaoh 1372 - 1355 BC) try even if that was not just at this time. And for another the magicians would have the same religion as the people, so why then a silly demand like this? (Some Muslims claims it is meant the forwarding of the worship of the pharaoh, but the pharaoh was not the main god in Egypt.)

018 26/41c: "Of course - shall we (the sorcerers*) have a (suitable) reward if we win". For one thing this is not from the Bible (see 26/35 above), and for another thing hardly anybody spoke like that to one of the mightiest pharaohs ever.

019 26/42c: “- - - ye (the sorcerers*) shall in that case (if you win over Moses*) be (raised to posts) nearest to my person (Ramses II).” It is highly unlikely that the mighty pharaoh Ramses II said this to a flock of sorcerers – and especially for winning over an after all small opponent. But it sounds good in a religious speech to uncritical believers.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

###020 26/46-47: "Then did the sorcerers fall down, prostrate in adoration, Saying 'We believe in the Lord of the Worlds - - -". For one thing this is not from the Bible. But much more serious in this connection is that #######this is one of the proofs for that Muhammad knew he was lying each time he explained away his inability to produce any miracle as a proof for his god and for his own connection to a god, with that Allah did not want because it would make no-one believe in Allah anyhow. Here Muhammad is telling - early in his career and before many of those "explaining" aways (surah 26 is from 615 - 616 AD = shortly after Muhammad started his preaching in earnest) - about a minor miracle which made all those sorcerers suddenly become ardent believers in just Allah. Also see 26/51 below.

The same goes for Ramses II becoming a Muslim in 10/90 because he saw a miracle of a made flooding.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

###021 26/51: "Only, our (the sorcerers*) desire is that our Lord (Allah) will forgive us our faults, that we may become foremost among the Believers". For one thing this is not from the Bible. For another thing it is a contradiction to reality - one know there was no religion like Islam in Egypt around 1235 BC when the Exodus happened according to science - if it happened. But more serious: #####That Muhammad told that such an after all small miracle could make all the sorcerers such strong believers, proves very strongly that he knew he was lying each time he told miracles would make no-one believe. Also see 10/90c and 26/46-47 above.

As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d above.

022 38/4d: "And the Unbelievers say, 'This is a sorcerer telling lies!". Already at that time there were many who saw that at least parts of the Quran could not be true.

023 38/4e: "And the Unbelievers say, 'This is a sorcerer telling lies!". How could this reliably be written in the claimed "Mother Book" (of which the Quran is a copy according to Muhammad) billions of years before it was said or happened? One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% like the Quran claims many places (if you look, you will find more cases than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem full predestination contra free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 5 reasons - at least 3 of them unavoidable - for this:

  1. When something is changed, automatically the future is changed.
  2. The laws of chaos will be at work and change things, if even a tiny part is made different. And multiply even a tiny change with some billion people through the centuries, and many and also big things will be changed.
  3. The displacement of a happening - f.x. the death of a warrior in battle - of only one yard or one minute may or even will change the future forever (that yard or minute f.x. may mean that the warrior killed - or not killed - an opponent). The laws of chaos and the "Butterfly Effect" and the "Domino Effect" kick in.

  4. The so-called "Butterfly Effect"; "a butterfly flapping its wing in Brazil may cause a storm in China later on" or "a small bump may overturn a big load".
  5. The so-called "Domino Effect": Any change will cause this and this to change, which will cause this and this to change, which will cause this and this to change - - - and so on forever. Also each cause may cause one or more or many changes. And: The Butterfly Effect only may happen, whereas the Domino Effect is unavoidable and inexorable - a main reason why if you in a battle is killed 5 meters from or 5 minutes later than where and when Allah has predestined - not to mention if you die when tilling your fields 50 miles off - unavoidably the entire future of the world is changed. Perhaps not much changed, but like said; multiply it with many billion people through the centuries, and the world is totally changed. And full clairvoyance of course totally impossible - except in occultism, mysticism, made up legends, and in fairy tales.

This that Allah predestines everything like the Quran claims and states many places, is an essential point, because besides totally removing the free will of man (in spite of the Quran's claims of such free will, or some Muslims' adjusted "partly free will for man" - to adjust the meanings where the texts in the Quran are wrong, is typical for Islam and its Muslims) - it also removes the moral behind Allah's punishing (and rewarding) persons for what they say and do - Allah cannot reward or punish people for things he himself has forced them to say or do, and still expect to be believed when he (Muhammad?) claims to be a good or benevolent or moral or just god. Also see 2/51b and 3/24a above.

And as mentioned above, full predestination also makes prayers to Allah meaningless, as everything already is predestined according to Allah's Plan - a Plan which no prayer ("nobody and nothing") can change.

Also see 3/154e, 6/149a, 7/34a, 14/22b, and not least 27/22-26 above.

024 40/24e: "- - - they (Ramses II, Haman, Qarun*) called (him (Moses*)) 'a sorcerer telling lies!'" Qarun hardly called him so, according to the Quran. (And also according to the Bible, as in the Bible Qarun does not exist.)

025 40/24f: "- - - they (Ramses II, Haman, Qarun*) called (him (Moses*)) 'a sorcerer telling lies!'" See 40/25d below.

026 43/49b: "- - - they (Pharaoh Ramses II and his people*) said, 'Oh thou sorcerer! - - -". See 43/20b above.

027 51/39b: "- - - (Pharaoh (Ramses II*)) - - - said: 'A sorcerer - - -'". See 50/2a above.

028 51/52: "- - - no messenger came to the Peoples (anywhere in the world*), but they said (of him (wrong, as there also were a few women like Miriam and Huldah*)) in like manner, 'A sorcerer or one possessed". This is wrong, as such accusations are not reported for a number of the Biblical prophets. But Muhammad was accused of this, and then it was good psychology to tell that this was normal for all prophets or messengers and thus that Muhammad was a normal such one.

28 + 11.188 = 11.216 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

236. SOUL - THE ETERNAL ONE

According to the Bible, humans consists of a physical body and a kind of spirit - the eternal soul. The physical body has a limited time of life - the time it is has here on Earth. The soul on the other hand is going to live on forever, either in Heaven or in Hell.

The soul exists also in the Quran, but as also the body goes on to the "next life" - necessary as most of the pleasures in the Quran's and Islam's Paradise are bodily pleasures - the soul plays a vague and much less central and much less clear role than in the Bible.

In the Quran the word soul is used in at least 2 different meanings: As another word for a human, and for the undefined "spirit" which makes up the spiritual part of human beings. This last part - often called "the eternal soul" is the essential part in religions, but we also have included a number of verses where "soul" only is a synonym for "human being"/"man".

¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤

###001 2/25k: "- - - companions pure - - -". These are the famous houris - the beautiful and willing women whom nobody knows where come from. This is not only contradicted in the Bible, it simply is incompatible with the Bible and its clear message that marriages, etc. does not exist in Heaven (f.x. Matt 22/30), as every saved soul "will become like the angels". One of the many proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are totally different gods - if one of them exists. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one.

002 2/48a: "- - - a day when one soul shall not avail another - - -". The Day of Doom.

003 2/48b: (At the Day of Doom no help is possible for your soul), "nor shall intercession be accepted (by Allah*) for her (your soul*) - - -". Wrong - it is clearly said other places that intercession is possible if Allah permits it - and it is clear there that he may permit it in some cases. Also see 2/48c just below.

004 2/48c: (At the Day of Doom no help is possible for your soul), "nor shall intercession be accepted (by Allah*) for her (your soul*) - - -". Wrong - other places it is clearly stated that Muhammad will on that day have wide rights to intercede - the only one with wide such rights. If we are cynical and believe Muhammad made the Quran and the religion himself, this is a nice trick for gaining more power - anyone who did not feel sure he/she would end in Paradise would do anything to please Muhammad in this life to make him intercede for them in the next one.

005 From 2/75b And for what reason? Just in order to be right, instead of to try to find out what is right. #####This in spite of the fact that the price if they are wrong, is the loss of the soul of each and every Muslim - - - if there is a Hell in the perhaps next life. Also see 2/130a, 3/24d and 3/77a below.

006 2/90a: "Miserable is the price for which they (here likely the Jews*) have sold their souls - - -". Muhammad claimed non-Muslims did not want to listen to him because they had falsified the scriptures and in addition wanted a good life on Earth, and thus that they had "sold" the life in Paradise in a next life for a good life on Earth. Also see 3/77a below.

007 2/90b: "- - - sold their souls - - -". Contradicted at least by the Bible which claims that the Bible will save their souls. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

008 2/110b: "- - - whatever you have sent forth for your souls before you - - -". This simply means that your good (and bad) deeds are transferred to merits waiting for you at the Day of Doom.

009 2/123a: “(The Day when) one soul shall not avail another - - -". = The Day of Doom.

010 2/123b: “(The Day when) one soul shall not avail another - - - nor shall intercession profit her (the soul*) - - -.” An absolute law: No intercession possible. But:

  1. 20/109: “On that Day (Day of Doom*) shall no intercession avail, except for those whom permission has been granted by (Allah) - - -.” Here it is possible if Allah permits.
  2. 34/23: “No intercession can avail in His (Allah’s*) Presence (= on the Day of Doom*), except for whom He has granted permission.” Intercession ok if Allah permits.
  3. 43/86: “And those whom they invoke (“gods”, "saints*) besides Allah have no power of intercession – only he (has*) who bears witness to the Truth - - -.” According to the Quran the prophets and messengers are to be called forth “to witness to the truth”. “He” therefore must be referring to each and every prophet and messenger who according to this verse have power to intercede.
  4. Muhammad according to Al-Bukhari and according to 43/86 just above has the right to intercede.

Intercession is not impossible in spite of 1/123 – it only takes permission.

(4 contradictions.)

011 2/130c: "- - - such (persons*) who debase their souls with folly - - -". One more of Muhammad's discriminating names for non-Muslims.

012 2/259f: "- - - the bones, how We (Allah*) bring them together and clothe them in flesh". The Quran claims that the dead are resurrected in flesh, as contradicted with the Bible/NT which claims it only is the soul which is resurrected. This is one of the differences between the two books which are so fundamental - in reality how is the life in Paradise - that this alone proves that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and their religions not even fundamentally the same one, no matter how many undocumented claims the Quran makes. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

013 2/286a: "On no soul doth Allah place a burden greater than it can bear." Wrong: Also among Muslims you find self murder, persons who flee from their families, persons resorting to crime or prostitution to survive (according to our information Arab has 26 words for "prostitute", and language science tells that when there are many different names words for something, this means that the "something" is central for users of that language), persons who succumb to mental illness from unbearable pressure, etc.".

014 3/25f: "- - - each soul - - -". This is not necessarily wrong, as man is made from body and soul. But remember that according to the Quran man is resurrected bodily in the possible next life. (A necessity for Muhammad, as the pleasures in the Islamic Paradise mainly are bodily pleasures - that is all this omniscient and omnipotent god has to offer).

015 3/25g: "- - - each soul will be paid out (= get the reward*) just what it has earned - - -". There are different gardens in Paradise according to Islam - one better than the other. Exactly how many is not clear, but at least four or six and may be more. In addition there are the higher heavens. The better a Muslim - and the better and more willing a warrior - the better heaven you go to. (This is contradicted by the claim that those of your family who are good Muslims, will be gathered together in Paradise - it is extremely unlikely that all in a family (remember we talk about extended families like normal in the old times and some places also today) qualifies for the same level of Paradise). In Hell there seems to be 7 parts, one worse than the other.

016 3/25h "- - - each soul will be paid out (= get the reward*) just what it has earned, without (favor or) injustice". There is no correspondence between the after all small sins which sends most sinners to Hell, and the sadistic and never ending terrible punishment they get there - a high degree of injustice.

But remember as for punishment and rewards - and forgiving: They cannot be given unless there are made changes in the Plan of Allah, which several verses in the Quran states nobody and nothing can make. (A predestined reward or punishment is not a reward or punishment, but theater.)

017 3/30a: "On the Day when every soul is confronted - - -". = The Day of Doom.

018 3/90e: "- - - for they (who leave Islam*) are those who have - - - gone astray". Only it Allah exists, if he is behind what the Quran tells, and the book in addition tells the full truth and only the truth. If on the other hand the Quran is a made up book, and "the others" happen to follow a god which really exists, somebody else are astray. Not to mention that the Muslims in case is very astray - especially if the real god is one preaching a good and benevolent religion, as it will be difficult for him to accept souls from a war and hate and suppressing - and dishonest - religion.

And what if Allah is from the dark forces, like f.x. parts of the Quran's moral code may indicate?

019 3/117a: "- - - A Wind which brings a nipping frost: It strikes and destroys the harvest of men who have wronged their own souls - - -." Muhammad does not seem to know much about frost and it’s (in)ability to choose between good and bad men.

020 3/135a: "- - - (not*) wronged their own souls - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

021 3/145a: “Nor can a soul die except by Allah’s leave - - -". One of the many, many never documented claims in the Quran. Muhammad never was able to prove anything at all about his claimed god or his own claimed connection to him.

Another point is that according to the Bible souls cannot die - the body can, but not the soul.

###022 3/145b: “Nor can a soul die except by Allah’s leave, the term being fixed as by writing”. Wage war - you die when your term comes and not before, no matter what you are doing. The for Muhammad most essential side of predestination? It is easy by means of statistics to show the claim is wrong, but right or wrong does not matter much in cases of blind belief. But one thing is clear: Any man as intelligent as Muhammad did know this was a lie.

023 3/193d: "- - - take to Thyself (Allah*) our souls - - -". See 3/193c just above.

024 3/198a: "- - - for those who fear their Lord (Allah*), are Gardens - - -". Muslims go to Paradise. But a Paradise of mainly bodily satisfaction and luxury. Is this the best an omniscient and omnipotent god has to offer? Or was it just the maximum which could interest the primitive souls of primitive warriors?

025 4/1d: (A4/1): ”- - - created you from a single Person (”nafs”) - - -.” Is this the correct meaning? Or f.x. ”- - - from humankind - - -” (Muhammad ’Abdu)? Or ”- - - from a soul - - -.” Or “- - - from a spirit - - -”? Or ”- - - from a living entity - - -.”? Or ”- - - from a vital principle - - -”? Or “- - - from self - - -.”? Etc. The word ”nafs” is very vague and has many meanings – far from the clear language Muslims claim. At least 7 possible varieties of meaning - "ways of reading". Is this a sample of a god's clear speech?

026 4/63: “Those men (not good Muslims or apostates*) - - - keep clear of them, but admonish them, and speak to them a word to reach their very soul.” To keep clear of the not good Muslims, not to mention the possible apostates (this verse shows that apostates did (and do) exist - there are Muslims denying this), was not the real – and shortly also not the official - line for a long time. It soon was: Punish them! This verse is contradicted and often “killed” and abrogated by at least these verses demanding stricter actions: 2/191, 2/193, 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 4/90, 5/33, 5/72, 5/73, 8/12, 8/38-39 (the warning), 8/39, 8/60, 9/3, 9/5, 9/14, 9/23, 9/29, 9/33, 9/73, 9/123, 25/36, 25/52, 33/61, 33/73, 35/36, 47/4, 66/9. This includes many advising or permitting political, social, economical, etc. compulsion (with the sword in the background if you protest) – we mention a few here: 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 5/72, 5/73, 9/23, 14/7, 15/3, 33/73, 35/36. They are all quoted under 2/256. (At least 29 contradictions).

###027 4/65b: "- - - they (persons*) can have no (real) Faith until they make thee (Muhammad*) judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against thy decisions - - -". = You only are a real believer if you accept Muhammad's total dictatorship and never question his decisions. This is a sentence which alone tells books about Muhammad and about Islam.

#028 4/65c: "- - - they (persons*) can have no (real) Faith until they make thee (Muhammad*) judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against thy decisions - - -". Totally contradicted by the Bible - such a clash of fundamental principles that this verse alone proves that Yahweh and Allah is not the same god. And then there are all the other proofs in addition. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

029 4/79b: “- - - but whatever evil happens to thee, is from thy (own) soul.” But:

  1. 4/78: “All things are from Allah.” See remark to 4/78c above and 14/22b below. There are MANY verses claiming that Allah decides everything.
  2. It also is thought provoking that whatever you do, it can have no good result for you, because all the good results come from Allah.
  3. How is it possible that everything evil which happens to you is your own fault if Allah predestines everything, like the Quran states many places?

