Humans, Other Beings in/Relevant to the Quran, Part 38
01 Jan 2016
211. RAMSES II
Likely the greatest of the pharaohs of Egypt. Born around 1297 BC. Chosen by his father, Seti I, to become the next pharaoh when he was 14. Became pharaoh in 1279 BC and ruled till 1213 BC. As science believe the Jews' Exodus happened around 1235 BC, this in case means that it happened during the reign of Ramses II - which among other things in case means that the pharaoh in spite of what the Quran (and the Bible) says, did not drown.
As the Quran says the involved pharaoh drowned, and as it is a fact that Ramses II did not drown, Islam normally claims that the Exodus happened earlier - often it is said 1500-1600 BC and sometimes even earlier - under pharaohs one does not know how died, and thus may have drowned, but science is pretty unanimous: Around 1235 BC. The few exceptions are some scientists who believe it happened a little later - during the reign of Ramses II's son and successor Merneptah or Merenptah (1213 - 1203 BC), But that was after Ramses II, not before.
The Pharaoh connected to the baby Moses likely was Horemheb - also he a strong pharaoh.
¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤
001 2/49aa: "- - - the people of Pharaoh - - -". The people of Ramses II - Egyptians.
002 2/50aa: "- - - the people of Pharaoh - - -". The people of Ramses II - Egyptians.
*003 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. 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".
004 2/248j: Conclusions about verse 2/248 in the Quran: It tells that Saul (wrongly called Talut in the Quran) has become a king, and that the Ark of Covenant was going to be brought to the Jews. But Saul was king shortly before 1000 BC, whereas the Ark of Covenant was made - not brought, but made - under Moses somewhere around 1330 BC (according to science the Exodus - if it is not fiction - took place ca. 1235 BC (under Pharaoh Ramses II) and the Ark was made not too long afterward). The Quran is some 300 years wrong - in addition to wrong way of "delivery". There are so clear references to the Ark in the Bible, that even if the Bible is the only source for it, Islam will have to bring strong proofs to make us believe it was brought by angels during the reign of Saul/Talut, containing relics from Moses and Aaron and their families.
By the way: The Ark was crafted from acacia wood and gold by a man named Bezalel (2. Mos. 37/1-9).
*005 3/84m: “- - - in (the Books) given to Moses”. Wrong. Moses (if he ever existed) lived 1300-1200 BC (if the exodus from Egypt ever happened, it took place ca. 1235 BC - during the reign of pharaoh Ramses II according to science. Moses then was 80 according to the Bible, and lived for another 40 years the Bible says). These 5 books (the Torah) were written not earlier than ca. 800 BC, and may be as late as 500 BC, according to science, but named after Moses. Moses was never given those books (though he was orally given the law, which he himself wrote down later, according to the Bible – the laws later became part of “The Books of Moses” (what Moses wrote down sometimes was called "the Book of Covenance")) - but this Muhammad did not know - - - whereas a god had known it. See 2/53a above.
There also is an extra point here: The so-called Mosaic religion never was a proselyting one. And for nearly 2ooo years Abraham and his descendants never did much proselyting. Islam is a strongly proselyting religion - even by means of strong compulsions and sometimes even death warnings and murder to force people stay or become Muslims. This very central difference - a historical fact - is one more proof for that Abraham and his descendants (f.x. Moses) never were Muslims.
006 6/7a: “If We (Allah*) had sent unto thee (Muhammad*) a written (message) on parchment, so that they (Muslims and non-Muslims*) could touch it with their hands, the Unbelievers have been sure to say: ’This is nothing but obvious magic!’” Muhammad never ever was able to prove anything about what he told his mostly naïve and uneducated audience. But he got questions about and demands for such proofs many times from followers and others – this is mentioned repeatedly in the Quran. He had to evade those requests and demands, and an obvious way was to find ways of explaining them away. Here the technique he uses is “No matter what proofs I produce, they will not believe anyhow, so why produce proofs at all?” Swindlers and cheats frequently use such techniques. It is obvious for anyone able to think for himself or herself that the logic is twisted and wrong – but the ones wanting to believe or the very naïve might believe in it. What is more serious is that Muhammad was an intelligent man and a man knowing a lot about how to treat and sway people. There is no way he did not know he used twisted logic and dishonest psychology and story, and that a real miracle - or more than one - had made new believers, even if some would try to call it magic. And no way that he did not know that if he produced real evidence that would strengthen his followers enormously and make huge numbers of unbelievers become believers. In a short sentence: There is no way an intelligent man did not know this excuse was a lie. This even more so as he/the Quran told that all the sorcerers of pharaoh Ramses II became good Muslims because of a small miracle Moses made. The same goes for Ramses II becoming a Muslim in 10/90 because he saw a miracle of a made flooding.
007 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, and the same goes for Ramses II becoming a Muslim in 10/90 because he saw a miracle of a made flooding (two stories which prove Muhammad knew he was lying when he said miracles would convince no-one. 3) 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.
008 7/103d: “- - - see what was the end (drowning*) of those who made mischief. (Pharaoh and his men*)”. According to science the exodus happened (if it happened) around 1235 BC, during the reign of Ramses II. Ramses II did not drown, which is the punishment the Quran claims. (Also the Bible - from where it is likely Muhammad got this story, at least indirectly - tells that the pharaoh drowned. But the Bible was made by humans. Humans might have mixed Ramses II with one of his generals or one of his 67(?) sons. A god had known the truth.)
009 7/105c: "- - - your (the Pharaoh's*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". Science says that if the exodus ever happened, it took place around 1235 BC. That means under the mighty and well known Pharaoh Ramses II (Islam wants it to have happened earlier under pharaohs whose reason for death is not known - Ramses II did not drown (guess if 3 religions had vocalized about it if this had been the case!)). What is very sure, is that Allah was no known god to Ramses II, except perhaps as one of many gods in a distant country. And what is as sure, is that Ramses II was a polytheist. And his main god likely was the big Egyptian god Ptah, as one of his sons, the one who succeeded him on the throne, was named Merneptah or Meremptah (Merne-Ptah or Merem-Ptah).
010 7/105d: One small "en passent" here as Muslims do not like the timing of the Exodus, and as M. Yusuf Ali makes a comment (in A1073 to this verse) "(The Jews stayed in Egypt*) perhaps two to four centuries. (Renan allows only one century).": The Bible is very clear on how long time the Jews spent in Egypt: 430 Years, and there was no reason for the Jews to falsify this number, in addition to that in spite of Islam's claims no falsification is known in the Bible, mistakes yes, falsifications no (again: Guess if Islam had screamed about it if even one documented falsification had been found!). But as Ramses II did not drown, Islam needs to use an earlier pharaoh where one does not know how he died - f.x. Thothmes I (ca. 1540 BC) is mentioned. But Jacob - the patriarch who took the Jews to Egypt lived around 1600 - 1800 BC (if he is not fiction), or to be exact: Abraham lived - if he is not fiction - around 2ooo - 1800 BC. Jacob was his grandson, and as Abraham was old when he got Isaac (the father of Jacob) it is realistic to say Jacob lived around 1600 - 1800. Then it is not possible to use earlier pharaohs than Ramses II if the Jews stayed 430 years. A little twist is necessary in case - and voila!: Islam says (the mentioned YA comment 1073): "- - - Israel stayed there perhaps two to four centuries." Problem solved - without any source for the estimate given. May be the 430 years in the Bible is a falsification? (but in case why?) - the standard and easy "explanation" Muhammad always used.
There is another point here you never hear Muslims mention: According to the Bible (1. Mos. 46/27) the Jews were 80 - 90 (70 + the wives of Jacob's sons) when they settled in Egypt. The same book mentions 2 - 3 places that when they left Egypt, they were 600ooo men = something like 2.ooo.ooo included women and children. It at least theoretically is quite possible for say 80-90 to become 2.ooo.ooo in 430 years - especially if other slaves joined them to get out from bondage. But it is in no way possible - scientific nonsense - in 200 or 300 years (and 100 years is a joke) , and even 400 years may be unlikely - for a geometrical curve like this one is, one extra generation makes a big difference. Also this makes an exodus and a pharaoh around 1500 - 1600 BC like Islam likes to claim to get rid of Ramses II, impossible.
There are some scientists, though, who think Exodus happened a little later, under the son of Ramses II, Merneptah. But that in case as said means later and not before - and under another pharaoh we know did not drown.
Honesty is not always a main thing in Islam. An indoctrinated rule.
011 7/110b: “His (Moses’) plan is to oust you (Pharaoh*) from your land - - -". Taken into account how powerful Ramses II was - perhaps the mightiest pharaoh ever in the old Egypt - and Moses only the spokesman (hardly the leader yet) of a group of slaves, no adviser could say such a thing to the Pharaoh and expect to be believed.
From where did Muhammad get this version?
012 7/110-127: At least this part of the story (Moses/Ramses II) is not from the Bible. Actually not the rest, too, but the correspondence there is more reasonable.
013 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.
014 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.
NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!
###015 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, and thus explained away the fact that he (and his presumed god) was unable to make miracles and thus prove his claims. Here he tells just the opposite: Disbelievers - even sorcerers - in Muhammad's own words here became Muslims because of one small miracle in his own story about Moses(!), - also psychologically a much more correct tale on just this one point. The same story f.x. in 20/69-70. That Muhammad told this story and even repeated it, #####shows that he knew miracles work, and thus that he knew he was lying in the Quran every time 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 a miracle of a made flooding.
Honesty is not always a main thing in Islam. The indoctrinated rule of al-Taqiyya.
NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!
016 7/124a: “Be sure I (Ramses II*) will - - -". A time anomaly. See 4/13d above.
017 7/124b: “Be sure I (Ramses II*) will - - -". See 7/88a above.
018 7/124c: “Be sure I (Ramses II*) will cut off your hands and feet on opposite sides - - -“. As far as we have been able to find out, Egypt at the time of Ramses II did not use this Arab way of punishment.
019 7/124d: “- - - and I (Pharaoh Ramses II*) will cause you all to die on the cross”. In Egypt at that time crucifixion was not used.
020 7/127b: "Said the chiefs of Pharaoh's people: "Wilt thou (Ramses II*) leave - - - (etc*)". See 7/88a above.
021 7/127d: “He (Ramses II*) said: ‘Their (the Jews’*) male children will we slay - - -“. But they were already slaying the male children of the Jews – that was why the baby Moses had to be put on the Nile according to the Bible (1. Mos. 1/22) and not contradicted by the Quran. Both a mistake and a contradiction. And mistakes and contradictions do not exist in the Quran? See f.x. 7/141 below - it was a reality, not a new decision.
- 2/49: “- - - We (indicated Allah*) delivered you from the people of Pharaoh (who*) - - - slaughtered your sons - - -“.
- 7/141: “- - - Pharaoh’s people - - - who slew your male children and saved alive the females - - -.” Both the Quran and the Bible tell more than one place that the killing of male babies started long before the situation in 7/127. The Bible tells that the killing of male babies was the reason for why the baby Moses was set adrift on the Nile - a desperate try to save him (the Quran gives no real reason).
- 14/6: “(Moses said about Pharaoh that he*) slaughtered your sons and let your women-folk live - - -.”
022 7/127e: "He (Ramses II*) said - - -". A time anomaly. See 4/13d above.
023 7/127f: "He (Ramses II*) said: "Their male children - - - (etc.*)". See 7/88a above.
024 7/136b: "- - - We (indicated Allah*) drowned them (Ramses II and his people*) in the sea - - -". Wrong as far as Ramses II goes - we know from history that he did not drown.
*025 7/137b: “- - - We (indicated Allah*) leveled to the ground the great works and fine Buildings which Pharaoh and his people had erected - - -”. There is no trace neither in archaeology, nor in history, literature or art, not even in folklore or fairy tales of such a catastrophe around the year 1235 BC (some years before the end of the reign of Ramses II in 1213 BC) when this should have happened – at the time of the exodus from Egypt. On the contrary; Ramses II was one of the strongest and most successful of the pharaohs, and also a great builder leaving MANY great buildings behind after many years of - among other things - building. Has Muhammad put more drama to his story, believing it would be impossible to control if it were true? Islam will have to find proofs - and they do not exist. (You will meet Muslims claiming the Quran here refers to the natural wear and tear which today means there are many ruins in Egypt, but that has nothing to do with a punishment of the pharaoh and his people to do - just another "explaining away", and a very primitive one.) As there is no god behind a book of a quality like the Quran and all its errors, wrong facts, contradictions, etc., from where did Muhammad get this story? - and this question is strengthened by the fact that it is untrue (if not Islam prove - prove - the opposite).
