Muhammad in the Quran, Vol. 3: Chapter 67



Muhammad was very eager telling that what he told, was the truth. Have you ever noticed that the ones most eager to tell how truthful he/she is, is the cheater and deceiver?

We also are struck by the fact that the Quran and Muhammad never - and Islam and Muslims very seldom - claim that the Quran is "the Book of Honesty" or Islam "the Religion of Honesty". (Well, with facts like al-Taqiyya (lawful lie), Kitman (lawful half-truth), Hilah (lawful pretending/circumventing), acceptance for use of deceit and betrayal, acceptance for breaking/disuse of words/promises/oaths (2/225, 3/54 (if Allah can cheat, cheating is ok), 5/89, 16/91, 66/2), it would be a too obvious al-Taqiyya.)

We may quote science:

"You need a Muslim's (blind*) belief to be able to believe that the 'perfect' quality of the Quran may be a proof for divine origin".

Maxime Rodinson: "It needs the faith of Muslims to be able to continue to see in them (the texts of the Quran*) an unparalleled work of universal rhetoric whose very perfection is enough to demonstrate its divine origin."

"You need a Muslim's (blind*) belief to be able to believe that Muhammad was a "good and benevolent man".

"Islam is falsifying history when if describes the historical Muhammad".

Everything in the Quran is the truth? - believe it if you are able to (actually much in the Quran is proved wrong - - - which proves that the book is not from any god).

For a relatively full list, see ", Book A" (containing unbelievably some 1750 points with wrong facts + hundreds of other errors, contradictions, etc., but still not complete), but here are some samples:

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

######001 12/20aa: "- - - dirhams - - -". These silver coins did not exist at that time - the first ones were minted some 2500 years later. Worse: They did not exist at the time of Muhammad, too, and thus this word cannot have been used by Muhammad when he dictated this surah (at the time of Muhammad time the Arabs mainly used the Greek drachma. The first dirhams were copies of Persian coins where the words "In the name of Allah" were added, and made under caliph Utman. The first "real" dirhams were made under Abdalmalik in 695 AD. The Persian coins may have been called dirhams - a word derived from drachma - but it is ever so clear that even they did not exist at the time of Joseph some 2ooo+ years earlier.)) ###### THE QURAN IS "MUHAMMAD'S EXACT WORDS DOWN TO THE LAST COMMA", like many Muslims claim? Also see 12/20c below. (Also: The comma did not exist in Arab at the time of Muhammad.)

002 12/28c: "Truly - - -". Definitely not a proved truth - only a not proved claim. See 2/2b above.

003 12/77f: "- - - the truth - - -". See 2/2b above.

###004 13/1g: “(the Quran*) is the Truth“. (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

  1. There are many mistaken "facts" which science, history, geography, archaeology, literature, art, etc., proves are wrong. (At least unbelievable 1700+ !!! places with mistaken facts, and perhaps 3000+ errors all together).
  2. There are “more than 100 divergences (mistakes*) from the rules and structure of normal Arab language”, according to Ali Dashi “Twenty-three years”.
  3. There are verses where it clearly is Muhammad who is speaking, in stark contradiction to all statements that the book is made by Allah or has existed from eternity (though some of the places - f.x. 6/114a in Yusuf Ali or 27/91a in Pikthall or Dawood - the mistakes are camouflaged by dishonest translators inserting the word “Say”, according to Ibn Warraq.)
  4. The Quran states that the Quran is in pure Arab language. But according to al-Suyuti there are at least 107 foreign words used in the book, and Arthur Jeffery (specialist in Arab and in non-Arabic words in the Quran) says ca. 275 words from Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek, and also from Syria, Ethiopia, and Persia. Even the word Quran is said to be from Syria. (The Arabs later found an excuse for those mistakes: Al-Tha’alibi tells that the Arab started to use those words and made them Arabic. An easy but dishonest explanation.)
  5. They used an alphabet without vowels, and to make it even worse, when writing the Quran/surahs in the old time, they did not even use the small points newer Arab uses to specify different letters. Because of this it often is difficult or impossible to know which word is meant. To use an English example: If you only have the consonants “h” and “s” and put in vowels, the result may be “house” or “hose” or “his” or “has”. Because of this there are thousands of possibilities for mistakes - or different meanings. Muslims tell the Quran was finished not later than 656 AD, but that is not true - only the simplified version using the old unfinished alphabet was used then, was finished by Caliph Uthman not later than 656 AD, and lots of versions were written as the language and the alphabet were completed. Not until round 900 AD was the Quran really finished, and by then there existed numbers of versions. Muslims under the very learned Ibn Mohair (died 935 AD) finally canonized 14 versions and accepted 10 more = 24 versions accepted by Islam (see Preface of "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran"). Over the centuries many fell out of use. Today there are mainly two - one dominant (Hafs) and one much used in parts of Africa (Warsh) + 4 which are used in smaller regions also in Africa. After all that, how can anybody pretend that the Quran of today is sent down from Allah letter-by-letter and comma-by-comma? – the comma did not even exist!
  6. The language in the original Quran was so little exact, that there frequently is necessary to insert explanations.
  7. And how then can anyone pretend that the language in the Quran of today is perfect and correct language word for word and meaning for meaning just as dictated by Allah, when one knows that they spent 250 years “de-coding” the original texts and polishing the language?
  8. And even more so: How can anyone pretend with a straight face that the Quran(s) of today is the one and perfect one from Allah, when the clergy/religious leaders and the educated elite at least, know that there were at least 14 + 10 “correct” versions earlier (to camouflage that they were different versions, Muslims call them “ways of reading” – you meet the word even today, because even today there are “different ways of reading”) - versions that over the centuries by an arbitrary process was reduced to 3 and then to 1-2. (The one dominating today, most likely dominates because it happened to be used when Egypt printed Qurans in 1924, according to Ibn Warraq).
  9. Of the 14 and more versions which existed, how can one be sure that the most correct versions were the ones which finally came to dominate? - or that those versions (Hafs and Warsh) had all interpretations of the primitive writings correct (especially as they are not quite similar)?
  10. There are lots of places in the Quran where the logic is wrong – mainly because Muhammad draws conclusions or make statements without first proving that it really is Allah who made this and this. F.x. the sun and the moon and night and day may be good proofs for Allah, but ONLY if it first is proved that it really is Allah who made them and runs them. Muhammad never really proves anything essential. Never. He just claims or states. The results are invalid claims with invalid logic, not real “signs” or “proofs”. Valueless. Or even worse, as the use of such arguments proves to the entire world that he has no real and true facts/arguments. Still even worse: The use of bluffs is the hallmark of cheats and deceivers.
  11. "Proofs". The facts in the point above are even more essential here in this point - in points where he indicates or even uses the word “proof”. The problem is the same, and the only possible conclusion is the same: Valueless demagogy that proves that he had no real and true facts/arguments. Even worse: The use of invalid arguments is the hallmark of cheats and deceivers.

There is little reason to believe the Quran ever was perfect and without mistakes, and even less reason to believe that the Quran of today is so (it simply is not). This even if you omit all the mistakes we know about. At very best the book only is partly true. Also see 13/39a+b, 43/4, 85/21-22 below.

005 13/1h: "- - - the Truth - - -". See 2/2b above.

#####006 13/2l: “- - - explaining the Signs in detail - - -“. Wrong and/or logically invalid “explanations” in reality are not explanations at all – even if they were in detail, which they in many cases are not. But it tells a lot that Islam and Muslims in spite of declarations like this from Allah, uses claims about difficult to understand language and difficult to understand explanations and stories, as a reason for why they have to explain what Allah in his bumbling and inapt helplessness has been unable to explain in a way people understand. But then of course Muslim believers, imams, etc. are more intelligent and knowledgeable than Allah, and thus better able to give correct and understandable stories and explanations, explaining what Allah "really" meant.


