Muhammad in the Quran, Vol. 4: Chapter 95
15 Dec. 2015
MUHAMMAD - MISCELLANEOUS
¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤
001 2/13a: "Believe as the others believe - - -". This is an invalid argument, as the fact that some or even many believe, does not prove their belief is true. The argument merits that one looks into the belief and check if it may be true or not. To follow believers without checking their belief, is just to go along with the flock of sheep, and as sheep are not the most intelligent of animals, they not always end at the best places. But honestly: If you just follow the sheep in blind belief, you deserve whatever you get.
Islam has the word "taqlid" = to deny what conflicts with old or wishful thinking f.x. inherited from ones fathers. (Or to be more exact: To accept what parents and scholars and others around you say, without asking for or checking proofs for that what they say is true.) This quote tells Muslims that they shall rely on taqlid and what others believe. Do not use your brain and knowledge to evaluate if what your fathers and others told you is right - use taqlid.
#### How many Muslims or prospects have ever sat down and read the Quran with their brains and knowledge, and not only their eyes, engaged. Thinking: "What is true? What may be true? What is doubtful? Are there things which cannot be true? "Instead of: "The Quran is the truth, because so my father and others claim. How can I explain away the wrong facts, other errors, contradictions, etc.? And how many such "explanations" can I use before I make Allah a liar when he tells the book has easy and correct - literal - language and is explained by an omniscient god, and a book where only the sick of heart (3/7) look for hidden meanings which only Allah knows?
002 3/42c: “Behold the angels (plural*) said (when they came to tell Mary she was going to have the baby Jesus*)”. According to the Bible there only was one angel - Gabriel (Luke 1/26).
#####003 3/199g: "For them (strongly believing Jews and Christians*) is a reward with their Lord". There may be a hope for Paradise also for Jews and Christians - - - if this verse is not abrogated (made invalid) by a stricter one later on.
###004 4/29c: "- - - nor kill (or destroy) yourselves - - -". A most essential sentence in a time with lots of self murder terrorists - self murder clearly is against this verse in the Quran.
##005 5/69b: “Those who (believe in the Quran), and those who follows the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabeans – any who believe in Allah (here "included" Yahweh/God*) and the Last day, and work righteousness – on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.” This may indicate that also Jews and Christians (and Sabeans - most likely people from the then mainly Christian Sabah/Sheba, but also a couple of other explanations may be possible - see 2/62f above) may go to Paradise. But see 5/69c just below.
Muslims and Islam have a strong tendency to forget this verse and this point. This even though this surah is from 632 AD and one of the very last ones, and thus according Islam's rules for abrogation should be a strong one.
####006 5/101b: "Ask not questions about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble". Guess if this is a revealing sentence! Do not ask questions - debate - if the result may be something that put question marks to the Quran!! - the criterion is not to find the truth, but not to find anything which may give you reason to question Islam - true or not is not part of the statement. This tells something serious about Muhammad, about the Quran, and about Islam. And most likely a main reason why Islam ended in its intellectually and culturally blind alley, and petrified and stagnant dark ages from around 1100 AD - dark ages they were forced backwards and protesting (f.x. printing was prohibited in Egypt for 300 years, because "it could be used to hurt Islam") out from by ideas, impulses and technical news from the west, and by military realities - mainly during the last century only. Also see 5/102a below.
NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!
##007 7/101d: “- - - they (non-Muslims*) would not believe what they had rejected before.” (Literally: “- - - to which they had given the lie aforetime”.)
#####Comment A7/80 (7/82 in the 2008 English edition): “- - - an allusion to the instinctive unwillingness of most people to give up the notions – positive or negative – to which they are accustomed.”
But the book skips also here the fact that this also goes for Muslims: If they are strongly indoctrinated like Muslims are, they may react strongly to arguments and facts they do not like – and without thinking over – or being mentally unable to think over – even true facts. To live in "taqlid" - uncritical acceptance of what your father and surroundings believe is the truth - is easier and less demanding.
NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!