030 4/97a: "When the angels take the souls - - -." A small (?) contradiction: Other places it is Allah or the Angel of Death who does this, not "angels" in plural.

031 4/107a: "Contend not on behalf of such as betray their own souls - - -". Well, a clear order. But different from - and contradicting the moral of - "search for the lost lamb" in NT.

 

032 4/107b: "- - - such as betray their own souls - - -" = the ones who leave Islam, or may be all non-Muslims - one of Muhammad's many intended negative names for non-Muslims.

033 4/110b: "- - - wrongs his own soul - - -". = To sin.

034 4/111aa: "- - - he (the sinner*) earns it (sins*) against his own soul - - -". The expression "soul" is used also in the Quran, but seems to have a more diffuse meaning than in the Bible. In the Bible it is the religious and eternal part of your being - the very part which is "life" as contrast to "body", and the part which will live on after the body is dead. In the Quran is seems to represent the essence of your physical life. But then the Quran and Islam do not need anything more or anything more clearly defined, because you according to Muhammad will be resurrected in body, and then the soul is of little essence.

035 4/113c: "But (in fact) they (non-Muslims*) will only lead their own soul astray - - -:" Because of all the wrongs in the Quran, everything there is doubtful if it is not proved, included this - at least it is no proved fact. And if they believed in Yahweh or some other perhaps existing god, there is a chance that they were not led astray especially if Allah is a made up one, which is highly likely as the Quran with all its mistakes is from no god. Besides: What is really the definition of "the soul" in the Quran?

#036 5/8e: "Be just, that (justice*) is next to Piety - - -". Compare this to NT, which says something like "Faith, Hope and Love - but strongest is Love". The same god? Believe so if you are able to. (And remember that this was written in Greek, which has two words for "love" - "eros" = the erotic or bodily love, and "agape" = the higher kind of love - the love between souls. This was written "agape". (For a contrast: Do we have to remind you about how central "eros" is in the Quran?))

037 5/15i: "- - - a (new) light - - -" may refer either to the Quran or to Muhammad. With so many errors and such a horrible morality neither of the two brought much light to humanity. Riches to some Muslims, yes. Power to some Muslims, yes. Peace to some searching souls - like believers find in any religion - yes. But no light - actually the period from around or shortly after 1000 AD when Islam finally gained full control in Muslim countries and up to some 50 - 90 years ago, yes, some places right up till today, Islam represents the "dark middle age" in the Muslim area - - - and little peace and no progress for humanity.

038 5/16c: "- - - the light - - -" may refer either to Muhammad or more likely to Islam. With so many errors and such a horrible morality neither of the two brought much light to humanity. Riches to some Muslims, yes. Power to some Muslims, yes. Peace to some searching souls - like believers find in any religion - yes. But no light. And no peace on Earth.

039 6/8c: “They (people*) say: ‘Why is not an angel sent down to him?’ If We (Allah*) did send down an angel, the matter would be settled at once, and no respite would be granted them”. This question – a proof f.x. by means of an angel – arose frequently. Muhammad’s often used “explanation” was this: Allah will not send down an angel until The Last Day (the Day of Doom). That means that if he sends down angles, that day becomes the Last Day (“the matter will be settled at once, and no respite would be granted them”), and in that case the unbelievers would lose their chance to become believers (“- - - no respite would be granted them”.) This “explanation” is nonsense even according to the Quran. That book tells that the angel Gabriel visited Muhammad often, it tells that angels come down to fetch the souls of the dead, it tells that angels come down to fetch your soul when you fall asleep and to return it when you wakes up, it tells that angels surround you to note down your good and bad deeds – not to mention the thousands of angels Allah sends down to do battles together with Muslims time and again. And angels visiting f.x. Abraham, Lot, and Mary.

There was not one single reason why Allah could not use one of the myriads of angles he daily and frequently sends down, as a proof for Muhammad.

On the contrary: There were all reasons for Allah to prove himself and his claimed messenger - in stark contradiction to Muhammad's claim, it had given lots of followers. Proofs: 1) Human psychology. 2) The Pharaoh's sorcerers all became Muslims because Moses made a miracle (a story which proves Muhammad knew he was lying when he said miracles would convince no-one. 3) The same goes for Ramses II becoming a Muslim in 10/90 because he saw the miracle of a made flooding. 4) Jesus made miracles and got many followers from this, which Muhammad knew.

A very obvious bluff and a piece of fast-talk. Muhammad's knowledge of the sorcerers' reaction to Moses' miracle proves that he knew he was lying when he claimed that the reason why Allah did not prove his existence, was that it would not make anybody believe anyhow. How many other place in the Quran did Muhammad lie? - this even more so as the Quran makes it clear Muhammad believed in the use of dishonesty as a working tool.

040 6/12h: "It is they (non-Muslims*) who have lost their souls, that will not believe". As far as Jews and Christians go, this is contradicted by the Bible. There also is a serious question about the Muslims’ souls, as it is clear that the Quran with all its mistakes, etc. is not from any god. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

041 6/20d: "Those who have lost their own souls - - -". One of the many negative and discriminating names Muhammad has for non-Muslims - here mainly Jews and Christians.

042 6/24a: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) lie against their own souls - - -". They lie knowingly and will hurt their future in the claimed next life. At least this is what Muhammad claimed.

043 6/26: "- - - they (disbelievers*) only destroy their own souls (by not believing in Allah*) - - -". This only is true if the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth about everything. If f.x. Allah is a made up god, and the disbelievers also believe in other gods which do not exist, it does not matter if also Allah exists or not, or is not the god described in the Quran. And if they on the other hand happen to believe in a god who exists, the Quran's claim here is very wrong.

044 6/60a: "It is He (Allah*) who doth take away your soul at night - - -" = makes you sleep - sleep is like a kind of death, as Allah takes away your soul. Muhammad often took natural phenomena and told they were because of Allah - like any believer in any religion can say about his god(s) as long as he can evade demands to prove it - there are few things so cheap as words.

045 6/61d: "- - - when death approaches one of you, Our (Allah's*) angels (plural*) take his soul - - -". This is another contradiction, because another place in the Quran it is said Allah takes your soul, and yet another place that it is the Angel of Death (name - singular) who does it.

046 6/61e: "- - - Our angels take his soul - - -". But the Arab word used for Angel here, is "rusul" - the same word which the Quran uses for Muhammad in the meaning "messenger". If you instead inserts this meaning of the word in this claimed clear and distinct language, you get "- - - Our messenger (Muhammad*) take his soul - - -". Knowing something about the real Muhammad, this may provoke a few thoughts.

##047 6/70d: "- - - every soul delivers itself to ruin (Hell*) by their own acts - - -". Here we are back to one of Islam's impossible contradictions: Muhammad needed the predestination, because it gave many and unafraid warriors - they were not to die until Allah had when decided, so war was not dangerous. But if Allah predestined everything there was no moral reason for him to punish humans for sins he had predestined they should do - thus man had to have free will. Muhammad was and Islam is unable to explain the very serious contradiction: Allah decides and predestines everything, but man had free will and decides for himself. Islam only has the weak claim "it is impossible for man to understand, but has to be true as Allah says so in the Quran" - see 6/149a below. Some Muslims try to explain that what is meant, is that man has partly free will, but that is a nonsense explanation. For one thing no human had fully free will - he always was partly dependant on nature and on others, and never had any more than partly free will at best, so then it is not a way out of the problem to claim he only had partly free will. And for another: When it is made totally clear that Allah decides and predestine absolutely every detail on Earth, there is no kind of free will left for man, not even a partly one. And not forget that for a third: The laws of chaos would make even partly free will spoil Allah’s predestination and unchangeable Plan,

048 6/93ga: "Yield up your souls - - -". The word "soul" is used sporadically in the Quran, but with a somewhat unclear definition and position. In the Bible it is clear that the soul is the spiritual part of you, and the part which is claimed to live on in a next life. But as Muhammad claimed resurrection in body - necessary as the pleasures his Paradise mainly are bodily pleasures - the soul has no clear position, except that it has to do with consciousness or life to do.

049 6/104d: "- - - if any will see (the claimed truth in the Quran's teaching*) it will be for (the good of) his own soul - - -". Islam is "to one’s own good" only if the Quran is from a god - which it is not with all those errors - and tells the full truth and only the truth. (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

050 6/123: "- - - they (bad non-Muslims*) only plot against their own souls - - -". In propaganda and in slander an opponent always is bad. As for souls, that is a bit vague something in the Quran - vague likely because Muhammad really did not need it, as he claimed the resurrection for the next life is in body (not in soul like in the Bible - one more strong proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god , and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion.)

 

051 6/152b: "- - - no burden do We (Allah*) place on any soul, but that which it can bear." Wrong. There are suicides, there are persons fleeing from their families and/or surroundings, there are mental break-downs also in Muslim societies. Many of these are because life is too tough.

052 7/37ca: "- - - Our (Allah's*) messengers (angels*) (of death) arrive and take their (non-Muslims'*) souls - - -". The "soul" is an a bit unclear thing in the Quran, but it is clear it represents consciousness (Allah takes away your soul when you are sleeping) and the life essence - when it is taken away permanently like here, you are dead. But unlike in the Bible the soul is not your eternal spirit and, the part of you which will become like an angel in Heaven (f.x. Matt. 22/30) as you will be resurrected in body in the claimed next life, according to the Quran.

053 7/42c: “- - - no burden do We (Allah*) place on any soul, but that which it can bear - - -“. Can this be true? – also among Muslims self murder (or seeking death for Allah, when the real reason is a too difficult life), deserting one’s family or child, resorting to crime to be able to live on, etc. happens.

054 7/160f: "- - - soul - - -". Neither the word soul nor what it is for or what is its purpose or religious significance are clearly explained or defined in the Quran, unlike in the Bible.

055 7/177e: "- - - (non-Muslims*) wrong their own souls". Only if the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth about everything. And not if the non-Muslim happens to believe in another god who really exists (if such a god is to be found).

056 8/50c: (A8/57): “If thou ((Muslims*) couldst see, when the angels take the souls of the (unbelievers) at death - - -.” This is the meaning if you guess that the Arab word “yatawaffa” refers to the angels. But if you guess it refers to Allah, the sentence becomes like this: “- - - when He (Allah*) causes (them) to die - - -”. A detail in difference for the one who dies. But for a text which is “correct and identical to Muhammad’s and Allah’s words to the last comma”, even this is a significant proof for that this claim is wrong. And these variants of course also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has/have more than one meaning.

057 8/53a: "- - - until they (a people*) change what is in their (own) souls - - -". This is not possible for them if Allah predestines everything like the Quran tells many places. Then only Allah can change it. Full predestination + free will - even partly free will - is an impossibility even for an omnipotent god. As said before, in the realm of the immaterial world there are things impossible even for gods.

058 9/17ca: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) witness against their own soul to infidelity". 1): Why does an omniscient god need witnesses - do not his followers trust him? 2): Again this in the Quran somewhat diffuse word "soul". As man is claimed resurrected in body, the soul is not essential in the Quran.

059 9/29m: "- - - until they (non-Muslims*) pay Jizya - - -". Strongly contradicted in NT, which says you shall give to the emperor what belongs to the emperor (the tax) and to Yahweh what belonged to Yahweh (the souls*). I.e. do not mix taxation etc. with the religion (f.x. Matt. 22/15-21). Yahweh and Allah the same god? Jesus and Muhammad in the same line of prophets? Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

060 9/55a: "- - - in reality Allah's Plan is to punish them (the rich non-Muslims) - - - and that their souls may perish - - -". A standard "explanation" of how it could be that many non-Muslims had a better life than Muslims.

061 9/70g: "It is not Allah Who wrongs them (hypocrites*), but they wrong their own souls". How come when Allah decides absolutely everything according to many verses in the Quran?

**062 9/85b: “Allah’s plan is to punish them (the ones not wanting to go to war*) with these things in this world, and that their souls may perish in their (very) denial of Allah”. Refusing war means:

  1. Social contempt.
  2. To most likely end in hell.
  3. To deny Allah.

Is it possible to put more social and religious pressure on a man to make him go to war - willing or not? Anyone saying Islam is peaceful, either has not read the Quran, is repeating “correct” words but wrong meanings, or is a Muslim (who believes it or not believes it). In addition he or she must accept the claim that the Bible is falsified - a claim both science and Islam strongly have proved to be wrong, by being unable to find even one documented falsification in the existing some 45ooo relevant scriptures and fragments older than 610 AD. There are MANY claims from Muslims and from Islamic institutions (cfr. here the Islamic rules for the use of dishonesty to defend and/or promote Islam) but not one proved case. (An interesting extra point here is the fact that there exists not one copy or fragments from the Quran older than 610 AD when Muhammad started his mission. This in spite of that the Quran tells that all claimed prophets/messengers - 124ooo or more according to Hadiths - received a book similar to the Quran (copy of the claimed "Mother of the Book" = "Mother" of the Quran), books which naturally in addition would have been copied by hand, like all central books were in the old times, so that there may be should have existed at least a million complete or partly copies of these Quran-like books through the times. Far more copies than there ever existed of the Bible.

#####Not one single copy or even fragment older than 610 AD when Muhammad started his mission is ever found. Are the claims a bluff? Or may be an al-Taqiyya or something? - Muhammad as showed was not adverse to lying in the Quran.

063 9/85c: "- - - their (non-Muslims'*) souls may perish in their (very) denial of Allah". Similar are often claimed, but never proved - and wrong unless Allah really exist and is correctly described in the Quran.

##064 9/113a: "It is not fitting, for the Prophet and those who believe, that they should pray forgiveness for Pagans - - - (who are bound for Hell*)". In NT it always is permitted to pray for the lost souls - we are back to the search for f.x. "the lost sheep" and to "the 11.th hour" (Luke 15/8-10 and 15/11-31, Matt. 18/12-14, 20/8-13). Definitely Allah is not like Yahweh - and Muhammad not in the same line of prophets as Jesus (if they had been, their teachings had had to be similar). And remember: Science has proved far beyond any even unreasonable doubt that the Bible and especially the NT is not falsified in spite of Muhammad's never proved claims - may be some mistakes, but no falsifications. The best proof for this is Islam: If one single real falsification had been found, Islam had screamed about it to every living being on Earth, included rats and worms. No such scream has ever been heard.

As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d above.

065 10/30a: "- - - the deeds it (the soul/person*) sent before - - -". All the deeds - good and bad - you have done during your life on Earth. Deeds which at the Day of Doom will decide if you go to Heaven or Hell. Only beware that Islam's thoughts about what is just and what is unjust often are peculiar.

A contradicting point is that according to Hadiths, Allah predestined whether you are to end in Paradise or Hell already 5 months before you are born. Explain this contradiction if you are able to.

066 10/30b: "- - - they (every soul*) will be brought back to Allah - - -". This only may be true if Allah exists, is a central god, and is correctly described in the Quran.

067 10/30c: "- - - they (every soul*) will be brought back to Allah - - -". Comment A18/48: "I.e., will be brought back to the realization of Allah's oneness, uniqueness and almightiness - the instinctive cognition which has been implanted in human nature as such". As Islam has no proofs or even clear indications at all for the existence of a top god named Allah or for Muhammad's connection to a god, you rather frequently will meet claims like this about instinctive knowledge, etc. about Allah/a god. Science has found no traces from such knowledge (actually man has few if any intellectual instincts). Neither has Islam - claims, yes - documentation, no. (Science has found longing for a god in a minor part of humans - some few (5 - 10?) percents - but a longing or a need for something strong to lean to, is something very different from knowledge, and as said only in a minor group of man).

068 10/30d: "- - - they (every soul*) will be brought back to Allah their rightful Lord - - -". Often claimed, never proved. It is not even proved that Allah exists - he after all just is a renamed pagan god (al-Lah) - or that he in case is a god (with the immoral moral code, etc. he(?) launched, he in case may be something quite different).

069 10/44c: "- - - it is man that wrongs his own soul (by sinning*)". How is that possible if Allah decides and predestines every detail in your life, like the Quran states MANY places?