The Quran claims it quotes Allah when it says that the Quran has a plain, clear and easy to understand language which is to be understood easily and literally if nothing else is indicated (f.x. 3/7, 11/1, 15/1, 18/2, 18/54, 19/97, 26/2,27/1, 28/2, 36/69, 41/3, 43/2, 44/2, 44/58, 54/17, 54/22, 54/32), and that only bad people "sick of heart (33/12, 33/60)" or "in whose hearts is perversity" (f.x. 3/7) look for hidden meanings - meanings "only Allah can understand". Then one has to be naive in the extreme to believe in Muslims' claims that all the mistakes, contradictions, invalid logic, unclear language, etc. in the book in reality are not mistakes, etc. but only the omniscient god who are so clumsy expressing himself that he has been unable to say what he meant, and that clever Muslims have to help him and tell what he "really" meant or explain that "it is parables". Or that Allah does not mean what he clearly says, but that the mistake, etc. in reality is an allegory - a hidden meaning - and clever humans have to explain the "real" meaning of his helplessly chosen words. Strangely you mainly find such claims from Muslims in connection with mistakes, etc., - clearly the omniscient Allah is not mastering neither science nor the plain Arab language properly, and really do need the help from intelligent and clever mere humans to be able to express himself. One or a few such cases should be disturbing for the believers, as an omnipotent god does not make mistakes and he also should be a master of expressing himself clearly and impossible to mistake in clear words with distinct and unmistakable meaning. One or a few cases could be explainable, but when it runs in the hundreds and even a few thousands of such cases, it requires blindness, naivety and/or wishful thinking beyond the unbelievable to be able to believe in such "explanations". Even with lots of wishful thinking it takes blindness and naivety far into the incredible to be able to make oneself believe this.

"One case is coincidence, two cases are suspicious, three cases are proof", Stalin said. Here are may be 3ooo cases!!

##### On the background of that Allah several places in the Quran tells that he explains everything in detail, all claims from Islam and Muslims that he "in reality means something else" are invalid al-Taqiyyas (lawful lies) if the Quran is reliable. THIS EVEN MORE SO AS ALLAH(?) ALSO IN THE QURAN TELLS THAT TO SEEK FOR HIDDEN MEANINGS IN THE QURAN ONLY IS FOR THE SAKE OF HEART, AND THAT ONLY ALLAH CAN UNDERSTAND SUCH HIDDEN MEANINGS ANYHOW.

###### The fact thus is that such claims (that the Quran means something different from what the text says) are an insult to any god - and corruption and falsification of the texts in the Quran.

007 13/19e: "- - - the Truth - - -". See 2/2b above.

008 14/19cb: "- - - in Truth - - -". See 2/2b above.

009 15/7c: "- - - the Truth - - -". (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.) See 2/2b above.

*010 21/31d: “- - - and We (Allah) have made therein (in the mountains*) broad highways (between the mountains) - - -”. We honestly did not know Allah - or any other god - built highways. And here we could make a cheap joke ("tell your congress-men (or similar) to ask Allah build your roads, instead of spending all that tax money on it"). But we refrain from it.

Well, it would be possible for Muhammad to say - true or not true - that Allah showed the first travelers where to travel. But in no case Allah built the roads - or highways. Unless Islam really proves he did - but Islam never proves, they only tell or state or claim, even though they demand proofs from everyone else. Or they say it is said so in the Quran, and that proves it. But a book with that many mistakes has little value as a proof - and besides it is logically impossible to use the Quran to prove the Quran, as circular proofs are without value.

011 21/51c: (A21/55 – in 2008 edition A21/59, but some is omitted): “We (Allah*) bestowed aforetime on Abraham his rectitude of conduct - - -.” But the Arab expression “min qabl” which here is translated to “aforetime”, also may mean “already in young years”. “The Message of the Quran”, 2006 has (translated from Swedish): “Already in his youth We (Allah*) gave Abraham - - -.” Interestingly the ones who have revised the 2008 edition in his name (Muhammad Asad is as far as we know dead – the book originally is from at not later than 1980), has omitted some of his information and changed the text to this: “And, indeed, long before (the time of Moses) We vouchsafed unto Abraham - - -.” Also the information about alternative meanings is omitted in the 2008 edition. To make the text more clear? – or out of honesty?

###012 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 26/46-47 above.

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

013 26/113c: "- - - if ye could but understand". ###The trouble is that if you really understand the Quran - not only the superficial words telling nice things about the religion, but really study what the texts really tell you, you understand and see all the mistakes, etc. and see that this book is not connected to any god.

#####014 26/193-196b: (A26/85 – in 2008 edition AA26/83): “With it (the Quran) came down the Spirit and the Truth – to thy heart and mind that thou mayst admonish in the perspicuous Arabic tongue. ####Without doubt it is (announced) in the revealed Books of former peoples.” What is sure - absolutely sure - here is that the Quran is NOT announced in the Bible. It is totally wrong - so wrong that not even Islam looks for such announcements. They try to find foretelling about Muhammad, but not about the Quran - most likely because there is no point in the Bible which can be twisted to a foretelling for that book. This claim thus is not only totally wrong, but also totally dishonest. (Do you understand why it is so complicated to use Islamic sources? - every detail has to be checked to see if it may be true or not.)

###What is absolutely sure is that the Quran is not announced in the Bible. (####And in spite of Islam's and the Quran's claims about the opposite (7/157), this also goes for Muhammad - he is not even mentioned, not even indirectly, in the Bible.) The claim that the Quran is announced in the Bible is so hopeless that it is unusual to meet it even from the most fanatical Muslims - there is nothing in the Bible even for them to "hang" such a claim on.

"The Religion of Truth"?? ######How much is really true in a religion using such methods? And is a religion based at least partly on dishonesty reliable?

015 33/12g: "- - - Allah and His Messenger promised us nothing but dilution". Already at that time there were many who saw that something was seriously wrong with Muhammad and with his new religion.

016 33/70c: "- - - (always) say a word directed to the Right". The Arab word here translated with "the Right", is a word meaning "exactly correct" - true, relevant for the point, and straight to the point. ####Remember that this is how the Quran demands things should be said - and several places in the book says is how things are said in the Quran - , when they try to explain away mistakes, etc, by claiming it is an analogy or something - a very normal "explaining away" for Muslims to use. #####Not to mention the times Muhammad lies in the Quran or advices the use of dishonesty as working tools.

017 33/72d: “We (Allah*) did indeed offer the Trust (Islam/the Quran) to the (material*) Heavens and the Earth and the Mountains; but they refused to undertake it, being afraid thereof - - -.” Frightened suns and planets and mountains??? Not bad even for a religion – animism just like in fairy tales.

018 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).

##019 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.
  7. In no castle anywhere in the world there are earth worms in a place where a king would sit. And if it happened out-of-doors, his servants would ask questions if the king did not go inside during night.

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

020 34/36b: "Verily - - -". It definitely is no proved verity/truth. In a book with this much wrong, this word cannot be accepted as reliable unless there is at least one proof.

021 34/43f: "This (Islam*) is only a falsehood invented". All the mistakes, etc. in the Quran shows they were right - no god is behind a book of a quality like the Quran with all its errors, etc. And what is Islam if the Quran is a made up book? - Pagan?

#####022 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.

#####023 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.

024 35/5c: “Certainly the promise of Allah is true.” There never through the times was one single documented case of Allah giving and/or keeping a promise - if there had been, Islam had put it on the walls of every mosque and many other places. Claims aplenty, proved cases none.

###025 35/24i: “- - - there never was a people, without a warner having lived among them (in the past).”