One of the many bluffs or repeated folk tales in the Quran.
026 8/52b: "- - - the People of Pharaoh (Ramses II*) - - - they rejected the Signs of Allah - - -". See 8/49a above.
027 8/54b: "- - - the People of Pharaoh (Ramses II*) - - - treated as false the Signs of their Lord (Allah*) - - -". See 8/49a above.
028 10/75c: "- - - but they (Pharaoh Ramses II and his chiefs*) were arrogant - - -". See 10/71b above.
029 10/76a: "When the Truth did come to them (Pharaoh Ramses II and his people*) from Us (Allah*) - - -". Here at least there is a contradiction to the Bible - according to the Bible the message was from Yahweh. But it also contradicts science and Islamic reality: Neither science nor Islam has ever found any trace from a god like Allah, a religion like Islam, or a book like the Quran anywhere in the world older than 610 AD - some 1800+ years after Exodus.
030 10/78a: "They (Pharaoh Ramses II and his chiefs*) said: "Hast thou - - -". See 10/71b above.
031 10/78b: "Hast thou (Moses*) come to us to turn us away from the ways we found our fathers following - - -". Contradicted by the Bible: In the Bible there is no religious debate between Moses and Ramses II - only: "Let my people go". (But one may wonder if the reason why Muslims are so reluctant even to check the truth behind all the mistakes in the Quran, is because they are unable to question the indoctrination from their fathers - taqlid.) 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.
032 10/78c: "- - - in order that you (Moses*) and your brother (Aaron*) may have greatness in the land (Egypt*)?" This is not from the Bible. In the Bible there is no conflict about power or the religion here - there you only find "let my people go". But then much of what is said in the Quran to be from Exodus (= 2. Mos.), is not from the Bible - the only existing source about Exodus (the Jews leaving Egypt under Moses) except for legends and fairy tales.
033 10/78d: "- - - in order that you (Moses*) and your brother (Aaron*) may have greatness in the land (Egypt*)?" YA1463 comments: "Notice how they (Pharaoh Ramses II and his men*) attribute evil motives to the men of Allah, motives of ambitions and lust for power - - -. The same device was used against Al Mustafa (another name for Muhammad*)". For one thing this kind of insinuations from Ramses II is not mentioned in the Bible. But more interesting is that Yusuf Ali here turns the facts (the only perhaps facts are in the Bible, as the Quran and all its mistakes are not from any god, and thus not from any reasonably reliable source) upside down: Like so many places the history of real or claimed historical prophets was changed to become parallels to Muhammad's own life and story, to make him look like the old prophets, and thus a normal prophet.
Another point is that for an open mind it is ever so easy to see from the Quran that "Al Mustafa" wanted power. Respect and power - and women.There also is an extra point here: The so-called Mosaic religion never was a proselyting one. And for nearly 2ooo years Abraham and his descendants never did much proselyting (not until Jesus, who ordered it before he left). Islam is a strongly proselyting religion - even by means of strong compulsions and sometimes even death warnings and murder to force people stay or become Muslims. This very central difference - a historical fact - is one more proof for that Abraham and his descendants (f.x. Moses) never were Muslims. This on top of that neither science nor Islam has found traces from a god like Allah, a religion like Islam, a book like the Quran, or prophets preaching Islam before 610 AD, when Muhammad started his proselyting, and on top of the fact that Abraham did not have camels, and thus could not go back and forth between Canaan/Sinai and Mecca like the Quran tells. These are facts from history. Also as far back as history goes, it tells that the Jews had the god Yahweh and the Mosaic religion, not the very different Allah and Islam or similar.
034 10/79a: "Said Pharaoh (Ramses II*): 'Bring me - - -". See 10/71b above.
035 10/79b: "Said Pharaoh (Ramses II*): 'Bring me - - -". A time anomaly. See 4/13d above.
036 10/83e: "- - - certainly Pharaoh was mighty on the earth - - -". Pharaoh Ramses II was one of the mightiest - if not the mightiest - pharaoh ever in old Egypt. Worse: We know his history pretty well, f.x. that he did not drown. Because of this Muslims wants Exodus (the Jews leaving Egypt) and Moses to have happened earlier under less well known pharaohs who perhaps may have drowned (they often indicate around 1500 - 1600 BC, and never an indication about from where they have the numbers). But science is clear: If Exodus ever happened, it happened around 1235 BC, (sources f.x. Encyclopedia Britannica) which means during the reign of Ramses II. (Or at utmost during the reign of Ramses II'S son and successor, Merneptah - 1213-1203 BC.)
037 10/88c: "- - - they (Ramses II and his people*) mislead (men) from Thy (Allah's*) Path". According to the Bible there were no religious controversy here - only that the Pharaoh did not want to lose so many slaves - slaves after all have a value.
038 10/88d: "- - - send hardness to their hearts, so that they will not believe - - -". Quite a contradiction to the teaching of Jesus, at least (though there are cases in the Bible where Yahweh hardened hearts - included the heart of Pharaoh Ramses II).
039 10/90b: “At length, when overwhelmed with the flood, he (pharaoh Ramses II*) said: - - -”. We know a lot about Ramses II - he was one of the really great pharaohs, and much material exists from his time. One of the things we know, is that he did not drown (was not “overwhelmed with the flood”) - one of the reasons why Islam wants this to have happened earlier under less known pharaohs who may have drowned. This episode is nowhere motioned in the Bible.
NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!
*040 10/90c: “I (Ramses II) believe that there is no god except Him Whom the Children of Israel believe in (indicated by Muhammad to be Allah)". One more thing we know about Ramses II (see 10/90), is that he was a polytheist and never a Muslim – and never a Jew. This episode is nowhere motioned in the Bible.
When Ramses II saw the miracle that Moses’ god could command the wind and the water, he became a believer - according to the Quran.
#### This episode(?) told by Muhammad in 614-615 AD also is a very strong proof for that Muhammad knew that miracles or other proofs from a god - like indicated Ramses II understood here - would make people believers, and thus a strong proof for that he knew he lied each time later when he "explained" away requests for proofs from/for Allah with the claim that proofs or miracles would have no effect.
NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!
*041 10/90d: “I (Ramses II) believe that there is no god except Him Whom the Children of Israel believe in”. This and much more in this story is not from the Bible. As the Quran with all its mistakes is not from a god - from where did Muhammad get this information or "information"?
042 10/90e: "I am of those who submit (to Allah in Islam) (= became a Muslim*)". Wrong: We know Ramses II never became a monotheist - and he lived for years after the Exodus (if it ever happened) and was a polytheist. This also is one reason for why Islam wants Exodus to have happened earlier and under pharaohs we know less about, included no knowledge's about how they died - Islam propose 1500 - 1600 BC f.x, and even earlier. But this conflicts with what science knows about this - science agrees on ca. 1235 BC if it ever happened, which means under Ramses II.
043 10/92a: “This day (when the Egyptian army caught up with Moses and the Jews*) shall We (Allah*) save thee (Pharaoh*) in the body - - -.” The expression “in the body” should mean the same as “bodily” or “safe and (relatively at least) sound”. This may be true, as Ramses II did not drown. But it strongly contradicts other verses in the Quran which tells that he drowned. It also must be said that to save the Pharaoh in the very moment of death, would contradict 4/18, which tells it is too late to repent when you know you are about to die.
- 17/103: “- - - but We (Allah*) drowned him (Pharaoh) and all that were with him.”
- 28/40: “- - - and We (Allah*) flung them (Pharaoh and his men*) into the sea: now behold what was the End of those who did wrong!”
- 43/55: “- - - and We (Allah*) drowned them all (Pharaoh and his men*) .”
044 11/97: "- - - Pharaoh (Ramses II*) and his Chiefs - - -". At least 2 time anomalies. See 4/13d above.
045 11/99: "And they (Ramses II and his chiefs*) are followed by a curse in this (life) and on the Day of Judgment - - -". Ramses II was hardly followed by any curse in this life. About the possible next? - it is cheap and easy to claim things as long as you can evade any requests for a proof. On the other hand: Such claims carry little weight for persons with at least a medium brain.
**046 13/1f: “- - - the Book: that which hath been revealed unto thee (Muhammad*) from thy Lord (Allah*) - - - “. That is the question, to quote Hamlet: Did a god really produce and reveal a book with that many mistakes, contradictions, and invalid “proofs“? No. And when no god revealed it, he also did not reveal it to Muhammad.
An alternative is that the Devil impersonated Gabriel and in other cases told Muhammad “by inspiration”, and that it thus was revealed to him, but from dark forces. Another alternative is that it all stems from a sick brain – TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) + lust for power may easily explain everything. Yet another alternative is that it was not revealed, but made up – the fact that many of the mistakes which are in accordance with the wrong science of the time and area of Muhammad, and also the fact that Muhammad was not stupid enough to believe everything that is said in the Quran, may indicate that it is made up. (As for the last argument: F.x. the claim that miracles would not make any people believe, Muhammad was too intelligent and knew too much about people to believe himself – and f.x. Jesus was a good proof of the opposite: A lot did not believe in spite of everything, but quite a number came to believe because of what they saw and heard and witnessed. The same was the conclusion of the story that Muhammad himself told about the magicians of Pharaoh Ramses II and Moses: They came (according to Muhammad’s own words) to believe after a small miracle. And similar for Ramses II himself 10/90.) For similar also see 2/231 – 3/3 – 4/136 – 5/48 – 5/59 - 5/64 – 5/67 – 6/7 – 7/2 – 7/3 – 10/2 – 13/19 – 16/89 – 18/1 - 16/102 – 25/33 – 27/6 – 33/2 – 34/6 – 35/24 – 35/31 – 39/2 - 47/2.
047 14/6d: "(Pharaoh Ramses II*) slaughtered your (the Jews'*) sons, and let your women-folk live: therein was a tremendous trial from your Lord". According to the Bible this was a misdeed from the Pharaoh, not a trial from the god.
#####048 17/59a: "And we (Allah*) refrain from sending Signs (Quran-speak for "proofs for Allah"), only because the men of former generations treated them as false - - -".
This is Muhammad's standard "explanation" for why Allah would not and Muhammad himself was unable to give any real proofs for the existence of Allah or for Muhammad's connection to a god - Allah or someone else. And it is not a good one, as for one thing it obviously is not true:
- There were stories both in the Bible and in the Quran - f.x. the sorcerers of Pharaoh Ramses II and Moses - about people believing in the performed miracles/real proofs (if true stories). The same goes for Ramses II becoming a Muslim in 10/90 because he saw the miracle of a made flooding.
- Muhammad knew about at least some of the stories about the miracles Jesus performed, and how huge flocks of believers he got from the miracles.
- It is not only contra, but incompatible to human nature and psychology that not a good percentage of the ones who witnessed real miracles/proofs would come to believe.
Muhammad was intelligent and he understood people and how to manipulate them. He knew this. But he obviously was unable to find a better excuse - there are not many excuses which would work. But remember that dishonesty is an accepted working tool in Islam - f.x. al-Taqiyya.
What is really strange, is that Muslims have not seen through this "explanation" centuries ago, and still are unable to do so.
This is a monument over the effect of brainwashing, of wishful thinking, of ability to refuse to see the obvious, of lack of ability/training in critical thinking, uncritical acceptance of authorities, and more. A monument over the weak point of the human brain - and over taqlid (blindly and unquestioning believing because your fathers said that this and this - f.x. the Quran - must be the truth, because so their fathers had told them).
There are many such cases in the Quran. The three most prominent and serious effects may be the impossible combination of full predestination like the Quran states many places, and free will of man, and the as impossible combination of full predestination, and claims about any effect of prayers or forgiving.
049 17/59g: “And We (Allah*) refrain from sending the Signs (real proofs*) only because the men of former generations treated them as false: We sent the She-camel to the Thamud to open their eyes - - -”. Thamud is the only example mentioned here – a tale “borrowed” from old Arab folk tales.
One thing is that we have never been able to understand how a camel could be a proof of Allah. (But actually the camel is part of an old Arab folk tale: It came out from a cliff and became a prophet for a god.) But just read the Bible – which the Quran “borrows” (and twists) many stories from – and you will see that real proof has effect (which is most natural). That it will have no effect just is fast-talk with somewhat bent logic and psychology – one of those any intelligent man knowing something about how people think and reacts was sure to know was untrue.
- For one thing: To use something which was claimed to have happened, but more than 2ooo years before, is not valid without documentation.