070 10/46b: "- - - or We (Allah*) take thy (Muhammad's*) soul (to Our Mercy) - - -". One of the many never documented claims in the Quran. Claims are cheap when you do not have to prove them.

071 10/100a: "No soul can believe, except by the Will of Allah - - -." Is it then morally acceptable to condemn all the others to Hell, when their lack of belief is because Allah has decided it so? (according to Hadiths he decides whether to send you to Hell or to Heaven 5 months before you are even born). Very different from NT where everybody have the possibility and are welcome to search for Heaven.

072 10/100b: "No soul can believe, except by the Will of Allah, and He will place Doubt (or obscurity) on those who will not understand." Similar comment to 10/100a, but much stronger, especially since their inability to understand is because of the brain Allah gave them, and because in spite of a bad quality brain he all the same could have made them believe: Order "Be" and it is for Allah.

073 10/104c: "- - - Allah - Who will take your (peoples'*) souls (at death) - - -". One more of the easy claims any believer can make on behalf of his god(s) as long as no proof is necessary. But what is the connection between the soul and resurrection in body is never explained in the Quran - actually not even clearly what the soul is.

074 11/7k: "- - - the Unbelievers would say, 'This (Resurrection*) is nothing but obvious sorcery!" Now resurrection of the soul you find in most religions, but remember that the Quran claims that Allah reassembles you atom for atom and wake you up again bodily - which may be difficult to believe. (But as Islam's pleasures in Paradise mainly are bodily pleasures - top food, drink, women, clothes, housing, surroundings, weather, shade - this only have a meaning if you are resurrected bodily to enjoy it. But honestly resurrected in soul only - as a free spirit - you will be far more free, and honestly spiritual activities and pleasures are far more pleasurable and satisfying than luxury and sex, especially in the long run - - - but primitive, rough warriors hardly knew this, and more down-to-earth "carrots" had to be used". Is the Quran's Heaven mainly a luxury brothel?

075 11/21a: "They (non-Muslims*) are the ones who have lost their own souls - - -". The Quran is full of loose claims and as loose statements - and like all the others of any consequence also this one is not documented or in any other way proved. It even may be wildly wrong if Allah does not exist or if he exists, but belongs to the dark forces. And it definitely is wrong if there somewhere is a real god - f.x. Yahweh - who rules the claimed afterlife.

076 11/31e: "- - - Allah knoweth best what is in their (peoples'*) souls - - -". See 2/233 above.

077 11/101a: "It was not We (Allah*) who wronged them: they wronged their own souls - - -". Perhaps correct if man has free will, wrong if Allah predestines everything like the Quran claims again and again, "perhaps" if man has partly free will which some Muslims try to explain away this total contradiction with no possible explanation (even partly free will also is 100% contradicting the many verses in the Quran clearly stating that it is Allah who decides everything).

078 12/53aa: "- - - the (human) soul is certainly prone to evil - - -". A good proof for this is how easy it was - and is - to get Muhammad's followers to obey the evil parts of the Quran's moral code - stealing/robbing, raping, enslaving, torturing, suppressing, killing, etc.

079 12/101e: "Take Thou (Allah) my (Joseph's*) soul - - - (as a Muslim)". Believe it if you want - but remember how many mistakes, errors, etc. there are in the Quran, and that there does not exist one single trace from Islam or similar anywhere in the world in the world older than 610 AD. Not one single trace (except the two religions building on the Bible, and they - and especially the Christian one - are so far from Islam, that the claimed relationship mostly just are claims, and the rest superficial points). Well, according to the Bible Joseph's god was Yahweh, not Allah.

080 12/101f: "Take Thou (Allah) my (Joseph's*) soul (at death) as one submitting to Thy (here indicated Allah's*) Will (as a Muslim) - - -". For one thing there is nothing even remotely similar to this in the Bible, and for another: This text is incompatible with the Bible to say the least of it - according to the Bible Joseph's god was Yahweh, not Allah, and according to facts neither science, nor Islam has found one single trace of Muslims/Islam older than 610 AH - Joseph (if he is not fiction) lived 2ooo-2500 years earlier.

081 13/11b: "Verily (this definitely is no proved verity/truth*) never will Allah change the condition of a people until they change it themselves (with their own souls) - - -". But how can they change anything themselves, if it is true that Allah decides absolutely everything and according to an unchangeable Plan, like the Quran states many places? (For Muhammad it was essential to make Allah seem fair by claiming that man had free will and thus himself was to blame for bad deeds. But the good Muhammad was never able to combine this with another claim he needed to have many and daring warriors; predestination. Even Islam admits it is not possible to combine the two (but claims very lamely, that all the same it must be true as it is said so in the Quran - it is beyond the incredible what believers are able to believe if they just want to believe it (if it is Iblis/the Devil who is behind the Quran, perhaps he knew what he did anyhow.)

082 13/33a: "- - - He (Allah*) Who standet over every soul - - -". Incompatible with the Bible.

083 13/42d: "He (Allah*) knoweth the doings of every soul - - -". See 2/233h above.

084 14/22b: "- - - reproach your (sinners'*) own souls (for sinning*)". Why? Why, when the Quran so clearly and so often states that Allah decides everything and has 100% predestination? It was Allah who decided that you should sin - how can he then punish you for it when he forced you to do it? As for "free will for man" which the Quran and Muslims blame, that is not even theoretically possible when there is full predestination by Allah - even Islam has given in explaining how that can be possible. (But Islam cannot drop the claimed free will - for one thing there then will be more mistakes in the Quran, and the religion a false one, and for another Allah then will be a morally very bad god, punishing man for sins he himself has forced them to do. Therefore they say: "Even if it is impossible, it all the same must be true, because Allah says so in the Quran" (A6/141) - likely the lamest of all "explanations" you meet from Islam. In the immaterial sphere of existence there are things impossible even for omnipotent gods.) Also see 3/154e, 6/149a, and 7/34a above and not least 16/35e below.

085 14/45: "- - - men who wronged their own souls - - -". See 14/22b above.

086 14/51a: "- - - Allah may (on the Day of Doom*) requite each soul according to its deserts - - -". Once more contradicted by the Bible, which says this will be done by Yahweh, not by Allah. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

087 16/28b: "- - - wrongdoing to their (sinners') own souls". But how is it possible that humans can be sinners, if it is Allah and his total predestination who forces them to do it? The Quran many places states absolutely that Allah decides and predestines everything and according to a Plan nobody and nothing can change!

088 16/33c: "But Allah wronged them (the sinners*) not: nay, they wronged their own souls". This is wrong if Allah decides everything - predestination - like the Quran strongly states several places. It may be correct if man has free will - but then Allah is not omniscient. (Muhammad needed predestination to get fierce and willing warriors - you did not die until Allah had decided, and then you could as well go to war and win wealth and women and slaves and merit in Heaven, as sleep in your bed. And he needed free will for man for his little cultivated and proudly free tribe people and even more for making punishment morally possible for a claimed good and benevolent and fair god. And unbelievably he was able to use both, even though they are impossible to combine even for gods. It is unbelievable what you can make people believe when they wish and want to believe - or are brainwashed and not really thinking.

089 16/38e: "- - - that Allah will not raise up those who die - - -". Remember here that when most religions claim the resurrection of the soul, Muhammad claimed Allah resurrected also the body - but in young and perfect shape. This was and is a bit difficult to believe. But for Muhammad it was a necessity, as most of the pleasures in his heaven were and are bodily pleasures.

090 16/111b: "- - - every soul will be recompensed (fully) for all its actions - - -". One central difference between Islam and especially NT: NT stresses divine love and forgiving (though acts count), the Quran stresses acts (though forgiving counts - but is forgiving possible if everything is predestined?)

091 17/12b: "- - - two (of Our (Allah's*)) Signs - - -". There exists not one single reliable sign for Allah, and no-one has ever existed. Mostly the claimed "signs" are natural phenomena which Muhammad without proving anything simply claimed for his god - just like many a believer in many a religion has done thousands of times before and after him - unproved words are that easy to "borrow", and are worth exactly nothing as proofs, except that naive souls and wishful thinkers may believe in it. Well, they prove one thing: That the user has no real arguments and no real proofs - if he had had, he had used those instead.

092 17/45b: "When thou (Muslims*) dost recite the Quran, We (Allah*) put, between you and those who believe not in the Hereafter, a veil invisible". If Allah does not exist and thus is unable to put up a veil, may be a real god does so if any exists - except for War gods, he/she/they might not be interested in souls from war and apartheid religions.

093 17/49c: "What! When we (humans*) are reduced to bones and dust, should we really be raised up (to be) a new creation?". It is said that the old Arabs did not value the next life much, but at least they knew it existed in many religions - it was no surprise to them. But Islam claims that Allah picks up all the atoms and juices of your rot and nullified body and puts it all back to recreate you - though as a young person (nothing is said about fixing the body of handicapped or the mind of mentally retarded), and that was a bit much for the non-believers to believe in. We must admit we find it somewhat unbelievably, too - but for another reason: Why! - why recreate the body, when a soul free from cumbersome bones and meat are much freer? - and when mental and intellectual pleasures and experiences are much more fulfilling than bodily ones? May the reason be that in a primitive culture(?) like in the old Arabia, the bodily pleasures were the only ones rough warriors really knew and were able to picture? - and to experience bodily pleasures one needed bodies. Is the explanation for bodily recreation simply that Muhammad needed "carrots" his primitive and self centered (f.x. unable to feel empathy with their victims or with women they raped) rough bunches of warriors were able to visualize?

094 18/4d: "(It is wrong*) that Allah hath begotten a son”. Well, we are back to the old facts that Jesus according to the Bible - written on the background of thousands of witnesses/listeners and thus difficult to falsify - many times called God/Yahweh Father (Yahweh is called the father of Jesus at least 204 times in the Bible, and Jesus the son of Yahweh at least 89 times - many of those cases by Jesus himself, a very reliable person also according to the Quran), that humble humans - f.x. Muhammad - are unable to understand completely the ways and wishes of a god (may be Yahweh wanted a son for some reason), and that Islam has to deny that Jesus was the son of Yahweh, in order to make (or pretend?) Mohammad the greatest prophet. Besides: Where are Islam’s proofs? - in spite of Islam’s glorifying of blind belief - a psychologically wise slogan when all they have are doubtful and at least partly wrong texts from a doubtful, self proclaimed “prophet” of at least as doubtful character - it is naïve in the extreme to believe blindly in so serious matter as eternity. If your chosen religion is a made up one - which every blind believer in every religion believes just their religion is not - where do you end if there is a next life? - and what if there is a real religion that you have not found, because of your blindness. Perhaps all religions are made up and just is a result of an inner longing in some people for something absolute (science have found that many weak - and some stronger - souls have such a longing in their genes or psyche - one of the genes active here is the gene VMAT2, according to The American Institute of Cancer Research, who stumbled across it in their research for cancer genes), but in that case one at least does not have to make life as miserable for ones fellow men (and even more for the women) as Islam preaches - hate, suppression, rape, stealing, enslavement, and war.

095 18/28a: "And keep thy (Muslim*) soul content with those who call on their Lord (Allah*) - - -". = Do not mingle with non-Muslims - a claim similar to what often is used by leaders of new sects, especially fringe ones or extreme ones, not to get correcting ideas and facts into the group.

096 18/32-42: Another story explaining that you should take it easy even if some have a better life than you. For one thing riches of this world may be lost, and for another thing may be you end in Paradise, whereas they do not. The logic is impeccable - if the Quran speaks the truth.

But it is too obviously a propaganda story, with a too obvious point - the stupid non-Muslim versus the good Muslim. Ok for primitive or naive souls who needs things over-explained. But not a well told story - we react negatively to tales for adults told for mental level around 7 years. And there is much in the Quran told for this mental level or a little higher - and oversimplified.

##097 18/50a: "- - - We (Allah*) said to the angels. 'Bow down to Adam.'". This is not from the Bible, and it is one of the more than 100% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. In Allah's paradise, man clearly has measurably higher standing than angels. In Yahweh's the lines are not as clearly told, but it is very clear that angels are of higher standing than man. Add this to man's life in the paradises: Allah's offer resurrection in body, top earthly luxury and plenty of women - like in a luxury brothel - and no mental activity. In Yahweh's the resurrected souls becomes like angels. There are nearly no similarities at all, and the differences are formidable. Not the same paradise - not the same gods.

098 18/55d: "- - - praying - - -". But what is the use of praying, if Allah already has predestined your future according to his Plan - a Plan which nothing can change? Not to mention if it is true that he already before you were born, had decided whether you are to end in Hell or Heaven. According to Hadiths he decides on this at the same time as ########he gives you a soul 5 months before you are born.

099 19/71c: (YA2518): “Not one of you but will pass over it (Hell/Sirat*) - - -.” 3 possible interpretations: A: Every soul (person)? – they are resurrected in flesh according to Islam) must pass over/through/by the fire. Or B: Possibly it only refers to the wicked ones if the word “you” is only directed to them. Or C: May be it refers to the bridge Sirat (not mentioned by name in the Quran) over Hell and the march across that one. The book is this unclear.

100 20/15d: "- - - every soul to receive its reward by the measure of its Endeavour". But in case from which god - if there is a god? There is no reliable information about Allah, except that before Muhammad he was the pagan main god in Arabia. Because of all the errors in the Quran and because of the very doubtful ethics and moral of the one (Muhammad) dictating it, the reliability of the claims also about Allah in that book, is far below what any scientist or reliable judge will accept.

101 20/15e: "- - - every soul to receive its reward by the measure of its Endeavour". In the Quran a main question for the claimed next life is the balance of your good contra bad deeds - and the best of deeds was to go to war for Muhammad (Allah?) and destroy, steal, take captives for extortion, etc., and later also to force Islam on them and Iblis take the abrogated flagship 2/256: "Let there be no compulsion in religion". In especially NT the main way to salvation is the love and forgiving from Yahweh, as much as good deeds, though they count.

102 20/109a: “On that Day shall no intercession avail, except for those whom permission has been granted by (Allah) - - -.” Here it is possible if Allah permits.

  1. 2//123: “(The Day (of Doom*) when) one soul shall not avail another - - - nor shall intercession profit her (the soul*) - - -.” An absolute law: No intercession possible.
  2. 2/254: “- - - before the Day (of Doom*) comes when no bargaining (will avail), nor friendship, nor intercession.” Among others: Intercession is impossible.
  3. 6/51: “- - - they will be brought to (Judgment (= Day of Doom*)) before their Lord (Allah*): except for Him they will have no protector nor intercessor - - -.”
  4. 82/19: “(It will be) the Day (of Doom*) when no soul shall have the power (to do) ought for another - - -.”

No question about permission – simply impossible.

(4 contradictions).

103 21/47d: "- - - not a soul will be dealt with unjustly - - -". Wrong, if the rules in the Quran are in accordance with Allah's rules. Even if we omit the immoral parts of the Quran's moral code and ethical code, there remain in sharia laws parts which are highly immoral and unjust, the pinnacles of which may be that a raped woman shall be punished for unlawful sex if she cannot bring 4 male witnesses to the very act, that stealing and rape of captives are "lawful and good" in and after a raid in the name of the god - jihad - (a condition which makes this even more repulsive and tells macro words about Muhammad and Islam - and also nearly everything is named jihad), and a number of the rules for raids, terrorism and war.

104 21/102: "- - - what their souls desire, in that will they dwell". = In the Quran's and Islam's paradise. See 10/9f above.

105 22/37a: “It is not their (the sacrificial animals*) meat nor their blood, that reaches Allah: it is your piety that reaches Him - - -“. Does an omniscient god have to see you killing helpless animals to see that you are a pious believer? – not if he really is omniscient. If Allah really is omniscient and if the only purpose with sacrificing animals is to prove your piety, then the sacrifice in reality is without meaning, as an omniscient god all the time knows very well whether you are a pious believer or not. Actually the Quran many places makes it absolutely clear that Allah knows also the innermost corners of even the deepest parts of your soul. To what avail and what meaning and what logic is a “test” or a “proof” of your piety, if Allah already knows the answer on beforehand? - and by the way: The same goes for testing your piety in war and battle and kill and be killed, something that even was meaningless if Allah were a good god - not to mention if he knows the answer already. Even worse: What is the purpose and what is the meaning of such slaughtering if Allah really predestines everything? - if he has predestined that you shall sacrifice a sheep or a camel, then it is not even a test of tour piety; it only is Allah playing a childish, bloody and meaningless game.