  1. 28/46: “Yet (art thou (Muhammad*) sent) as a Mercy from thy Lord (according to the Quran = Allah*) to give warning to a people to whom no warner (= prophet, messenger*) had come before - - -.” No messenger had they had, even though “every people” had had.
  2. 32/3: “Nay, it is the Truth from thy (Muhammad’s*) Lord (Allah*), that thou mayest admonish to a people to whom no warner has come before thee - - -.”
  3. 34/44: “But We (Allah*) had not given them (Arabs”*) Books which they could study, nor sent messengers to them before thee (Muhammad*) - - -.”
  4. 36/6: “In order that thou (Muhammad*) mayest admonish a people (the Arabs*) whose fathers had received no admonition - - -.”

Which verse(s) is/are wrong?

(4 contradictions).

###026 35/24j: “- - - and there never was a people, without a warner (a prophet for Allah*) having lived among them (in the past) - - -”. As said before: Neither in archaeology, nor in architecture, nor in art, nor in history, nor in literature, nor in folklore, nor in folk tales - not even in fairy tales - do we find a single trace of any teaching of monotheism before 610 AD, with two well known exceptions (Jews and Christians) and two or three less known exceptions (Pharaoh Akn-Aton, praying to the sun, a semi-Christian sect in Persia, an Arab sect around 600 BC - likely inspired by the two monotheistic religions in the area – plus the Zoroastrians after a fashion). Some places one or a few gods dominated, but no monotheism.

  1. In the Americas - absolutely nothing.
  2. In Australia - absolutely nothing.
  3. In the Pacific - absolutely nothing.
  4. In Europe - absolutely nothing except Christians and some Jews.
  5. In Africa - absolutely nothing with the exception of one single man: Pharaoh Akn-Aton - but he so definitely was not speaking about Allah. He wanted the sun for the only god. (+ Jews and Christians).
  6. In Asia - absolutely nothing, except in what we now call the Middle East: The Christians, the well known Jews and as already mentioned the Zoroastrians mainly in Persia (after a fashion) and a couple of monotheistic old sects. Of course there was Buddha, but he was/is no god, and besides he accepted that gods existed, but told they were on wrong ways not leading to nirvana - no monotheism.

124ooo (or more - the number is said to be symbolic, as there may have been more) prophets had to have left some traces somewhere, if the tale was true.

This statement simply is not true. If Islam still insists, they will have to produce strong proofs. “Strong statements demands strong evidence”, to quote science. And not just loose claims, invalid “signs” and “proofs”, and more loose statements like Islam normally produces- real proofs are needed.

027 37/15c: "This (the Quran*) is nothing but evident sorcery!". "Sorcery" hardly is the correct word, but perhaps "fantasy".

028 37/128: "Except the devoted and sincere devoted servants (= good Muslims*) of Allah among them (the Jews around 870 - 900 BC)". For the readers not knowing much about the facts in old Israel/Judah: There does not exist one serious scientist believing in Muslims or belief in Allah in Israel/Judah around 800 - 900 BC. Not even among the non-Jews there. Hardly even a Muslim believes so - not if he is serious.

029 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.

030 38/8d: "- - - they (opponents of Muhammad*) are in doubt - - -". Wrong - at least for many of them: They were not in doubt, but saw that things were very wrong in this new religion.

031 38/8e: "- - - My (Allah's*) (own) Message!" If the Quran is Allah's message, Allah is far from omniscient - if he exists.

032 38/29c: “Here is a Book (the Quran*) which We (Allah*) have sent down unto thee (Muhammad*), full of blessings, - - -". A book full of errors and thus not from a god, is no blessing from anybody.

033 38/86b: "- - - nor am I (Muhammad*) a pretender". One of the many easy and never proved claims in the Quran.

034 38/87a: “- - - a Message to all the Worlds (plural and wrong*).” Likely the Quran and Islam should reach all the 7 Earths that the Quran mentions – but there are no 7 Earths (flat, and one above the other according to Hadiths.) See 65/12 below. But humanity should beware that Islam is intended for all the world - ####included suppression of all non-Muslims. This actually is the official goal for the Quran - included the suppression of all others.

035 39/2e: “(Allah has*) revealed the Book (the Quran*) to thee (Muhammad*) in Truth“. Can it really be the truth that Allah has sent down a book like this, with so many errors? - see 2/2b, 13/1g, and 40/75 above. In that case Allah cannot be omniscient. Something is wrong. (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

036 39/14b: "It is Allah I (Muhammad*) serve - - -". This may - may - be true if Allah existed and was something supernatural - white or dark. If he not only served Muhammad - like many a self-proclaimed "prophet" through the times (though not with as much success as Muhammad).

037 40/38-45: Contradicted by the Bible: Neither this man, nor this story is mentioned in the Bible - like so much more of the "biblical" stories in the Quran (most of them are from apocryphal - made up - scriptures, folklore, legends, and fairy tales). See 40/24b above. 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.

038 40/46-50: This is not from the Bible. See 49/24b above. There is much in the Quran pretending to be from the Bible, but which is not. We point out some of it. But from where did Muhammad get this kind of stuff? Not from a god, as no god delivers books with so many mistakes, etc. From dark forces? From a mental illness - like TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) like modern medical science suspects? From made up or apocryphal scriptures? From legends or fairy tales (science knows Muhammad "borrowed" many of his tales in the Quran from such ones and from made up apocryphal stories)? From fantasy?

039 40/51a: “We (Allah*) will, without doubt, help Our messengers and those who believe - - -.” Only possible if Allah exists and is something supernatural (but what his help is worth if he in case belongs to the dark forces, may be another question).

040 40/69a: "Seest thou (Muhammad?/Muslim?) not those that dispute concerning the Signs of Allah? How they turn away (from reality)?" This is pure, but not intended irony: As there is not one single valid proof or sign for Allah - many claims, but not a single valid one - it is the ones who believe in such claimed "signs" who have no contact with reality.

##041 40/75: “- - - the Truth (the Quran*) - - -”. To repeat things:

  1. The Quran contains at least - at least - some 500 points where Islam/Muslim scholars confirm the texts are not clear or even not possible to understand surely - one has to guess.

  2. The Quran contains more than 1750 places with wrong facts. Add the ones we have overlooked (some more we have found during the work with this book will be added - perhaps 250 new ones? - 2ooo all together?) + all the other kinds of mistakes and other types of wrongs and you may have some 3000 or more places with mistaken facts, other errors, contradictions, etc. in one single book.
  3. The Quran in addition contains at least 200+ “most likely“ wrong facts.
  4. The Quran is likely to contain more mistaken facts we have not seen.
  5. The Quran contains lots of invalid “signs” claiming to be indicating or “proving” Allah/Islam. The use of invalid arguments is the hallmark of cheats.
  6. The Quran contains a number of invalid “proofs,” pretending to indicate or “prove” Allah/Islam. The use of invalid “signs” and “proofs” are strong hallmarks for cheats, swindlers, and deluders.
  7. The Quran contains a huge number of claims and statements taken from thin air or resting on other invalid claims, statements, “signs”, or “proofs”. The use of such invalid arguments and cheap words is the hallmark of cheats and deceivers.
  8. There is not one single statement, “sign” or “proof” in the Quran which really proves Allah - they without exception are logically invalid, mostly because it is not first proved that it really is Allah who is behind them. There are a few taken from the Bible that may indicate a god - not Allah, but a god. But the Bible talks about Yahweh, not about Allah (and the teachings are fundamentally so different - see 29/46 - that in spite of what the Quran and Hadith say, Allah is not the same god as the one Jesus told about - not unless he is schizophrenic.)
  9. The Arab Quran contains more than 100 linguistic mistakes according to linguists.
  10. The Quran is said to be pure Arabic. It contains a lot of non-Arabic words. We have seen different numbers, but perhaps 275 different words according to Arthur Jeffries (the word Quran is said to be one of them). For the story these are not serious, but they are mistakes compared to what the Quran says, and the Quran pretends to be perfect and without mistakes - sent down from an omniscient god. Islam has an explanation, though: Arabs has used the foreign words and made them Arab. A Negro does not become an Arab even if he moves to Arabia. A very practical way of making something look true only.
  11. The Quran contains at least ca. 300 contradictions.
  12. The Quran contains at very least 400+ places where the original Arab text is so unclear that it is impossible to be sure what is really meant.
  13. The Quran contains lots and lots and lots of places where the text is unclear - this is openly admitted also by Muslim scholar (you will find it in any reasonably thorough book explaining Quranic texts).
  14. The oldest alphabets known - f.x. the cuneiform one - are perhaps 5100-5200 years old. Pictographs as a means for writing texts (f.x. Sumer - now part of northern Iraq - China, and Egypt) are of roughly similar age, though in China a bit younger: Egypt some 3400 BC, Sumer some 3300 BC, China some 1500 BC. Homo sapiens - modern man - is perhaps 200ooo years old, the Neanderthals and Denisovans a lot older, and then there are f.x. Homo Habilis, and Homo Erectus, etc. - man's first forefathers developed some 5-6 million years ago. 35/24 says: “- - - there never was a people, without a warner having lived among them (in the past)," and Islam tells that every "warner"/"prophet"/"messenger" received a copy of "the Mother of the Book" = a Quran. Why did Allah send down such copies and what did they mean to the "messengers" and to people before they learnt how to read?