008 8/67-68 Al-Tabari writes that Muhammad after the battle of Badr and the claimed reception of verses 8/67-68, that no prisoner should be released unless they paid extortion money - if not they should be executed. It seems that al-Tabari meant this was too mild treatment, because he writes that the Muslims were punished because they took prisoners at the battle of Badr (instead of killing them at once), during the battle of Uhud the following year (the Muslims lost 70 men + 70 were taken prisoner, and Muhammad himself was a little hurt). Muhammad Ibn Ishaq tells that after that battle, Muhammad had said: "I won by means of terror, Earth was for me made to a place of adoration and (it was made) clean. The entire language is made my own. Looting has been permitted me, something not permitted for any earlier prophet (but Muhammad all the same claimed to be in the same line of prophets as the Jewish ones*). Also intercession was permitted for me. This was five things no prophet had been permitted before me. Then Allah says it has not been permitted for any prophet on Earth to take prisoners from their enemies before he has spread death on Earth. You (the Muslims*) want the riches of this world (extortion money for prisoners of war), but Allah wants the next world, that is to say to show ones belief by killing the infidels so that the next world may be obtained. It there was not an advice from Allah noted down before, what you have done (extorted money*) caused a strong punishment - - -" (Ibn Ishaq p. 484).
#### 009 11/87c: "- - - the worship which our fathers practiced - - -". The reason why Muslims believe in Islam is that their fathers and surroundings claim it is the truth, not that they ever have gone into the material to see if it at all is possible that it can be the truth. (Which it is not with all those mistakes, etc. in the Quran).
010 12/2g: "- - - before this (the surahs of the Quran*), thou too (Muslims*) wast among those who knew it (the religion?*) not". Comment A12/3: "The Arab words "la'allakum ta'qilun" - - - (here*) are meant to impress upon everyone who listens to or reads the Quran that its appeal is directed, primarily, to man's reason, and that the "feeling" alone can never provide a sufficient basis of faith". Muhammad understood psychology and used similar claims rather frequently - impressing on his followers that "you are intelligent who understand and follow my teachings" - to be told they are wise and intelligent is flattering, especially for uneducated and/or naive persons. ### But if Islam had been based on knowledge and peoples' intelligence and reason, it had disappeared fast and become a bloody comma and a sample of peoples' incredible ability to believe in spite of knowledge and facts and their as incredible ability to be blind to everything they do not want to see. Islam rests on the gut feeling that what my parents and everyone else told me was right when I was a child and later, and what all my surroundings and imams claim is the truth, is the truth - "taqlid" simply - and the mistakes in the Quran are just that the others do not know anything or do not understand that the "explanations" mean there are no mistakes anyhow, and the facts other points to are just lies from "Muslim-haters", and, therefore, there is no reason to check or think over facts not consistent with Islam. The same goes for its partly horrible moral code.
This is one of the ways Islam and Muslims use to flee from facts and arguments they do not like.
(There is much in that moral code - and Islam only have a moral code, no moral philosophy, as everything has to be done like Muhammad said or did - which is far from the basis for all real inter-human moral: "Do unto others like you want others do unto you".)
###011 13/27e: (A13/48 - in the English 2008 edition 13/49): "- - - their (humans'*) original, innate faculty to realize the existence of Allah and their own dependence of His guidance - - -". Science has nowhere and to no time found such an "innate faculty" concerning any god. This includes all Islamic universities and other Islamic research centers. (Guess if Muslim newspapers and others had had big letters on their front pages if such a faculty had ever been found!) But Islam needs arguments even like this, as there is no clear documentation for any of their central religious claims. Scientifically this is not even "gobbledygook". Dishonesty.
012 13/43f: (A13/84): “Enough for a witness between me (Muhammad*) and you “non-Muslims*) is Allah, and such as have knowledge (Muslims*) of the Book (the Quran*)”. The comment says:"(This is*) - - - implying that a true understanding of the Quran unavoidably leads one to the conviction that is has been revealed by Allah". Pointing to all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran proving 110% that no god is involved in its making, we do not bother to add more comments, except that as Islam has no documentation for any of its central religious claims, it needs even arguments like this.
Islam has not one proof neither for Allah, nor for that a god was involved in the delivery of the Quran, nor for that Muhammad had any connection to any god, and you will find they sometimes use "svada" (a good Scandinavian word meaning "(lots of) meaningless, nice talk") like this to under build or "prove" things.
We also remind you of the fact that "a conviction" far from is the same as "s fact", not to mention how far it sometimes is from "a proved fact".
But of course if "true understanding" means blind belief in the Quran after all errors and worse has been "explained" away and glossed over and the brain and real knowledge of the world is disengaged, then one may put forth claims like Muhammad Asad does here. But you have to disengage your brain and knowledge also to be able to believe such claims. "- - - a true understanding unavoidably - - -" are impressive words, but nonsense is nonsense.
013 16/63c: "- - - but Satan made, (to the wicked), their own acts seem alluring - - -". If dark forces were the maker(s) of the Quran - at least no god was involved - can this be what happened to the Muslims? Many honestly believe that their immoral moral code and all their sharia laws are good moral and ethics.
This is one of the many points in the Quran telling Islam's moral code that non-Muslims are second rate or worse.