106 23/35b: "Does he (the claimed Muslim prophet*) promise that when ye (people*) die and ye become dust and bones, ye shall be brought forth (again)?" Remember here that what Muhammad promised and Islam promises, is that Allah shall find all the pieces and juices - all atoms and molecules - you were made by and put everything together again and then wake you up to the claimed next life. The old Arabs knew about a possible waking up of your soul, but this process with putting everything together and waking you up bodily, was a bit hard to swallow - it still is for people knowing some about chemistry, physics, etc. - especially as a life free from the cumbersome body like in NT is a far more attractive alternative for a possible next life. (But in Islam's Paradise most of the pleasures are bodily ones, and then Muhammad needed bodily resurrection - very different from NT where Jesus tells that in Paradise you become like the angels (f. x. Luke 20/36, not to mention: "For the Kingdom of God/Yahweh is not a matter of eating and drinking (or sex*) - - -", (Rom.14/17).) - the same god and the same Paradise? - impossible.

But a copy of Muhammad's experiences like so much in the Quran - - - "proving" Muhammad's problems were normal for prophets, and that Muhammad thus was a normal prophet - though the greatest one. Not from the Bible.

107 23/62a: "On no soul do We (Allah*) place burdens it cannot bear - - -". Wrong. There f.x. are self murder also in Islam - a few of them may even be camouflaged as self murder terrorists. And there are persons fleeing from their families. And persons with mental problems so big that it hurts or destroys them mentally. They are unable to bear their burdens.

108 23/74d: "- - - those who believe not in the Hereafter - - -". Practically all religions had and have a "hereafter". Not identical to the Islamic one, admittedly, but so much is wrong in the Quran, that also the description of the Paradise may be wrong (it actually is to be hoped - Islam's Paradise is a primitive, unfair and little inspiring one, except perhaps for primitive souls: Plenty of sex, good food and clothes and pleasant weather for the men, more diffuse rewards for women). f.x. the Christian Paradise is very different - very. (F. x. Mark 12/25).

109 26/3a: "- - - frettest thy soul - - -". This is claimed said to Muhammad (by Allah*).

110 27/62a: "- - - who listens to the (soul) distressed when it calls on Him (Allah*), and who relives its suffering - - -?" How does this fit the strong claims in the Quran about Allah predestining everything according to a Plan which no-one and nothing can change the very least? Either Allah has decided a better future for you or he has not - nothing can change his Plan - - - which means that either the Plan is untrue or your prayers are wasted time. (But predestination was necessary for Muhammad to get as many and as fearless warriors as possible - predestination meant that battles were not more dangerous than staying home, and in battles you could gain loot.

As for the value of prayers in Islam, also see 62/9c. And if you combine 62/9c with 67/9c - a strong one - you get something thought-provoking. (And relevant here: Muslims often are taught that a question or problem can have 2 or more true and correct solutions - Islam is forced to teach this, because if not, many of the mistakes and contradictions in the Quran become too obvious. But this ONLY is true if parallel true solutions are possible. In cases where 2 or more possible solutions are mutually excluding each other, maximum 1 of the mutually excluding ones can be true. It should be a bit thought provoking for Muslims, that just this "small" difference in theoretical thinking and teaching, was one of the reasons (there were several of course) for why Europe and the West exploded into the Technical Revolution, while the Muslim area stagnated). Two star examples are: 1) Full predestination is not possible even for an omnipotent god to combine with even the smallest piece of free will for man - the two are mutually excluding. 2) The same for full and unchangeable predestination long time before, combined with any claimed effect of prayers (or forgiving) - the two are mutually excluding each other.)

##111 27/70: "But not grieve over them (sinners who are lost*) - - -". This is one more of the really huge differences - 100% - between NT and the Quran - Jesus and Yahweh felt deep sorrow for each lost soul, and joy for each lost soul which was saved in time - even in "the eleventh hour". Read f.x. "William Booth enters Heaven" (if we remember the title correctly) - one of the huge triumphs hailed by poetry. And see f.x. Luke 15/8-10 and 15/11-31, Matt. 18/12-14, and 20/8-13.

112 27/84a: "Until, when they (non-Muslims*) come (before the Judgment Seat, (Allah) will say - - -". One of the many things which is not proved, is that there will be a judgment day like the one the Quran claims - and in case if it is run by Allah, or f.x. by Yahweh. If it is run by Yahweh, his rules for accepting to Heaven or not, are so different from Allah's (one of the 120% sure proofs for that the two claimed gods are not the same one), that the result for many a soul may be dramatically better - or worse.

113 27/92b: "- - - if any accepts the guidance (by Muhammad*), they do it for the good of their own souls - - -". Wrong if the Quran is a made up book, and even more so if there somewhere exists a real god they are prohibited from looking for.

114 29/6b: “And if any strive for (with might and main), they do so for their own souls - - -“. If you f.x. go to war or take part in raids, you gain merit with Allah.

115 29/40c: "It was not Allah Who injured (or oppressed) them (non-Muslims*): they inquired (and oppressed) their own souls". Wrong if they were forced to do what they did by Allah's predestination - a predestination the Quran several places says is total and according to Allah's unchangeable Plan.

##116 31/12e: "Any who is (so) grateful (towards Allah*) does so to the profits of his own soul - - -". What kind of profit? If the Quran is a made up book - and with all its errors, etc. it at least is from no god - also Islam is a made up religion representing the dressed up pagan god al-Lah. Not much profit neither for body or soul - except for the priests and other religious leaders, included Muhammad.

117 31/28a: "And your - - - recreation is in no wise but as an individual soul - - -". Actually according to the Quran, you are not resurrected as a soul, but bodily, though in the shape of a young person. Nothing is said about what age babies and children have when resurrected. Also nothing is said about f.x. mentally retarded persons in Paradise.

118 32/11b: “The Angel of Death (singular* and obviously a name – capital letters*) - - - will (duly) take your souls - - -.” But:

  1. 39/42: “It is Allah who takes the souls (of men) at death - - -.”
  2. 47/27: “- - - the angels (plural*) take their souls at death - - -.”

(2 contradictions.)

119 32/13b: “If We (Allah*) had so willed, We could certainly have brought every soul its true guidance - - -”. This only could be true if Allah exists and is a god.

120 32/13c: “If We (Allah*) had so willed, We could certainly have brought every soul its true guidance - - -”. Not from the Quran - too many errors, etc. This also means Allah is no god and benevolent god - he could save numberless humans/souls from Hell, and did not do so.

#121 32/13f: “If We (Allah*) so willed, We could certainly have brought every soul its true guidance: but the Word from Me will come true, ‘I will fill Hell with Jinns and men all together’”. One thought: May be it is true Allah has arranged also Hell like a number of Muslim scholars believe (their logic is that Hell could not exist without Allah's permission, if Allah is omnipotent). Another thought: No matter if he has or not – as long as he wants to fill Hell with living beings, he is no benevolent god. Yet another thought: Can the Quran be explained by that the god permitted f.x. a devil (Iblis?) to make a "holy" book to deceive more humans, on the condition that it contained so much wrong that intelligent persons had a fair chance to see the trap?

122 32/13j: “If We (Allah*) so willed, We could certainly have brought every soul its true guidance: but the Word from Me will come true, ‘I will fill Hell with Jinns and men all together’”. Here are two more differences between Yahweh and Allah:

  1. Yahweh did not have this choice because man really had free will.
  2. Yahweh tries to get as many as possible to Heaven (Luke 15/8-10 + 15/11-31 and Matt. 18/12-14 + 20/8/13). Allah has early made a conscious decision to fill Hell with "Jinns and men altogether".

The same god? Impossible.

123 32/13k: “If We (Allah*) so willed, We could certainly have brought every soul its true guidance: but the Word from Me will come true, ‘I will fill Hell with Jinns and men all together’”. Many Muslim scholars believe Allah is the real ruler also of Hell, as Iblis could not run it against the wish and will of Allah, as Allah is omnipotent. This verse indicates that this may be correct. What does it in case tell about Allah?

124 33/50c: “O Prophet! We (Allah*) have made lawful (for sex*) to thee (it is not unusual that the god "permits" this towards the founder of a religion or a sect – it happens not infrequently*) thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers: and those to whom thy right hand possesses out of the spoils of war (which was quite a huge number*) whom Allah has assigned to thee; and the daughters of thy parental uncles and aunts, and the daughters of maternal uncles and aunts, who migrated (from Makkah (= Mecca*)) with thee; and any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes to wed her – this is only for thee, and not for the Believers (at large); we know that We have appointed for them (permitted sex*) as to their wives and those whom their right hands possess – in order that there should be no difficulty for thee.” As for slaves, a huge number passed through Muhammad’s hands – perhaps 2000 or more only from the Qurayza tribe. We do not know if and in case how many of them he personally raped, except Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay (which we know about because the first later became one of his concubines, and the other one of his wives), but the casual way and the minimal fuzz with which two rapes happened and made, makes it easy to think that they neither were the first, nor the only ones – to rape ones captives and slaves was (and formally still is) completely ok in Islam. That just was the way life was/is for slave women and captive women under Islam.

And once more: Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use or disuse of the god, is typical for such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but as what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam, it became the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life under Islam.

Besides: Does Muhammad's private sex life belong in a claimed holy book for all times and all the world?

125 33/50f: "(Muhammad may have for a wife*) any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet (Muhammad') - - -". The literally correct translation according to M. Azad (A33/59 - A33/60 in the English 2008 edition): "if she offered herself as a gift (Arab: "in wahabat nafsaha") to the Prophet (Muhammad*)". Here is an interesting piece of information: Most Muslim commentators take this to mean "without demanding or expecting a dower". The dower was and is an integrated part of the Muslim formalities of a wedding. Here it seems that also here Muhammad got special treatment from Allah: Cheap wives. This in addition to that he could take a prisoner of war, make her slave, marry her and "give" her her freedom - except from her new husband - as a dower. Muhammad did this at least with Safiyya bint Huayay - a very cheap wife, as the dower cost him nothing.

Muhammad was pretty different from Jesus, also on this point. Definitely not from the same religion.

Besides: Does Muhammad's private sex life belong in a claimed holy book for all times and all the world? - or as part of a religion? And would a god revere such texts in his Heaven?

126 34/7d: "- - - (in ridicule) - - - (because of the claim that *) when ye (people*) are all scattered to pieces in disintegration, that ye shall (then be raised) in a New Creation - - -". The reason for their skepticism hardly was the resurrection. Perhaps it was true that the old Arabs did not believe strongly in a next life, but they in case knew that resurrection was normal for the surrounding religions, and thus nothing new or strange. What was difficult to believe, was resurrection of the body, not only of the soul. (But for Muhammad resurrection of the body was necessary, as most of the pleasures in his claimed Paradise were bodily pleasures).

#####127 34/50b: “If I (Muhammad*) am astray, I only stray to the loss of my own soul - - -.” Wrong to at least the 9. power (as there are better than a billion Muslims – or the 10. power or more if you reckon the ones through the times). If Muhammad was astray – ALL believing Muslims are astray – and all the mistaken facts, contradictions, invalid logic, etc., tell an ominous tale. The Quran also is contradicted 100% by any religious knowledge and by logic. ONE MORE PLACE WHERE AN INTELLIGENT MAN LIKE MUHAMMAD HAD TO KNOW HE WAS LYING, BECAUSE THE LOGIC IS WRONG.

#####128 34/50c: “If I (Muhammad*) am astray, I only stray to the loss of my own soul - - -“. This is utmost and extremely wrong – if Muhammad was astray (and too much point in that direction) it is to the loss of each and every Muslim’s soul. Because then Islam is a false religion. Also see 34/50a just above.

129 35/32d: "- - - some who wrong their own soul - - -". Non-Muslims.

130 36/54b: "- - - not a soul will be wronged in the least (on the Day of Doom*)". Wrong. There is no small (but too big) sinner deserving the sadistic and everlasting torture in Hell - punishment they may deserve, ok, but nothing like this.

131 37/66b: “- - - they (the “infidels” in Hell*) will eat thereof (the disgusting fruits of the zaqqum tree in Hell*) and fill their bellies therewith.” Also in Hell life is so similar to on Earth that you need food and drink - ought not to be necessary as you are immortal there (the same goes for Paradise actually). In Yahweh's Paradise - and the corresponding Hell - there is mentioned nothing about the necessity for food or drink. But then his Paradise is one for the soul, not a one where a body is needed. More proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.

132 39/15e: "Truly, those in loss are those who lose their own souls and their People on the Day of Judgment". The intended meaning here only may be correct if Allah exists and is a god, and if the Quran in addition tells the full truth and only the truth about the possible next life and also about how to qualify for it.

Thought provoking: What does this quote mean if the Quran is a made up book - and at least no book of that quality is from any god - and Islam thus a made up religion?

133 39/41g: “He, then, that receive guidance (see 39/41c*) benefits his own soul - - -“. How can it benefit your soul to steal/loot, hate, rape, murder, mass murder (many, many cases in Muslim history), enslave, suppress, etc? It benefits your pocket – and gives Muhammad and his successors many and cheap warriors – but your soul? Wrong. This kind of life only brutalizes a man – and his culture and religion. For similar claims see 2/2 – 2/5 – 2/120 – 10/35 – 12/111 – 16/64 - 16/89 - 18/55 – 22/54 - 27/2 – 31/3 – 41/44 – 45/11 – 46/30 – 47/32 – 68/7 – 71/13 – 87/3.

134 39/41i: "- - - he (non-Muslim*) who strays (from the Quran*) injures his own soul". This only is true if the Quran is 100% correct in everything.

135 39/42a: “It is Allah who takes the souls (of men) at death - - -.”

  1. 32/11: “The Angel of Death (singular* and obviously a name – capital letters*) - - - will (duly) take your souls - - -.” But:
  2. 47/27: “- - - the angels (plural*) take their souls at death - - -.”

(2 contradictions.)

136 39/42b: "- - - those that did not (He (Allah*)) takes (the soul from*) during their sleep". Sleep according to the Quran has to do with that Allah takes away your soul for some time. You wake up when/if he sends it back. Not exactly the explanation modern science use.

137 39/53c: "- - - transgressed against their (non-Muslims*) souls". Nobody transgresses against themselves or their souls by not believing in a claimed message which obviously - because if hundreds of errors, etc. - is wrong.

138 41/31c: "- - - therein (Paradise*) shall ye (Muslims*) have all that your soul shall desire; therein shall ye have all that ye ask for". See 10/9f and see if you find all you ask for - nearly all you find are bodily pleasures. On top of that this only is a never proved claim.

139 41/46d: "- - - whoever works evil, it is against his own soul - - -". But what about other souls if he leads them to an invalid or made up religion? A relevant question as the Quran is not from a god - too many mistakes, etc.

140 From 42/7f: Is there a Paradise? – and is it in case a paradise for the body like in the Quran? – or for the soul like in the Bible and in many other religions? – or something else.

141 43/60b: “And if it were our (Allah’s*) Will, We could make angels from amongst you (non-Muslims*) - - -.” Then why not? - it had been a much more efficient way of saving the souls of people - if Muhammad spoke the truth - than self proclaimed prophets, terror and war. But may be Muhammad bluffed?

142 43/70-71: “Enter ye the Garden, ye and your wives, in (beauty and) rejoicing. To them will be passed round, dishes and goblets of gold: there will be all that the souls could desire, all that the eyes could delight in - - -”. Like the richest ones in Arabia – and with plenty of fruits to eat according to 43/73. Is earthlike luxury (and sex) all an omnipotent god has to offer in his Paradise?

One of the strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - if they had been, their paradises had been the same one.

143 45/15b: "- - - if he (anyone*) does evil, it works against (his own soul)." Wrong in some cases: If he/she also destroys the soul of others it does not only work against his own soul. A thought very close here: Muhammad! The Quran is not from a god - too much is wrong. If Muhammad consciously made it up, all or parts of it, and if he exists in some second world - what kind of burden is he carrying?. And another: If Muhammad made up the Quran, consciously to gain power, etc., or unconsciously because of an illness like TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) - where are all the Muslims ending, living in accordance with such a harsh and largely immoral war and discrimination religion?