Some facts here: Science tells that the Homos (humans) split from the Pans (chimpanzees) sometime between 6.3 and 5.4 million years ago, that our forefathers Homo Habilis emerged some 2.4 million and our later forefathers Homo Erectus some 1.5 million years ago, and that modern man after a transition period of some 200ooo years finally was Homo Sapiens sometime between 200ooo and 160ooo - likely 195ooo - years ago. At least Homo Habilis and Homo Erectus were sentient beings, if likely more primitive than Homo Sapiens. And then there were man's older "brothers", the Neanderthals and the Denisovans (400ooo years old?) who both definitely were sentient and humans/people. 35/24: tells: “- - - there never was a people, without a warner having lived among them (in the past).” The oldest knowledge of reading is some 5ooo+ years old. How did older "messengers" use their copies of "the Mother of the Book" - the Quran? And in what language were they written? - Muslims like to claim that the Quran has to be read in Arab, but remember here that the Arab - or proto-Arab - language is maximum from around 7ooo BC, and the Arab alphabet was not completed until around 900 AD.

The Quran at best is partly true. There are very good reasons for doubt and skepticism.

It is also told that the Quran is a copy of a revered “Mother Book” in the Heaven of Allah. This has to be wrong. An omnipotent god impossibly can have revered - not kept as a funny curiosum, but revered!! - a book with that many mistakes and contradictions, that number of loose and without value claims and statements, not to mention all the invalid “signs” and “proofs”- hallmarks of an imbecile or a cheat or deceiver. Besides: The other 124ooo+ earlier prophets (or at least many of them) according to Islam received a similar copy of the Mother Book. Pretend you were the prophets Hud or Salih living at least 2000 years before Muhammad (because Moses spoke about them according to the Quran, and he lived (?) some 2000 years before Muhammad - Hud and Salih consequently must have lived before that), or that you were one of the Indian prophets in the Americas before 1492 AD – or in the Arctic or in Australia 100 years before Botany Bay – the Quran and Islam claims that all people have had prophets. Then read the Quran and see how much you would understand and how much not – even words like cows, sheep, goats, camels, ships, coats of mail, and a number of other words – what did they mean in South America or Australia? And how much is irrelevant? – f.x. Muhammad’s family problems, all the facts and happenings relevant mostly for Arabia, etc.

Read the Quran with that in your mind – and weep.

Would a god make or revere or use copies of such a claimed timeless and unchangeable book for his prophets through all times and all over the world? – Remember we here talk about the perfect and timeless Mother Book that the Quran and all other not falsified books sent down to the prophets all over the world from Adam to Muhammad are exact copies of. This in spite of that Islam explains that the reason for new prophets and new scriptures were that time changed, so the scriptures had to be changed a little - how to change perfect copies of the one and only and perfect Mother Book?

Similar can be said about words like "surely", "verily", etc. They are claims, not verified facts. Also see 67/9c - a strong one - and as for contradictions to the Bible also 40/20b.

042 41/3a: “A Book (the Quran*) whereof the verses are explained in detail - - -”. Many verses are not explained in detail - see f.x. all the extra explanations that has been necessary concerning Islamic laws.

#### 043 41/3b: “A Book (the Quran*) whereof the verses are explained in detail - - -”. As mention in 41/3a just above, far from enough details are included. But the words at least make it clear that there are no hidden meanings behind them (unless otherwise is specified). This means that when Muslims and Islam explain away mistakes, etc. with that it is not the clear and /or explained meaning which is meant, but some hidden meaning or parable or something behind it, they are wrong. Muslims often try such ways of "explaining" errors, etc. away. Also see 41/3d and 41/3e below

Also see the chapter "Literal language in the Quran - according to the Quran" in "1000+ Comments on the Quran", and 41/3da below.

###044 41/43a: “Nothing is said to thee (Muhammad*) that was not said to the messengers before thee (Muhammad*) (f.x. to Jesus and the old Jewish prophets*) - - -.” Wrong. As both science and Islam thoroughly have proved that the Bible is not falsified – and especially strong proofs for NT – it is very clear that what Muhammad claimed to have been told, often is far from what the real prophets and patriarchs had been told. And this is strengthened by the fact that it very often is very clear that Muhammad took his “biblical” stories not from the Bible, but from religious legends (often even based on apocryphal scriptures and stories, not the Bible) that circulated in the area, and which Muhammad believed was from the Bible - - - and then later he had only one way out how to explain the errors compared to the real Bible: To claim he was right and the Bible falsified!!!. As for the quotation above, it is not true that nothing was said to Muhammad that was not said to earlier (real) prophets – a fact that Islam even confirms sometimes – f.x. in the statement from Muhammad that he was the first “messenger/prophet” who had got permission from the god to steal and rob and rape, which the god according to the Quran even confirms is “god and lawful”.

To be impolite, but truthful: The Quran's claim here is rubbish.

###045 42/3d: (A42/2): "I.e. the basic truths propounded in the Quranic revelation - - - are the same as those revealed to the earlier (Jewish*) prophets". To be very polite: This is not true. There are oceans between Muhammad and the Jewish prophets - deep fundamental differences and contradictions, especially compared to Jesus and his new covenant. Muhammad was not in that line of prophets - not even in the same moral world - and with a basically very different religion - one of war and suppression, dishonesty and apartheid, simply 180 degree contradiction to Jesus' teachings and a lot different from the older prophets, too.

The fact is that the many and deep differences between the messages in the Bible and the Quran are one of the absolute proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.

046 42/15h: “There is no contention between us (Muslims*) and you (“infidels”).” Please tell that in the old Palestine (the name coined in 135 AD by Emperor Hadrian) and the modern Darfur. And in Sind/India, and in Armenia, not to mention in Africa and many other places in older times. Thoroughly contradicted by Islamic history of aggression, war and suppression.

047 42/15i: “There is no contention between us (Muslims*) and you (“infidels”).” May be not in 614 – 618 AD. But later it was the power class = Muslims (with Muhammad as dictator), and non-Muslims “thoroughly subdued” - - - and with the religion a lot changed = contradictions and abrogations in the Quran. This verse is contradicted and often “killed” by at least these verses: 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).