- For another: Muhammad himself used the miracles Moses according to the Quran made and told they made all the sorcerers of Pharaoh Ramses II become Muslims. The same goes for Ramses II becoming a Muslim in 10/90 because he saw the miracle of a made flooding.
- For yet another: There had been several prophets in between - with Jesus as the star in this connection - and also f.x. Paul even though he was not a prophet, who made miracles people believed in and attracted followers.
This "explanation" is invalid also according to the Quran (contradicted). What is worse: It is one of the places it is clear Muhammad knew he was lying, as it is clear from the Quran that he at least knew about the miracles of both Moses and Jesus, and that these made people believe.
050 17/101e: "- - - Pharaoh (here Ramses II and another one than the one at the time of Joseph naturally (some 400 - 500 years earlier) - - -". A time anomaly.
051 17/101f: "- - - Pharaoh (Ramses II*) said to him (Moses*): O Moses" I consider - - -". See 17/90b above.
*052 17/102c: “- - - I (Moses*) consider thee indeed, O Pharaoh, to be one doomed to destruction!” (Not from the Bible.) Pharaoh Ramses II was not doomed to destruction, at least not this time. He did not drown, in spite of what the Quran (and the Bible) says (but for the Bible there is a possible explanation for the mistake - not so for the Quran, as gods make no mistakes). – and he lived for several years after the possible exodus around 1235 BC. (This may be one of the reasons why some Muslims want the Exodus from Egypt to have happened under pharaohs we do not know so well as Ramses II - preferably one we do not know if he may have drowned or not. You, therefore, frequently see or hear Muslims claim the Exodus was in the 1500s or 1600s BC or even earlier, and that the time in Egypt was 200-300 or even 100-200 years - claims which collide also with other information (f.x. the number of Jews leaving Egypt, and the mentioning of the town Ramses at least two times (1. Mos. 1/11 and 12/37) in connection to the Exodus. It is unclear if this was the new capital Ramses II built, or another town/city named after Ramses II, but it refers to Ramses II (Ramses I only reigned 1-2 years around 1290 BC and hardly had time to build any city, and even if so, it was too late for claims about Exodus around 1600 1500 BC or earlier))). The Bible clearly says 430 Years, and science (included Encyclopedia Britannica if we remember correctly) is pretty unanimous: If Exodus ever happened, it happened around 1235 BC = during the reign of Ramses II.
The Bible: The Pharaoh honored his word to Moses and “let his people go” – though only after 10 serious plagues. But then he regretted the loss of all those slaves and followed them. The Jews were caught against a sea, but Yahweh made a path for them across it.
053 17/103a: "So he (Ramses II*) resolved to remove them (the Jews*) from the face of earth - --". This is not from the Bible. The Bible tells Ramses regretted loosing so many slaves and wanted to recapture them. (2. Mos. 14/5).
***054 17/103b: “- - - We (Allah*) did drown him (Pharaoh Ramses II) and all who were with him.” The pitiful fact is that we know from history that Ramses II did not drown. He even did not die until some years after possible the exodus, according to history (in 1213 BC).
- 10/92: “This day (the same as in 17/103*) shall We (Allah*) save thee in the body - - -“. The Quran mainly tells that the Pharaoh did drown (even though Pharaoh Ramses II did not die from drowning, and not until some years later than when science says the Exodus took place – if it took place). But here either that is contradicted – or Allah in reality contradicted his own promise of “saving the Pharaoh in the body”, which should mean “bodily”, “safely”.
***055 17/103c: “- - - We (Allah*) did drown him (Pharaoh Ramses II) and all who were with him.” According to the Bible it was Yahweh, not Allah who did this (except that Ramses II did not drown and did not die until several years later). And Ramses II did not drown.
056 19/35a: “It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah (Yahweh*) that He should beget a son”. We hope it really is the god that is talking here, because if it is Muhammad; how is a human to know what is befitting for a god? - and majesties often have children - many children. F.x. Ramses II had 67 sons (well, the number varies some from one source to another) and an unknown number of daughters, and Djingis Khan had so many children that science still can trace his DNA in Asia (source: New Scientist). And if this statement is true, there is the enigma of Jesus’ saying “father” and “my father” about Yahweh (the word “father” (of Jesus) is used at least 204 times in the Bible, and the word “son” at least 89 times about the relationship between Yahweh and Jesus according to our latest leafing through the Bible – frequently by Jesus himself) – both the Bible and the Quran says Jesus was honest - and science has shown that the Bible is not falsified in spite of Islam's never documented claims. (Also remember: Muhammad calls Yahweh Allah, as he insists it is the same god - something that is possible only if Yahweh/Allah is schizophrenic as there are too many and too grave differences between the two teachings.) Also see 19/92 – 37/152 – 37/180 below.
057 20/24a: "- - - Pharaoh - - -". If this ever happened, it happened around 1235 BC according to science - which means during the Reign of Ramses II. But no matter which pharaoh, it is a time anomaly for the ones who received a book like the Quran earlier than that.
058 20/44: "- - - he (Ramses II*) may take a warning or fear (Allah*)". There is not one sign of any kind in any kind of science indicating that the claimed god Allah was known in Egypt around 1235 BC, and thus no reason to believe Ramses II would fear him.
059 20/47b: “Verily we (Moses and Aaron*) are messengers sent by thy (Ramses II’s*) Lord (Allah*) - - -“. Wrong – Ramses II was a polytheist. Besides: He would have heard about Yahweh (but would not respect the god of slaves very much), but never about Allah.
060 20/47e: “- - - we (Moses and Aaron*) come from thy (Ramses II’s*) Lord (Allah*)!” See 20/47a just above.
061 20/49c: "Who then, O Moses, is the Lord of you two (Moses and Aaron*)?". The Jews had been in Egypt 430 years according to the Bible. Islam claims 100 - 300 years. (The Quran says that the Pharaoh drowned. We know that Ramses II did not drown, and Islam, therefore, needs to find a pharaoh who can have drowned, and therefore tries to move it backwards to more unknown pharaohs who can have died that way - if not something is seriously wrong with the Quran, as a god does not make mistakes in his holy book. (Also the Bible says he drowned, but the Bible is written by humans, and humans can make mistakes - f.x. mistaken one of Ramses II's generals or many (67?) sons for the pharaoh.)) After even 100 years the ruling pharaoh would know who was the god of a big group in his country like the Jews. The question is not logical.
062 20/51c: "What then is the condition of previous generations?" Ramses II asks if Moses means earlier Egyptians - polytheists - now were in Heaven or Hell. Such a debate is not mentioned in the Bible. From where did Muhammad get these details? As the Quran is not from a god, the alternatives are: From dark forces. From old tales. From his possible illness (TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy). From a scheming brain.
063 20/57a: "He (Ramses II*) said: 'Hast thou (Moses*) come to drive us (Ramses II*) out of our land - - -'". See 20/49b above.
064 20/57b: "Hast thou (Moses*) come to drive us (Ramses II*) out of our land - - -". In the Bible there is nothing like this - the only topic was "Let my people go". As the Bible is the only source about Moses, and as there was no god involved in making the Quran with all its errors (in spite of Islam’s many, but never proved statements and claims) one may wonder from where Muhammad got this new information(?).
065 20/57c: "Hast thou (Moses*) come to drive us (Ramses II*) out of our land - - -". As said there is nothing like this in the Bible. But also in the Quran there is nothing which could give the mighty Ramses II - or his advisers - suspicions like this. This part of the debate is illogical.
Besides: Where is the logic? - a group of hardly armed slaves should topple the biggest and strongest power in the region?
066 20/59b: "Moses said: 'Your (Ramses II*) tryst is the Day of the Festival, and let the people be assembled when the sun is well up". Not in the Bible - see 20/57b+c above,
067 20/61b: "Forge not ye (Ramses II*) a lie against Allah - - -". Most of the details in this story are different from the Bible, included this. See 20/57b+c above.
068 20/61c: "- - - lest He (here indicated Allah*) destroy you - - -". Well, Allah has not proved the power of destroying anything at all in all the time since long before Pharaoh Ramses II and till now. Lots of claims, but no proved case (guess if Muslims had told about it if such a case had existed!)
069 20/63b: "- - - their (Moses, Aaron*) object is to drive you (Ramses II) out from your land - - - etc.". Not from the Bible - there Moses' only topic was "Let my people go". See 20/57b+c above.
070 20/64: "- - - he wins (all along) today who gains the upper hand". This is nonsense both military and realistically spoken. No matter what happened, Ramses II had the control - he was too powerful to win over in just such a small confrontation. Which also the result of it shows - according to both the Quran and even more the Bible, it took a lot more - and very much tougher means - before he gave in (2. Mos. Ch. 7-11).
071 20/71b: "Surely this (Moses*) must be your (magicians'*) leader - - -". Here something is wrong. Moses had grown up in the same circles as the pharaoh (Ramses II). Ramses knew him and his history and knew he had been far away for 40 years (though unspecified in the Quran - much is lacking of information in the Quran; a hallmark on medium and low quality literature. A good writer also knows his details - just see the difference between a good writer and a piece in a young girls' romantic magazine (as literature much of the Quran is not of higher standard than that, even though the language itself is polished and thus likely better in the original - but that does not make it better as literature)).
072 20/71c: "- - - I (Ramses II*) will cut off your hands and feet on opposite sides - - -". If our sources are correct, Egypt at that time did not use this Arabian kind of punishment.
*073 20/71d: “- - - I (Pharaoh Ramses II*) will have you crucified - - -”. If not our sources are very wrong, Egypt at that time did not crucify people.
074 20/72b: "Never shall we (the magicians*) regard thee (Ramses II*) as more than the Clear Signs - - - etc." Not in the Bible - just like much more in this story (we do not comment on all of it). See 20/57b+c above.
075 20/72c: "- - - Him (here indicated Allah*) who created us (the magicians of Ramses II*) - - -". See 6/2b above and 21/56c below.
076 20/73a: "- - - we (the magicians of Ramses II*) have believed in or Lord (here indicated Allah*) - - -". Wrong, as Allah was unknown in the old Egypt - a historical fact. Yahweh might have been possible - information from the Jews - but not Allah.
077 20/73b: "- - - may He (Allah*) forgive us (the magicians of Ramses II*) our faults - - -". All the other things aside; Allah only can forgive if he exists and is a real god.
As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d above.
*078 20/78b: “Then the Pharaoh pursued them with his forces, but the waters completely overwhelmed them and cover them up”. May be the water covered up the troops, but not the Pharaoh - - - Ramses II did not drown, and he did not die until years later (1213 BC) according to science. Another thing: They most likely did not cross the Red Sea proper. The original Hebrew Bible in reality uses a name that also has the meaning “Sea of Reeds”. The Sea of Reeds - also named Timsah Lake - was a big, shallow lake south of the Bitter Seas in the area where you now find the Suez Canal. For Moses to walk past a big lake with his some 2 million Jews (600ooo men + women and children according to the Bible) and belongings and animals is one thing. To march down the western side of the Red Sea and plan to cross that sea by boats they did not have, is quite another thing – remember that they did not know that Yahweh would split the sea (and most of them hardly had believed it if they had been told). The fact that the Hebrew name for the sea they crossed (?) – Yam Suph – also means “the Sea of Reeds” is mentioned in footnotes many times in NIV – and in other literature. Similar claims that all – included the pharaoh drowned – in 7/103 – 10/90 -17/103 – 23/48 - 26/66 – 27/14 – 28/40 – 40/37 – 43/55 – 44/25-28 – 51/40 – 69/9-10 - 73/16 – 79/25. We may add that science seems to be pretty sure that if the Exodus happened, it happened around 1235 BC = during the reign of Ramses II. As we know that Ramses did not drown, Islam dearly wants it to have happened earlier and under a less known pharaoh that we do not know from what he died, but as so often they only back up the claim with speculations. And not to forget: If it happened much earlier the "known" facts do not add up.
079 20/79b: "Pharaoh (Ramses II*) led his people astray instead of leading them aright". This may or may not mean that Ramses II should have made Egypt Muslim - 2ooo years before Muhammad and the first known mentioning of Islam or of Muhammad's version of Allah. No comment.
080 21/52-71: Abraham delivered from Nimrod's fire. This story is taken from "Midrash Rabbah". And this part has another point: Abraham and Nimrod did not live at the same time (if they ever lived). Muhammad had a strong tendency to mix persons from different times (f.x. Haman (see the Book of Esther) and Ramses II - some 800 years wrong. Or Mary and Miriam - some 1200 years wrong.) You do not find this story about Abram (later renamed Abraham) and the gods in the Bible - the only source about Abraham - and 1000 years or more older than the Quran, and a book where one of the heroes had benefited from a tale like this, so no-one would dream of taking it out if it was true.