144 47/27: “- - - when the angels (plural*) take their (peoples’*) souls at death”. But:

  1. 32/11: “The Angel of Death (singular* and obviously a name or a title – capital letters*) - - - will (duly) take your souls - - -.”
  2. 39/42: “It is Allah who takes the souls (of men) at death - - -.”

(2 contradictions.)

145 47/38b: "Any who are niggardly (when giving to "Allah's cause*) are so at the expense of their own souls". Allah will remember it when you arrive in the claimed next world. A nice verse also for terrorists needing money for their deeds.

#####146 48/10d: ANOTHER STRONG ONE FOR MUHAMMAD: "- - - then anyone who violates his oath (to Muhammad - see 48/10b above*), do so to the harm of his own soul, and anyone who fulfils what he has covenanted with Allah (in reality with Muhammad*) - Allah will soon grant him a great Reward (free of charge for Muhammad*)". No comment should be necessary here, except; "no payment does Muhammad ask for his preaching" - a square lie (he demanded 20% of everything robbed/stolen - 100% if the victims gave in without a fight - some 2.5% tax from Muslims and Jizya (tax of unspecified size, but often 50% of what was produced + land tax from his stolen estates in Medina, Khaybar, and Fadang = 50% of what was produced) from non-Muslims. Of course all was in the name of Allah, but here on Earth all those riches were for Muhammad - he spent the better part of it for bribes and for war). Hypocrisies also are lies.

147 50/3a: “What! When we die and become dust (shall we live again?)”. Muhammad taught that at the Day of Doom all humans would be revived in flesh, and bodily and not least mentally to be just the same humans that they were here on Earth except rejuvenated – Allah would assemble all the bones, dust, fluids and gas molecules you once consisted of, and recreate your (former) body and soul from it (though in the shape of a young and good-looking individual – but as the Quran talks little about your children in Paradise, it is unclear if babies and children that died were/are recreated as adults or not. It also is unclear if they will be self-sufficient in Paradise, or only members of your family). Believe it who wants to.

148 50/16c: "- - - We (Allah*) know what dark suggestions his (man's*) soul makes for him". Why then 2/233h above?

149 50/21a: "- - - every soul - - -". Normally the Quran tells the resurrection is in body, not in soul.

150 53/15: "- - - the Garden of Abode - 'Jannat-al-Ma'wa'". It is unclear what this means. Some Muslim scholars think the souls of Muslims find their abode there, but nothing is clear about this verse.

151 53/23c: "They (non-Muslims*) follow nothing but conjecture and what their souls desire!" Another never proved claim - from a claimed prophet whose desire was power, riches (at least for bribes) and lots of women. And the relevant counter-question is: Was and is Allah anything but a conjecture from Muhammad's brain and perhaps wishful thinking and desire? - nothing was ever proved about this claimed god.

152 56/2: "Then (at the Day of Doom*) will no (soul (beware here is said soul - normally the Quran claims resurrection in body*)) entertain falsehood - - -". Not even an al-Taqiyya (lawful lie) or a Kitman (lawful half-truth) or a Hilah (lawful deceit/circumvention)? (Three kinds of dishonesty which are among the permitted ones "if necessary" in Islam - the only of the big religions embracing dishonesty).

153 56/47c: "What! When we (humans*) die and become dust and bones, shall we indeed be raised up again?" The resurrection hardly was what the old Arabs reacted to - even if the next life perhaps had no central position there, they knew it well from other religions. But Muhammad claimed that not only the soul, but also the body should be resurrected - which was and is a bit difficult to believe, especially as a next life not encumbered with a physical body sounds much more interesting. But knowing what kind of paradise Allah/Muhammad had to offer, a body was necessary: You cannot have much pleasure from a paradise where almost everything is bent on bodily pleasure, unless you have a body.

154 56/52-54: “Ye will surely taste of the Tree of zaqqum. Then will ye fill your insides therewith, and drink Boiling Water on top of it.” Pure sadism and torture. No need for food or drink is mentioned in the Bible's hell - but then according to the Bible only your soul is resurrected, whereas according to the Quran you are resurrected with your earthly body.

###In the Bible's Hell there only is the fire. One more indication for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - and if you put together all the differences between the two hells, you have a strong proof for the same, as if the two gods had been the same one, also their Hell had been one and the same.

155 56/83: "Then why do ye (humans*) not (intervene) when (the soul of the dying man) reaches the throat - - -". One thing here is that the word "intervene" is not in the original Arab text - the translator has added it to give "the clear and not to be misunderstood language in the Quran" meaning. Another thing is: Does a dying soul pass through the throat? - in case how do you see that so that you know when to intervene? - and how do you intervene to stop it?

156 56/87: "- - - call back the soul (of a dead person) - - -". Muhammad never proved a comma of the central points of his religion, but he demanded profs from anyone else - which shows 2 things: He was unable to prove anything - if not he had used proofs - but all the same he found proofs essential - if not he had not demanded it from others. In this case he even demands a proof he knows it normally is impossible to produce (the main thing obviously was not to find the truth, but to win the debate) - though you find some possible cases in the Bible.

157 57/22a: "No misfortune can happen on earth or in your (humans'*) souls but is recorded in a decree before We (Allah*) bring it into existence - - -". Anything which happens on earth and even anything you think and feel ("happen - - - in your soul") is claimed predestined by Allah.

158 57/22b: "No misfortune can happen on earth or in your souls but is recorded in a decree before We (Allah*) bring it into existence - - -". Everything which happens is not only predestined by Allah, but even recorded "in a decree" before Allah makes it happen. But where is then the justice in punishing man for sins, when it is Allah who has decided it and made it happen??!!

##159 57/22c: “No misfortune can happen on earth or in your souls (minds*) but is recorded in a decree before We (Allah*) brings it into existence - - -.” In more plain words: Nothing can happen unless in accordance with predestination - with what Allah has decided and written down on beforehand. But this contradicts each and every verse saying man has free will and also that man is to blame when he does something wrong. And what about accidents and natural catastrophes – are they planned and executed – like Calvin by the drawer/artist in Calvin and Hobbs – by a benevolent, good god? Not to mention: What about prayers? - if everything is predestined long before and in accordance with a Plan nobody and nothing can change, also prayers can change nothing and are in case meaningless in Islam.

(At least 10 contradictions).

160 57/22d: “No misfortune can happen on earth or in your souls but is recorded in a decree before We (Allah*) bring it into existence: that is truly easy for Allah:” See 4/78 above, Plus: How do Islam explain why Allah makes natural disasters - like the tsunami of 2004? And how do they explain why non-Muslims are condemned to Hell, when “no misfortune in your souls” f.x. not becoming Muslims, can happen except by the will of Allah? A benevolent god?

161 57/22e: "No misfortune can happen on earth or in your souls but is recorded in a decree before We (Allah*) bring it into existence: that (predestination*) is truly easy for Allah". Many Muslims try to explain away the predestination - that it "is not really predestination" or "it is not full predestination" or something like that. The reason is that if Allah predestines everything like the Quran clearly states, he is unjust when he rewards or punishes people for what they do. Therefore Muslims need - and Muhammad needed - free will for man so that man can be blamed for things himself. But free will for man is impossible to combine with full predestination , and thus you meet these claims about "not real predestination", etc. and "partly free will", etc. But this verse (and many others) leaves no doubt about that everything is predestined by Allah, and that predestination is easy for Allah. (NB: Also partly - even a tiny part - free will for man makes predestination and also precognition from difficult to (mainly) impossible - the laws of chaos see to that.

162 59/19b: "- - - He (Allah) made them (non-Muslims*) forget their own souls!" This is wrong unless Allah exists and in addition is a god.

163 From 61/13b: The very best one can say about the Quran and “Glad Tidings”, is that for some parts of it partly were glad tidings because they grew rich and/or powerful, and that for some others parts of it brings peace to the soul – like strong believers gain from ANY of the main religions.

164 63/11a: "But to no soul will Allah grant respite - - -". In no case Allah can do this unless he exists.

**165 64/7b: “The Unbelievers think that they will not be raised up (after this life*)”. Wrong. Islam wants to be a religion for the entire world, and most religions it met and meets have a second life. But what was difficult for the old Arabs - and others - to accept, was that Muhammad told that not only your soul - or something similar - was to be resurrected, but your complete and exact body and mental self, except that you are to be resurrected as a young and good-looking person - there is said nothing about people born with mental or physical handicaps, or babies/children in this connection. (There is one inconsistency, though: 2-3 places the Quran tells that your women in Paradise will be of “suitable age” - f.x. 78/33. Why? - if everyone will be young and then of roughly the same age?) If bodily resurrection is believable or not, anyone will have to decide for himself or herself.

We should mention, though, that the old Pagan Arabs did not pay much attention to a possible next life. But if that is what Muhammad here meant, that is an Arabism, because this was a rarity except among the Arabs.

166 64/16c: "- - - and spend in charity for the benefit of your own soul". The stress the Quran puts on charity is one of the positive aspects with Islam. But beware that there are at least two essential differences between NT and the Quran here:

  1. The Quran tells you to help others to gain merit in Heaven. NT tells you to help others because it is the right thing to do, because they need help, and to gain merit in Heaven.
  2. The Quran tells you get the same merit from helping your wife or other close to you, as when you help strangers - then why help strangers and distant acquaintances? In Christianity to help your nearest ones is a matter of course and more or less a duty, and only helping others gives any amount of merit "up there".

167 65/1f: "- - - any who transgress the limits of Allah, does verily wrong his (own) soul". As the Quran is not from a god, the relevant question is: Are the limits from Allah? - from dark forces pretending to be a god? - or from humans, f.x. Muhammad?

168 69/36a: “Nor hat he (the sinner in Hell*) any food except the corruption from washing wounds.” A pertinent question: How and with what do you wash wounds – and how do fried wounds excrete corruption - in Hell? But that aside:

  1. 37/66: “- - - they (the “infidels” in Hell*) will eat thereof (the disgusting fruits of the zaqqum tree in Hell*) and fill their bellies therewith.” About zaqqum tree also see 44/43 and 56/52-54 above
  2. 88/6: “No food will there be for them (the “infidels” in Hell*) but a bitter dari (a dry bush with needles*) - - -.”

(2 contradictions.)

###Also the big differences between the Bible's and the Quran's hells are more than big and fundamental enough to prove that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - if they had been, also their hells had been more or less identical. In Allah's Hell one needs food and drink, whereas this is not necessary in Yahweh's (as there only are souls, not bodies.)

**169 69/50a: “But truly (Revelation (of the Quran*)) is a cause of sorrow for the Unbelievers”. True, but for other reasons than the Quran indicates: Because of all the war and blood and terror Islam has represented through the ages - and the answer is NOT that also other religions have caused wars, etc. as that does not make a hate, rape, suppression, robbery and blood religion like Islam one single iota better – and in most other religions it is done in spite of the real religion, not because of. (CSPI informs that it has been calculated that through the times some 270 million non-Muslims have been killed because of Islam. Of these are some 120 millions from Africa (all the many millions of slaves brought out of Africa or died during transport are not included).). And because many felt pity for souls going lost in a religion built on a book where something is seriously wrong. (May be their own religion(s) also were wrong, but all the mistaken facts, etc., in a book pretending to be from an omniscient god, prove that in Islam there really is something that is wrong - and it makes one doubt very strongly that it really is a divine revelation).

Actually Islam is the only one of the big religions that directly proves itself – by means of their holy book – that it is something seriously wrong with the holy book and thus with the religion.

170 73/13a: "- - - Food that chokes - - -". According to the Quran one also in Hell (and in Paradise) has to eat and drink, and the food in Hell is very bad and repulsive.

In Yahweh's Paradise and Hell are souls. Souls do not need to eat or drink. In Allah's people do resurrected bodies need food and something to drink. One more proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - if they had been, both their paradises and hells had been identical.

171 73/20j: "- - - whatever good ye (people, Muslims*) send forth for your souls - - -". = Whatever good deeds you do in this life, will benefit you at the Day of Doom - and in the war religion Islam was turned into in/after 622 - 624 AD, nothing was a better deed than to go on raids or war for Muhammad - - - and nearly all of Muhammad's raids were for stealing/looting, taking captives for slaves or extortion, and later also for power and for forcing Islam on the Arabs - large parts of Arabia got the choice: "Become Muslims or fight us and die" (though many by Muhammad's successors, not by Muhammad himself). Also see the list about Muhammad's raids and wars, where the purpose of the raids are given, in https://www.1000mistakes.com .

172 74/38: "Every soul will be (held) in pledge for their deeds". Is this fair if Allah predestines everything you say and do like the Quran states? (The Quran claims that man also has free will, but this is not possible to combine with full predestination, even for an omnipotent god, as the two are mutually excluding each other - in the non-material realms of life, there are things impossible also for omniscient and omnipotent gods.)

173 75/3+4: "Does man think that We (Allah*) cannot assemble his bones? Nay, We are able to put together in perfect order the very tips of his fingers". This has to do with the claimed resurrection. Unlike many religions which tell the resurrection of the spirit, the Quran claims that the body also is resurrected (necessary for Muhammad as nearly all pleasures in his paradise are bodily pleasures). Allah assembled all the atoms, molecules and juices you had been made from, and put it back to remake your complete body and mind - but as a young person (nothing is said about children or f.x. retarded ones on these points). This was - and is - a bit difficult for non-Muslims to believe - especially as a free mind - or soul - is a much more attractive idea.

174 75/3+4: "Does man think that We (Allah*) cannot assemble his bones? Nay, We are able to put together in perfect order the very tips of his fingers". This has to do with the claimed resurrection. Unlike many religions which tell the resurrection of the spirit/soul, the Quran claims that the body also is resurrected (necessary for Muhammad as nearly all pleasures in his paradise are bodily pleasures). Allah assembled all the atoms, molecules and juices you had been made from, and put it back to remake your complete body and mind - but as a young person (nothing is said about children or f.x. retarded ones on these points). This was - and is - a bit difficult for non-Muslims to believe - especially as a free mind - or soul - is a much more attractive idea.

175 75/26: "- - - when (the soul) reaches to the collar-bone (in its exit (at death*)) - - -". It is nice to be told how this happens. But as no-one really knows this, and as the Quran with all its mistakes is from no god, from where is this information? - Or is it simply one more of the Quran's mistakes?

176 75/29: (YA 5825) "- - - one leg will be joined with another". This either refer to making the dead body ready for the funeral, or the Arab word "Saq" (= leg) "may also be taken metaphorically to mean a calanity: calamity will be joined to calamity for the poor sinner's soul - - -". Again the clear and impossible not to understand clearly texts in the Quran.

177 75/38b: (A75/16): "For this rendering of 'sawwa - - -: The stress on Allah's creating man AFTER he has been a sprout (English 2008 edition "germ-cell") 'who fasten itself' (omitted in the English 2008 edition), is a metonym for His endowing the (originally) primitive organism with what is described as a 'soul'". In Islam the fetus is not a human until Allah has given it a soul some time after it is conceived. According to Hadiths this happen when the fetus is 4 months old. The Quran does not tell what a fetus is before this.

178 76/10b: "- - - a Day of distressful wrath from the side of our Lord (Allah*)". There is nowhere documented that there ever will be a Day of Doom - it will not happen unless gods exist and not unless those gods split the good and the bad, f.x. instead of transforming every soul into something good. And even if a Day of Doom really exists, there is nowhere documented that it is run by Allah - a claimed god you only meet in a book full of mistakes, invalid claims - of which this may be one - contradictions., etc., etc., and told only by a man of dubious morality and a man with much to gain by making people believing in his religion, and of making them obedient believers. You find some kind of Hell in most large religion, and it is often used by the leaders to frighten the followers into submission and obedience, just like what is done by Muhammad and the Quran - a very normal practice in many religion simply.

Another fact is that also according to the Bible - and many other religions - there will be a Day of Doom, but according to the Bible it will be run by Yahweh, not by Allah.

