C H A P T E R I X
OTHER “SIGNS” AND “PROOFS” - NOT ONE OF THEM WITH ANY LOGICAL VALUE AS PROOF FOR ALLAH, FOR THE TEACHINGS OF MUHAMMAD OR FOR ISLAM
(A possible exception: Some proofs - for Yahweh - borrowed from the Bible.)
In chapter VIII was quoted a number of - though far from all - places where the Quran/Muhammad has taken natural phenomena and used them as “proofs” for Allah - - - without one single time to prove that Allah was behind those phenomena. Words are very cheap, and any priest in any religion can say the same about his god or gods - yes, one has not even got to be a priest, as any man and woman can say the same. Words are that cheap and easy. Remember also that in the Quran “Sign” often is synonymous with “Proof”.
Muhammad many times even was asked for proofs, but had only some fast talk and unproven statements + some boasting (?) about what Allah could do “if he willed”, to offer - not the slightest wisp of a proof.
Muslims will say that the Quran proves itself, as it is sent down by an omniscient god. But an omniscient god does not send down lots of mistakes and invalid “signs” etc. The only thing the Quran proves is that it is not made by someone omniscient. An omniscient god simply does not make that kind of and that number of mistakes. Neither does he use invalid “signs” or “proofs” - especially not as any omniscient god had to know man sooner or later would discover the cheating, and loose confidence in him and his book.
I also am unable to understand why an omniscient god had to change his religion so fast and so much - and brutal - in 622 AD. Was his earlier teachings that wrong?
And if there is just a small god - or a man - trying to bully himself to power, behind the Quran, and not really one who knew everything, proofs for omniscience and -potent are absolutely necessary. “Strong claims demands strong proofs.” But as there are no proofs, all those claims are invalid.
But there are more claims for “Signs” (mostly synonymous with “proof” in the Quran) and “Proofs” - ones not based on claims on nature. Actually so many that I just pick a few of them.
0Aa 2/39: “Those (non-Muslims*) who - - - belie Our (Allah’s*) Signs - - -”. Reference to unspecified and unproven signs. Unproven signs according to all laws of logic, proves nothing. There are many like this in the Quran - I only quote some of them.
0Ab 2/41: “- - - sell My (Allah’s*) Signs - - -”. See 2/39 just above.
0Ac* 2/87: “We (the god*) gave Jesus - - -clear (signs) - - -”. Yes, if the Bible speaks the truth, Jesus had clear signs. But the Jew Jesus was speaking about the Jewish (and Christian) god Yahweh. Now Muslims like to tell that Allah and Yahweh is the same god, but that is not possible unless that god is mentally ill. There is so big difference between Yahweh, especially as we meet him in NT (the teachings on which the Christian religion is based), and the hard and bloody warrior god we meet especially in the some 22 surahs from Medina, that it is not possible it can be the same one - not unless he at least is deeply schizophrenic.
0Ad 2/118: “We (Allah*) have indeed made clear the Signs unto any people who hold firmly to the Faith - - -”. The “Signs” possible to find in the Quran, offers not a single proof for Allah - - - unless you are prepared to believe anything and any loose words. Here is a not proved statement about unspecified, not proved signs. Normally such ways of arguing are hallmarks of cheats and deceivers - and I remind you of what kind of man Muhammad was - highwayman, rapist, murderer and warlord, etc., after first having been an Arab salesman (also salesmen have no reputation for being 100% honest. Here Islam of course says he was - and it may or may not be true).
001 2/129: “Our Lord (Allah*)! Send amongst them (Muslims/Arabs) a Messenger (Muhammad*) of their own who shall rehearse Thy Signs - - -”. It is symptomatic that Muhammad never ever was able to produce one single real “sign”, even though he was asked for it many times.
0Ae 2/151: “- - - rehearsing to you (Muslims*) our (Allah’s/Muhammad’s*) Signs - - -”: Quite likely Muhammad did - but if he rehearsed only the ones in the Quran, not one single of them was or is proved true, (with the possible exception of some signs from the Bible proving Yahweh).
0Af 2/159: “Those who conceal the clear (Signs) We (Allah*) have sent down - - -”. No danger - not one single valid or clear sign/proof for Allah is sent down (unless it is omitted from the Quran). But it is VERY typical for the Quran to talk about “signs” as they were proven facts. (And at the same time often accept nothing about other gods without demanding proofs).