048 42/24g: "And Allah - - - proves the Truth by His Words". Muhammad's literal meaning here is that the words of the Quran is of such a quality, that only a god can have uttered them. Muslims and Islam claim the same today - and are as wrong as Muhammad: The linguistics are ok because it was polished by Islam's best brains for some 250 years before the final prototype were ready around 900 AD, but on most of the other points the Quran really is of miserable quality, and no god ever was involved in a book - not to mention a claimed holy book - of that level.

Besides: That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact. It also is proved at least partly wrong.

And not least: Nobody uses this kind of arguments and "proof" if they have valid arguments and/or proofs. It simply is fast talk. At very best a so-called circular proof: The words are claimed to be the truth, and then the claimed truth proves the words which proves the truth which proves the words - - -. Circular proofs are by definition invalid.


And: Science says: "You have to have a Muslim's belief to be able to believe that the Quran's texts are of such a quality that the quality proves the book is from a god".

049 42/24h: "And Allah - - - proves the Truth by His Words". As long as Allah is unable to prove they really are his words, the words from a man with a moral like shown (NB: Notice that we say "shown", not "claimed") in the Quran and other central Islamic literature, carries no weight as proofs, as long as they are not backed by real proofs - words are too cheap).

And we repeat: Science says: "You have to have a Muslim's belief to be able to believe that the Quran's texts are of such a quality that the quality proves the book is from a god".

###050 42/24j: “And Allah - - - proves the Truth by His Words.” Muhammad was asked many times to prove his - or presumably Allah’s - words, but he never did, and seemed never to be able to, this even more so, as f.x. some of his “explanations” for why he never could prove anything, an intelligent man like him knew were lies (f.x. that real miracles would make no-one believe anyhow). And the words of the Quran prove not a thing, among other reasons because:

  1. Far too many mistakes pretending to be facts. (Swindle?)
  2. Far too many loose statements pretending to be facts. (Swindle?)
  3. Far too many invalid “signs” pretending to be documentation. (Swindle?)
  4. Far too many invalid or even wrong "proofs" pretending to be documentation. (Swindle?)
  5. Some obvious lies – f.x. that miracles would make no-one believe, or that Muhammad wanted no payment (in spite of what Islam and Muslims claim, Muhammad was well off when he died - estates in Mecca, Medina, and Fadang, and more - even though he had spent fortunes for bribes for followers/power, and lots of women also cost something). (Swindle.)
  6. Muhammad was unable to present anything but fast-talk when asked for proofs. (Swindle?)
  7. Lots of invalid use of logic. (Swindle?)
  8. Lots of contradictions (– proves for lies?)
  9. Lots of unclear language - at least 500+ confirmed by Muslim scholars. (Not from a god.)
  10. Lots of fast talk. (Suspicious.)

These all are hallmarks of a crook and a cheat and a deceiver.

####What does this mean for the religion?

051 43/4c: "- - - the Mother of the Book (from which the Quran is copied according to the Quran*), in Our (Allah's*) Presence, high (in dignity) - - -". No book with so much wrong like the Quran is cherished by a god - or held high in dignity by any god - not even by a baby dwarf god hidden in a cradle in remote corner. Something is seriously wrong.

052 43/42d: "- - - verily We (Allah*) shall prevail over them (non-Muslims*)". Only if Allah exists and is a major god - - - and only if they do not believe in an existing god - f. x. Yahweh, whom both the Bible and the Quran claims exists (even though the Quran wrongly mixes him with Allah).

053 43/43d: "- - - verily - - -". It definitely is no proved verity/truth. See f.x. 2/2b and 42/33c above.

When used in the Quran words like "true", "truth", "truly", "sure" "surety", "surely", "verity", "verily", etc. are claims, not proved facts. Also see 2/2b + 13/1g and 67/9c - 2 strong ones - and as for contradictions to the Bible also 40/20b. Also the latter half of the comments to 41/39a is very relevant. These and similar words cannot be taken at face value unless they are proved.

###054 43/48b: (A43/41): "The concept of 'returning' to Allah implies that the instinctive ability to perceive His (Allah's*) existence is inherent in human nature as such - - -". #####Scientifically this is nonsense and gobbledygook. No such "instinctive ability" has ever been found - not even a shadow of it. One has found that a minor percentage has a longing for something strong to lean to - a god. But nothing more - no "ability to perceive" a god. But Islam is built on absolutely nothing - only on never proved words and claims from a man of doubtful character, but with a liking for power, riches for bribes, and women - and needs dogmas like this. True or not true does not matter very much, as al-Taqiyyas (lawful lies) and Kitmans (lawful half-truths), etc. are not only permitted, but advised to use "if necessary" for defending or advancing the religion

- Islam sometimes is a bit "special" when it comes to honesty. (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

#####055 43/59d: "- - - We (Allah*) made him (Jesus) an example to the Children of Israel". (YA4660): "A reference to the limited mission of Jesus, whose Gospel to the Jews only survives in uncertain fragmentary forms". We do not think this merits any comment, but quote it to show a sample of what Muslims are told even today. Remember here that al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing, etc. not only are permitted, but advised "if necessary" when defending or promoting Islam.

#056 43/63d: “(Jesus said*): fear Allah and obey me - - -.” This is really is Muhammad’s slogan – he wanted power, that much is easy to see from the Quran, and religion/Allah was his Platform of Power. And many places in the Quran it becomes clear that Muhammad wants everyone to believe he was a “normal” (but top) prophet (actually he was no real prophet, as he did not have the gift of making prophesies – see chapter about Muhammad in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" or 9/885 above.), and then it was nice if Jesus used the same words like Muhammad and showed this was normal ways for prophets to talk. But one of the really – and one of many - fundamental differences between Jesus and Muhammad (and for that case between f.x. Buddha and Muhammad and also between most of the Jewish prophets and Muhammad), was that Jesus was absolutely not interested in power on this Earth. Consequently this slogan that Muhammad very frequently used to secure his power, was meaningless for Jesus. (The Quran does not oppose this fact: That Jesus preached, but he did not seek power on Earth.)

What Jesus according to the Bible said was: "Follow me" - which is miles from "Obey me".

Also the verse below can be taken as part of a strategy for reducing Jesus from something special to something ordinary – at least an ordinary prophet – to make it easier for Muhammad to be number one (another obvious example: During Muhammad’s claimed trip to heaven, Jesus lived in the lowest of the prophets’ heavens – heaven number 2. Whereas other known prophets from the Bible lived higher up and closer to the god, and Muhammad was to be given place in the 7. heaven, the closest one to the deity):

Finally there is the death and resurrection of Jesus. If that really happened, Jesus clearly was at least one division higher up than Muhammad. So according to Muhammad and the Quran it did not happen.

057 43/78d: “- - - but most of you (non-Muslims*) have a hatred to the Truth.” The truth (Islam) - see 40/75 and 41/12. And in addition:

  1. *Few hate – but many are frightened.
  2. Quite a number feel distaste because of the inhuman and unjust moral code, laws and traditions in Islam.
  3. ##There is a difference between frightened strength and frightened weakness – a fact that sometimes is forgotten.

058 43/78e: "- - - most of you (have a hatred for the Truth (the Quran*))". The real truth was that a number of them understood that something was seriously wrong with Muhammad's new religion. But Muhammad's claim of course sounded - and sounds - better for his followers.

059 44/3b: “We (Allah*) sent it (the Quran) down during a blessed night - - -.” This contradicts everything that is said other places in the Quran, and everything Islam says, about how the Quran was sent down(?): Piece by piece over 23 years. (But this sentence my refer to the first time verses were claimed sent down - see 44/3c just below.)

060 44/3f: (A44/4): "The revelation of the Quran is but a continuation and, indeed, the climax of all divine revelations which has been going on since the very dawn of human consciousness".

To comment on the last first: How far back do we have to go to find forefathers who were not conscious beings? There f.x. is no doubt that Homo Habilis and Homo Erectus were conscious beings - but how much further back in time to find "the very dawn of human consciousness"? At least a few million years. This means that Islam has been taught on Earth for a few million years at least. You are free to believe it if you want, but no trace of Islam older than 610 AD when Muhammad started his preaching, has ever been found anywhere.

Some facts here: Science tells that the Homos (humans) split from the Pans (chimpanzees) sometime between 6.3 and 5.4 million years ago, that our forefathers Homo Habilis emerged some 2.4 million and our later forefathers Homo Erectus some 1.5 million years ago, and that modern man after a transition period of some 200ooo years finally was Homo Sapiens sometime between 200ooo and 160ooo - likely 195ooo - years ago. At least Homo Habilis and Homo Erectus were sentient beings, if likely more primitive than Homo Sapiens. And then there were man's older "brothers", the Neanderthals and the Denisovans (400ooo years old?) who both definitely were sentient and humans/people. 35/24: tells: “- - - there never was a people, without a warner having lived among them (in the past).” The oldest knowledge of reading is some 5ooo+ years old. How did older "messengers" use their copies of "the Mother of the Book" - the Quran? And in what language were they written? - Muslims like to claim that the Quran has to be read in Arab, but remember here that the Arab - or proto-Arab - language is maximum from around 7ooo BC, and the Arab alphabet was not completed until around 900 AD.

But the main point here is that the Quran is so different from the Bible, and especially from NT and its New Covenant, and Muhammad so different from the Jewish prophets included Jesus, that it takes a lot of naivety or/and blindness to be able to believe in claims that Muhammad belonged to the Jewish line of prophets or that Islam is from the same god as the two other religions. That someone makes an undocumented claim does not mean that the claim is true - and when it is claimed in a book full of mistakes, told by a man of a very doubtful moral, but with much to gain from making people believe in his new religion, there are extra reasons for being careful.

The Quran simply is an apocryphal book far away from Yahweh. So far away that it normally is not even counted among the apocryphal ones.

061 44/8c: "- - - (Allah is*) the Lord and Cherisher to - - - your earliest ancestors". The Quran claims that Islam was the original religion and the religion of even the first humans. Man is much older - a few million years since our very first forefather - but modern man - Homo Sapiens - emerged 160ooo - 200ooo years ago (the latest findings may indicate ca. 195ooo years ago). During all that time there is not one single trace of a religion like Islam until after 610 AD, when Muhammad started his preaching (actually he started it for real in 613 AD) - not in old artifacts, not in architecture, not in stone carvings, not in history, not in literature, not even in legends or fairy tales. What comes closest, were the Mosaic and the Christian religions, but their god was Yahweh, not Allah - two clearly different gods, as the basic elements of their religions were very different on too many points (especially easy to see if you compare to NT and its New Covenant).

Some facts concerning our oldest ancestors: Science tells that the Homos (humans) split from the Pans (chimpanzees) sometime between 6.3 and 5.4 million years ago, that our forefathers Homo Habilis emerged some 2.4 million and our later forefathers Homo Erectus some 1.5 million years ago, and that modern man after a transition period of some 200ooo years finally was Homo Sapiens sometime between 200ooo and 160ooo - likely 195ooo - years ago. At least Homo Habilis and Homo Erectus were sentient beings, if likely more primitive than Homo Sapiens. And then there were man's older "brothers", the Neanderthals and the Denisovans (400ooo years old?) who both definitely were sentient and humans/people. 35/24: tells: “- - - there never was a people, without a warner having lived among them (in the past).” The oldest knowledge of reading is some 5ooo+ years old. How did older "messengers" use their copies of "the Mother of the Book" - the Quran? And in what language were they written? - Muslims like to claim that the Quran has to be read in Arab, but remember here that the Arab - or proto-Arab - language is maximum from around 7ooo BC, and the Arab alphabet was not completed until around 900 AD.

By the way: The oldest known temple - building for revering one or more gods - is in Turkey, not in Arabia, and definitely not for Allah. Gobekli Tepe was built around 9ooo BC - some 7ooo years before Abraham and perhaps 5ooo years before Noah. Actually before even the costal Arabia was settled some 7ooo BC or a little earlier

#####062 45/5e: "- - - the fact - - -". Beware that the Quran - and Muslims and Islam - often are very free and liberal when using words like "fact", "proof", etc. Always check if the claims really are facts or proofs, etc., before you believe in such words from Muslim/Islamic sources. And do not judge a Muslim if you find out he is lying about this or that, and especially not concerning the religion. Remember that in Islam it often is not a sin to lie - yes, when it comes to defending or promoting the religion, it even is advices to do so "if necessary". Cfr. "Al-Taqiyya" (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), "war is deceit" (and "everything" is war), and the rules for breaking even words/promises/oaths in the Quran (f.x. 2/225a, 3/54, 5/89a+b, 16/91d, 16/92a+b, and 66/2a). (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.) All this are moral "specialties" you do not find in normal religions - not to mention in the Bible or NT. But then the moral code in the Quran is a bit "special" on too many points.

063 47/19a: "Know - - -". Also this is one of the words which cannot be accepted at face value in a book with so much wrong like in the Quran, unless there are additional proofs.

064 49/7f: "- - - but Allah has endeared the Faith to you, and made it beautiful in your hearts - - -". Allah or someone else? The Quran's many mistakes, its partly immoral moral code, and its inhuman war religion may make one think about forces very different from benevolent gods.

Another point: If Allah was able to make Islam "beautiful" to some people, why then did he not do the same to the rest of mankind and save them from Hell? There only are 2 possible real answers: He was not able to - which means that either he does not exist, or he for other reasons is unable to do it = not omnipotent. Or he does not want to - and knowing the extreme sadism and horror in Hell, no "explanation away" is valid, and there only is one possible explanation: He is not a good and benevolent god.

065 49/7h: “- - - He (Allah*) has made hateful to you (Muslims*) unbelief - - -”. To hate unbelief for most Muslims means to hate the unbelievers/non-Muslims.

Also see 49/7g just above - a close parallel.

066 50/24-25: "- - - Rejecter of Allah, who forbade what was good, transgressed all bounds, cast doubts and suspicions". Well, f.x. the followers of Yahweh reject Allah, but they definitely do not forbid what is good - on the contrary they in some ways are more good towards other humans than Muslims - and transgressing also some Muslims do as well as Yahweh's people. Finally: To cast doubt and suspicion on books who deserves it, should be no great sin.

067 50/42b: "- - - in (very) truth - - -". See 2/2b and 13/1g above.

"- - - truth - - -"?

A. Occam's Broom (the same Occam as the one with the razor): "The intellectual dishonest trick of ignoring facts that refute your argument in the hope that your audience won't notice". (New Scientist 21.Sept. 2013.) This trick is frequently used by Muhammad, by Islam, and by Muslims arguing for the Quran's texts and for Islam - just use your ears and/or eyes, and brain, and you will find lots and lots of samples, f.x. in some of Muhammad's lies in the Quran.

B. "'Surely' (etc.*) and rhetorical questions - whenever you encounter these in a text, stop and think. The author usually wants you to skate over them as if the claim is so obvious as to be beyond doubt, or the answer self-evident. The opposite is often the case." (Graham Lawton.)

Try to count such cases in the Quran - they are MANY. Especially the never proved claim "the Truth" and similar are very often used. Samples: "Without doubt", "certain", "verily", "clear", "right", "fact", "wrong", "sign", "proof" (even modern Muslims disuse this word often), "term appointed", "predestined", "If Allah wanted - - -", "non-Muslims are bad, Muslims are good", "error", "wisdom", and more.

#######Like said these two rhetorical ways of dishonesty are used very many places in the Quran - we have not counted, but hundreds. Each of them may be a hidden lie - is a lie if the orator knows his point is a claim or bluff or worse, and not a proved or provable fact. And according to the Quran what is said in the Quran, is said by Allah.

Who needs such tricks? - the cheat and deceiver, the swindler and the charlatan.

068 53/3: “Nor does he (Muhammad*) say (aught) of (his own) desire”. It will take strong proofs to prove that surahs like no. 66 or no. 111 are worthy of a god and belongs in a revered Mother Book in Paradise - one that may be has existed since eternity. And also to prove they are worthy a book revered by an omniscient and omnipotent god. And what about "the Mother Book"/the Quran repeatedly solving Muhammad's domestic problems?

Not to mention how strong proofs it takes to prove that a god sent down all those mistakes, contradictions, etc.

And as for prophesies, a few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens if it is nothing spectacular). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention pretended to or claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2 in the definition of a prophet), and finally both he and Islam said and say that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad “except the Quran” – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in the Hadiths, are made up stories). Muhammad also directly said in the Quran that he was unable "to see the unseen" = unable to make prophesies. Also see 30/40a and 30/46a above.

Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only “borrowed” that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.

What is for sure: All the mistakes, contradictions, cases of invalid logic and of unclear language definitely are from no god's desire - an omniscient god makes perfect texts.

069 53/3-4: "Nor does he (Muhammad*) say (aught) of (his own) Desire. It is no less than inspiration sent down to him". This means that everything Muhammad said, in reality was inspired by Allah, and thus Allah's words - which means that also Sunna (Hadiths) can abrogate the Quran and the other way around. But no omniscient god would need to abrogate himself. And in the Quran there are a number of abrogations - lots of them.

It seems that abrogation is/was used mainly in these cases:

  1. When Muhammad or Allah had said (Quran mainly) or done (Hadith often) something he/they later found was not wise - like the Satanic Verses.
  2. When Muhammad found that he had forgotten verses - this happened according to Hadith. F. x. al-Bukhari (3/223 and 8/91): ”Aisha (one of Muhammad’s wives*) said: ’(Muhammad said*): - - - he (a man*) reminded me of such and such verses I had dropped from Surah so and so”.
  3. When Muhammad/Allah found that what he/they had ordained for the Muslims was more than they would accept: Spoils of war belonged to Allah - but it was changed to 20% for Allah and 80% for his men. Praying much of the night, was reduced to less. And each Muslim capable to fight 10 “infidels”, was reduced to 2 “infidels”, etc. But why did not an omniscient god know this from the start?
  4. When Muhammad/Allah wanted a rule changed- f.x. less and less alcohol, or more and more war. (According to Ibn ’Arabi “'The verse of the sword’ has abrogated 124 verses” - mainly all the peaceful ones.) But why did not an omniscient god know the best rule from the very beginning?
  5. When Muhammad himself did things differently from his own teachings, his deeds became an abrogation of the Quran. The Quran f.x. prescribes whipping of adulterers, whereas the praxis some places even today is stoning - at least of the woman. The reason is said to be that Muhammad himself practiced stoning - even took part in it personally. His praxis of murdering opponents also made good examples for the future. (There also is a rumor in Islam that there was a verse demanding stoning for illegal sex, but that this verse in case was one of those which were omitted when Uthman had the official Quran made.) The same goes for torture. And murder - though that also was prescribed. There also is f.x. the case of donkey meat – it is not prohibited by the Quran, but Muhammad prohibited it during a war campaign – and forever - according to Hadiths.

The use of abrogation forever was - and is - a problem for Islam. The reason is that with the exception of the “satanic verses” and possible other verses which were abrogated and told by Muhammad to be forgotten - and verses forgotten or for other reasons omitted from the Quran by caliph Uthman and his men when making the “final” Quran in the 650s AD (persistent rumors in Islam tells that some 100 verses were forgotten or for other reasons omitted) - the abrogated verses remain in the book, and much worse: As mentioned above it is often highly unclear which verses are abrogated and invalid, and which are not. Some Muslims say nothing is abrogated (which is a dream made up because abrogation really is not worthy an omniscient god, and raises serious doubts about the god Allah, his omniscience and his powers and his existence, and perhaps also because many people needs something absolute to believe in or rely on) but it only is a dream. The reality is abrogation. The only question is how many verses? As mentioned there are numbers from 5 to 500, but realistic may be 200 - 300 or some more (up to 500) - it depends on how strict the reader is. Muslims tend to find fewer abrogated verses than others - 100 or more are not uncommon - perhaps because they are reluctant to admit unnecessary weaknesses in their god and their religion - - - though Ibn Arabi said about the famous and infamous “verse of the sword” (surah 9/5 “- - - fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them - - -”): "The verse of ‘the sword’ has abrogated 124 verses” - f.x. all the peaceful ones about non-Muslims and about no compulsion in religion. And that was only the “sword verse” - there are many more. Also see 2/106.

The problem with not knowing which verses are abrogated and which not, is exacerbated by the fact that even the verses Muslim scholars agree on are abrogated, remains in the Quran - they cannot be taken out, because Allah sent it down like that, and men cannot correct his mistakes or what to call it.

Some of the serious results of the uncertainty around abrogated verses are:

  1. It is difficult to be a judge when you do not for sure know which verses relevant for a case are abrogated and invalid, and which not. How to judge when you know the dictator of your country has nullified paragraphs in the constitution of the country, but without it is possible for you to know for sure which ones and how many?
  2. Many Muslims honestly believe Islam is a peaceful religion because they do not know or do not believe/accept that the peaceful verses are abrogated. They even may be insulted when being told so. And we non-Muslims should remember that this honest belief leads to a use of their religion which makes these groups of Muslims no danger for their surroundings (but of course our problem is to know who of them are honest and who not).
  3. It is easy to defend - or make propaganda for - Islam by pointing to peaceful verses without even mentioning the word “abrogation”. Many non-Muslims look at the verse and – not knowing the abrogating rule and verses – believes it.
  4. A lot of naïve non-Muslims with superficial knowledge about Islam easily accepts and tells about the peaceful real Islam - often as opposed to other religions. They simply do not know that Islam started as a mainly peaceful religion, but was transferred to one of hate, stealing, rape, suppression, blood and war around and after 622 AD when Muhammad became strong enough and in addition needed first highwaymen and then warriors.

But: Why did an omniscient god need to change his worse and his Plan?? - he had to try and fail and correct? - he was undecided and changed his mind? - or - -? And what does this tell about Allah - if he is not a made up pagan god like he was in the old Arabia?

#070 53/11b: “The (Prophet’s (Muhammad’s*)) (mind and) heart in no way falsified that which he saw.” If the Quran is fundamentally different from the Bible, and the Bible is not falsified according to science – in spite of Islam’s not documented claims - what explanations are then left for the differences between f.x. what Muhammad claimed the Bible said and what it really said? This simply is one of Muhammad's many, many never proved claims - he never was able to prove anything a t all concerning the main point of his religion.

071 54/24d: "Truly should we (non-Muslims*) then (if they followed a religion like Muhammad's new religion*) be straying in mind, and mad". As the Quran with all its errors, etc. is not from any god, this may be a correct statement. But one more nice and exact parallel to Muhammad's experiences.

And: When used in the Quran words like "true", "truth", "truly", "sure" "surety", "surely", "verity", "verily", etc. normally are claims, not proved facts. Also see 2/2b + 13/1g and 67/9c - 2 strong ones and as for contradictions to the Bible also 40/20b. Also the latter half of the comments to 41/39a is very relevant. These and similar words cannot be taken at face value unless they are proved.