179 76/21a: "- - - garments of fine silk and heavy brocade, and they will be adorned with bracelets of silver - - -". As mentioned some places: The Quran's Paradise is just a top luxury copy of life on Earth. Very different from NT's "they (the souls in Paradise*) will be like the angels" (f.x. Luke 20/36, not to mention: "For the Kingdom of God/Yahweh is not a matter of eating and drinking (or sex*) - - -", (Rom.14/17).). Yahweh and Allah the same god with so totally different Paradises? Not one chance.

180 78/38b: "That Day shall the Spirit and the angels stand forth - - -". It is unclear what the Spirit her is. You will find it translated as the souls (of the people), but more common it to believe it is the Holy Spirit from the Bible (it is mentioned a very few times in the Quran). Some go one step further and say that it must be the angel Gabriel, as he is the Holy Spirit. This is a claim - as always from Islam not proved - you often meet from Muslims, at least from lower educated ones, ####even though it is not from the Quran. Our short comment is that no-one who really has read the Bible, would ever get such an idea - not unless he had decided if before he started reading and skipped reading what did not fit his idea. How could f.x. an angel split (parts of) himself in 12 at Pentecost (Acts 2/3-4)? A spirit can split itself, but not an angel.

##########Besides this verse kills the claim that Gabriel was another name for the Holy Spirit. Gabriel was an angel according to both the Bible and to the Quran. Here the Quran says "the Spirit and the angels" = the spirit is not an angel. Thus according to the Quran and this verse, Gabriel cannot be the Holy Spirit.

**181 78/40c: (YA5914): Is Judgment very near? Yes. There are three stages of Judgment. (1) Many of our sins and wrongdoings find their penalty in this life. It may not be an open and striking event, but it corrodes the soul and conscience all the time. Let us therefore turn back to Allah and ask for forgiveness. (2) Where the Penalty is not actually perceived in this life, Death is considered the Lesser Judgment for each individual soul. - - - Death may come to anyone at any time, and we must be ready for it. (3)Then there is the final Judgment, when the whole of the present order passes away - - -". An interesting fact here is that this is not a clear part of the Quran - the ###Lesser Penalty is nowhere clearly mentioned in the book.

###Also see (YA5822) under 75/22c above - a detail is interestingly different: Here death is the Lesser Judgment, there it is some pain after death which is that judgment.

As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d above.

182 79/1-5a: (A79/1-3 – YA5916-5919): This is one of the really (un)clear ones in the Quran: “By (= swearing by*) the (angles) who tear out (the souls of the wicked) with violence; by those who gently draw out (the souls of the blessed); and by those who glide along (on errands of mercy), then press forward as in a race, then arrange to do (the command of their Lord (Allah*) - - -.” Then compare it to this – a translation of exactly the same Arab original text: “Consider those (stars) that rise only to set, and move (in their orbits (!!)) with steady motion, and float (through space) with floating serene, and yet overtake (one another) with swift overtaking, and thus they fulfill the (Creator’s (Allah’s*)) behest!” Is it from the same book? Or something from the aborigines in Australia or somewhere? These very different ways of understanding the text, arises from the fact that only some letters - the consonants - were written in the old Arab texts, and the missing letters has to be guessed. Also note how much is added in ( ) to arrive at the meanings one wishes – this is permitted in Islam (NB: Such inclusions far from always are “leading one by the nose” – it often is correct additional explanations). But anyone who believe in the claim about the very clear language used in the Quran, either has no – zero – knowledge about it, or is very naïve, or goes by wishful thinking only, or is lead by his nose - - - or needs a “head shrink”. Sorry, but that is how it is.

 

We may quote A. Yusuf Ali (YA5619): "A translator’s task in such passages (79/1-5) is extremely difficult (because the original text has so unclear meaning*)".

183 79/10-11: "What! Shall we (humans*) indeed be returned to our former state? - What - when we shall have become rotten bones?" Muhammad claimed people would be resurrected to the claimed next life in body, not only in soul, (though as young adults). This was - and still is - a bit difficult to believe, especially as it is so meaningless - resurrection to a next life as free souls could be much more exciting than still being bound to a cumbersome physical body. On the other hand Muhammad was forced to claim resurrection in body, because except for relative closeness to Allah and peace, all which his paradise has to offer, is physical luxury and bodily pleasure - nothing else. To enjoy that you have to have a body.

184 79/40b: "- - - and had restrained (their) soul from lower Desires". - like stealing/robbing in the name of Allah? - like raping in the name of Allah? - like making fellow humans slaves in the name of Allah? - like suppressing them in the name of Allah? - like destroying their loves in the name of Allah? - like torturing them in the name of Allah (f.x. skinning alive, burning alive, burying alive) - like murdering them in the name of Allah (often in sadistic ways)?

185 81/7: "When the souls are sorted out - - -". Beware that the souls will be sorted in 3 groups according to the Quran - the especially good Muslims "nearest to Allah", going for the best parts of Heaven, the ordinary good Muslims going for the lower classes of Heaven, and the rest, going for Hell. One of the clear differences to the Bible showing Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - if they had been, their Paradises had been one and the same.

186 81/23b: "- - - without doubt he (Muhammad*) saw him (Gabriel?*) on the horizon". This likely refers to Muhammad's claim that he ones saw the angel Gabriel with his 600 wings on the horizon. 600 wings may sound impressive for uneducated people only knowing how fast birds can go with just 2 wings. But 600 wings would create so much turbulence that Gabriel in case would fall like a sack of meat - there is a good reason why both birds and planes only have 2 wings. Any god would know this, but Muhammad not. Then who made the Quran?

Another small point here is that you will not find one single place in the Bible where angels are described with wings. Seraphs yes. Cherubs yes. Ordinary angels no - and Gabriel was an angel both according to the Bible and to the Quran. (The wings of the angels were created by artists in the 3. and 4. century AD, simply because it was the only means those artists knew for flying - it is not from the Bible). If angels are spiritual beings or souls, they may not need wings for flying. One more difference between the Quran and the Bible?

As for Gabriel there is a strange fact in the Quran: He is never mentioned in the surahs from Mecca. Not until after he came to Medina did Muhammad start claiming he got his information(?) and messages(?) from Gabriel. If Muhammad really had got - or even only believed he got - the claimed messages from a central angel, this had been such a strong agument that there is no chance Muhammad had not told about this - and often - during the first difficult 12 years in Mecca. What is the explanation?

"- - - without doubt - - -". Occam's broom.

187 82/1b: (YA5997): “When the sky is cleft asunder - - -.” A literal reference to the Day of Doom? – or metaphorically to your death? – or as metaphorically to “the awakening of the Inner Soul”. Once more: Nobody knows.

188 82/19a: “(It will be) the Day (of Doom*) when no soul shall have the power (to do) ought for another - - -.” But:

  1. 20/109: “On that Day (Day of Doom*) shall no intercession avail, except for those whom permission has been granted by (Allah) - - -.” Here it is possible if Allah permits.
  2. 34/23: “No intercession can avail in His (Allah’s*) Presence (= on the Day of Doom*), except for whom He has granted permission.” Intercession ok if Allah permits.
  3. 43/86: “And those whom they invoke (“gods”, saints*) besides Allah have no power of intercession – only he (has*) who bears witness to the Truth - - -.” The word “he” cannot refer to Allah, because the Quran always then use capital 1. letter (“He”). But according to the Quran the prophets and messengers are to be called forth “to witness to the truth”. “He” therefore must be referring to each and every prophet and messenger - - - who then according to this verse have power to intercede.

Intercession is not impossible in spite of 82/19 – it only takes permission. Hadiths also tell that Muhammad has the right of intercession.

(3 contradictions.)

189 83/34e: "- - - this Day the Believers will laugh at the Unbelievers - - -". One more indication for that Yahweh and Allah is not the same god: NT makes it pretty clear that that not even the god laughs at lost souls.

190 86/1+4: "By the Sky - - - There is no soul but has a protector over it". Sentences in the Quran starting with ”by” normally are an oath - the Quran/Muhammad is swearing by something. But whenever Muhammad or the Quran swears - or in other ways promises - remember that according to the rules for al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth), it is permitted to lie to defend and to forward Islam (and for 6-8 other topics), and that according to Muhammad's own words and deeds in the Quran, oaths should be broken if that will give a more satisfying result - pay expiation to Allah afterwards if necessary. (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

191 86/4: "There is no soul but has a protector over it". According to the Quran every human have angels nearby. Worth remembering each time Muhammad tells Allah cannot send down angels to prove himself or to prove his connection to Muhammad, because sending down angels means that the Day of Doom has arrived.

192 91/7a: "By the Soul, and the proportion and order given to it - - -". Has the soul a specific proportion?

193 91/7b: "By the Soul - - -". Muhammad/Allah swearing by the soul - sentences in the Quran starting with "by" normally are oaths in the Quran. One of the clear proofs in the Quran for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and for that Jesus and Muhammad are not in the same line of prophets like the Quran likes to claim (in addition to that Muhammad was no real prophet - he "did not see the unseen (3/144, 6/50,7/188,10/20, 27/65, 46/9, 72/26, 81/24)" so he was unable to make prophesies (even though some Muslims try to claim the opposite in contradiction to what the Quran itself says), and a "prophet" unable to make prophesies, is no real prophet - - - but it is an impressive and imposing title to "borrow" - many a self proclaimed messenger from one or more gods have "borrowed" this title.

194 91/8a: "And it’s (the soul's - in this case the conscience’s?*) enlightenment as to its wrong and right - - -". Beware that the conscience is a natural part of most (?) humans, but its enlightenment as to what is right and wrong, good and bad, is not something given by nature or by a god. This is given by what your surroundings tell you are god and bad (which is one of the main reasons why bad quality friend may destroy the personality of a person - - - not to mention that this is why many Muslims honestly believe f.x. their moral code is a good one, etc. - compare it to "the golden rule": "Do against others like you want others do against you" and weep.)

195 91/9b: "Truly he succeeds that purifies it (his soul*) - - -". If there really is a soul in the religious meaning of the word, and if there is a next life, this claim may well be true. But is anyone purifying his soul by living according to a book full of mistakes and contradictions, a book "selling" a partly very immoral moral code (compare it to "do unto others like you want others do unto you", and judge yourself), a partly unethical ethical code (f.x. to claim that to steal/rob and rape is "lawful and good" is highly unethical - in addition to that it is immoral and unjust), unjust laws (f.x. to punish a woman for unlawful sex after being raped, if she cannot produce 4 men who have witnessed the rape, perhaps is the most unjust law which has ever existed, at least outside the most brutal and dark dictatorships) - does anyone really purify his/her soul by living according to such a religion?

196 91/10: "- - - he fails who corrupts it (the soul/conscience*)!" To highlight this point, we remind you that to act according to "the golden rule" mentioned in 91/9b just above, you have to "corrupt" any conscience "trained" by Islam - f.x. by refusing to steal/rob, suppress, kill, etc.

197 97/4d: (A16/2 (and A97/4)): "The term "ruh" (lit. "spirit", "soul" or "breath of life") is often used in the Quran in the sense of "inspiration" - and, more particularly, "divine inspiration" - - -". Well, this is one - or actually 4-5 - possible meaning(s). But also see 97/4c just below.

198 100/1c: “By the (Steeds) that runs (into the midst of the foe*) - - -.” The Arab word “al-‘adiyat” no doubt means a war-horse or charger. But is the meaning literal? Or is the charges symbol for the good Muslim fighting for Muhammad/Allah? Or is it symbol “beyond any doubt” for “the erring human soul or self”? Muslim scholars find the text unclear, and are still debating – after 1400 years.

198 + 11.216 = 11.414 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

237.   SPIRITS - THE HOLY ONE

In the Bible, the Holy Spirit is something a bit diffuse, but clearly something very special. Muhammad never understood it, but ha mentioned it a few times in the Quran. But he had so vague knowledge about Christianity, that he indicated in the Quran that Mary, mother of Jesus, was the 3. part of the Trinity, instead of the Holy Spirit. This tells something about the knowledge the maker of the Quran had, whoever that was.

Well, as for the Trinity, it is not part of the Bible. That dogma is man-made and may be wrong, as this is not said in the Bible. It is a Christian dogma from the 4. century, and it got its present form from the so-called Cappadocian Fathers (Gregory of Nyassa (332-395), Basil the Great (320-79), Gregory of Nazeanzus (329-389)). The nearest you come in the Bible is that Jesus many times said that he and his father, Yahweh, were one.)).

But the Muslim dogma that the Holy Spirit just is another name for the angel Gabriel, has even less reliability. There is no foundation for it in the Quran, and it is very clear from the Bible that it is something much more special than a mere angel. Nobody reading the Bible with an open mind, would ever get such an idea. (The only basis for this dogma is that Muhammad often claimed Gabriel brought him messages, but a few times claimed that so did the Holy Spirit. Logical misconclution: The two have to be one and the same(!)

¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤

001 2/87g: "- - - the Holy Spirit." This is one of the few places the Holy Spirit is clearly mentioned in the Quran (at least here and in 2/253, 5/110, 16/102, 17/85, and 26/193 - the last one not 100% sure, though). All the same Muhammad believed the trinity consisted of God/Yahweh, Jesus and Mary!! Also beware that many Muslims who has not read the Bible, believe the Holy Spirit = the arch angel Gabriel (Gabriel was said to bring Muhammad messages, the Holy Spirit was said a few times to bring Muhammad messages - "ergo" the Spirit = Gabriel. You also other places in Islamic literature will see that not all Muslims have studied the laws of logic. "Cows have horn. Cars have horn. 'Ergo' they are the same"?) Anyone who reads the Bible with an open mind, will see that the Holy Spirit is something special.

002 2/253f: "- - - the holy spirit - - -" This is one of the few times the Spirit - also named the Holy Spirit, the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Truth, the Spirit of God/Yahweh, the Spirit of the Lord, etc. - like Allah and like Muhammad it has several names) - is mentioned in the Quran (you also find it in 2/87, 5/110, 16/102, 17/75 likely in 26/193). Muhammad had very vague ideas about it and f.x. believed the Trinity consisted of Yahweh, Jesus and Mary (!). Muslims often claim it is another name for the angel Gabriel - and idea no-one who ever read the Bible with an open mind would get. And in addition to everything else which makes the claim ridicules, the old Jews knew well the difference between angels and spirits, and in the entire Bible there is not one single case where the two are mixed or mistaken. (But never think that a religious person will believe facts if they do not fit his belief).

#003 4/171k: "- - - a Spirit proceeding from Him (Allah*) - - -". One of the few references in the Quran to the Holy Spirit. (Not 100% sure.)

#004 4/171l: "- - - a Spirit proceeding from Him (Allah*) - - -". A contradiction to the Bible - in the Bible the Holy Spirit belongs to Yahweh.

005 5/73b: “They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity - - -.” Muhammad never understood the trinity - he even believed it consisted of Yahweh, Jesus, and Mary, a mistake no god - agreeing or not agreeing to the Trinity - would have made. But for once there is a possibility that the Quran has a point; the Trinity is formally not a part of the Bible. On the other hand those are the three special ones: Yahweh, Jesus and the Holy Spirit - we may think of them as God, his co-worker and representative, and his errand boy/messenger boy and helper. Trinity or not - those three have a special status according to both the Bible and the Quran (even though the Quran does not agree to which status - it even say the Holy Spirit = the angel Gabriel, which makes anyone really knowing the Bible laugh.) There also is the fact that according to the Bible, Jesus said that he and his father was one - but figuratively meant. But also see the introduction to this chapter.

006 5/110c: "- - - I (Allah*) strengthened thee (Jesus*) with the holy spirit - - -". Contradicted by the Bible which tells it was Yahweh who did this. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

007 5/110d: "- - - the holy spirit - - -". The Spirit is mentioned a few times in the Quran, even though Muhammad did not understand it properly. Muslims today often claim that this is just another name for the angel Gabriel, even though this is not said in the Quran - perhaps because Muhammad used to claim it was Gabriel who brought him many of his claimed revelation (though other times he dreamt them), and once it is mentioned that the Holy Spirit brought him some revelations; viola! - the Holy Spirit = Gabriel. The logic is invalid (the most you can say logically, is: "perhaps the Holy Spirit is Gabriel" - there is a long distance from "perhaps" to "is", but you will often see Muslims doing this kind of logically invalid "jumps" to get answers they wish or want. Just keep an eye open and you will see such logically invalid "conclusions" here and there.) No-one who knows the Bible would get that idea, as the Holy Spirit clearly is something special (and also the old Jews knew the difference between an angel and a spirit) - but Islam as normal just claims without any documentation.