***014 17/36a: "And pursue not that of which you (Muslims*) have not knowledge - - -". And the most essential thing not to pursue, is knowledge which can make you doubt Islam - true or not. In the old times when Islam really fought science and knowledge until the finally destroyed it in 1095 AD, the question was not if the knowledge was right or wrong - only if it was Islamic or not. "Idle curiosity" is bad. (But the language in the Quran is far from clear; some translators mean this only means you shall not listen to rumors, etc. - an aspect Muslims with all their conspiracy theories may be should remember?)
015 18/29e: “- - - let him who will, believe, and him who will, reject (Islam*) - - -.” Muhammad changed his mind as his power grew after 622 AD: This verse contradicts (and abrogates) at least these verses (here are 88 out of the 124 Muslim scholars say are abrogated by 9/5): 2/109, 2/190, 2/256, 2/272, 3/20, 4/62, 4/81, 4/90, 5/3, 5/28, 5/48, 5/99, 6/60, 6/66, 6/70, 6/104, 6/107, 6/112, 6/158, 7/87, 7/188, 7/193, 7/199, 8/61, 9/68, 10/41, 10/99, 10/102, 10/108, 11/12, 11/121, 13/40, 15/3, 15/94, 16/35, 16/82, 16/125, 16/126, 16/127, 17/54, 18/29, 18/56, 19/39, 20/130, 21/107, 21/112, 22/49, 22/68, 23/54, 23/96, 24/54, 26/216, 27/92, 28/50, 28/55, 29/18, 29/46, 32/30, 34/25, 34/28, 35/23, 35/24a, 36/17, 39/41, 41/34, 42/6, 42/15, 42/48, 43/83, 43/89, 44/59, 45/14, 46/9, 46/135a, 46/135b, 46/135b, 50/39, 50/45, 51/50-51, 51/54, 52/45, 52/47, 53/29, 67/26, 73/10, 73/11, 79/45, 86/17, 88/22, 109/6. They are all quoted under 9/5. (At least 89 contradictions).
016 21/25d: "- - - therefore, worship and serve Me (Allah*)". In reality only because the word of the man who believed in and institutionalized (by using and permitting lies) al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), etc., the broken word and promise, included even sworn ones, and the man who taught his followers to use deceit and betrayal ("War is betrayal"). Only on this man's word all Islam rests.
####017 21/53b: "We (Abraham's people*) found our fathers worshipping them". #####This is as true for Muslims as for anyone else. A man once told a tale. Some ones believed it and told their children by mouth or in writing. The children told their children that this was true, without ever checking if it even could be true. And so on generation after generation. Not one single comma is proved about Islam. It is only that once upon a time some forefathers started believing the tales of a charismatic leader. And this in spite of clear and overwhelming proofs for that something is - or more correctly; many things are - very wrong in his tales, and in spite of knowing very well that he believed in using lies, deceiving and even breaking of oaths, and in spite of knowing he wanted power plus riches for bribes for more power - and women - - - just so like many a self proclaimed prophet through the times. (And in this case it might be thought provoking that many a false prophet went far out for riches and power and women, whereas none of the known real(?) prophets were much interested in such things (NB: Men like David and Solomon in the Bible are not reckoned to be prophets, but mighty kings)).
We may add that it is typical for blind belief in the surrounding's religion - "taqlid" in Arab - in any religion, included Islam, to believe not because of proofs, but in spite of proofs. This in spite of the very obvious fact that a religion which is clearly proved wrong, obviously is on a wrong track and will lead its followers to no paradise if there is a next life. Man is a strange creature sometimes: When strong belief collides with clear and true facts, the clear facts can home whistling a song.
This verse is not from the Bible - just like so many other "Biblical" tales in the Quran.
We also may point to the Islam today is based on pure taqlid - the fathers and others claiming that the Quran is the truth, "because so our fathers told us their fathers claimed", and then it must be true.
*018 21/91c: “- - - and We (the god*) made her (Mary’s*) son (Jesus*) a Sign for all peoples.” Very correct according to the Bible - 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/Yahweh from NT - are too different for that to be possible - not unless the god is seriously ill mentally.
Definitely not a proof for Allah. But a proof for Yahweh/God if the old books tell the truth on this point.
ESSENTIAL: ISLAM AND MUSLIMS OFTEN CLAIM THAT MUHAMMAD WAS FOR THE WHOLE WORLD, BUT JESUS ONLY WAS FOR THE JEWS, WHEREAS MUHAMMAD WAS FOR ALL PEOPLE. HERE THE QURAN CONFIRMS THAT JESUS - AND THUS CHRISTIANITY - WAS FOR ALL PEOPLES.