072 54/25: "Nay, he (Muhammad's parallel Salih*) is a liar, an insolent one!". As the Quran - and thus its twin (exact copies from the same claimed "Mother Book" in Heaven) claimed given to the claimed prophet Salih - with all its errors, etc. is not from any god, this may be a correct statement. It at least is clear that Muhammad lied at least some times in the Quran (f.x. when Muhammad claimed that real miracles would make no-one believe - he was too intelligent and knew too much about people, and he knew this was a lie; at least some would believe if they got proofs for Allah).

###073 58/11d: And a sample of honesty in Islamic religious debate: The same text and comment as in 58/11c just above, but from the adjusted and more "correct" English 2008 edition:

Muhammad Asad's translation according to this edition (and NB: According to our knowledge he died long before 2008 AD. (He lived from 1900 till 1992.)): "And whenever you are told, 'Rise up (for a good deed)', do raise up - - -". And his claimed comment: (A58/20): "The interpretation implied in the words 'for a good deed' interpolated by me (Asad !!*) is analogous to that offered by most classical commentators, and most explicitly by Tabari (see 58/11c just above*); in the words of Qatadah (ibid.), "Whenever you are called to do a good deed, respond to this call".

The words that it means going to war - see 58/11c just above - have "disappeared", and this is not done by Muhammad Asad, as he was dead by then, but the book does not tell the readers that it is someone else who has made the book more politically "correct". Islam is too peaceful to be honest about such things.

One sample of honesty and reliability in Islamic religious literature and debate.

How much is really honesty and reliability in Islamic religious literature and debate - not to say propaganda?

Do you understand why we say that it is heavy work to study Islamic literature, because every piece of "information" have to be checked to find out if it is true or not?

##074 59/3a: "And had it not been that Allah had decreed banishment for them (the Jewish tribe Banu Nadir - Banu means tribe*) for them - - -". There exists a Scandinavian word "poelsevev" - literally meaning "a weaving made from sausages" - which means utter nonsense with a large dash of stupidity included. This tale is "poelsevev" - Muhammad simply was forced to let them go because a strong Arab tribe (the Khazraiites under Abd Allah b.Ubayy) demanded it, even though he wanted to murder the men and enslave the women and children like he f.x. later did with bani Qurayza, when he was military stronger.

PS: Which god would use "poelsevev"?

###075 62/2m: (A62/1) "The designation of the Prophet (Muhammad') as a man 'from among themselves' is meant, in this context, to stress the fact that he, too, was unlettered (ummi) in the primary sense (= had not learnt how to read and write - a claim science is skeptical to*) of this word, and could not, therefore, have 'invented' the message of the Quran or 'derived' its ideas from earlier scriptures". This is wrong at least to the 2. power and dishonesty at least to the 3. There is no connection between knowing how to read and write, and the ability to make up tales. Tellers of tales made up good stories, legends, fairy tales, etc., etc., for perhaps a million years before writing was even invented (ca. 3200 BC). Similar goes for the claim that as he could not read, he could not have got his "information" and ideas from the Bible, but has to have got it directly from Allah. You do not have to be able to read yourself to get information about religions and other things - a lot of what anybody even today get of information, is verbal. And this was even more so the case in the old times when telling of tales, histories, legends, fairy tales, etc. was a popular pastime in long evenings - in Arabia like in most primitive cultures. The argument and the claim is even more stupid as the tales in the Quran mostly are not even from the Bible, but from tales and legends and folklore (that is why they are different from the Bible - not falsifications of the Bible like Muhammad claimed, but the use of verbal tales based on, but different from the Bible).

And not to forget: Muhammad married rich, and would have no problem to pay somebody to read stories which interested him. (This in addition to that several things points to that he knew both how to read and write.)

The mildest word possible to use for claims and arguments used here - and often used by Muslims - is rubbish. This even more so as the facts we have pointed to here, are so well known, that there is no chance at all for that Muslim scholars do not know them, and all the same they use the claims and arguments - - - and uneducated or lower intelligent (or wishful) believers even believe them!

The only thing the use of such claims and "arguments" proves, is that Muslims have no real arguments. If they had had, they would not have to use stupidity like this for "proofs".

#####076 64/1e: (A64/1): "- - - all human beings are endowed with the instinctive ability to perceive the existence of the Creator - - -". #######This is so stupid a claim that it is not even wrong - it is plain imbecility. It also is totally un-scientific - no scientist has till this day found even traces of such an ability. It is a pure al-Taqiyya (lawful lie - something you only find in Islam of the big religions), likely dictated by the fact that Islam has not one single valid proof for its god (lots and lots of claims, but not one real proof - and the word of a man like Muhammad is not much worth), and they are groping for handholds where they can - if you go looking, you will find a number of such invalid claims about indications for a god in Islamic literature. There is a drive or a need for something strong - a god - in a minor part of humanity (may be 5 - 10% of the population). But no-one - included science and included Islam - have ever found even traces of an ability in man to perceive a god.

Islam has not one single proof for Allah. But they feel the need for one, and use many "clever" ways to try to find something. One recurring claim is this that human instinct can feel/perceive/have knowledge about the god. This is one of the cases.

The only two things such wishful thinking proves, is that Muslims feel the need for proofs for their claimed god very strongly - so strongly that they forget to use their brain. And that they have no such proof - if they had, they would use that proof instead of using more or less occultism and wishful dreams for "arguments".


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


#############077 66/12c: (A66/26): “- - - We (Allah*) breathed into (her (Mary’s*) body) Our spirit - - -.” Does this refer to how Jesus was created? – or does it refer to the "normal" transfer of spirit that according to Islam makes a fetus to a human, and which according to Islam happens 5 months before the baby is born? Nobody knows – and this is an essential question in just this case. But the text is not clearer than this.

According to the fact that Mary was a virgin (according to several points in the Quran - 3/47, 19/20, 21/91, 66/12), though, she could not be the carrier of a fetus. Thus this has to be the very "start" of Jesus - the creation of him. And note that according to this verse it was done by the god personally: "'We' breathed into her 'Our' spirit - - -". (This way of using the words "We" and "Our" is named "royal 'We'", and is used by kings, etc. in formal speech instead of "I" and "my".) There thus is no doubt that Jesus was "started" by the god himself. This also goes even if it here is meant that the god blew the soul/personality/mind into Jesus at the 4-month stage, as it after all is the soul/person/mind which counts in the case of Jesus, not the body. We may add that there is no way of believing that if the god personally started the growth of a fetus, that fetus was to become an ordinary man - this even more so if you combine this verse with 19/19, telling that Mary would get a holy son.

In spite of Muslim scholars' debates about this, there really is only one possible conclusion here: The god "started" Jesus - and the male who "starts" a baby, is the father of that baby. THUS THE QURAN HERE DIRECTLY CONFIRMS THAT JESUS WAS THE SON OF THE GOD (AND 19/19 CONFIRMS THAT HE WAS HOLY) - this in spite of Muhammad's repeated claims about the opposite, as Jesus the son of the god would make Muhammad maximum messenger number 2 (and Muhammad wanted respect and power). Muhammad clearly accepted the use of dishonesty as working tools - this is clear from several points in the Quran. He also personally used dishonesty as a means - f.x. when murdering the peace delegation from Khaybar - and he lied at least a few times in the Quran (some cases are listed in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran"). But the problem when lying is not to make up a lie, but not to say things in other connections which shows that this and this was a lie. Also remember that in such cases what is said unconsciously is more reliable than what is claimed very consciously. About Jesus Muhammad claims Jesus was number 2, but here and in 19/19 stumbles and divulges that Jesus for one thing really was the son of the god, and that he was holy.


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


078 86/13c: "- - - this (the Quran*) is the Word that distinguishes (good from Evil)." Some claims do not need a comment.

Sub-total Chapter 67 = 78 + 6.113 = 6.191.


>>> Go to Next Chapter

>>> Go to Previous Chapter

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