THE QURAN, DIFFERENT TOPICS
31 March 2013
##01 19/36b: “Verily Allah is my (Muhammad’s*) Lord and your (Muslims’*) Lord - - -“. This is a serious one: Here clearly it is Muhammad himself – Muhammad the man - who is speaking. How is that possible in a book made by a god before the universe was created or may be one which has existed since eternity, and a copy of a revered Mother Book sent down from Heaven by Allah? (There are a few mistakes(?) like this (8? + angels speaking) in the Quran – see 6/114a.)
If Muhammad is speaking in the Quran - and he clearly does at least 8 places according to our sources - not all the words in the Quran are from Allah. How many are? - and how much from Muhammad?
But then it definitely is no proved verity/truth that Allah really is a god, and if he in case is correctly described in the Quran - it may be Muhammad's words only.
#02 23/112: (YA2948): “He (Allah*) will say - - -“. Here is an interesting small – or big – detail when you think about all the claims about how exactly like Muhammad’s words the Quran is: A. Yusuf Ali refers directly to the difference between 2 “ways of reading”. One is the Hafs version after 'Asim, the other is after Warsh – Islam uses the expression “ways of reading” (“qira’ah”) and pretends that that is something different from versions, which it is not. Islam just use another word to conjure away the fact that there exist and existed different versions of the book – there once were 14 “canonized” ones + a lot of others. We quote: “The Hafs reading is “Qala”, “He will say”. This follows the Kufah Qira’ah. The other Qira’ah reads “Qul”, “Say” (in the imperative).” In itself this is a minor detail – though far more than “correct to the last comma” like Muslims often claim (in the first case the quote if from Allah, in the second case Allah is ordering someone (Muhammad?) to speak) – but it documents that the different versions of the Quran still exist and are used. (Actually the two that are in daily use today, are Warsh in parts of Africa, and Hafs in the rest of the world.)
#####03 26/196b: “Without doubt it (the Quran*) is (announced) in the revealed Books (the Torah, the Bible*) of former peoples.” There is very much doubt about that, as the basic elements of the teachings are too different – especially compared to NT and “the new covenant” which is the fundamental one for Christianity. It is plainly wrong - it is absolutely sure that the Quran is not announced in the Bible or in any relevant Jewish scriptures. Also see the chapter about "Muhammad in the Bible" in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran", and 26/193-196b above..
Flatly stated: It is incorrect that the Quran is revealed in the Bible (not even Muslims claim this today - and if you run across the claim, their references are not to "documentation" about the Quran revealed in the Bible, but to claimed references to Muhammad there (they only are possible to see if you cherry-pick words and add wishful thinking plus twisting of the word or its context, and a huge dash of al-Taqiyya and/or Kitman - lawful lies and lawful half-truths)). Even this often met claim that Muhammad is foretold in the Bible, as you understand is wrong. And as said the basic thoughts are too different between the Bible and the Quran: Both books cannot come from the same god. This is especially easy to see if you compare the Quran to NT.
Some Muslim scholars say it is the basic ideas of the Quran which is foretold in the Bible. Please read the Bible and especially NT, and the Quran and compare - and weep (you will not be tempted to laugh - except a black laugh).
04 27/4d: "- - - We (Allah*) have made their deeds pleasing in their (non-Muslims'*)eyes - - -". Guess if that is the case also for Muslims, included warriors, al-Taqiyya (lawful lies) users and terrorists.
05 28/56d: "- - - guidance". There is not much true religious guidance in a book with no god behind it - and there is no god behind a book as full of errors as the Quran - and no good forces preaching so much hate, suppression and blood. Actually we do not think there ever was a war religion that benefitted even its most ardent believers as human beings - such religions often gave power and riches, but that was it. And that is it.
06 33/37a: This verse does not at all belong in any holy book - this is solving of Muhammad's family affairs. (Muhammad fell in love - or in desire - with the wife of his adopted son, Zaid. According to old Arab law an adopted son was a son, and a father-in-law could not marry his daughter-in-law. But Allah changed the law for Muhammad, there was a divorce - what could Zaid say against his mighty "father"? (Muslims claim the marriage was not a good one - that be as it may, it anyhow was a betrayal of Zaid, and even most Muslims do not feel entirely well about this marriage) - - - and Muhammad had himself yet another wife. Also see 33/37 just below.
##07 59/23c: (YA5402): Here we just want to quote “The Meaning of the Holy Quran”: “How can a translator reproduce the sublimity and the comprehensiveness of the magnificent Arabic words, which means so much in a single symbol?” But this is just another and glorified way of saying: “How can one translate from a language where the words are so little precise and so vague in meaning, that it is difficult to know what is really meant”.
08 66/3-5: These are family problems in Muhammad's family. Do they belong in a holy book? And: The Quran is a copy of the "mother book" which Allah and his angels revere in his "home". For one thing, how did Muhammad's family problems end up in the "mother book" written may be billions of years earlier? - and for another; would a god revere texts like this?
#09 26/210-211: “No evil ones have brought down this (Revelation). It would neither suit them - - -“. May be no evil spirits have brought down the Quran. But is definite that no omniscient god has done so – too many mistakes, etc. It also is definite that no good or benevolent god or spirit did it – far too inhuman, full of hate and suppression and blood – not to mention the wretched ethic and moral in the book. All the same it is possible it was not sent down by bad or evil forces (even bad supernatural forces would be too intelligent to make a book with so many mistakes, contradictions, invalid logic, etc., as they had to know they would be found out sooner or later and lose their credibility - though a possibility is that the god demanded a low quality book to permit the Devil to make such a trap - f.x. may be the god wanted it to be possible for humans to understand something was wrong and thus evade the trap) – it simply is possible, and even likely, that it was made by one or more men (all the wrong science and "knowledge" in accordance with the local beliefs in and around Arabia at that time, and a lot more points in that direction). But what is absolutely sure, is that an Islam like the one one finds in the surahs from Medina suits evil spirits and forces very well: Inhumanity, stealing, blood, hate, war. Just ask Muslims what they think about the Mongols attacking them in the east. The religion in Mongolia under and after Djingis Khan basically was quite similar to Islam. When Islam used their war machine and inhumanity in f.x. India and other places, they according to all Muslims were heroes. Then they met Mongols who did just the same to Muslims - - and the Mongols were terrible monsters. But then the southern Mongols became Muslims and continued in the same way like before, but now against non-Muslims - - - and now they, too, were great heroes according to Islam. Ask Muslims if the f.x. remember the name Timur Lenk (Tamerlane).
Islam as described in the surahs from Medina, definitely suits evil forces/spirits.
We may add: As all the errors, etc. in the Quran prove 100% and more that the book is not from a god - it is heresy and slander to blame this quality on a god - there only remain 3 possible makers of the Quran: A cold human brain (probably Muhammad's in case), a mental disease (modern medical science suspects Muhammad had TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy - a mental disease which can give fits and religious illusions just like Muhammad had), or the dark forces (and very many points in the Quran, in its moral code, in the sharia laws, etc. fit a devil better than they fit a good and benevolent and forgiving god).
This content was posted with assistance from M. A. Khan, the editor of islam-watch.org and the author of "Islam Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism and Slavery" (available online)