019 21/105b: "Before this We (Allah*) wrote in the Psalms, after the Message (given to Moses): 'My servants, the righteous, shall inherit the earth'". In which psalm? the closest to this we can find is in Psalm 37/29: "- - - the righteous will inherit the land - - -". This is a bit different from that Allah's followers shall inherit the world - especially as what is righteous may differ a lot from the Quran to the Bible.. It would not be the first time the Quran has misquoted the Bible.
### NB: these few words (6 words in English, though we have been told it makes 8 words in Arab) from Psalm 37/21, is the only sentence in the entire books where the texts are the same in the Bible and the Quran. On top of all far from a sentence saying anything very specific.
020 22/11a: "There are among men some who serve Allah, as it were, on the verge - - -". Muhammad had some experiences with undecided persons. And there were also the ones to whom economy was more essential than belief - he used "gifts" to keep a number of them (up to 100 stolen camels to a chief).
A small curiosum: Of the first 4 outside his family in Muhammad's then small sect, 3 later became Christians (and one was killed) according to Ibn Ishaq.
#####021 23/1d: (A23/11): “- - - a Quranic allusion to the fact that people often reject a new ethical proposition on no better grounds than that it conflicts with their 'inherited' habits of thoughts and ways of life. Indirectly, this allusion implies a condemnation of all blind 'taqlid', i.e. an unthinking acceptance of religious doctrines or assertions which are not unequivocally supported by divine revelations, the explicit teachings of a prophet, or the evidence of the unprejudiced reason”.
- #####But the book skips the fact that this also goes for Muslims, especially as the Quran with all its errors is no revelation from any god: If they are strongly indoctrinated, they may react strongly to arguments and facts they do not like – and without thinking over – or being mentally able to think over – even true facts.
- The book here has tailor-made a definition to fit Islam. It has forgotten (?) that for one thing that reason is unable to find the right answer without full and correct information – and the Quran is full of mistakes - that claims about divine revelations are 15 to the dozen in some religious circles and invalid as proofs without documentation (something Muhammad and Allah were unable to produce) – and that the same goes for any self proclaimed prophet, and especially so if his teachings are very much wanting and he himself a questionable person (like the real Muhammad was). Not to mention "the evidence of the unprejudiced reason" - a meaningless expression in a culture where unprejudiced reason does not exist. This expression in reality in Islam is a claim for "belief on basis of blind belief". But definitions like these frequently are used in Islam and many Muslims really believe this is ok. logic - - - which make straight thinking difficult for them.
- 1: There is not one point in the Quran which is proved to be a divine revelation - lots of claims, but not one valid proof.
- 2: All the wrong facts and other errors in the Quran prove that the book is not from any god - no divine revelation.
- 3: As Muhammad also according to the Quran was unable to make prophesies = he was no prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself, but no prophet.
- 4: Reason - prejudiced or unprejudiced - never is a proof for anything. Reason can make conclusions, but ONLY on basis of facts or proofs - reason itself never is a fact or a proof. This is one of Islam's ways of disusing wrong logic to try to construct "proofs" for Islam, and for the Quran's claimed reliability.
*022 23/14a: “Then We (Allah*) made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood - - -”. Wrong. And doubly wrong:
- The sperm is not made into a clot of congealed blood.
- Sperm (1 cell from it) combines with an egg cell and becomes a zygote.
Muhammad did not know better, as this was what one believed in Arabia at his time - without a microscope it is impossible to see exactly what happens. But a god had known. There is a saying that “the taste is the proof of the cake”, and this is tasty. Muhammad and the Quran and Islam and Muslims had and have very busy time to find “explanations” - some of them rather unlikely - to “explain” why Allah/Muhammad did not produce one single real proof for that a supernatural being was involved, even though many friends and as many foes asked sincerely for it. But Allah did not even have to make the slightest miracle to prove his existence. All he had to do was to tell the truth in all these cases - like this one - where the Quran now are proved to be wrong. If Allah really did exist, and if he really was/is omniscient - why then did he make up so many wrongs, when correct information had proved something?
As it is, all scientific "facts" in the Quran is in accordance with what was believed to be the truth in Arabia at that time (much of it actually was Greek or Persian "knowledge".)
A disturbing fact is that even today Muslim scholars try to tell that in one step of development the fetus is a clot of congealed blood(!!!). F.x. YA2872: "The first change in the fertilized ovum is the conversion into a sort of clot of thickly congealed blood - - -". ########This is a pure al-Taqiyya, and the real truth is and was so well known, that there is no chance that Yusuf Alai did not know he was lying (to make the Quran seem true) - - - and our edition is from 2004 AD!!