002 2/187: “Thus doeth Allah make clear His Signs to men - - -”. Not one single proved sign is referred to - not really an unproved one, either.
003 2/209: “If ye (Muslims*) backslide after the clear (Signs) have come to you - - -”. It is not possible to backslide after clear signs that never arrived - the only thing that ever arrived in Mecca or Medina or other places, was words - and that any man, woman or priest can produce.
0Ag* 2/211: “Ask the children of Israel how many clear (signs) We (the god) have sent them.” Yes, if the Bible speaks the truth - quite a number. But that in case proves the Jewish/Christian god Yahweh - as said in 2/87 it is impossible that the two can be the same, even though Muslims like to pretend/say so. (A small curiosum: Yesterday a newspaper in Kuala Lumpur, capital of the Muslim country Malaysia, was forbidden to use the name Allah for the Christian God. (This has happened infrequently through history) “Allah is the name of the Muslim god, and cannot be used about the Christian one, (Yahweh or normally called God by Christians*)”. Q.E.D - Allah is not Yahweh.)
004 2/219: “They (Muslims*) ask thee (Muhammad*) how much they can spend (on gambling*); say: ‘What is beyond your needs.’ Thus doth Allah make clear to you His Signs - - -.” One thing is that this making clear is far from clear to me. Worse: What signs? There are no proven signs about Allah anywhere in the Quran.
(Another curiosity: In the book “The Message of the Quran”, certified by Al-Azhar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy in Cairo (one of the 2-3 top universities in the Muslim world on such subjects) in a letter dated 27. Dec. 1998, it is admitted rather reluctantly that there are no proofs for Allah, and that it is not possible to prove him. Actually that is part of a wider fact: It is not possible for humans to prove a god. That only a god can do (by doing something supernatural). And this is very clear: Neither Allah nor Muhammad produced a single proof for Allah, in spite of many requests. But Jesus did give proofs according to both the Quran and the Bible - if one of them speaks the truth).
0Ah 2/231 “Do not treat Allah’s Signs as a jest - - -”. Once more: These just are invalid or imaginary signs treated like solid proofs - they all are invalid by all and any law of logic. Anyone reading the Quran will find a large number of them - they are so easy to find, that I do not include many more of them. No omniscient god would use invalid “signs” or “proofs”.
005 2/241-242: “For divorced women (provision should be made) on a reasonable (scale). This is the duty of the righteous. Thus doth Allah make clear His Signs to you - - -” I must admit I do not see neither a sign, nor how it is made clear. At least there is no proven sign.
006* 2/252: The Jews’ (or Israelis‘) King Saul/Talut and David beat the Philistines in battle and felled Goliath - - - “These are all Signs of Allah - - -”. If they were signs, they were signs of the Jewish god Yahweh. See 2/87.
0Ai 3/19: “But if any deny the Signs of Allah, Allah is swift in calling to account.” He can call no one to account as long as not a single proven sign exists to deny.
007* 3/49: “I (Jesus*) have come to you, with a Sign form your Lord (the god*), in that I make for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and it becomes a bird by Allah’s leave (this tale is “borrowed” from one of the apocryphal (= made up religious fairy tales*) so called “Child Gospels”, in this case the so called Egyptian one, but also mentioned in the so called Arab one from Syria around 500 AD, and in the Gnostic (fairy tale) Thomas’ Child Gospel - it is not from the Bible*), I heal the blind, and the lepers, and I quicken the dead (stories “borrowed” from the Bible*) - - -(some more not from the Bible*). Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe.” If it had been proven, it had been a sign. Now only that borrowed from the Bible may perhaps be true - but in that case it is a proof for Yahweh.
It is totally invalid as a proof for Allah, as long as:
I. It is not proved that Allah really did this - and stories from fairy tales need solid proofs. Or:
II. It is not proved that Allah and Yahweh really is the same god - which only Muslims want to believe, and which they have never produced the slightest proof for - - - in addition to that the two gods (?) have so different teachings that it is impossible they can be the same god (Muslims explain this with that the Bible is falsified, but any professor in history would deem the Bible far more likely to be true - and for solid reasons - than the Quran (though even the Bible may partly be made up).
The Gnostic stories, tales and “gospels” were made up by semi-Christian or sometimes semi-Jewish sects to fit their special points of view on how a god should be. The sects were quite widespread once upon a time. Muslims frequently use these and other made up tales to try to “prove” their statements. Not to mention how often one meets Muslim references to the so called Barnabas Gospel - - - made up at the Caliphs Muslim court in Baghdad (in the 1400 century?)
AND IT IS A STRANGE (?) FACT THAT THE QURAN OFTEN AGREES WITH MADE UP STORIES FROM APOCRYPHAL BOOKS AND STORIES WELL KNOWN IN ARABIA AT THE TIME OF MUHAMMAD, INSTEAD OF THE MAY BE TRUE ONES IN THE BIBLE, AND NOT LESS PECULIAR THAT IT THEN EXPLAINS THAT THE REASON FOR THE DIVERGENCES IS THAT THE BIBLE IS FALSIFIED.
0Aj 3/86: “How shall Allah guide those who reject faith after they accepted it and bore witness that the Messenger (Muhammad*) was true and that Clear Signs had come unto them?” Well, on basis of this sentence it is not possible for Allah to guide anyone, because Muhammad/the Quran is proven (by science) full of mistakes, and not one single so called sign is proven true - with the possible exception of some “borrowed” from the Bible, and they in case prove Yahweh/God, not Allah.
008 3/106-108: Bad people will go to Hell, good Muslims will go to Paradise, the book states her - without any documentation - and continues: “These are the Signs of Allah”. Well, it is a statement hanging in thin air - typically for the Quran; not proven and impossible to prove. Believe it if you are primitive and naïve enough - especially thinking about the fact that all and everything is based only on the words of a somewhat “special” warlord, rapist and dictator who liked power - and ask questions if you are not entirely naïve.
0Ak 3/118: “We (Allah*) have made plain to you the Signs - - -”. Wrong. The only thing that is made plain about the so called signs is that the ones not “borrowed” from the Bible without exception are just lose statements and cheap words any priest and any believing man or woman can use about any god - real or imagined.
What does it tell about the Quran and about Muhammad that loose statements are pretended to be facts and proofs? After all that kind of argumentation is one of the hallmarks for cheaters, deceivers and swindlers. The same for fast talk - you find also that in the Quran.
0Al 4/56: “Those who reject Our (Allah’s) Signs, We shall soon cast into the Fire - - -”. As long as no reliable sign is sent, there is no excuse for casting anyone into Hell.
009 5/114: (Jesus said*): “O Allah our Lord! Send us from heaven a Table - - - for - - - a solemn festival and a Sign from Thee - - -”. This is NOT a story from the Bible. And if it had been true, you can be 100% sure it had been there. Muslims explains away any discrepancy between the Quran and the Bible with the (as normal for Islam unproved) statement that the Bible is falsified. But if any Christian had wanted to falsify parts of the Bible, it would have been to strengthen Jesus, not to weaken him. A wonder like this had strengthen his esteem a lot, it never had been omitted if it was true - falsification of the Bible or not. Science believes the tale is inspired by a twisted recollection (Muhammad did not know the Bible well, and especially not NT) of the last Easter meal of Jesus. This in addition to that Jesus had been killed years before if he had been preaching about the known foreign polytheistic god al-Lah (the name changed to Allah by Muhammad).
A “sign” from a made up - and definitely not proved - story really is a valuable and worthy sign.
010 6/19: “’What thing is the most weighty in evidence (of Allah*)?’ Say: ’Allah is witness between me (Mohammad*) and you (Muslims*); this Quran hath been revealed to by inspiration - -”.
I. It is nowhere proved that Allah had anything to do with the Quran - on the contrary: All the mistakes etc. in the book prove that no god was involved, at least no omniscient one.
II. Can a book with that many mistakes, loose statements and invalid “signs” and “proofs” really be evidence for anything at all? - except for that something is wrong.
And this verse 6/19 tells is the most weighty evidence for Allah!
011 6/97: “It is He (Allah*) Who maketh the stars (as beacons) for you, that ye may guide yourself, with their help, through the dark spaces of land and sea: We detail Our Signs for people who know”. Well, but where is the proof for that Allah had anything to do with the making of the stars at all? The Quran even flagrantly proves that Allah/Muhammad have not the faintest idea neither of what the stars are or where they are (according to the Quran they are points of fire that even can be used for weapons against bad spirits, fastened to the nonexistent lowest of 7 material heavens - which means that according to the astronomy of that time they are situated somewhere between the Earth and our moon (as the moon was fastened to another heaven, that could not be the lowest one)).
Some “sign” and some detailed explanation!
012 6/104: “Now have come to you (people/Muslims*), from your Lord (Allah*), proofs - - -”. But no proof is mentioned. The statement simply is hanging in the air. Another loose statement treating non-existing proofs as facts.
013 7/37: “Who is more unjust than one who invents a lie against Allah or reject His Signs?” What if someone has invented lies about Allah and made up the “signs”? There are lots and lots of words, but no proofs - not even when repeatedly asked for proofs, Muhammad was able to produce a single, small one - only fast talk, a sign and hallmark of someone unreliable without a real case.
014 10/82: “And Allah by His Words doth prove and establish His Truth, however much the Sinners may hate it”. There only are four truths that are established by the presumed words of Allah - the Quran:
I. There are lots and lots of mistakes in the book.
II. There are lots and lots of invalid “signs” and “proofs” in the book.
III. There are lots and lots and lots of invalid statements in the book.
IV. Because of I-III it is proved 100% that the Quran is not made by an omniscient god.
015 18/9: “Or doest thou reflect that the Companions of the Cave - - - were wonders among Our (Allah’s*) Signs?” The religious fairy tale about the 7 sleepers in Efesos fleeing from emperor Decius (252-254 AD) emerged around 400 AD, and was known in Arabia (some Muslims try to move it to the area and time of the Dead Sea Scrolls to make the fairy tale loan less obvious, but the story is too easy to recognize.) This made up religious fable or legend is used in the Quran as a fact and a real wonder and consequently as a sign/proof for Allah. But first the tale has to be proved - and a fairy tale needs a strong proof - to have any value as a proof for anything at all.
There is real irony in 18/13: “We (Allah*) relate to thee (the listeners*) their (the 7 sleepers‘*) story in truth - - -”. In truth?
016 18/17: “Thou wouldst have seen the sun, when it rose, declining to the right from their (the 7 sleepers‘*) Cave, and when it set, turning away from them to the left, while they lay in the open space in the midst of the Cave. Such are among the signs of Allah - - -”. Some sign; presumed sleeping men in a lightly revised fairy tale. (But the Quran have nearly no tale not known beforehand in Arabia - all are taken from older fairy tales, folk tales, fables, legends, the Bible, the Torah and a few from tales from countries further east, and then twisted a little to fit in the Quran. It was not strange that sceptics told Muhammad and Muslims that they just told old tales.)
017 20/128: “Is it not a warning to men (to call to mind) how many generations before them We (Allah*) destroyed, in whose haunts they (now) move? Verily, in this are signs for men endued with understanding”. This is a theme Muhammad/the Quran frequently returns to: In the Middle East there were scattered ruins from towns and hamlets and houses. Muhammad told that they all were remnants from earlier “unbelievers” punished by Allah for not believing their supposed prophets. As usual without a single proof for all places put together. (In Pakistan this year Muslims proposed to put placards with quotes like this on old ruins - proofs for the fate of “infidels”. This really tells something about those Muslims and about the level of education even today - in 2007 AD. What then about naïve, primitive and zero educated poor people 610-632 AD? - were they easily “impressed”?)
His explanation is even more difficult to believe, as any professor and even student of archaeology can give many other explanations for ruins in arid areas - and especially in arid areas where the inhabitants were all waging war against everybody else at times.
Absolutely not a valid sign without a real proof.
018* 21/91: “- - - and We (the god*) made her (Mary’s*) son (Jesus*) a Sign for all peoples.” Very correct - but a sign for Yahweh/God, not for Allah - not unless Islam proves Allah is the same god as Yahweh/God. And the two religions and the two gods - especially the war god Allah from the surahs from Medina compared to the benevolent God from NT - are too different for that to be possible.
Definitely not a proof for Allah. May be a proof for Yahweh/God.
019 26/97-103: Non-Muslims end in Hell and nobody can help them. “Verily, in this is a Sign - - -”. Yes, but only if it is true, not just words made up to frighten naïve and/or primitive people to accept a certain religion. Islam presents not one single proof, only cheap words ANYONE can use. How can we learn if Allah really had something to do with it? Islam really has a job to do to prove it. This especially as they never bother to prove things - statements from nowhere are their profession.
020 26/197: “Is it not a Sign to them that the Learned of the Children of Israel knew it (as true)?”
I. This sentence is dishonest. It is not proved, but Islam claims that some learned Jews accepted Muhammad as a prophet. But only a few of the thousands of learned Jews in case. If the story is true, an honest sentence had said: “- - - a few of - - -” or at most “- - - some of - - -”. Dishonesty in a presumed holy book does not give a favourable impression. And why is dishonesty necessary?
II. As the great majority of the Jews - learned as not learned - denied that Muhammad could be a prophet even as they were robbed of their possessions, slaughtered in wars, and murdered “en masse” as helpless prisoners, it is absolutely sure that what the Jews - learned or not - meant about him, was no sign for Muhammad or Allah. This even more so as to become Muslim was the only way to keep one’s riches and later one’s life, as Muhammad gained power in Medina, and still most Jews refused him. A few “renegade” swallows make no summer.
021 30/25: “And among His (Allah’s*) Signs is this, that heaven and the earth stand by His Command - - -”. A most easy statement, as long as Muhammad refused to prove anything at all. Invalid.
022 30/37: “See they not that Allah enlarges the provision and restricts it, to whomsoever He pleases? Verily, in that are Signs for those who believe”. There are signs of Allah in the fact that some are rich, some are poor and some are directly in distress? Islam should prove that no other explanations for riches and poverty are possible. Without such proof these presumed signs are invalid.
023 32/26: “Does it not teach them (non-Muslims*) a lesson, how many generations We (Allah*) destroyed before them, in whose dwellings they now go to and fro? Verily, in that are Signs - - -”. There had been signs if it was clear that Allah really had destroyed them.
024 34/9: “We (Allah*) could cause - - - a piece of the sky to fall upon them (non-Muslims*). Verily this is a Sign for every devotee that turns to Allah - - -”. The sky is an optical illusion made by the bending of light in the upper atmosphere - not a material heaven like Muhammad believed. It is not possible to make a piece of an optical illusion fall, and absolutely not upon someone. (the Arabs knew about meteorites - the Quran really speaks about a falling piece of the sky not a meteorite).
A totally untrue statement. Some sign of Allah.
0Am 34/43: “When our Clear Signs are rehearsed to them - - -”. One more place where the word sign - here even strengthened with the word “clear” - is used like if the so-called signs are manifested facts. But not one single of them is a proven fact - as said before; with the possible exception of some shanghaied from the Bible, but those in case prove Yahweh/God.
There are literally hundreds of places in the Quran where the word “Sign” is misused like this.
025 38/29: “Here is a Book (the Quran*) which We (Allah*) have sent down unto thee (Muhammad*), - - - that they (people*) may mediate on its Signs, and that men of understanding may receive admonition”. What follower would ever admit he was not a man of understanding? - especially if he had little knowledge. But in the Quran there is not one valid sign specifically proving Allah. Not one single. And what is then this “proof” worth for Islam? - less than nothing, because one starts wondering what kind of god - or man - uses invalid proofs?
026 40/4: “None can dispute about the Signs of Allah but the Unbelievers”. This may be absolutely correct:
I. It is a reason for social extrication in Muslim societies to doubt any word in the Quran.
II. It is a reason for imprisonment in some Muslim countries to doubt too much in the Quran.
III. It is a good reason for being murdered by Muslims if you express too much doubt in the Quran, not to mention in Muhammad - the weak link in the religion (the only witness and not a very holy character). (Added March 2008: A woman in Malaysia, Kamariah Ali, was just sentenced to 2 years of prison for being inconsistent with Islam. The judge, Mohammad Abdullah, told she had committed a grave offence, and that the sentence was in the public interest.)
IV. It still is a reason for death penalty in some Muslim countries to doubt too much in the Quran, not to mention to want to leave Islam.
V. Even for non-Muslims it is dangerous to doubt the signs and the Quran - they may be murdered. Islam do not trust the power of the word - with a reason, thinking about all the mistakes and invalid statements, “signs” and “proofs” in the Quran - and resort to murder. It is better to believe in the religion of the fathers, than to try to find out if it really is true. Like Islam says when “hunting” for proselytes: It is difficult to question your deepest beliefs and what you were imprinted as a child. Better not to control if what you believe is right or wrong - and to run the risk of not finding the right religion (if one exists) in time, if Islam is wrong.
Yes, only non-Muslims can - or are permitted to - discuss or dispute the signs of Islam. And even for us it is so dangerous, that this “book” can not be printed unless the printer is very brave, in spite of the book being very down-to-earth and based entirely on the Quran + correct scientific knowledge.
027 45/19+20: “They (non-Muslims*) will be of no use to thee in the sight of Allah: it is only wrongdoers (that stand as) protectors, one to another; but Allah is the Protector of the Righteous. These are clear evidences to men - - -”. Read these two sentences, and see if it is a proof - not to say a clear proof - of anything, as long as the statements are not proved. 100% invalid.
028 46/8: “Say: ’ Had I (Muhammad*) forged it (the Quran*), then can ye obtain no single (blessing) for me from Allah:” What an unbeatable proof!!!
029 Muhammad is said to prove that he was a prophet, by answering 3 cryptic questions brought by Uqba b. Abu Mu’ayt from Jewish rabbis in Medina - he got the answers from Allah via Gabriel. The first concerned the “seven sleepers”. Any god had known the story is made up - a Christian legend - but Muhammad did not know this. The second concerned Alexander the Great (Dhu’l Qarnayn - an Arab name for him) - and Muhammad answer fairy tales any god had known were wrong. The third concerned the Holy Ghost - and Muhammad had no real answer. But the conclusion after the fiasco (it was not known then that it was a big fiasco) was clear: The story was an unmistakable proof for that Muhammad was a prophet. Worse: EVEN TODAY WHEN WE EASILY SEE WHAT IS WRONG, MUSLIMS REFUSES TO ADMIT THE OBVIOUS AND TRY TO EXPLAIN THE ERRORS AWAY - AND RECON THE WRONG INFORMATION AS SURE PROOF OF HIS BEING A REAL PROPHET, IN SPITE OF THAT NO GOD HAD GIVEN HIM ANSWERS SO FAR FROM THE REALITY. It should be a matter of doubt for any thinking person - but then Muslims are not thought how to think, but only to accept and obey. This really is an interesting “proof”.
0An 62/5: “Evil is the similitude of people who falsify the Signs of Allah - - -”. What does it mean that invalid signs are falsified? Especially in a book with so many mistakes?
P O S T S C R I P T U M T O C H A P T E R I X
This should be enough, as these points are so very easy to find for anyone who reads the Quran. Whenever you see the word “Sign” ask yourself: Is this meant to be a sign, or is it just another reference to not proved signs pretended to be facts? If it is said to be a sign: Is this just another statement built on no proof and thin air? And if it is said to be a sign built on proofs: Check if the “proofs” it rests on, really are proofs, and not just other statements founded on cheap words.
I believe I have checked all places where the words “sign” or “proof” are used in the Quran. With the exception of some taken from the Bible, I have found none - NONE - that is valid according to any law of logic. They only are statements, or rests on other statements not proved. A few even are directly wrong.
As for the ones taken from the Bible, some are wrong, some are proved by science to be correct, and quite a number are not proved neither right nor wrong. But at least the Bible to a large degree rests on many writers and many witnesses - though points can be wrong anyhow. It also is written much nearer what happened in time, a few years to some tens of years later for NT, compared to more than 600 years and mainly recited from words-of-mouth for the Quran for the same stories. And told only by a warlord and worse aspiring for power.
It really is very sobering that the Quran is built only on the words of one single man - a man that today would be treated with much suspicion in a court, because of his life and behaviour when living as a self-proclaimed prophet, highway man and warlord. Highwaymen, murderers, rapists and warlords do not rate very high for trustworthiness. And self-proclaimed prophets? There have been numbers of them through history. They often like power, women and often a good life - and frequently are not too “difficult” on how to obtain it. Muhammad at least liked power and women.
It also is sobering to know that it is a fact that easy words, cheap, loose statements, and invalid “signs” and “proofs” all are hallmarks for parasites and deceivers, not to say swindlers. Like Goebbles: “Tell a lie often enough, and people start believing”.
Cairo, 11. 12. 07