Who then was Nimrod? Nimrod according to the Bible was the son of Cush, who was the son of Ham, who was one of the three sons of Noah, who - if he ever lived - lived some 5ooo-6ooo years ago. If Abraham ever lived, he lived some 3800-4ooo years ago. This means there were some 1ooo-2ooo years between Nimrod and Abraham.
It takes a lot of missing knowledge to mix two persons living some 1ooo-2ooo years apart. No omniscient god makes that kind of mistake.
081 23/46: "- - - Pharaoh (here referred to Moses' pharaoh, Ramses II*) and his Chiefs - - -". Time anomalies.
082 22/47b: "They (Pharaoh Ramses II and his chiefs*) said: 'Shall we believe - - -'". See 23/24b above.
083 23/48: “- - - and they (Pharaoh and his chiefs*) became the ones who were destroyed (drowned*))”. But at least the pharaoh (Ramses II) was not destroyed/drowned. Ramses II did not die by drowning. And we know he died only years after the (possible) exodus in ca 1235 BC - - - if it ever happened.
084 26/11a: "The people of the Pharaoh: will they not fear Allah?" The people of Egypt were polytheists. It is likely at least many of them had heard about Yahweh, the god of their Jewish slaves, but Allah they had never even heard about - perhaps al-Lah (or in case more likely his earlier names al-Ilah or the even older Il), but not Allah. There is not even a trace found from monotheism under Ramses II - the pharaoh of Moses. (Islam prefers to talk about other pharaohs - preferably older ones - because science knows Ramses II did not drown, but science is not in doubt.)
085 26/26b: "(Moses) said (to Ramses II*): "Your Lord (Allah*) and the Lord of your fathers from the beginning." This contradicts reality, as we know Allah never was the god of the old Egyptians - there never was any monotheism, except Akn-Aton (pharaoh 1372 - 1355 BC) and his sun god (and on top of all the old al-Lah (older name al-Ilah and even older Il) was the moon god once upon a time, at least during the time he was named al-Ilah). And for another it contradicts the Bible: Moses never tried to pretend Yahweh was the god of the Egyptians according to the Bible, or discussed religion at all - his only topic according to the Bible was: "Let my people go".
We may add that originally Hubal was the moon god in Arabia, and the Kabah was his temple and dedicated to him. But when Muhammad was born, al-Lah - sometimes named Allah - had taken over as Arabia's main god and moon god, or coalesced with him. It is a bit ironic that a building dedicated to an old moon god was and is the most holy place on Earth for a claimed other and claimed omnipotent god - and as ironic is the fact that if Muhammad had been born earlier, Islam's god might have been named Hubal, not Allah (Muhammad simply took over the claimed mightiest of the pagan gods in Mecca, and earlier Hubal was reckoned to be the most powerful one).
086 26/27c: "Truly your messenger (Moses*) who has been sent to you (Pharaoh Ramses II*) is a veritable madman!" Notice that this is the same as was said about Muhammad by some in Mecca. If you read the Quran, you will see that most of the claimed or real prophets told about, are told to have had similar experiences like Muhammad. Simply Muhammad's way to tell his surroundings and followers - true or not true - that this was the normal reception of prophets, and thus that he was a normal prophet.
Like much more in this story, this is not from the Bible.
087 26/28a: "(Moses) said (to Ramses II*) - - -". A time anomaly.
*088 26/29c: “If thou (Moses*) dost put forward any god other than me (the pharaoh*), I will certainly put you in prison.” Wrong – in Egypt one had many gods. (One knows some 2ooo names for gods in the old Egypt, but some gods may have had more than one name.) Even more: According to one of Islam’s tries to explain away the mistake of placing Xerxes’ man Haman (see the Book of Esther) at Ramses II’s court - and hundreds of years wrong - the high priest (Ha-Amon) of one of the main gods – Amon – even was present and one of the pharaoh’s main advisers at this meeting (a “fact” that in case makes this sentence impossibly illogical - but then it is typical for Muslims' explaining away of mistakes in the Quran, that the "explanations" "explain" some aspects with a mistake, but collides with others). It is impossible that Ramses II said this if at the same time a high priest - Haman/Ha-Amon - of a main god was present. Or the other way around: If Ramses II said this, Islam’ "explanation" about Haman as Ha-Amon is proved wrong. Make your choice - but science knows that Amon was a top god among many others in Egypt, so it is highly unlikely Ramses II said what the Quran claims, unless Islam has real proofs.
The religious part - and other details - in this debate are not from the Bible. (According to the Bible the only thing Ramses II now said about the god of the Jews, was a short sentence saying that he did not know him and would not respect him (2. Mos. 5/2), and he said pretty little about Yahweh later, too).
As it is proved ever so well that Egypt had many gods (may be 2ooo names included local ones and different names for the same god), this quote is historical nonsense. And as Islam claims that the high priest for the god Amon - Ha-Amon - is the explanation for the name Haman mentioned in the Quran, either this Islamic "explanation" or the claim that Ramses II said he was the only god is nonsense and dishonesty.
089 26/35: "His (Moses'*) plan is to get you out of your land - - -". What is the basis for this claim? - there was nothing indicating that Moses had such plans. Besides: This is not from the Bible, so from where did Muhammad get his "information"? As no god was involved in the Quran, the only alternatives are legends, apocryphal (made up) scriptures, fairy tales or fantasy.
Plus a historical fact: Ramses II was one of the mightiest Pharaohs ever. There was no chance that a group - even a large group - of badly armed slaves could topple him and his armies and take over the power.
090 26/36b: "They (Ramses II's advisers*) said: 'Keep him (Moses*) and his brother (Aaron*) - - -".
See 26/3c above.
091 26/41b: "- - - they (the sorcerers of Ramses II*) said to Pharaoh: Of course - - -". See 26/3c above.
092 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.
091 26/42b: "He (Ramses II*) said: 'Yea (and more) - - -'". See 26/3c above.
093 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.
094 26/44b: "- - - (the sorcerers) said: 'By the might of Pharaoh - - -". See 26/3c above.
095 26/46b: "- - - the sorcerers (of Ramses II*) fell down - - -". See 26/3c above.
NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!
###096 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!!!
097 26/49b: Pharaoh Ramses II said: “Surely he (Moses*) is - - -". See 26/3c above.
104 26/49c: Pharaoh Ramses II said: “Surely he (Moses*) is your (the sorcerers’) leader - - -.” Wrong. Ramses II knew Moses from the royal court from before Moses had to flee (see 26/18-19), and knew he had been away for 40 years (according to the Bible - an unspecified number of years, but years, according to the Quran) – he could not be the leader of the local sorcerers.
098 26/49d: "Be sure I (Pharaoh Ramses II) will cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides - - -". According to our information this Arab way of punishing was not used in Egypt at the time of Ramses II.
099 26/49e: “- - - I (Pharaoh Ramses II) will cause you (Moses and others*) to die on the cross!” But the old Egypt did not use crucifixion as punishment. Similar claim in 7/124 – 20/71.
100 26/50b: "They (the sorcerers of Ramses II*) said: 'No matter - - -". See 26/3c above.
101 26/51: "Only, our (the Pharaoh's sorcerers*) desire is that our Lord (indicated to be Allah*) will forgive us our faults, that we may become foremost among the Believers". ####### THE MOST SERIOUS POINT HERE IS THAT MUHAMMAD CLAIMS THAT THE SORCERERS BECAME EAGER MUSLIMS BECAUSE OF MINOR MIRACLES PERFORMED BY MOSES. THIS WAS AS EARLY AS 615 OR 616 AD. T H I S P R O V E S T H A T M U H A M M A D A T L E A S T L A T E R K N E W H E W A S L Y I N G E A C H T I M E H E C L A I M E D T H A T T H E R E A S O N F O R T H A T A L L A H D I D N O T U S E M I R A C L E S O R O T H E R R E A L P R O O F S, W A S T H A T I T W O U L D N O T M A K E A N Y B O D Y B E L I V E A N Y H O W !!!!!!!
The same goes for Ramses II becoming a Muslim in 10/90 because he saw a miracle of a made flooding.
*102 26/63a: “Then We (Allah*) told Moses by inspiration: ‘Strike the sea with thy rod’. So it divided, and each separate part became like the huge, firm mass of a mountain”. According to science the Jews started the exodus (if it ever happened - and if it did, it happened ca. 1235 BC during the reign of Pharaoh Ramses II - one of the greatest pharaohs ever - and some years before Ramses II’s death (Muslims often wants to change this – preferably to around 1500-1600 BC - because we know Ramses II did not drown, but science is clear on this point)) from Goshen in the north of Egypt – to be specific: In the Nile delta. They travelled south roughly parallel to what is now the Suez Canal, and to the west of it. Then they turned south east, before they again headed south - still roughly parallel to what is now the Suez Canal, but now to the east of where the canal now is. Then they continued south parallel to the Red Sea. Before the Suez Canal came, between the Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea, here was unbroken low and quite flat land with some scattered lakes, the biggest of which were the Bitter Seas.
According to science the Jews may have been cornered against one of the seas during the above mention leg towards southeast, a sea named the Timsah Sea – or Yam Suph in Hebrew (meaning the Sea of Reeds). In the old Hebrew scriptures the Jews were cornered against Yam Suph (also named Timsah Sea), which can mean the Red Sea (the most frequently used translation) or the Sea of Reeds – both names are possible. The Sea of Reeds was a shallow sea - as for the exact depth our sources are vague, but quite likely just a few meters at most. (The longest reed we have been able to find, is a special kind of rice growing in the Tonle Sap Lake in Cambodia. It can be up to 5-7 m. The reeds growing in Egypt are shorter, and to get the name “Sea of Reeds”, the lake had to be shallow enough for the reeds to get their “heads” above the water over at least a large part of the lake). To guess: From 1 or 2 and up to a few - perhaps 3 to 5 - meters deep as indicated above, or perhaps a bit more at the deepest places.
In such shallow seas there simply was not deep enough water to make “each separate part - - - like the huge, firm mass of a mountain”. Wrong in case – and it is likely this is the case, even if the more dramatic Red Sea most often is used as a translation. This because for Moses it had been plain stupidity to march south along the western side of the Red Sea when he wanted to go east to Sinai, and then have to cross that sea in boats they did not have, to reach his destination, with all those people, equipment, animals, etc. (The Bible tells they were 600ooo men, which means some 2 mill. included women and children – a number which is mathematically possible (though not likely) after the 430 years the Bible says the Jews lived in Egypt - but it is likely many other slaves came along to get out of bondage, and thus added considerably to that number. 2. Mos. 12/38 indicates so.)
103 26/66: “But We (Allah*) drowned the others (the Egyptians).” Wrong, at least for Ramses II himself - he did not die from drowning, and he did not die until years later (in 1213 BC). The Bible has a similar mistake, but the Bible is written by humans, and humans can have mistaken one of Ramses II's generals or one of his 67(?) sons (the number varies from one source to another, as it in reality is unclear) for the pharaoh - an omniscient god does not make such mistakes.
104 27/14: “- - - see what was the end (death by drowning*) of them (pharaoh Ramses II and his men*)”. Wrong at least for Ramses II personally - he did not die until some years later, and not by drowning.
*105 28/3a: “We (Allah*) rehearse to thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) some of the story of Moses and Pharaoh in Truth - - -”. The story about Moses contradicts and differs not a little from the one told in the Bible - which for this part is more than 1000 years nearer in time to what (maybe) happened - and with stronger traditions concerning Moses. It is a question which one is most reliable. In any case: Both have the death of Pharaoh Ramses II wrong (but when it comes to the Bible it is possible to explain this - not so with the Quran, which is told by Allah (or even has existed since eternity and is never made), as Allah is omniscient, and omniscient gods make no mistakes (the human narrator of the Bible may have mixed Ramses II with one of his 67(?) sons or one of his generals - for Allah such a mistake is impossible)).
Moses and his brother Aaron came to Pharaoh Ramses II (one of the really strong and mighty pharaohs in the history of Egypt - may be the mightiest ever). A lot is known about Ramses II, among other things that he did not drown. Because of this you often meet Muslims claiming this happened earlier and under more unknown pharaohs which we do not know from what they died, but science is not in real doubt, and also the years then do not add up.
##There is at least one more historical fact connected to this story which is wrong in the Quran: The Quran tells that Allah destroyed all the large, magnificent buildings in Egypt (7/137). There is no kind of scientific indication for that this can be correct - no trace from such a catastrophe at that time neither in archeology nor in literature nor even in folklore. And remember: No omniscient god makes mistakes - then who made the Quran?
Another point: As no god ever was involved in a book of a quality like the Quran, also no god rehearsed it to Muhammad.
There also is an extra point here: The so-called Mosaic religion never was a proselyting one. And for nearly 2ooo years Abraham and his descendants never did much proselyting (not until Jesus, who ordered it before he left - and remember here that the Quran (21/91) confirms that Jesus was for all peoples, (and in 19/19 that he was holy, which Muhammad definitely was not)). Islam is a strongly proselyting religion - even by means of strong compulsions and sometimes even death warnings and murder to force people stay or become Muslims. This very central difference - a historical fact - is one more proof for that Abraham and his descendants (f.x. Moses and the Jewish prophets) never were Muslims. This on top of that neither science nor Islam has found traces from a god like Allah, a religion like Islam, a book like the Quran, or prophets preaching Islam before 610 AD, when Muhammad started his proselyting, and this on top of the fact that Abraham like mentioned did not have camels, and thus could not go back and forth between Canaan/Sinai and Mecca like the Quran claims. These are facts from history. Also as far back as history goes, it tells that the Jews had the god Yahweh and the Mosaic religion, not the very different Allah and Islam or similar.
106 28/4b: "- - - (Pharaoh*) broke up its (Egypt's*) people in sections - - -". Comment YA3329: "For a king or a ruler to make individual distinctions between his subjects, and especially to depress or oppress any particular class of his subjects, is a dereliction of his kings duties - - -". Is it here pertinent to remind the reader about how Muslims at times and places have treated non-Muslims and sects of Muslims? Or the Arabs' superiority compared to other Muslims, especially the first centuries. Not to mention that it is the Quran's official policy that all non-Muslims shall be suppressed.
Besides the argument is dishonesty, as the Jews were slaves. There never was a society who did not make distinctions between slaves and free - just ask the Quran. This also Muslim scholars know ever so well, but all the same they use arguments like this to blacken the pharaoh. But Ramses II was in exactly the same class as Muhammad on this point - f.x. Muhammad permitted the owner to rape his female slaves included children, but not free ones - - - not unless he first made her/them his slaves/captives. As every Muslim scholar know, Muhammad also practiced this himself.
To make a comparison of today: Muhammad behaved quite similar to IS today (2014 AD). IS, Boko Haram and others are the ones who live according to the surahs im the Quran from Medina.
107 28/4c: "- - - their (f.x. the Jews'*) sons he (Ramses II and/or Horemheb or in-between ones*) slew - - -". Remember this sentence the places in the Quran where it is said Ramses II would (start to) kill the sons. Muhammad has mixed up his arguments a little and contradicts himself. (The reason according to the Bible why his mother put Moses to the river, was a desperate try to save him from being killed - the Quran does not give a reason for the god's advice)
108 28/6a: "To establish a firm place for them (the Jews*) in the land (Egypt*), and to show Pharaoh, Haman, and their hosts - - - the very thing (the Jews taking over the power in Egypt*) against which they were taking precautions." Wrong - and strongly contradicting both the Bible and parts of the Quran - also see 28/5b above.
Strangely it here seems like Allah intended to make the Jews powerful in Egypt, and that it was this Ramses II was taking precautions against. Strange words because other places in the Quran it is clear that what Moses and his Jews wanted, was to leave Egypt - something which is strongly confirmed by the Bible.
109 28/6c: “- - - Haman - - -”. Science says this is the Haman from the book of Esther in the Bible. Uneducated Muslims say it just was another man with the same name. Educated Muslims are more careful with that claim.
Haman (see the Book of Esther) was according to the Bible, a powerful minister under the Persian king Xerxes (Hebrew: Ahasuerus) (486 - 465 BC) and a central person in the mentioned book - Muhammad may well have heard about him. In that case something is very wrong, because Ramses II naturally was king/pharaoh in Egypt, and on top of that lived some 800 years earlier. Haman could not be his top minister.
Here Islam has an explanation that just may be true: One of the main gods in Egypt at that time was Amon. According to “the Message of the Quran” the title of the high priest of Amon, was Ha-Amen - which could be understood as Haman. Not very likely, especially as this is the kind of “explanations” one frequently finds when Islam has problems finding better stories. But after all possible. Except that a god does not make such mistakes either - a mistake like this means the surah is based on human fallibility.
Some Muslims then instead want to explain this with that it was another Haman. But science is not in doubt, it is the same. Another question here is: Was the name Haman at all used in Egypt? – it is said to be a Persian name.
But this explanation or "explanation" is invalid and made up if it is true like Ramses II according to another place in the Quran ( says he knows no god except himself (28/38). If Ramses II claimed to be the only god in Egypt, no high priest of another god could be present. (Wrong as Egypt was polytheistic.)
Also see 28/38a below.
110 28/8b: “- - - Haman - - -”. See 28/6b above.
111 28/8c: "- - - (it was intended) that Moses should be to them (the Pharaoh and his men*) an adversary and a cause of sorrow, for Pharaoh and Haman (see the Book of Esther) and (all) their hosts were men of sin." That it was predestined is nowhere said in the Bible.
112 28/8d: "- - - (it was intended) that Moses should be to them (the Pharaoh and his men*) an adversary and a cause of sorrow, for Pharaoh and Haman and (all) their hosts were men of sin." According to the Bible (no age is given in the Quran) Moses was 80 years when he returned to free his people. If science has the numbers correctly, we now are around 1235 BC. The pharaoh of the baby Moses (likely Horemheb, 1319-1292 BC (or may be 1307-1292)) had died (2. Mos. 2/23), and Ramses II now taken over as pharaoh. Haman was a name, not a title (and as far as we have found out not an Egyptian name). A man old enough to have a high position when baby Moses was found, would not be alive 80 years later - not to mention still have a high position. Two plain facts the Quran has "forgotten". (A possible explanation is that Muhammad did not know how old Moses was when things started to happen - but any god had known. Then who made the Quran?)
113 28/9c "- - - we (the pharaoh*) - - -". This is a time anomaly. If the claimed "Mother Book" of the Quran is written before things happen, like Islam claims - may be existed since eternity - the story only can be correct if there is 100% predestination. If even 99% predestination, the laws of chaos would in relatively short time change the story. See heading and 28/4c.
*114 28/38a: “Pharaoh said: ‘O Chiefs! No god do I know for you but myself - - -”. This is one of the really good ones, because Egypt at the time of Ramses II had a good number of gods, included some central ones with a strong clerical organization. It is typical for many “explanations” of mistakes in the Quran that Muslims “explain” some aspects of it, but are then unable not to “collide” with other information in the book - f.x. explaining the heavens as the modern universe (see 51/47c) without telling how the stars then could be fastened to the lowest heaven (37/6-7, 41/12)). But at the time of Muhammad the old gods were reduced - Egypt was partly Christian (the forefathers of the present-day Copts). A real god had not made this blunder, but Muhammad could not know. Then who composed the Quran?
Islam tries to explain this away with that it is not meant literally - only that Ramses II was the top. But in this case - like so often - it is very clear what the Quran says. And also remember that the Quran - and most Muslims - say that the Quran is to be meant literally where nothing else is said - - - and to call something an allegory or say it is figuratively meant, we think is the for Islam the most used means of explaining away of things/mistakes in the Quran which has no explanation.
#### Remember: To claim the Quran means something different from what the texts say, is to falsify its texts. Plus: Who is better to explain than an omniscient god?
There also is the fact that Haman was a leader under Xerxes (Hebrew: Ahasuerus) (486 - 465 BC) of Persia some 800 years later. Islam tries to explain the mistake away by claiming that what was said was not Haman, but Ha-Amon (a mistake in the Quran in case) - the title of the high priest of the Egyptian central god Amon - see 28/6c above. This claimed explanation is impossible if Ramses II was the only god in Egypt.
115 28/38b: “- - - Haman - - -”. See 28/6b above.
116 28/38c: “(Pharaoh said*) “O Haman (minister for Xerxes some 800 hundred years later and hundreds of miles/km further northeast – in Persia - and not an Egyptian name either*)! - Light me a (kiln to bake bricks) out of clay - - -". Egypt at that time did not use burnt bricks, but bricks made of a mixture of clay and straw (this actually is mentioned in the Bible in 2. Mos.5/7-15) dried in the sun. It even would be meaningless to burn this kind of bricks, because the straw would be burnt to ashes. Egypt had the technology for burning clay - they had pottery. But sundried bricks were much cheaper, and good enough for most purposes in that very dry climate.
Another point is that for their big buildings the Egyptians used natural stones, not bricks.
Any god had known all these facts, Muhammad obviously not. Who made the Quran?
117 28/38d: (A28/37 – YA3371): “(Pharaoh said*) “O Haman (minister for Xerxes 800 years later and hundreds of km further northeast, in Persia - and not an Egyptian name either*)! - - - build me a lofty palace, that I may mount up to the god of Moses - - -.” Muslims like to tell this does not refer to something like the tower of Babylon (built from bricks), but to a pyramid - - - and without mentioning a single word about well known facts like it took some 20-30 years to build a big pyramid (and Ramses II at the time science believe this happened if it happened, was not young), or that the pyramids in Egypt were built from natural stones, not from brick, so a kiln has no connection to them. There also is quite a difference between a palace and a pyramid.
118 28/38e: (A28/37 – YA3371) A real question here is, is this (see 28/38d just above) the correct meaning of the Arab word “ittali’u”? Or did Pharaoh wish that “- - - haply I may have a look at the god of Moses - - -”? Or (translated from Swedish): “- - - that I may get some information about the god of Moses - - -.” Not too big variations in the meanings, but far from “exact to the last comma” like Muslims like to boast of.
Another open question: Is this sarcasm or a seriously meant order? – the Quran does not tell and nobody knows. The famous exact language of the Quran!
*119 28/40a: “So We (Allah*) sized him (Ramses II*) and his hosts, and flung them into the sea - - -”. Wrong at least for Ramses II himself - he did not drown and he died years later according to science (in 1213 BC).
120 28/40b: “So We (Allah*) sized him (Pharaoh*) and his host, and Flung them into the sea: now behold what was the End of those who did wrong!” Well, one thing is that according to the Bible, they were not flung into the sea. But more essential just here is this contradiction:
- 19/92: “This day (the same day as 28/40*) shall We (Allah*) save thee (Pharaoh Ramses II*) in the body - - -.” Not “save the body” like many Muslims like to insist, but “in the body”. Save him bodily - alive.
- Plus the fact that Ramses II did not drown - and did not die until 20+ years later.
121 28/42: "In this world We (Allah*) made a Curse to follow them (Ramses II and his people*) - - -". Not from the Bible (like many of the details in this story). Then from where, as the claim that it is from a god, is wrong? - too many errors in the book.
122 29/16a: Abraham delivered from Nimrod's fire. Taken from the story "Midrash Rabbah", not from the Bible - there is nothing similar about Abraham in the Bible, but there is one about Daniel 1000+ years later, which may have inspired this "story". And another point: Abraham and Nimrod did not live at the same time (if they ever lived). Nimrod was the great grandson of Noah (1. Mos. 10/1-8: Noah - Ham - Cush - Nimrod), and if he is not a fiction, he lived 3ooo - 5ooo (3200?) BC. Whereas Abraham - if he ever lived - lived some 1800 - 2ooo BC. Muhammad had a strong tendency to mix persons from different times (f.x. Haman (see the Book of Esther) and Ramses II/Xerxes - some 800 years wrong. Or Mary and Miriam - some 1200 years wrong.)
123 29/24d: "Slay him (Abram/Abraham*) or burn him". Actually there is said nothing in the Bible about Abram/Abraham having troubles in Ur in Chaldea where he came from (1. Mos. 11/29-31). And actually this tale is "borrowed" from the story "Madras Raba", and as for Nimrod's fire - another point here is: Abraham and Nimrod did not live at the same time (if they ever lived). Nimrod was the great grandchild of Noah and lived (?) 1ooo - 2ooo (?) years before Abraham. Muhammad had a strong tendency to mix persons from different times (f.x. Haman and the time of Ramses II/Xerxes - some 800 years wrong. Or Mary and Miriam - some 1200 years wrong.)