#####This is Islam and honesty even today!!!!
Like it is now, all these facts are incredibly strong proofs for that there was no omniscient god involved in creating the Quran - and what then about Islam? - is it a made up, false religion? That actually is the only likely conclusion. Not to mention: What will then in case happen in a possible next life to all humans - Muslims - who have had their chances to look for a real religion (if such one exists) blocked by Islam?
023 23/24i: “- - - (moreover) we (non-Muslims*) have never heard (anything like) this from our forebears of old!” (A23/11): "(This is*) a Quranic allusion to the fact that people often reject a new ethical position on no better grounds than that it conflicts with their inherited habits of thoughts and ways of life. Indirectly, this allusion implies a condemnation of all blind "taqlid", i.e., an unthinking acceptance of religious doctrines or assertions - - -". The bad fact is that this also goes for Muslims, and even more so as no god revealed a book with so many and grave errors like the Quran.
024 23/53d: "- - - each party (sect*) rejoices in that which is with itself" = each sect highlights what it means is correct understanding of the religion, and each sect means only they are right. In a war religion this leads to strife, terror and murder - just see the situation between f.x. Shi’ia and Sunni Muslims, not to mention between them and the Amaddiyya or between Muslims and non-Muslims.
025 23/116a: “Therefore exalted be Allah, the King, the Reality - - -“. If there is one thing which is not proved in Islam, it is the reality of Allah. Everything in the religion rests only on blind belief and taqlid in a tale told by a man with very dubious moral, but a strong wish for power and for wealth for bribes - - - and women – a man using his religion as his platform of power (like many others). And a self proclaimed prophet unable to make prophesies (= a stolen or “borrowed” title).
026 25/21g: "- - - impiety - - -". = Not believing in Allah and Muhammad - every other belief is impiety, according to the Quran. Note strongly that you also have to believe in Muhammad - nice for Muhammad here on Earth.
027 25/32g: "- - - stages, gradually". But always after things had happened, so that it f.x. could help Muhammad in a fix or give weight to his decisions. An omniscient god had sent the verses in advance so that one could have been prepared or even avoided the problems.
(A26/38): “(Zamakhshari): ‘- - - ancient usage and precedence in time are no proof of (a concept’s) soundness”. Razi, for his part, states that (this*) verse represents ‘one of the strongest (Quranic) indications of the immorality (Arab “fasad”*) inherent in (the principle of) "taqlid", i.e. the blind, unquestioning adoption of religious concepts or practices on basis of one’s uncritical faith in no more than the “authority” of a scholar or a religious leader.”
- But the book skips the fact that this also goes for Muslims: If they are strongly indoctrinated, they may react strongly to arguments and facts they do not like – and without thinking over – or being mentally able to think over – even true facts. And also for them it is highly immoral just to accept a religion or something just because their fathers and others believe in it because their fathers again believed so.
- But there hardly is a major religion more authoritative and with a clearer demand for blind belief than Islam. Or with stronger and more ruthless indoctrination.
Also see 6/108b and 23/1b above.
###028 26/74c: “They (Abraham's people*) said: ‘Nay, but we found our fathers doing thus (what we do)”.
029 27/31b: "- - - in submission (to the true Religion) - - -". It is indirectly, but clearly indicated in the Bible that the topic and the reason for her travel, was Solomon's knowledge and intelligence, not religion. (1. Kings 10/1 and 10/6-7). There also in the Bible is reported nothing about religious debates or tries for making her change her religion - the Mosaic religion never was a proselyting one (a historical and scientific fact which also collides with some of Muhammad's tales in the Quran). But Muhammad normally twisted his tales to make them fit his stereotype receipts for how tales in the Quran should be. Contradiction to the Bible.
030 27/59c: "- - - His (Allah*) servants whom He has chosen - - -". No omniscient god would choose a prophet telling his followers lots of wrong facts and other errors.
031 28/14a: "- - - We bestowed on him (Moses*) wisdom and knowledge: for thus do We reward those who do good". Simply wrong - you can be as good as the most goodhearted, and it does not influence your intelligence much. And you may be the incarnation of a sadist or cheater or thief or suppressor or robber baron or war lord or slave taker or mass murderer and still be intelligent. F.x. Muhammad was wise and intelligent (though with limited knowledge about too many subjects).
032 28/75d: "- - - 'Produce your (human's*) Proof - - -". Muhammad's weight laying on and demand for proofs from others, as said shows that proofs are valuable - but he never was able to prove even one inch of the essential points in his own, new religion.