008 7/180a: "The most beautiful names belong to Allah - - -". Islam claims Allah has 99 names - and the names do exist in long lists. If the meaning of those names - like "the Oft-Forgiving", "the Most Merciful", etc. - had been true, the meaning of the names had been attractive. But the names themselves are far too prosaic to be beautiful. A curiosa: Even though Allah has 99 names and Muhammad a number, Muslims claim that the fact that the Holy Spirit one place cannot be the Holy spirit, because there is used another name, "!The spirit of Truth" - "ergo" the Spirit of Truth" must mean Muhammad, they claim (in their main claim for Muhammad in NT in John , ch. 14 -16). Logic? - especially when you know that the Holy Spirit is known by at least 6 different names in the Bible, included the Spirit of Truth?

009 9/31e : "- - - yet they (the Christians*) were commanded to worship but One God - - -". Muhammad never understood the Christian religion and thinking. According to Christians there is only one god. Then there is a figure - a helper or something (the son, Jesus) - who in reality gets his light and his power from God/Yahweh. And finally there is something more diffuse and seldom seen; The messenger boy or something, but something MUCH more than an angel, named the Holy Spirit (sometimes wrongly claimed to be the arch angel Gabriel by Muslims who have never read the Bible, or who have read it with a closed mind). To use a picture: There is one sun. Then there is a moon which gets its light from the sun. And there is the seldom seen satellite somewhere around. But only one sun. And that is the complete "pantheon". To mix Mary into the Trinity (like Muhammad does at least one place in the Quran) just is one more proof for that no god made the Quran, and for that Muhammad did not understand the trinity. Mary and the other saints (only for the Catholics, and not for all of them) are not divine. In Islam some good Muslims end in the higher heavens closer to Allah. In the same way Catholics believe that some really good Christians end up closer to God in Heaven - though figuratively. And just like Muhammad claimed he can interfere for whom he like on the Last Day, Catholics believe that as these normal, but good, humans called saint can interfere with God on our behalf, as they are closer to him. But as this is not a part of the Bible, the Protestants - and the Sunni Muslims - may be right: May be there are no saints.

010 16/102a: “- - - the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation (= the Quran*) from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -.”

  1. 2/97: “Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel – for he brings down the (revelation (= the Quran*)) (at least what is not brought by “inspiration”*) - - -“. Muslims sometimes say that Gabriel brought the most of those who were not sent by “inspiration”, but that the Holy Spirit brought some, and they might have got away with it - - - if it was not because other Muslims say that this is one of the proofs for that the Holt Spirit = Gabriel (sic!!).

In a way a contradiction. But the main effect is that as the Quran says the Holy Spirit brought down some verses, many Muslims as said believe the Holy Spirit just is another name for Gabriel. No-one who has read the Bible with an open mind would get such an idea (and it is neither said, nor hinted in the Quran).

011 16/102b: “- - - the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation - - -“. Muhammad Azad: “The Message of the Quran” tells that the Arab word “ruh al-qudus” (= the Holy Spirit) is used 3 times in the Quran (2/87, 5/110 – both connected to Jesus – and here), and that here it means the angel Gabriel. The Holy Spirit in Arab = Gabriel? That in case means that in 2/87 and 5/110 Jesus is strengthened with the angel Gabriel - a bit far from what the Bible tells. (It is likely Islam sets the Holy Spirit = Gabriel because the Quran tells that Gabriel brought large parts of the Quran (other parts came to him in dreams, by "inspiration", etc.), so that when it says that the Holy Spirit brought him verses, that must mean that the book is talking about Gabriel - not 100% logical to say the least of it. (But Muslims often are quick to go from "this may be so" to "this is so" and sometimes even to "this is a proof"). Also see 2/97. (There are texts in the Bible making this impossible - f.x. that the disciples of Jesus each got a part of the Spirit, whereas angels do not split into pieces. Besides the Bible very well knows the difference between angels and spirits. And not to forget: It is nowhere said in the Quran that Gabriel = the Holy Spirit.)

012 16/102c: (YA2141): "- - - the Holy Spirit - - -". YA's comment: = The title of the Angel Gabriel - - -". This is a claim you sometimes meet from Muslims. But no-one who ever read the Bible with an open mind, would ever get such an idea (and even the Quran does not say so) - the Holy Spirit clearly is something special in the Bible, and something much more and much more essential than even an arch angel. Besides the Bible knows very well the difference between a spirit and an angel. And: When the Holy Spirit came to the disciples of Jesus after he had left them, it split or splintered off something and took part in each of them. No angel could be split in 11 (Judas Iscariot was not there naturally) or more. Some spirits can.

013 17/47b: "- - - the wicked say, "Ye (Muslims*) follow none other than a man bewitched - - -". May be they were not wicked, but wise; in the old days people with mental disorders often were believed to be bewitched - invaded by a bad spirit. Modern medical science says there is a strong chance Muhammad had TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) - an illness which may give exactly the symptoms and illusions Muhammad is told to have had.

014 17/85a: "- - - the Spirit - - -". Most Muslim scholars mean this is a reference to the Holy Spirit (mentioned by full name 3 times in the Quran), though other explanations are possible - like Islam claims, the Quran has a very distinct language, easy to understand and impossible to misunderstand(?). But many of the scholars mix the Holy Spirit with the arch angel Gabriel - Gabriel brought messages to Muhammad according to the Quran, and the Holy Spirit a few times did the same - "ergo" the Holy Spirit must be Gabriel, Q.E.D. No comments except that no really knower of the Bible - Christian, Jewish, or something else - would ever get that idea if the book is read with an open mind.

015 17/85b: "- - - the Spirit (of inspiration) - - -". This explanation by the translator in reality is unclear, as it most likely is the Holy Spirit which is meant. But then the Quran a couple of places tells that the Holy Spirit brought verses to Muhammad, and as he claimed to get many of his verses "by inspiration", this conclusion - right or wrong - is easy to make. A small curio here: In the Hadiths it is told that Muhammad only dreamt such verses and surahs in the bed of Aisha (his child wife).

#016 From 59/24b: Just for the record: the Bible uses at least 5 or 6 different names for "the Holy Spirit".

017 70/4a: “The angels and the Spirit (“ruh” in the Arab text) - - -.” The word “ruh” is used a few times in the Arab text – at least in 16/2, 78/38, 97/4c and here. It likely means “the Spirit” or “the Holy Spirit”, but is f.x. in 16/2 given another translation (“inspiration”). A number of Muslims wants it to be another name for the angel Gabriel (simply because it was he who was said to bring down the surahs to Muhammad, and it is said a couple of places that the “ruh” – the Spirit or Holy Spirit – brought down such ones, “ergo” the Holy Spirit = the angel Gabriel). But the logic is not correct – by means of the rules of logical deductions it is possible only to say they may be the same. And here is another piece of information which makes that deduction unlikely or impossible: The “ruh” – the Holy Spirit” - is not included among the angels ("The angels and the Sprit" the text says). Neither is it the other places – which makes it highly unlikely logically that the Holy Spirit is an angel - the angel Gabriel. (In the Bible it is clear they are not the same).

018 70/4b: "- - - the Spirit ("ruh") - - -". May be a reference to the Holy Spirit of the Bible.

019 78/38b: "That Day shall the Spirit and the angels stand forth - - -". It is unclear what the Spirit her is. You will find it translated as the souls (of the people), but more common it to believe it is the Holy Spirit from the Bible (it is mentioned a very few times in the Quran). Some go one step further and say that it must be the angel Gabriel, as he is the Holy Spirit. This is a claim - as always from Islam not proved - you often meet from Muslims, at least from lower educated ones, ####even though it is not from the Quran. Our short comment is that no-one who really has read the Bible, would ever get such an idea - not unless he had decided if before he started reading and skipped reading what did not fit his idea. How could f.x. an angel split (parts of) himself in 12 at Pentecost (Acts 2/3-4)? A spirit can split itself, but not an angel.

##########Besides this verse kills the claim that Gabriel was another name for the Holy Spirit. Gabriel was an angel according to both the Bible and to the Quran. Here the Quran says "the Spirit and the angels" = the spirit is not an angel. Thus according to the Quran and this verse, Gabriel cannot be the Holy Spirit.

020 78/38c: (YA5911): "Some(!*) Commentators understand by 'the Spirit' the angel Gabriel, as he is charged specially with bringing Messages to human prophets". An interesting piece of information, as this is neither from the Quran nor from the Bible, and arch angel Gabriel also hardly is mentioned as a messenger boy in connection to Biblical prophets. (But the claim of course makes Muhammad look like a prophet at this point as he claimed he god his messages via Gabriel.) Also see 78/38b just above.

As for Gabriel there is a strange fact in the Quran: He is never mentioned in the surahs from Mecca. Not until after he came to Medina did Muhammad start claiming he got his information(?) and messages(?) from Gabriel. If Muhammad really had got - or even only believed he got - the claimed messages from a central angel, this had been such a strong agument that there is no chance Muhammad had not told about this - and often - during the first difficult 12 years in Mecca. What is the explanation?

021 97/4e: (YA6219): "The Spirit: Usually understood to be the angel Gabriel, the Spirit of Inspiration". Quite another meaning than the one(s) in 97/4b above.

And in addition: No-one who has ever read the Bible with an open mind, has ever got the idea the Spirit (= the Holy Spirit) was another name for the arch angel Gabriel - to find such a meaning in the Bible, you have to have strong and fixes ideas before you start reading. For one thing it is clear from all contexts that the Holy Spirit is something different from everything else and something special. For another the functions are different - how could f.x. an angel split himself in 12 at Pentecost - or be part of many disciples (the helper Jesus promised them before he left them). And not least: It is very clear that the Bible knows the difference between angles and spirits - there never is a mix-up of those two (also hardly in the Quran - but Muslim scholars have found a "good" idea anyhow, even though it is neither in the Bible, nor in the Quran). #####The Holy Spirit = Gabriel is not found neither in the Bible nor in the Quran - and is anti-thesis to the contexts and the texts in the Bible. For good measure see 94/4f just below.

#####022 97/4f: "Therein came down the angels and the Spirit - - -". The (Holy*) Spirit - here like in the Bible - is not an angel, and thus has to be mentioned separately.A verification in the Quran for that the Holy Spirit is not the angel Gabriel. Remember here that it also nowhere in the Quran is said or indicated that the Holy Spirit = Gabriel - this never documented claim is a later invention made by Muslims, and only based on the fact that the Quran tells Gabriel brought Muhammad messages, but also that the Holy Spirit a few times did so - - - which according to Muslims/Islam "must" mean the Holy Spirit = Gabriel. This deduction is far outside all rules for logically correct deductions.

22 + 11.414 = 11.436 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

238.   SPIRITS

Spirits - in Arab "ruh" - are non-physical living beings. Their existence has never been proved neither by science nor by anybody else, but you often find spirits in folklore and in many or most religions. Beware that Jinns are not really spirits, as they are made from fire = something physical. (Fire = smoke and gas so hot that it emits light.)

A special case is the Holy Spirit. Also angels are a special case - normally not included in the name "spirits".

The word "spirit" also is used connected to humans, referring to one's mental life or one's soul.

¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤

001 4/1d: (A4/1): ”- - - created you from a single Person (”nafs”) - - -.” Is this the correct meaning? Or f.x. ”- - - from humankind - - -” (Muhammad ’Abdu)? Or ”- - - from a soul - - -.” Or “- - - from a spirit - - -”? Or ”- - - from a living entity - - -.”? Or ”- - - from a vital principle - - -”? Or “- - - from self - - -.”? Etc. The word ”nafs” is very vague and has many meanings – far from the clear language Muslims claim. At least 7 possible varieties of meaning - "ways of reading". Is this a sample of a god's clear speech?

002 15/17a: “- - - We (Allah*) have guarded them (the Zodiacal Signs*) from every evil spirit accursed: - - -” According to the Quran, the stars – included the Zodiacal signs – are fastened to the lowermost of 7 heavens (material ones – they have to be, if the stars can be fastened to one of them). But jinns/bad spirits wanted to spy on the heavens, and had to be chased away by stars used as shooting stars. And then the Zodiacal signs were guarded at the same time. According to science this is utter nonsense to at least the fifth power. Any god had known – even baby ones – but Muhammad not. Then who made the Quran with all its mistaken facts, etc.?

###003 15/17b: “- - - We (Allah*) have guarded them (the Zodiacal Signs*) from every evil spirit accursed: - - -”. When you know a little about astronomy, this is such a nice claim that we like to look at it. Incredible that anyone with a measurable IQ is able to believe such a text.

**004 15/18a: “But any (jinn/bad spirit*) that gains a hearing by stealth (by spying on the heavens*) - - -". According to the Quran, jinns and bad spirits often try to spy on what is going on in the Heavens, by trying to listen to what is said. (If you think this is stuff from a fairy tale, do not blame us - a lot of the stuff in the Quran are from fairy tales, legends, etc.).

**005 15/18b: “But any (jinn/bad spirit*) that gains a hearing by stealth (by spying on the heavens*), is pursued by a flaming fire, bright (to see).” According to the Quran, the stars are fastened to the lowest of 7 material heavens (37/6-7, 41/12). The stars are lights and decoration, but are also used for shooting stars for weapons to chase away jinns and bad spirits. (YA comment 1954: "A shooting star appears to be meant".) Muhammad did not know that the mass of a star is somewhere in the range of 1 shooting star x 10 to the 20. or more power and utterly impossible to use as a shooting star in our atmosphere – for the reason of its glaring light, for the reason of heat, for the reason of irradiation, for the reason of gravity, for the reason of sheer size, etc. As said in 15/17a above: Scientific nonsense and insanity to at least the 5. power. No god uttered this fairy tale stuff – but Muhammad did not know any better. Then who made the Quran?

006 16/2d: “He (Allah*) doth send down His angels with inspiration (“ruh”) - - -.” But the Arab word “ruh” used here does not really mean inspiration – it means spirit or the Spirit (or the Holy Spirit) or the breath of life. We may add that Muslims often claims that the Holy Spirit just is another name for the angel Gabriel (an idea no-one who reads the Bible with an open mind would get). But here it is clear that the (Holy) Spirit – “ruh” – is not included among the angels (the angels transported the "ruh"). (Actually Muhammad never quite understood what the Holy Spirit – one of it’s at least 8-10 names – was). Also see f.x 70/4a, 78/38 and 97/4c where the same word – “ruh” – is used (it is used 21 times in the Quran).

**007 21/32c: “And We (Allah*) have made the heavens (plural and wrong*) as a canopy well guarded - - -”. Muhammad was unable to see the difference between stars and shooting stars. In the Quran it is told that the shooting stars (mistaken for being ordinary stars) are “arrows” used to chase away bad spirits or jinns (beings “borrowed” from old Arab pagan religion and folklore and unknown to any other “prophet” than Muhammad) wanting to spy on Heaven. Any child today knows the difference between a real star and a shooting star, and also what would happen on and to the Earth if shooting stars were real stars. Even a baby dwarf god had known this - but Muhammad not, as it is modern knowledge. The pertinent or impertinent question is: Who then composed the Quran?

008 23/17b; (YA2876): We simply quote: “Thara’iq"; tracts, roads, orbits, or paths in the visible heaven. These seven are clearly marked to our eyes (??*), in the immense space that we see around us. We must go to astronomy to form any plausible theories to these motions. But their simplest observation gives us a sublime view of beauty, order, and grandeur in the universe. The assurance given in the next clause, that Allah cares for us and all His Creation, calls out attention to Allah’s goodness, which is further illustrated in the subsequent verses.” #####A lot of words to avoid explaining anything about the 7 material heavens with the stars fastened to the lowest one (37/6-7, 41/12), and with stars used as shooting stars to chase away spying jinns and bad spirits, which is what the Quran in reality is speaking about. Here things are clear, but is made unclear and wrapped up in verbal wool to tuck away errors which the Quran clearly states many places.