124 29/39b: "- - - Pharaoh - - -". Pharaoh Ramses II definitely is a historical person, but just in this connection all the same a time anomaly.
125 29/40a: "- - - some of them (here the Egyptians*) We (Allah*) drowned - - -". This refers to the claimed drowning of the pharaoh - but it is wrong: Pharaoh Ramses II did not drown (and because of that Muslims wants it to have happened earlier under more obscure pharaohs, but science is in little doubt. Also this fits the number of years given in the Bible.)
126 40/24b: "- - - Pharaoh - - -". According to science (f.x. Encyclopedia Britannica) Exodus happened around 1235 B.C. (if it is not fiction) under Pharaoh Ramses II. Now Ramses II likely was the greatest pharaoh ever, and science knows much about him - among other things that he did not drown, in spite of that both the Bible and the Quran says so. But the Bible is written by humans, and humans can have mistaken one of Ramses II's generals or one of his 67(?) sons for the pharaoh. This explanation is not possible for the Quran which is claimed to come from a god - no omniscient god makes mistakes. Because of this Islam tries to claim it happened earlier - sometimes as early as 1500 BC or even a bit earlier - under less known pharaohs whom we do not know if may have drowned or not. That this also collides with other information about Exodus, does not matter very much - it is quite normal for Muslims to find "explanations" which seemingly give the answer they want, and overlook - or "overlook" - other facts which goes against their "explanation" or even makes it impossible. (In this case f.x. the 70 - 80 of Jacob's family who settled in Egypt around 1665(?) BC, impossibly could have multiplied to the number which according to the Bible left Egypt at Exodus in less than some 400+ years (430 according to the Bible). Something Muslim scholars know, but never mention.)
127 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.)
128 40/24f: "- - - they (Ramses II, Haman, Qarun*) called (him (Moses*)) 'a sorcerer telling lies!'" See 40/25d below.
129 40/26b: "Said Pharaoh (Ramses II*): 'Leave me to slay Moses - - -". Not from the Bible - like much more in this story and in the rest of the Quran. From where? Also see 40/25d above.
130 40/26c: "What I (Pharaoh Ramses II*) fear is lest he (Moses*) should change your religion - - -". For one thing this is naivety - it is not that easy for a little known leader of some slaves to change the religion of a mighty country, which Egypt was under Ramses II, and for another thing this is not from the Bible. Not to mention that with 1ooo-2ooo gods, the Egyptians - and Ramses II - easily could have assimilated one more. See 40/24b above. There was nothing about the religion during Exodus in the Bible, only: "Let my people go".
131 40/30a: "- - - the man who believed - - -". = a Muslim. If you are able to believe Muslims existed - and without leaving a single trace - under Ramses II around 1235 BC, you are perfectly entitled to do so. But contact a professor of Egyptology or a psychiatrist in case, because the belief is wrong according to science and also indirectly according to Islam (###they have been unable to prove the claim that Islam is older than 610 AD when Muhammad started).
132 40/34c: "No Messenger will Allah send (to Egypt*) after him (Joseph*)". This is not from the Bible - like so much of the "Biblical" stuff in the Quran. See 40/24b.
Besides this is wrong even according to the Quran, as Joseph lived somewhere around 1800-1600 BC (3 generations after Abraham, who according to science lived around 2ooo-1800 BC), whereas Moses - a prophet to the pharaoh according to the Quran - lived around 1300-1200 BC = long after Joseph. (According to the Quran the messenger and prophet Moses tried to teach Islam to Ramses II and his Egyptians.)
133 40/36b: "Pharaoh (Ramses II*) said: 'O Haman! Build me - - -". See 40/25d above.
134 40/37e: “- - - the plot of Pharaoh led to nothing but perdition (for him).” Wrong. We know from other places in the Quran, that the perdition is said to be drowning. But Ramses II did not die by drowning, and on top of that he did not die until many years after the possible exodus in ca. 1235 BC - both according to science.
135 43/47c: " - - - they (Pharaoh Ramses II and his people*) ridiculed them (Moses and Aaron*)- - -". See 43/20b above.
136 43/48a: "We (Allah*) showed them (Pharaoh Ramses II and his people*) Sign after Sign, each greater than its fellow, and We seized them with Punishment, in order that they might turn (to Us)". Note the purpose here; "in order that they might turn (to Us)" = become Muslims. A significant difference from the Bible. There Yahweh and Moses only asked the Pharaoh to let the Jews leave Egypt - no try to change their religion.(F.x. 2. Mos. 5/1).
137 43/49b: "- - - they (Pharaoh Ramses II and his people*) said, 'Oh thou sorcerer! - - -". See 43/20b above.
138 43/49c: "- - - for we (Pharaoh Ramses II*) shall truly accept guidance - - -". One thing is that nothing like this is in the Bible. Another thing is: How likely is it that Ramses II - probably the mightiest Pharaoh ever - said things like this about the god of a bunch of slaves?
And how likely is it that Ramses II had even heard about Allah nearly 2ooo years before Muhammad?
139 43/49d: "- - - for we (Pharaoh Ramses II*) shall truly (definitely not a proved truth - only a not proved claim*) accept guidance (accept Islam*)". In the Bible he only promised to let the Jews go, not to mention that there was no religious quarrel. As the Quran is not from any god - too many mistakes, etc. - from where did Muhammad get this version? And have Muslims found a single trace of Islam in Egypt or anywhere else older than 610 AD? - some 2ooo years after this is said to have happened. (You hardly will find a trace here from a religion like Islam until 639 AD, when the Muslims invaded Egypt.) Also see 43/52s below.
140 43/50b: "- - - they (Pharaoh Ramses II and his people*) broke their words". See 43/20b above.
141 43/51b: "- - - Pharaoh (Pharaoh Ramses II*) proclaimed among his people, saying: 'O my people! - - -". See 43/20b above.
142 43/51c: "Does not the dominion of Egypt belong to me (Pharaoh Ramses II) - - -". This was not a topic for Moses neither in the Bible, nor in the Quran. His topic was: "Let my people go". Even in the Quran which mixes religion into it to make Moses look like Muhammad, does not say that the ownership of Egypt was a topic from the side of Moses.
143 43/51d: "- - - (witness) these streams underneath my (Ramses II's*) (palace) - - -". There is found no palace in Egypt - neither from Ramses II, nor from any other - under which there were rivers.
144 43/52b: "Am I (Pharaoh Ramses II*) not better than this (Moses), who is a contemptible wretch and can scarcely express himself clearly?" Also for this verse (and much more in the Quran) see 43/20b above.
145 43/52c: "- - - this (Moses), who is a contemptible wretch and can scarcely express himself clearly?" This is what Ramses II meant about Moses according to the Quran. All the same he wanted to convert to his god according to 43/49d above. Believe it if you want.
146 43/55: “- - - We (Allah*) drowned them all (= Pharaoh Ramses II and his people*).” At least Ramses II himself did not drown. He did not die from drowning, and he did not die until some 20 years later. A main reason why Muslims want the Exodus to have happened much earlier - under pharaohs we do not know how died. But science is in little doubt - f.x. Encyclopedia Britannica does not write such things unconditionally if they are not sure.
Another juicy fact is that according to the Bible it was Yahweh who did this, not Allah.
##147 43/56: “And We (Allah*) made them a people of the past - - -”. Wrong. Neither Ramses II nor the people of Egypt became a people of the past around the year 1235 BC (the approximate year of the possible Exodus, according to science). That did not happen until much later – and the final doom came in 659 AD when the Arabs under Mu’awiya conquered the country and took over - forever (?). Muslims like to “explain” that “a people” mean the soldiers of Pharaoh. But the expression “a people” has a wider meaning than that.
148 44/19c: "- - - I (Moses*) come to you (Pharaoh Ramses II*) with authority manifest". Similar to 44/18c above.
149 44/25-28: “Thus (was their (pharaoh Ramses II and his men*) end)! - - -”. We know from other parts of the Quran that the end was drowning. Wrong, at least for Ramses II himself - he did not die by drowning (if he had done, you bet three religions had screamed about it!), and he only died years later than the possible exodus in ca. 1235 BC according to science.
150 44/28: "- - - and We (Allah*) made other people inherit (the drowned Egyptians*) - - -". Wrong. There are no historical indications for that that not their own people inherited them - on the contrary, the reign of Ramses II was a stable period, (and Ramses II's inheritor to the throne was his son Merneptah - and this name - Merne Ptah - is one more proof or that Ramses II was a polytheist: Ptah was one of the main gods in Egypt at that time, and Ramses II made the god's name part of the name of his son). But to claim that other people inherited them, is in line with Muhammad's often repeated claim about other cases where a people or a group of people disappeared - - - always because of punishment because of sins against Allah, according to Muhammad.
151 44/29: "And neither heaven nor earth shed a tear over them (the Egyptians who died*)". Very likely wrong - their families surely felt sorrow. This even more so as the common Egyptians were little warlike and took little pride in dying in war. Also compare to Yahweh's point of view concerning lost sheep, etc. (Matt. 18/12-14) - very different from Muhammad's/Allah's.
152 51/39b: "- - - (Pharaoh (Ramses II*)) - - - said: 'A sorcerer - - -'". See 50/2a above.
153 51/40a: “So We (Allah*) took him (Pharaoh Ramses II*) and his forces, and threw them into the sea (where they drowned*)”. For one thing they were not thrown into the sea, they went themselves (according to the Bible and not opposed by other places in the Quran) out on the dry sea bed, and then the water returned), but for another: At least Ramses II himself did not die by drowning and he also did not die until some years later (likely in 1213 BC - Exodus was around 1235 BC according to science).
154 53/36c: "- - - the books of Moses - - -" As the relevant books has no clear reference to a life to come, Islam straight-facedly claims it must be referring to some lost book of Moses - - - just like with the Gospels: As the Gospels do not say what Muhammad said it says and did not exist at the time of Jesus, the easy explanation is a claim that there was another, older Gospel which has disappeared. Simple and easy - - - even though the story of Jesus' life, death, resurrection and ascension to Heaven could not be told until after it had happened - at least not if man (f.x. Ramses II, Haman, or Herod) has free will.
155 66/11a: The wife of the Pharaoh (likely Horemheb - he had two wives, the first one was named Amenia, the second one Mutnodjment) is indicated to be a strongly believing Muslim. But it is utterly unknown to science that one of them can have been a Muslim 2000 years before Muhammad. Actually – and in spite of the Quran’s and of Islam’s repeated claims of being an age-old religion, science has found not one single trace of a religion like Islam anywhere or any time before 610 AD when Muhammad started his mission (and worse: Also Islam has been unable to find provable such traces) – and of really monotheistic religions only the Mosaic (Jewish), the Christian, and to a degree the Zoroastrians in Persia (+ the episode with the sun god of Akn Aton and the small monotheistic sect in Arabia, most likely inspired by the Jews and the Christians). Islam has to bring proofs.
156 66/11e: "- - - the Wife of Pharaoh (indicated by the context that it was she who found Moses*) - - -". Comment (YA5549): "Traditionally, she is known as 'Aisha, one of four perfect women, the other three being Mary, mother of Jesus, Khadijah the wife of the prophet, and Fatima his daughter.(There is not one proof for that any of them were perfect, but they were central persons for the religion, and thus ought to be perfect to make the religion look better.)
- In the Bible it was a daughter of the pharaoh who found Moses, not a wife of him. The Bible also gives no other information about her, than that she was the daughter of the pharaoh, and that she found Moses. From where did Muhammad get the claimed information about her? As the Quran is not from a god, the only possible source is the Bible - and there the information about this is partly different and partly not existing.
- As for Mary we refrain from commenting.
- As for Khadijah only the positive sides of her are ever mentioned by Islam - a correct picture is impossible to make. But a woman finding a 15 year younger husband not very often is a perfect human being.
- Also for Fatima Islam tries only to tell the positive sides. But no perfect woman would fight the caliph so as she should get the inheritance after Muhammad instead of Islam, like she did. A perfect woman also would not be angry and upset for the rest of her life for this (though admittedly she lived only half a year after Muhammad's death) because she did not get that inheritance instead of Islam.
If the pharaoh was Horemheb, his wife when Moses was found, was Mutnodjmet, simply because his first wife, Amenia, died before Horemheb became pharaoh. Mutnodjmet had several children, so that it is possible the pharaoh's daughter found Moses - especially if that daughter was a young girl, to pick up the baby was a natural reaction. But Horemhep's children were all dead when he himself died - and that meant the start of the 19. dynasty in Egypt.
**157 66/12a: “And Mary the daughter of ‘Imran - - -”. Once more this famous mistake. Imran was the father of Moses and Aaron - - - but they lived (if they are not fiction) some 1200 years before Mary, mother of Jesus. The pharaoh of Moses f.x. was Ramses II according to science, and we know when he lived. Muslims try to explain this with that it was another Imran, but science agrees on that it is the same one, and that Muhammad here made a genuine mistake. This even more so as Hadith shows that Muhammad later was told about his mistake, and tried to “explain” it away, but without success.
158 69/9a: "- - - Pharaoh (Ramses II) - - -". The only pharaohs mentioned in the Quran, are the two connected to Moses - one just mentioned in connection to the baby Moses being saved from the Nile (likely Horemheb - likely 1319-1292 BC), and the one connected to the Exodus all the other times. The one connected to the Exodus according to science, is Ramses II (though there is a small chance it was during his success of Merneptah). As we know Ramses did not drown, Islam tries to claim that the Exodus was much earlier, under pharaohs we do not know how died. But for one thing numbers, etc. do not add up with an early Exodus, and for another science is little in doubt, and states pretty surely that if it ever happened, it happened around 1235 BC, which means under Ramses II (see f.x. Encyclopedia Britannica).
159 69/9+10: “And Pharaoh, and those before him - - - (Allah*) punished them with an abundant Penalty.” The Quran tells that this penalty for the pharaoh was drowning, but Ramses II did not drown. Neither did he die until several years after the possible Exodus, according to science.
160 73/16b: “- - - We (Allah*) sized him (Ramses II*) with a heavy Punishment - - -”. For one thing: It is likely Ramses II got no personal punishment - he died years later. For another: We know from the Quran that the punishment was drowning - but Ramses II did not drown. Wrong.
161 79/17a: "- - - Pharaoh - - -". Always when the Quran talks about a Pharaoh, it is about the opponent of Moses, Pharaoh Ramses II. There is one exception only, and only indirectly: The baby Moses was picked up from the Nile by the wife of Pharaoh (in the Bible by his daughter - 2. Mos. 2/6). As according to the Bible this happened some 80 years before the Exodus, this pharaoh has got to be an earlier one (likely Pharaoh Horemheb - ca.1320 - 1292 BC). We may add that as we know Ramses II did not drown, it is normal for Islam/Muslim scholars to claim it was an earlier, but not specified pharaoh where we do not know the cause of his death. But science is in no doubt: If exodus took place, it was around 1235 BC = during the reign of Ramses II.
To complete the picture: There are a few scientists who believe Exodus happened - if it happened - not during the reign of Ramses II, but during the reign of his son and successor, Merneptah (also spelled Meremptah), but in that case Exodus happened even later than 1235 BC, and not earlier like Islam and Muslims want it to have happened (to place it under a pharaoh we do not know how died, and thus may have drowned). Merneptah ruled from 1213 BC to 1203 BC, and he did not drown.
162 79/18a: "Wouldst thou (Pharaoh Ramses II*) that thou shouldst be purified (from sin)?" In the Bible Moses did not talk about religion, only "Let my people go". From where is this extra information? Also see 79/16 just above.
163 79/19: "And that I (Moses*) guide thee (Pharaoh Ramses II*) to thy Lord (Allah*) - - -". This is not from the Bible - in the Bible Moses only tried to make Ramses II to "let my people go", not also to make him change religion. Also see 79/16 and 79/18a above.
164 79/21b: "- - - (guidance) - - -". The Quran indicates that Moses was a good Muslim, and that he had a book - a copy of the claimed and timeless "Mother Book" = similar to the Quran. Not much reliable guidance for Ramses II in such a book.
We add that there is no indication in the Bible for that Moses had a religious book. The only book mentioned, is "the Book of Covenant", in which Moses himself had written the short and original laws. And that neither science nor Islam has found any proved trace from neither a god like Allah, a religion like Islam, a book like the Quran, nor a prophet provably teaching Islam from before 610 AD, when Muhammad started his mission.
165 79/22: "- - - (Ramses II was) striving hard (against Allah)". According to the Bible, the involved god was Yahweh, not Allah.
166 79/24a: “(Pharaoh Ramses II*) Saying: ‘I am your Lord (in this connection: Your god*), most High’”. The pharaoh was not the “most high” god in the old Egypt. See 28/38a above.
167 79/24b: “(Pharaoh Ramses II*) Saying: ‘I am your Lord (in this connection: Your god*), most High’”. See 71/7b above.
The Quran here is contradicting reality. One knows the name of more than 2ooo gods (though some may be another name for the same god) from old Egypt. The names of pharaohs normally are not even included in such name lists, not to mention being top gods. They were not separate gods.
Also: Ramses II's inheritor to the throne was his son Merneptah - and this name - Merne Ptah - is one more proof or that Ramses II was a polytheist: Ptah was one of the main gods in Egypt at that time, and Ramses II made the god's name part of the name of his son.
##On the other hand more or less all the early pharaohs were reckoned to be incarnations of the falcon god Horus. During the 5. dynasty (2494 - 2345 BC) this changed to an incarnation of the sun god Ra - and even later the god Amon coalesced with Ra and the pharaohs incarnations of Ra-Amun (or Amun-Ra). But not an incarnation of the after all most essential god Ptah, and never - with a kind of exception for Pharaoh Aknaton (who mainly accepted only the sun god - then named Aton) - an only god, like the pharaoh says in the Quran.
168 79/25: “But Allah did punish him (Pharaoh Ramses II*) - - -”. Wrong at least as for in this life. We know from other places in the Quran that the punishment is said to be drowning. But for one thing Ramses II did not die by drowning, and for another thing: He only died years later (around 1213 BC - Exodus was around 1235 BG according to science).
169 85/18: "- - - Pharaoh and the Thamud - - -". The pharaoh here referred to is Ramses II in the story of Moses (though Muslims often try to claim it must be an older and less known one, because we know that Ramses II did not drown, and the Quran thus is wrong there, but science has no doubt), whereas the Thamud is a tribe from old Arab folklore - it may or may not have existed, and Islam will have to bring proofs for that their demise was like the Quran claims. (Actually it is likely it existed, but much later - from around 800 to some 600-400 AD.)
170 89/10a: "And with Pharaoh, lord of stakes - - -" Pharaoh Ramses II - the pharaoh of Moses. The stakes here is said to refer to the stakes used to hold up the tents. But Ramses II absolutely did not live in any tent. (Muslim scholars explain or "explain" it with that it is an old Arab expression for respect - many stakes = large tent = mighty person. This may or may not be the truth - it is a typical way for Muslims to explain away mistakes.)
171 89/13: "Therefore did thy (Muslims*) Lord (Allah*) pour on them ('Ad, Thamud, Pharaoh Ramses II, etc.) a scourge - - -". Muhammad claimed that the inhabitants of all ruins in and around Arabia and in all tales about earlier people in Arab folklore + Ramses II and his people, were killed by Allah because they had sinned against him. In case this is true, Allah is a far more bloody and revengeful god than Yahweh - but science has a number of other explanations for their disappearances (in a harsh and warlike land there really are other possible explanations - this even more so as Muhammad as normal never proved anything about his claims on this point, just like on most other points).
171 + 10.187 = 10.358 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).
212. RAYHANA BINT AMR
- raped by Muhammad and later his forced concubine.
Her full name was Rayhana bint Zaid ibn Amr. Her year of birth is unknown - perhaps around 610 AD. She originally was of the Jewish tribe Banu Nadir, but married into the - also Jewish - tribe Banu Qurayzah. She was captured by the Muslims when they fought down the Qurayzah. Muhammad did choose her for himself and raped her after her family (and many others) were killed or enslaved. He later offered to marry her, but she refused, and Muhammad kept her as his slave/concubine till she died, likely in 632 AD, but may be in 631 AD.
Rayhana was one of the two women we know Muhammad raped (the other one was Safiyya bint Huayay - under similar circumstances). We do not know if he raped more women, but the casual way Muhammad's men took the rapes, may indicate something.
You may meet claims that she later married Muhammad, or that he set her free. These seem to be stories made up later. It is clear that Muhammad offered to marry her, but that she refused. There is nothing in reliable sources about that she changed her mind later or that he set her free. On the contrary: The reasonably reliable sources - f.x. Ibn Ishaq - tell that Muhammad kept her as his concubine till she died.
It also is told that late in her life she became a Muslim. This may or may not be true.
There is another and serious aspect to Muhammad's rapes: Whatever Muhammad did is reckoned by Islam and Muslims to be morally good and ok, and the Quran and Islam clearly specifies that everything Muhammad did, also is ok for any Muslim to do, unless it is directly forbidden to do so (Muslims f.x. cannot have as many official wives as Muhammad, because the Quran says maximum 4 for all except Muhammad - but you of course may have as many concubines/slave women as you can afford). The Quran does not prohibit rape - at least not during and after Jihad ("holy war"). On the contrary, verse 8/69 says: "But (now) enjoy what ye took in war (of course included captives*), lawful and good". This may be one - strong? - reason why rape is so widespread among Muslims soldiers and warriors, etc.
We may add that to us these 3 words used in that verse - "lawful and good" stealing, raping, enslaving, etc. - is one of the most revealing and disgusting expressions about the Quran, about Islam, and about their moral code, in the entire Quran. And that tells something.
¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤
001 XXX: 627 AD: Banu Qurayza (the last big Jewish tribe) in Medina - and all men , some 700 Jewish men (all) murdered, some 2ooo women and children made slaves. One woman (Rayhana bint Amr) kept for Muhammad himself. She was raped by Muhammad personally, and he kept her in his harem. He later wanted to marry her, but she refused - which tells something. Surah 33/26-27 made all this a good deed - it happened to “arrive” shortly afterwards.
*002 3/6a: “He (Allah*) is it Who shapes you in the womb as He pleases.” Conception is a most natural process - one that even Muslims like very much to indulge in, sometimes whether the woman is willing or not - and if the woman is your slave or prisoner, rape is a right, “lawful and god”, for you - just ask Muhammad, who according to Islam (among others Ibn Ishaq) practiced rape himself - f.x. Rayhana bint Amr and - at nearly 60 himself - the 17 year old Safijja bint Huayay, just after he had tortured her husband Kinana to death (as for Safijja one of his men, Abu Ayub, waited outside the tent in case she should resist so much that it became dangerous for Muhammad and he needed help - but he managed the rape without help).
The Quran often "high-jack" natural phenomena and uses them for glorification signs" or "proofs" for Allah - always without any documentation for that Allah really is the one behind the phenomenon..
003 3/78e: "- - - and well they (Jews and Christians*) know it (that the Bible is falsified*)!" This is the kind of accusation one uses to strengthen an argument; "they" not only have done something bad, but have done so willfully. The added psychological effect of course is distaste or similar for those bad people - and if the Muslims believed the claimed "fact" that "they" were bad people, this made it easier for Muhammad later to kill and enslave them - - - and personally rape at least 2 of the young women. (First Rayhana bint Amr, and later 17 year old and newlywed Safiyya bint Huayay after he had tortured her husband to death - Muslims diplomatically say he married her (which he later did) after her husband was killed in the war). Whether he raped more women during his prophethood(?) or not is not known. But he clearly told his followers that during war rape - "sexual relationship" to use a diplomatic expression - was "lawful and good" as long as the woman was not pregnant. Also the fact that his man took the rapes pretty casually makes one think (you react casually to things you are used to).
004 3/148d: “For Allah loveth those who do good (in this case: To wage war for Allah and Muhammad*)”. To do battle for Allah - to steal and burn and kill and murder and destroy and rape for the good and benevolent deity - is a good thing which Allah loves. (Actually that it shall be made in the name of the god, makes it even more disgusting.) Did anyone say that modern terrorists have to twist the words of the Quran to find incitements to their deeds? And also: Muhammad got cheap warriors and gained wealth and power - in wars and robberies that really were illegal according to the Quran, as they in reality were wars of aggression, not really of defense. And they gave him the possibility to rape at least two women - Rayhana bint Amr and Safijja bint Huayay.
#005 4/24a: “Also (prohibited (for Muslims to marry*) are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess - - -“. = You can rape or marry slave women even if they were/are married before. No comments. In this connection remember that not until in unbelievable 1982 AD was slavery abolished in the last Muslim country – Mauritania. (And not until even more unbelievable 2007 did it become a punishable crime there). That is to say; we have heard that Niger was even later, but we have found no confirmation on this. Also remember that according to UN (2008 AD) some 24 million humans today “live as slaves or under slave like conditions” – a good percentage of them in Muslim areas. And not least: According to old Islamic laws (later than Muhammad though), all so-called “new ideas” became prohibited and punishable early in the Islamic period. That meant everything not in the Quran or traditions (Hadith) was prohibited. This turned out to be too harsh, and they were forced to accept some changes: Changes which could be said to build on the Quran or Hadith were called “god new ideas” and permitted, whereas all other were called “bad new ideas” and still prohibited. And if times are reversed sometime in the future the "bad new idea" (= not in the Quran or Hadiths) of ending slavery, may well be abolished as sinful. No matter how Muslims boast about that abolishing of slavery was/is an integrated part of Islam, that claim only is rubbish to be very polite. Islam was forced backwards and fighting into abolition slavery by the west, and if the situation changes sufficiently (f.x. in a future world dominated by Islam) slavery may well be reintroduced - Muhammad practiced slavery, and the abolishing it thus was and is "a bad new idea", like it or not, as everything Muhammad said and did was right.
Muhammad both took, raped (at least Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay), used as gifts, accepted as gift (at least his colored concubine Mariah, who bore him his son Ibrahim, who died as a baby, though) and sold slaves – and Muhammad is the great icon in Islam: Everything he did is permissible, good, and morally and ethically fine. So if Islam gains the upper hand and the pressure and ideas from the outside come to an end, will then to continue abolishing slavery be thought to be a “good new idea” or a “bad new idea” – and in the latter case: Will slavery then little by little be reinstated like said above? – at least as long as the slaves are not Muslims? There are many who would not be surprised. Especially slave women is a temptation.
006 4/24d: "- - - seek (them (female slaves*) in marriage) with gifts from your property - - -." Well, Muhammad took Safiyya prisoner, made her his slave, raped her, then later married her, and her "gift" was release from slavery (but not from marriage). A very cheap "gift" from Muhammad's property in reality. (He wanted to get a cheap new wife in the same way with Rayhana bint Amr, but she refused to marry him.) You do the same like Muhammad!!!
007 5/64h: “Amongst them (the Jews*) We (Allah*) have placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Judgment. Every time they kindle the fire of war, Allah doth extinguish it; but they (ever) strive to do mischief on earth. And Allah loveth not those who do mischief”. And why should you love them when Allah obviously did dislike them? Allah’s dislike is a good motif and explanation for ruthlessness against them. (Muhammad treated the Jews in and around Medina very ruthless – chased away (because too strong opposition did that he could not kill them in the beginning) a large part, enslaved big groups of women and children and murdered the rest of the survivors – except some who for some years were permitted to live as semi slaves on what used to be their own farms, for a very stiff price. Plus he personally raped and enslaved for his own harem at least two of the women after having murdered or enslaved their families – Rayhana bint Amr and Safijja bint Huayay (he later married Safijja)). Well, the verse is good hate propaganda – and hate is a good background for incitements to war, and for explanations for atrocities.
It is irony - but normal - for a religion of war to accuse others for enmity.
008 23/51b: "O ye messengers (included Muhammad*)! Enjoy (all) things good and pure - - -". Which for Muhammad among other things meant lots of women - we know the name of 36 ones: 11 long time wives, 16 short time wives, 2 concubines, 7 to whom he may be or may be not was married (if he was not married to them, the sex was unlawful according to Islam's rules. As for raping captives we know no number, but at least 2 (Rayhana bint Amr and Safijja bint Huayay). And "things good and pure" also were supreme power and plenty of riches - when he died he f.x. had estates in Medina, Khaybar and Fadang - a fact often "forgot" by Muslims claiming he lived a poor man's life.
*009 30/43a: “- - - the right Religion (Islam*) - - -”. Is it possible that the right religion can be based on a book with that many mistakes, contradictions, invalid logic, etc. repeated or made by an Arab salesman, highwayman, murderer (he let opponents and others murder - the number 26 is mentioned, Ibn Ishaq names 10), torturer and rapist (he - at an age of nearly 60 - at least raped the newlywed, 17 year old Safijja after he had let her husband Kinana be tortured to death, and Rayhana bint Amr after he had murdered the male part of her family and made the rest slaves.) Source for this information: Muhammad Ibn Ishaq: “Life of the Prophet Muhammad” - the in Islam most respected of the old (dead 768 AD) writers about Muhammad. (It was written for the second Abbasside caliph in Baghdad, Mansur, around 750 AD). Neither Arab salesmen, nor highwaymen, nor torturers, nor murderers, nor rapists have the best of reputations for being honest (this even if Islam insists he was, but Islam hardly is the most reliable source on just that point - if he was not honest, Islam is a made up religion, so Islam HAS to make him look honest and saintly). This Arab salesman, highwayman, torturer, murderer and rapist and inhuman warlord, was even unable to produce one single small proof for his story. But he (?) produced lots of loose statements and invalid “signs” and “proofs”. Similar claim in 12/40. And what about his institutionalizing al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth) by his example, and his telling (in Hadiths and in the Quran) that even oaths can be broken - is that part of the right religion?
He is the only source Islam is built on.
Can this be "the Right Religion"?
#010 33/26g: "- - - some (the Jewish men and male youths*) ye (Muslim's*) slew, and some (= the Jewish women and children) ye made prisoners." The word "slave" is a loaded word today - and Muslims not always 100% honest. Muhammad did not make them prisoners, but slaves, and he sold and gave them away. Muhammad also personally raped first Rayhana bint Amr, and when Khaybar finally was taken a couple of years later, Safijja bint Huayay - Safiyya was 17, and married very shortly before - and Muhammad raped her after he had tortured her husband Kinana to death (he lit a fire on his chest, let it burn till Kinana was practically dead, and then beheaded him - he believed Kinana knew about hidden money Muhammad wanted to steal). Also Muhammad’s slave Maria likely had little choice when he wanted sex with her. We do not know if he raped more women - or children - but the casual way his men reacted to the rapes, may indicate something. Muslims are very right: Muhammad is a moral idol for Muslims - Islam after all is a war religion.
#011 33/26g: "- - - some (the Jewish men and male youths*) ye (Muslim's*) slew, and some (= the Jewish women and children) ye made prisoners." The word "slave" is a loaded word today - and Muslims not always 100% honest. Muhammad did not make them prisoners, but slaves, and he sold and gave them away. Muhammad also personally raped first Rayhana bint Amr, and when Khaybar finally was taken a couple of years later, Safijja bint Huayay - Safiyya was 17, and married very shortly before - and Muhammad raped her after he had tortured her husband Kinana to death (he lit a fire on his chest, let it burn till Kinana was practically dead, and then beheaded him - he believed Kinana knew about hidden money Muhammad wanted to steal). Also Muhammad’s slave Maria likely had little choice when he wanted sex with her. We do not know if he raped more women - or children - but the casual way his men reacted to the rapes, may indicate something. Muslims are very right: Muhammad is a moral idol for Muslims - Islam after all is a war religion.
012 33/28-33a: This about Muhammad's wives and rules to make them stay quiet and satisfied - double punishment and double reward, etc., and other places in the Quran forbidden to remarry, ordered to talk from behind a curtain, his daughter Fatima promised a top position in Heaven, etc. contradicts the Bible in that such rules were not given to any of the Biblical prophets The same god would give at least somewhat similar rules to all his representatives - which he did to all the Biblical prophets, but not to Muhammad. Muhammad even had permission to rape women (f.x. Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay), an absolutely NO for all other prophets. Very clear indications for that Muhammad did not belong to the same line of prophets as the Biblical prophets, and did not get his claimed revelations from the same god. Too different rules.
013 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?
"But (now) enjoy what ye (Muslims*) took (stole of valuables and captives*) in war, lawful and good - - -" (8/69). "- - - enjoy - - - lawful and good - - -" (!!!)
13 + 10.358 = 10.371 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).
213. REUBEN - HALF BROTHER OF JOSEPH
- not named in the Quran.
¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤
001 12/7c: "Joseph and his brethren - - -". Benjamin was Joseph's only full brother - both sons of Rachel, Jacob's favorite wife. The other 10 had 3 different mothers (Rachel's sister, Leah, was the mother of Reuben, Simon, Levi, Issachar, and Zebulon - Bilha (slave of Rachel) of Dan and Naphtali - Zilpah (slave of Leah) of Gad and Asher. (1. Mos. 35/23-26.))
002 12/10a: "Said one of them (Joseph's half-brothers*): 'Slay not Joseph - - -". According to the Bible this was Reuben - who wanted to help him (1. Mos. 37/21-22). (The Quran often is short on fact details).
003 12/80c: "The leader among them (the brothers*) - - -". Like so many low quality books, the Quran often is short on real and controllable facts - like in this story f.x. the names of the brothers. (Shortage on controllable facts is typical for low quality literature). Their leader likely was Reuben - the oldest one and the same one who according to the Bible (like here not named in the Quran) tried to save Joseph originally.
004 12/81b: "(Reuben? - see 12/80c above - continued:) 'Turn ye (the rest of the brothers*) back to your father (Jacob*) and say - - -". See 12/80b above.
4 + 10.371 = 10.375 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).
214. RUQAYYA - DAUGHTER OF MUHAMMAD
Muhammad had 4 daughters (Zainab, Ruqayya, Umm Kulthum, and Fatima), but how many sons he had, is unclear. It is clear he had the son Qasim with his first wife, Khadija. It is likely Qasim died in 605 AD, and he was less than 2 years old when he died. Then there is Abdullah (or Abd-Allah). You do not find him in all lists of Muhammad's children, but it is likely he existed, but died as a baby or early infant. Further it is clear he had the son Ibrahim with his concubine Marieh. Also Ibrahim died as an infant - likely some 16 months old. These are sure or nearly sure.
Then there are the names Tahir and Tayyab. These are unclear. They may have been children, but they also may have been extra names for Abdullah. If they were children, they in case died very young.
A Muslim list (there are controversies on if all really were Muhammad's children):
- Quasim born ? died 605 AD
- Abdullah born ? died 615 AD
- Zaynab born ? died 630 AD
- Ruqayya born ? died 624 AD
- Umm Kulthum born ? died 631 AD
- Fatima born 605 or 615 died 632 AD (after Muhammad)
- Ibrahim born 630 died 632 AD (before Muhammad)
- For the names Tahir and Tayyab we have found no information.
Another point is the question if the official children really were Muhammad's? Khadija was 40 years old when she married Muhammad (who was 25 - but Khadija was rich and Muhammad poor).That a woman gets 4 daughters and 2 sons after she was 40, was and is highly unlikely - and especially as she had been married before, but had got no children. Not to forget that Muhammad got no (or perhaps 1) children with his at least 35 other wives and women, and thus had very low (or no?) fertility.
One possible explanation is that some or all of Khadija's children were from an earlier marriage, but "taken over" by Muhammad.
There also is the possibility that some of the children's mother was the sister of Khadija, Hilah, who died early. Many Shiah Muslims believe this.
Another is that someone more fertile than Muhammad was the real father. Remember here that in the old times it happened that rich women "bought" herself a husband - often a poor man - to have an alibi when "cultivating" an interesting, but forbidden man.
A 4. possibility is that Muhammad was fertile, but lost his fertility completely or nearly completely - f.x. through some illness.
As for his only other child - Ibrahim, mother the concubine Marieh - Marieh was a slave and had far from chosen the much older Muhammad herself. She may have "visited" an "interesting" man one or more dark night(s).
What is absolutely sure is that a man who is told to very active sexually, and has a large harem he uses + at least a few rapes, is either sterile or nearly sterile. (Islam and its Muslims never mention or debate this fact.) And there is the mystery of a woman who marries 40 years old and over years gets at least 6 children.
An even more serious point if there exists a god: The fact that all Muhammad's children died young or very young, was that a punishment for bad or wrong things Muhammad had done? It in case must have been very bad and very serious things to deserve such a heavy punishment.
¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤
Ruqayya married Utbah ibn Abu Lahab, but he divorced her. She then married Utman. Fled to Abyssinia first in 613 AD, and again in 615 AD. Returned to Mecca, but later fled to Yathrib/Medina. She had the son Abd-Allah, but he died very young. She died at the time of the Battle of Badr in 624 AD, perhaps from measles.
0 + 10.375 = 10.375 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).
215. SAD IBN ABU WAQQAS
Early and eager follower of and warrior for Muhammad. After Muhammad's death he became a military leader and took part in the conquest of Persia.
0 + 10.375 = 10.375 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".