033 29/50e: "The Signs are indeed with Allah - - -". One of Muhammad's ways of explaining the requests for proofs away: It was for Allah to decide showing signs (and Allah did not want, because miracles would not make anyone believe anyhow. Wrong.)
034 30/26c: “- - - all (beings*) are devotedly obedient to Him (Allah*).” Wrong. No non-Muslim is devotedly obedient to Allah. And no Muslim sinner is devotedly obedient to any god. Islam further will have to prove that also all non-human beings, included worms and slugs and insects and microbes - are devotedly obedient to him. Yes, they will even have to prove that all believing Muslims are devotedly obedient to him.
*035 30/47b: “We (Allah*) did indeed send, before thee (Muhammad*), messengers to the (respective) peoples - - -”. The Quran tells there were sent prophets by Allah too all peoples throughout the times - the Hadith (the second main “pillar” of “knowledge” about Islam) mention 124ooo (= 620 at any time for 5ooo years or 12-15 for 160ooo-200ooo. No traces found. Believe it if you can.), and even that may even be only a symbolic number. But neither in archaeology, nor in architecture (temples or stones reused for buildings f.x.), nor in literature, nor history, nor folklore, nor even in fairy tales are there the slightest traces from those prophets. That so many prophets should leave not even a whisper of a trace - flatly no. And especially so when you see what only 2 (claimed?) prophets - Jesus and Muhammad - resulted in. It is not possible that not at least some out of 124ooo left traces.
036 30/58e: "Ye (Muhammad*) do nothing but talk vanities". When you look at all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran: May be this statement is the truth.
###037 31/18a: "- - - Allah loveth not - - -". The word "love" is little used in the Quran, but this expression - "Allah does not love" - you meet here and there in the book. One of the extremely fundamental differences between NT and the Quran, between Yahweh and Allah, between Jesus and Muhammad. Anyone claiming there are close relationship between these two groups (NT/Yahweh/Jesus - the Quran/Allah/Muhammad) simply does not know what he/she is talking about - - - or is using an al-Taqiyya (a Muslim "lawful lie").
038 33/9-10: There were a few cases where Muhammad claimed they had got help from Allah - but only claims, no real indication, not to mention a clear-cut and proved case. Such claims are cheap.
039 33/13a: "Ye man of Yathrib! Ye cannot stand (the attack)! Therefore go back!" There was some pessimism before the siege and some wanted out of the war. But it may also refer to the battle of Uhud, where some 300 left Muhammad before the battle. Or it may refer to some raid or something - it was common that the ones not wanting to go to war, tried to find an excuse for staying at home.
040 33/56a: "Allah and His Angels send blessings on the Prophet: O ye that believe! Send ye blessing on him, and salute him with all respect". Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Kim Il Sung, and many others would like to be able to use words like this and be believed.
041 33/58a: “And those who annoy believing men and women undeservedly bear (on themselves) a calumny and a glaring sin.” But for Muslims to steal and extort from, rape, suppress, and murder non-Muslims without being provoked, was/is “lawful and good” as long as you can name it jihad – and anything is called jihad as long as the opponent is non-Muslim, not to mention Pagan. No doubt Muslims are something much better, yes.
###042 35/24j: “- - - and there never was a people, without a warner (a prophet for Allah*) having lived among them (in the past) - - -”. As said before: Neither in archaeology, nor in architecture, nor in art, nor in history, nor in literature, nor in folklore, nor in folk tales - not even in fairy tales - do we find a single trace of any teaching of monotheism before 610 AD, with two well known exceptions (Jews and Christians) and two or three less known exceptions (Pharaoh Akn-Aton, praying to the sun, a semi-Christian sect in Persia, an Arab sect around 600 AD - likely inspired by the two monotheistic religions in the area – plus the Zoroastrians after a fashion). Some places one or a few gods dominated, but no monotheism.
- In the Americas - absolutely nothing.
- In Australia - absolutely nothing.
- In the Pacific - absolutely nothing.
- In Europe - absolutely nothing except Christians and some Jews.
- In Africa - absolutely nothing with the exception of one single man: Pharaoh Akn-Aton - but he so definitely was not speaking about Allah. He wanted the sun for the only god. (+ Jews and Christians).
- In Asia - absolutely nothing, except in what we now call the Middle East: The Christians, the well known Jews and as already mentioned the Zoroastrians mainly in Persia (after a fashion) and a couple of monotheistic old sects. Of course there was Buddha, but he was/is no god, and besides he accepted that gods existed, but told they were on wrong ways not leading to nirvana - no monotheism.
124ooo (= 620 at any time for 5ooo years or 12-15 for 160ooo-200ooo, if each worked for 25 years. No traces found. Believe it if you can.) or more - the number is said to be symbolic, as there may have been more - prophets had to have left some traces somewhere, if the tale was true.
This statement simply is not true. If Islam still insists, they will have to produce strong proofs. “Strong statements demands strong evidence”, to quote science. And not just loose claims, invalid “signs” and “proofs”, and more loose statements like Islam normally produces - real proofs are needed.
But the Quran's claim is very clear.
The only possible conclusion about the claimed many prophets of the old and in the entire world, is that it was one of Muhammad's bluffs - and one he repeated a number of times. But also bluffs are a kind of lie.
043 36/6b: “- - - thou (Muhammad*) mayst admonish a people - - -". Admonish by means of a book overflowing with mistaken facts and other errors, a partly immoral moral code, etc.?
*044 36/69b: “We (Allah*) have not instructed (the Prophet (Muhammad*)) in Poetry - - -.” As for Muhammad not being versed in making poetry, this is a claim used by Islam as a “proof” for that the Quran is not made by Muhammad. But the claim is invalid – you do not have to be versed on poetry to spin tales like in the Quran. Actually the often naive style and helpless repetitions, etc, indicates that it is not made by a good poet or even essayist. And besides the Quran is not poetry, but prose.
045 37/31c: "- - - the Word of our (bad people's*) Lord (Allah*) that we shall indeed (have to) taste (the punishment of our sins)". It is said so in the Quran. But as the Quran is not from a god, then from who are these words in reality? - from Muhammad? - from Iblis/the Devil? - or from someone or something else?
046 37/36/e: "- - - possessed - - -". Remember here that in the old times one often believed that people with something wrong with their brain, were possessed by an evil spirit. And as Muhammad quite likely had TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) according to modern medical science, may be they were right - quite likely he was "possessed" by TLE.
047 37/151b: "Is not what they (opponents of Muhammad*) say, from their own invention - - -". This was a question frequently asked - and with some reasons - to Muhammad, too, but then about Muslims.
####048 42/13o: (YA4541): "Faith, Duty, or Religion, is not a matter to dispute about". Reflect on this - and as for Islam you may remember that the Quran with all its errors is not from any god. If you cannot reflect or dispute, you cannot find the truth - you only can believe because your fathers believed - taqlid - because critical thinking is prohibited by a book full of mistakes, dictated by a man of doubtful moral, but liking power and women - - - and riches for bribes. Why did he prohibit it?)
###049 43/22c: "We (non-Muslims*) found our fathers following a certain religion, and we do guide ourselves by their footsteps". This also is the reason for why most Muslims believe in Islam: Their parents and others have made them believe it is the truth - no real proof has been given them (because such proofs simply have never existed). And few if any Muslim have ever checked if what their fathers believed, could be true.
###050 43/23b: (A43/23): “Rezi (one of the foremost Muslim scholars through the times*) says: ‘Had there been in the Quran nothing but these verses (43/20-24*), they would have sufficed to show the falsity of the principle postulating blind, unquestioning (by a Muslim) adoption of (another person’s) religious opinions (“ibtal al-qawl bi’t-raqlid”) - - -‘”.
If he had indicated Islam and the fathers and/or the imams, it hardly would be possible to say this more accurate. Islam is to a very large degree based on indoctrination, social and judicial pressure, and glorification of blind belief + even physical threats if you ask "wrong" questions, air a "wrong" fact, or leave the religion. "I believe because my father told his father said the Quran is the truth, and then it must be the truth". Very few Muslims have tried to find out: "What can be true and what not in this book? - and can there then be a god behind it?" Instead the "logic" is: "The Quran is the truth - because so my father and my mullah tell me. How can I then explain away the wrong facts, other errors, contradictions, etc., so that it looks like the Truth?"
051 44/14d: "Tutored (by others) - - -". Muhammad was accused for this. A learned scholar was even named.
052 44/16a: "- - - We (Allah*) will indeed (then) exact Retribution!" See 3/77b above.
053 44/49: "Truly wast thou (inmates of Hell*) mighty, full of honor!" If you read the Quran, you will see that Muhammad normally stressed that victims of Allah's punishment were mighty and powerful people. This made his god look greater and mightier. But why does a claimed omniscient god need to be enlarged? And how do you really enlarge such a god? - not in reality pathetic ways like this at least.
Another possible - or additional - motif for hassling the rich and mighty, is the fact that for many years - until well after it started to pay well to follow Muhammad - his followers mainly were from the poor classes, and damning the rich ones to hell, was pep-talk for his poor followers.
054 46/31e: "- - - the one who invites (you) to Allah (Muhammad*) - - -". A time anomaly. And a problem: Also the Jinns never got a proof for that Muhammad told the truth.
055 46/32a: "- - - the one who invites (you) to Allah (Muhammad*) - - -". A time anomaly. And a problem: Also the Jinns never got a proof for that Muhammad told the truth.
#####056 47/31d: This verse - and quite a number of others - does not give meaning if Allah is omniscient and knows everything. If he is omniscient, he also knows everything about you. Not to mention if he on top of all if he on top of all predestines everything, so that you just are a puppet in a puppet theatre reacting to his Plan only.
But if this is Muhammad needing an explanation for why he sends warriors out to steal and enslave and enlarge his power, then suddenly tales like these are logical - if his followers were naive enough or blind enough.
057 53/10c: " - - - His (Allah's*) Servant (Muhammad*) - - -". No omniscient god had a servant telling so much wrong as Muhammad did.
058 60/1g: "- - - driven the Prophet (Muhammad*) and yourself (from your homes) - - -". This was (shortly) before they returned to Mecca in 630 AD, and some had their original homes there.
069 61/11g: "- - - in the Cause of Allah - - -". When so much is wrong in the Quran, and when the book pretends, but is not with all its mistakes, from any god, is this right? Or was it in the cause of Muhammad? - or perhaps in the cause of some dark forces, like the moral code of the book may indicate?
##060 62/2h: “(Muhammad was to*) instruct them (the Unlettered Arabs*) in Scripture - - -” To instruct them in scripture, he hardly could be an analphabetic himself, but that aside: See 40/75 and 41/12.
061 65/11d: "A Messenger - - - (who*) may lead forth those who believe - - - from the depths of Darkness into light." Wrong. No teaching as full of mistakes. etc, not from a god, and with a partly immoral moral code and a partly unjust law, etc. can lead anyone to religious light.
####062 69/52d: (YA5674): "- - - Allah has given us (man*) his absolute Truth (a claim, not a proved fact*) through his Revelations - - -". This is the reason why Muslims and Islam can admit no mistake in the Quran, no matter how obvious it is - a mistake will prove that things are wrong in Allah's "absolute Truth". And this also is why the myriad of mistaken facts and other errors in the Quran proves 110% and more that something is seriously wrong with the Quran and that it is not from a god - no omniscient god makes mistakes.
A cold fact here: No book as full of errors, contradictions, etc. as the Quran, is the truth - and no such book is from any god (no omniscient god makes mistakes, contradiction, uses invalid logic, uses helpless or unclear language/explanations, etc.)
But the main point here is: According to the Quran, Muhammad's words were the absolute truth.
063 74/1a: “O Thou wrapped up (in a mantle)!” Verse 74/2 makes it clear that this likely must be Muhammad. A time anomaly.
064 74/3a: "And thy (Muhammad's*) Lord (Allah*) do thou magnify!" There is little doubt about that Muhammad magnified Allah - may be even created him.
##065 86/6+7a: “He (man*) is created from a drop (of sperm*) emitted - Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.” Glorious: Muhammad did not even know that sperm comes from the testes - the “stones” - and placed the source inside the body and half a meter too high up!!!! And a place where it is too hot for production of semen. (The testes are in scrotum outside the main body because it needs slightly under body temperature to be able to produce semen). It is in accordance with Greek medicine – Hippocrates f.x. thought the sperm passed through the kidneys. Even a baby god knows better. Who composed the Quran? And what is Islam – and it’s Muslims - if the Quran is faked?
#066 86/6+7b: “He (man*) is created from a drop emitted (semen*) - Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs”. The minor thing is that it is not tested whether it is nature or Allah that creates babies. Worse: Man is not made from semen, but from 2 different cells. Much worse: The Quran does not know from where the semen originates. Muhammad may have believed it came from the upper part of the abdomen - wrong "knowledge" he got from old Greek science - but any - even half god - had known better. Is this a proof for that Allah is not involved, as the Quran does not know what he is talking about? The danger of bluffing always is to be discovered. And that leaves no credibility. (It f.x. is not possible to believe that an omniscient god has created a book with this many mistakes and invalid - even directly wrong - “signs” and “proofs”.)
067 86/13c: "- - - this (the Quran*) is the Word that distinguishes (good from Evil)." Some claims do not need a comment. But remember the basis for all normal moral codes: "Do to others like you want others do to you".
Sub-total Chapter 95 = 67 + 10.134 = 10.201.
Grand Total: 10.201.
>>> 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".