*009 26/193a: “With it (the Quran*) came the Spirit of Faith and Truth”. If truth came down with the Quran, it must have been mutilated later. That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact. Actually it is strongly proved at least to a large part wrong - so strongly that all the many errors, etc. prove 100% and more that the Quran is not from any god - too much is wrong. Too many and often too grave wrong facts, other mistakes, contradictions, etc.

NB: This is one of the places where Quran mentions "the Holy Spirit", (though the Arab "Al ruh al Amin" normally refers to the archangel Gabriel - but Muslims often mix the two, and many do not even know the difference and believe they are the same. This even though Muslim top scholars know the Bible, and no-one really knowing the Bible would mix the two; for one thing it indirectly, but very clear is told in the texts that the two are two different kinds of beings, and for another the writers of the Bible knew the difference between angels and spirits.)

As for Gabriel there is a strange fact in the Quran: He is never mentioned in the surahs from Mecca. Not until after he came to Medina did Muhammad start claiming he got his information(?) and messages(?) from Gabriel. If Muhammad really had got - or even only believed he got - the claimed messages from a central angel, this had been such a strong agument that there is no chance Muhammad had not told about this - and often - during the first difficult 12 years in Mecca. What is the explanation?

*010 26/210-211: “No evil ones have brought down this (Revelation). It would neither suit them - - -“. May be no evil spirits have brought down the Quran (though they may have brought it up). But is definite that no omniscient god has done so – too many mistakes, etc. It also is definite that no good or benevolent god or spirit did it – far too inhuman, full of hate and suppression and blood – not to mention the wretched ethic and moral codes in the book. All the same it is possible it was not sent down by bad or evil forces (even bad supernatural forces would be too intelligent to make a book with so many mistakes, contradictions, invalid logic, etc., as they had to know they would be found out sooner or later and lose their credibility - though a possibility is that the god demanded a low quality book to permit the Devil to make such a trap - f.x. may be the god wanted it to be possible for humans to understand something was wrong and thus evade the trap) – it simply is possible, and even likely, that it was made by one or more men (all the wrong science and "knowledge" in accordance with the local beliefs in and around Arabia at that time, and a lot more points in that direction). But what is absolutely sure, is that an Islam like the one one finds in the surahs from Medina suits evil spirits and forces very well: Inhumanity, rape, stealing, dishonesty, blood, hate, war. Just ask Muslims what they think about the Mongols attacking them in the east. The religion in Mongolia under and after Djingis Khan basically was quite similar to Islam concerning war, etc. When Islam used their war machine and inhumanity in f.x. India and other places, they according to all Muslims were heroes. Then they met Mongols who did just the same to Muslims - - and the Mongols were terrible monsters. But then the southern Mongols became Muslims and continued in the same way like before, but now against non-Muslims - - - and now they were great heroes according to Islam. Ask them if the f.x. remember the name Timur Lenk (Tamerlane).

Islam as described in the surahs from Medina, definitely suits evil forces/spirits.

011 27/17f: "- - - Jinns - - -". An Arabism - see 13/4d above - as they only exists in and around Arabia. The word sometimes is translated with "spirits", but they clearly are something different from ordinary spirits.

012 34/6c: “- - - the (Revelation (the Quran*)) - - -“. If it is a revelation, it at least is not from an omniscient god – too many mistakes, etc., and not from any good powers (god or spirit) – too much dishonesty, stealing, suppression, rape, hate, blood, murder, war, inhumanity, etc. Is it in case from the dark forces?

#013 34/8c: "- - - has a spirit (sized) him (Muhammad*)?" This question was and is more relevant than you should believe, because in the old days when someone lost his mind or turned crazy - more or less - one many places believed he/she had been invaded by a bad spirit. This expression thus means they thought there was something wrong with his brain - - - and modern medical science strongly suspects he had the mental decease TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) - an illness which can give just such fits and traumas/religious "experiences" like it is told Muhammad got. (Source among others BBC: "God on the Brain?" (BBC, Thursday 20 March 2003, BBC Two 17. April 2003).) If this is the case, this is a good partial - or full - explanation for why the Quran was made up (the rest easily may be his lust for power, honor and women).

014 34/41c: "- - - Jinns, most of them (non-Muslims*) believed in them". Wrong. In most parts of the world nobody knew about jinns - they are from Arab and surrounding folklore and pagan religion. An Arabism. They f.x. were material beings and not spirits, and therefore cannot be compared to the spirits one find in many religions.

015 34/46c: "- - - your Companion (Muhammad*) is not possessed - - -". Well, mental problems in the old times often were described as being possessed or being invaded by a bad spirit. Modern medical science suspects that Muhammad had a mental illness named TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. Source among others BBC: "God on the Brain?" (BBC, Thursday 20 March 2003, BBC Two 17. April 2003)). So perhaps that was just what he was according to the old way of saying it: Possessed. Plus he liked power and women and not least riches for "buying"/bribing more followers.

***016 37/6c: “We (Allah*) have indeed decked the lower heaven with - - - stars - - -”. The nature has produced billions of stars - of which man with his naked eyes is able to see 6ooo-7ooo. But in no way he used them to deck a non-existing lower heaven (below the moon according to the Quran, which tells that the moon is between the heavens) - - - and to the Quran as the moon is "between the heavens") - and neither do nature use the stars as weapons (shooting stars) to chase away evil spirits or jinns like in the Quran, next verse (37/7). Also if the stars - suns - were below the moon, Earth had been pretty hot (in addition to all other nonsense this verse would imply if it had been true, compared to the reality). Is this a proof for that nature knows what it is doing, whereas Muhammad was bluffing? Also see 41/12, 67/5.)

***017 37/6+7: “We (Allah*) have decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars - (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits.” See first 37/6 just above. Then: The Quran does not know the difference between a star and a shooting star, and tells that the stars are used for shooting stars for chasing away evil spirits that wants to spy or listen to what is said in Heaven. The shooting stars are used as weapons in such cases. It should not be necessary to say that this is wrong at least to the 25th – 30th order = the difference between the mass of a star and of a shooting star - literally trillions and more times bigger than shooting stars, and trillions of times as far off. Also see verse 8 below. That the lowest heaven is guarded, belongs only in fairy tales. Any god had known - then who made the Quran?

018 37/7: "(The stars are*) (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits - - -". Other places in the Quran make it clear that the guard means that Allah also uses the stars as shooting stars - weapons to chase away jinns and bad spirits wanting to spy on what is said in Heaven. The difference between a real star of zillions of tonnes, and shooting star of milligrams or a little more, is such that comments really should be unnecessary. And bad spirits spying on heavens which are not there? - the only thing which exists in the height where shooting stars happens, is rarefied air. We simply are back in the fairy tales. Also see 37/8 just below.

019 37/8: "(Stars used as shooting stars are used as weapons against jinns and bad spirits*) (So) they should not strain their ears in the direction of the Exalted Assembly (Allah's assembly*) - - -". If anyone are able to believe jinns and bad spirits are cruising or hiding in the heights where the shooting stars happen, to listen to what is said in the 7 heavens which do not exist (in those heights there only is rarefied air) they are fully permitted to believe so. No other comment should be necessary.

Well, we may add that this quote sounds like from a fairy tale. Perhaps with a reason?

020 37/9: "Repulsed - - -". The jinns and the bad spirits are chased away by the stars Allah uses for shooting star. If these verses were unknown, one might guess the writer was the slightly romantic Dane Mr. H. C. Andersen - it would fit his style. (If there is anyone not knowing him: He was a most famous writer of fairy tales.)

021 37/10: "Except such (jinns and bad spirits*) as snatch away something (secrets from Heaven*) by stealth, and they are pursued by a flaming fire, of piercing brightness (stars used as shooting stars by Allah as weapons to chase away jinns and bad spirits)". If anyone is able to believe jinns, etc. are cruising around or hiding high up in the stratosphere trying to steal secrets from the heavens which do not exist - at least not in the heights where shooting stars happen, they are permitted to do so. Any more comments should be unnecessary - except also see 37/7 and 37/8 above".

022 37/36e: "- - - possessed - - -". Remember here that in the old times one often believed that people with something wrong with their brain, were possessed by an evil spirit. And as Muhammad quite likely had TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. See f.x. BBC, Thursday, 20 March 2003 - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2865009.stm - and 17. April 2003 on BBC Two) according to modern medical science, may be they were right - quite likely he was "possessed" by TLE.

023 40/15d: "- - - the spirit (of inspiration) - - -". Muhammad claimed he got his information from his god by means of inspiration, and many places in the Quran you find he claims all other prophets received their information the same way - which in case would make Muhammad’s claim that he himself got it by inspiration, a normal way of divine communication, and thus Muhammad a normal prophet. As far as we can find the word "inspiration" is not used in such connections anywhere in the Bible, and thus not normal for Biblical prophets.

024 41/12f: “- - - and (provided it) (the lowest heaven*) with guard”. We know from other places in the Quran, that this “guard” is stars mistaken for shooting stars used against bad spirits and jinns wanting to spy on the heavens. The only place such “information” fits today, is in fairy tales. Who composed the Quran?

025 44/14e: "- - - (Muhammad is*) a man possessed!" There is a clear possibility that this claim was correct, as modern medical science suspects he had the mental disease Temporal Lobe Epilepsy - TLE. This mental disorder can give just the kind of religious "experiences" Muhammad claimed. Remember that in the real old days one often believed that a person with a mental disorder, simply was possessed by a bad spirit.

026 46/30b: "O our people!" Notice that the Jinns compare themselves to people, not so spirits - this according to Muhammad (who ought to have corrected them if they were wrong - or perhaps made the story himself*) and the Quran.

027 52/29c: "- - - nor are you (Muhammad*) one possessed". This may be wrong, as in the old times it was rather common to believe that a person with a mental disorder, was possessed by a bad spirit. And modern medicine strongly suspects Muhammad had TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) - TLE will explain very much in case.

##028 57/26c: "- - - Right Guidance - - -". Here indicated Islam. The Quran claims the old Jewish prophets - and it's many, many other claimed prophets - were teaching Islam, but that they were superseded by paganism or twisted into Jewism or Christianism. As for the last 2 mentioned religion, the Quran is proved wrong on this point both by science and even stronger by Islam. As for superseded by paganism, it is up to you to believe it, but there never was found one trace from Islam older than 610 AD when Muhammad started his new religion. Also: Allah cannot have much power if he could be superseded by each and every pagan god and spirit.

#029 58/22j: "- - - (Allah has*) strengthened them (Muslims*) with a spirit from Himself". This only may - may - be true if Allah exists and is a god - - - or from the dark forces. Another thing is that strong believers often feel strengthened by their religion - even clearly false ones - but this goes for believers in any religion.

####030 67/3a: “He (Allah*) Who created the seven heavens one above another - - -”. It is hardly possible to state the Quran’s picture of our sky more accurately and clearly than this. Neither is possible to be much more wrong, especially when we add that according to the Quran the heavens are held up by invisible pillars, that the heavens are made from something material (if not you could build them and not fasten the stars, etc. to them), that the stars are fixed to the lowest heaven (37/6-7, 41/12) with the sun (?) and the moon between the heavens, and that the stars also double as shooting stars to chase away spying Jinns and bad spirits - and everything as said kept up there by invisible pillars resting on Earth.. See 67/5a and 67/5b below. Who composed the Quran - a god or someone not omniscient? Muhammad perhaps? (And 71/15 even confirms “one above the other”).

This is not even fairy tale quality today - even small children know it is wrong.

Who made the Quran?

031 67/5c: "- - - the Evil Ones - - -". Here Jinns and bad spirits.

032 68/2b: "Thou (Muhammad*) art not - - - mad or possessed". Perhaps and perhaps not - modern medical science suspects TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. TLE fits his symptoms very well and would also explain his religious experiences or perhaps hallucinations. And in the old times they often believed that one who had a mental illness, was possessed by a bad spirit.

033 68/51f: "Surely he (Muhammad*) is possessed!" They may have been right, if he had f.x. TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) like modern medical science suspects, because at that time one often believed that someone with a mental disease was possessed by a bad spirit. At least they had knowledge and intelligence enough to see that something was wrong.

034 72/1b: "Jinn". A being originally from old Arab folklore, legends and old pagan Arab religion. According to the Quran, they were created by Allah from fire, and it seems that most of them end in Hell. It also seems, but is not 100% sure from the Quran, that Iblis - the Muslim Devil - originally was a Jinn. In western literature "jinn" often is translated with "spirit", but unlike spirits they seem to be material, though invisible, and also the Quran differentiates between Jinns and spirits, which means Jinns are not spirits. There exist old Islamic laws regulating marriages between humans and jinns, (but no such marriage has ever taken place), and such marriages could not be arranged unless (the Muslims thought) Jinns were material. Also fire = smoke and gas so hot that it emits light, and both are material. Strangely you found Jinns only in and around Arabia - an Arabism in a claimed universal god's tales.

035 72/5: "But we (Jinns (for Muhammad)*) do think that no man or spirit should say aught that is untrue against Allah". No comments except: Remember how much is wrong in the Quran and that not a comma of the essential claims is proved.

Well, one more thing: As the Quran is from no god and full of mistakes, contradictions, etc.: Who is speaking untruth about Allah? - Muslims or non-Muslims?

*036 72/8a: “And we (jinns – a being “borrowed” from pagan Arab religion, legends and fairy tales*) pried into the secrets of heaven - - -". According to this and some other places in the Quran, Jinns and bad spirits lurked around under the (lowest?) heaven and tried to spy on what happened and what was said in the heavens. As the havens (and likely Jinns) do not exist - at least not like described in the Quran - comments give themselves.

*037 72/8b: “And we (jinns*) pried into the secrets of heaven, but we found it filled with stern guides and flaming fires.” The Quran tells that Allah uses the stars like shooting stars – flaming fire – to chase away bad spirits and jinns wanting to spy on heaven. No comments should be necessary to this nonsense. Any god had known the difference between a shooting star, and a real star - even a devil had known. Then who made the Quran?

038 81/22: "And (O people!) your (here Arabs'*) Companion (Muhammad*) is not one possessed - - -". A most open question, as modern medical science suspects he had TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) - his symptoms are uncannily like those of that illness, included the religious illusions. And in the old times persons with mental illnesses were reckoned to be possessed by one or more bad spirit(s).

039 81/25: "Nor is it (the Quran*) the word of an evil spirit accursed". This may be wrong, as it is one of the real possibilities for who made the Quran (it is one of the theories for who is the real maker of the book) - the partly immoral moral code of the Quran, the partly unjust and/or immoral sharia laws, and its rules for blood, murder and war, may indicate a devil or bad spirits as the real maker(s). But even a devil would hardly deliver a book with so many errors, etc. - he had to know he would be found out sooner or later and loose credence. Which leave human creators as the likely creators, as it was no god - not with all those mistakes, etc? Though it is possible it was made by dark forces, if all the mistakes, etc. were a condition for permission from a god to try to lure more to Hell - the mistakes, etc. in case had to be included so as to make it easy for people to see something was wrong and avoid the trap.)

040 97/4c:** "- - - the Spirit (Arab "ruh"*) - - -". Chronologically this is the first time the word "ruh" is used in the Quran - and it is one of the many words in the Quran with unclear meaning: See 97/4d and 97/4e below.

041 97/4d: (A16/2 (and A97/4)): "The term "ruh" (lit. "spirit", "soul" or "breath of life") is often used in the Quran in the sense of "inspiration" - and, more particularly, "divine inspiration" - - -". Well, this is one - or actually 4-5 - possible meaning(s). But also see 97/4c just above.

41 + 11.436 = 11.477 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

239.   abu SUFYAN

Originally one of Muhammad's strongest opponents in Mecca, but he changed to Muhammad before Muhammad's conquest of Mecca in 630 AD. His daughter Umm Habiba married Muhammad, and this may have counted in his change. After Muhammad's death he took part in the conquest of Syria. He died in 653 AD. In 661 his son Muawiya became caliph and founded the Umayyad dynasty which ruled the Muslim empire until 750 AD (= 90 years). Historians suspect that the Muslim narrators' story about Abu Sufyan may be negatively colored by the bad reputation the Umayyad dynasty had in wide circles in the empire.

0 + 11.477 = 11.477 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).

 


>>> Go to Next Chapter

>>> Go to Previous Chapter

This work was upload with assistance of M. A. Khan, editor of islam-watch.org and the author of "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery".