My Opinion

nothing but my opinion

Koran: Non-Muslims are destined for eternal torture in hell

HellAlthough the Koran does not say that Allah loves those who do not believe Muhammad, there are over 400 verses describing the torments he has prepared for people of other religions or no religion:

And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers. (3:85)
 

The relative value of non-muslims is that they are only fuel for the fire of hell:

Verily, those who disbelieve, neither their properties nor their offspring will avail them whatsoever against Allah; and it is they who will be fuel of the Fire. (3:10)
 

When they light the fire, the unbelievers will be tormented by Allah's angels on his command:

O you who believe! Ward off from yourselves and your families a Fire (Hell) whose fuel is men and stones, over which are (appointed) angels stern (and) severe, who disobey not, (from executing) the Commands they receive from Allah, but do that which they are commanded. (66:6)
 

It does not matter how many good deeds an unbeliever does, because they do not count for Allah:

The parable of those who disbelieve in their Lord is that their works are as ashes, on which the wind blows furiously on a stormy day, they shall not be able to get aught of what they have earned. That is the straying, far away (from the Right Path). (14:18)
 

Koran 18:103-106:

Say (O Muhammad): "Shall We tell you the greatest losers in respect of (their) deeds? (18:103)
"Those whose efforts have been wasted in this life while they thought that they were acquiring good by their deeds! (18:104)
"They are those who deny the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of their Lord and the Meeting with Him (in the Hereafter). So their works are in vain, and on the Day of Resurrection, We shall not give them any weight. (18:105)
"That shall be their recompense, Hell; because they disbelieved and took My Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and My Messengers by way of jest and mockery. (18:106)
 

Muhammad told his people that anyone who rejects his claim to be a prophet will go to hell:

Verily, those who disbelieve in Allah and His Messengers and wish to make distinction between Allah and His Messengers (by believing in Allah and disbelieving in His Messengers) saying, "We believe in some but reject others," and wish to adopt a way in between. (4:150)
They are in truth disbelievers. And We have prepared for the disbelievers a humiliating torment. (4:151)
And those who believe in Allah and His Messengers and make no distinction between any of them (Messengers), We shall give them their rewards, and Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (4:152)
 

In Christianity, the punishment in the hereafter is directly linked to sin and "wickedness." It is said relatively little about hell, but the focus is on personal suffering for selfish or cruel deeds. In Islam, hell is a punishment for the mere non-beliefs of Muhammad's personal assertions about himself. Unlike the Bible, every 12th verse of the Quran speaks of hell, and vividly describes Allah's anger at the unbelievers:

These two opponents (believers and disbelievers) dispute with each other about their Lord; then as for those who disbelieve, garments of fire will be cut out for them, boiling water will be poured down over their heads. (22:19)
With it will melt or vanish away what is within their bellies, as well as (their) skins. (22:20)
And for them are hooked rods of iron (to punish them). (22:21)
Every time they seek to get away therefrom, from anguish, they will be driven back therein, and (it will be) said to them: "Taste the torment of burning!" (22:22)
 

Nobody can make such a torment for person without hating them intensively. Neither can help Allah's intense revulsion for unbelievers, nor influence the behavior of the unbelievers towards the Muslims.

The personal superiority of the Muslims is confirmed by the contrasting image in so many places in the Koran, where they are rewarded with the greatest earthly comfort in heaven, while the unbelievers at the same time suffer terrible agony.

In summary are showing these 400 verses about the hell, how difficult it has been for Muhammad to find enough stupid ones, who believed him. To keep these stupid ones together, who have believed him that they will get all comfort in the hereafter, he needed to repeat the verses in variations many times. How easy life can be if you can make promises, which you don't need to fulfill?

 

The tribe of Banu Qaynuqa

Banu QaynuqaThe early part of the Koran came into being when Muhammad lived in Mecca, a city with very few Jews and Jewish tribes. At that time, he presented himself to the Meccans as a Jewish prophet based on the stories he had learned from the Jews he had learned during his travels - and from his cousin Waraqa to a converted Jew (The Koran actually refers to this charge , But "Allah" denies it).

When Muhammad moved to Medina there were already three Jewish tribes, whose good graces he first needed, because he and his small bonds of Muslim immigrants were too weak. He tried to convince these Jews that he was the last in the succession of their own prophets and even changed the Qibla (prayer direction) to Jerusalem, the center of the Jewish world.

The Jews in Medina were not impressed by the esoteric assertions of Muhammad, especially since there were obvious discrepancies between their Torah and his version of the same stories. (In the Koran, the Bible is immature in the Bible and sounds more like a series of fairy tales with the same superfluous morality - believing Muhammad's claims about himself or experiencing earthly destruction and eternal torment).

When he was asked why he had no proof of his prophethood by performing miracles like the prophets of the past, Muhammad came up with a prudent apology that there was no point in the past since the Jews were prophets anyway (Koran 3:183-184). Thus Muhammad had nothing to offer but his own testimony.

The Prophet of Islam did not treat the Jewish rejection well, especially since his people had relied heavily on his many claims to be a prophet in the same way like Moses, Abraham and Jesus. Muhammad "solved" his dilemma by claiming that the Jews of Medina were heretics, and that his version of the Torah is a fake, since it "did not contain the verses" that supported his claims to be a prophet. (Interestingly, in spite of the many Jews, who were either converted to Islam from either compulsion or free will, the "unadulterated" Torah never came to light, which supposedly existed).

After Muhammad's victory against the Meccans in Badr, his wealth and power was so far that he could take care of his "Jewish problem". The words of the Koran are markedly harder to the "people of the book" in the Medina part of the text, and it goes into confrontation.

Much got done by the "constitution" of Medina, but the treaty that Muhammad created for all local tribes upon his arrival got temporarily forgotten. The Muslims have often forgotten to cancel or annul a contract. However, this contract got canceled after less than two years:

While we were in the Mosque, the Prophet came out and said, "Let us go to the Jews" We went out till we reached Bait-ul-Midras. He said to them, "If you embrace Islam, you will be safe. You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to expel you from this land. So, if anyone amongst you owns some property, he is permitted to sell it, otherwise you should know that the Earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle." (Bukhari 53:392)

 

After announcing his intentions, Muhammad sought an apology to take land from those Jews who refused to convert to Islam. His first goal was a tribe that had recently been in a conflict with the other two. Muhammad has correctly advised that the two other Jewish tribes would not come to support the Banu Qaynuqa tribe during a siege.

Muhammad's excuse has been an incident in which a Muslim was killed by the angry Jewish mob. The fact that the mob was furious because the Muslim in question had just murdered a Jewish merchant for the honor of a woman is sometimes denied by contemporary advocates of Islam who nevertheless admit that Muhammad decided to siege the Qaynuqa fort instead of his peaceful determination To agitation.

This point is important. According to Muslim historians, the first blood shed was when a Jew was murdered by a Muslim for playing a prank on a Muslim woman (by lifting her dress). The Muslim was killed in retaliation by those who had just witnessed the murder.

On what basis is physical violence - much less murder - justified by such a prank? Moreover, if Muhammad believed in the Old Testament law of the "eye for eye," why did he not recognize the legitimacy of the second killing against the inequality of the first?

In any case, the self-proclaimed prophet of God answered with a self-serving power against a people who had taken him into their community less than two years earlier. Unprepared for the battle, the Qaynuqa surrendered to their former guest without fighting.

Muhammad wanted to kill the entire tribe, but this was ruined by an Arab friend who was horrified by his intentions:

Abdullah b. Ubayy b. Salul went to him when God had put them in his power and said, "O Muhammad, deal kindly with my clients" (now they were allies of Khazraj), but the apostle put him off. He repeated the words, and the apostle turned away from him, whereupon he thrust his hand into the collar of the apostle's robe; the apostle was so angry that his face became almost black.
He said, "Confound you, let me go."
He answered, "No, by God, I will not let you go until you deal kindly with my clients. Four hundred men without mail and three hundred mailed protected me from all mine enemies; would you cut them down in one morning? By God, I am a man who fears that circumstances may change"
The apostle said, “You can have them.” (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 546)

Muhammad allowed the Jews of Qaynuqa to escape with what they could carry. He confiscated their wealth and their land, took a fifth for himself and gave the remaining to the rest of the Muslims. (According to the Koran, this was their punishment for those who do not believe in Muhammad. 3:10-12)

The man who saved the lives of the Jews was later called from Muhammad to be a hypocrite, and it is obvious that he deeply regretted his decision not to kill the Qaynuqa. One of the nine Koranic verses, which forbids Muslims taking Jews and Christians as friends, was "revealed" at this time.

Thus, Muhammad was able to fulfill his own promise that "Those who oppose Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad), they will be among the lowest (most humiliated)." (Koran 58:20), further strengthening his credibility among the Muslims and inspiring fourteen centuries of unrelenting jihad in his name to his followers.

 

Why the Quran is Not from Allah: 10 Reasons

QuranThe Quran makes a great deal of cases about itself. It says that it is the ideal and upright disclosure of God to man, and that it is important to the point that it has existed endlessly on tablets in paradise.

Faultfinders assert that it is a seriously masterminded gathering of citations from one man, go off as the expression of God to a guileless crowd in a primitive society. At the point when blamed for being a lunatic, for instance, Muhammad would go into his tent and afterward develop with a pearl 'from Allah' like, "You (Muhammad) are not a madman" (68:2). The general population would then take this as evidence that he was most certainly not.

A few Muslims say that the Quran would not be accepted by such a large number of today in the event that it were not valid. In any case, conviction does not make truth – especially when it must be indecently implemented with segregation, mutilating and demise.

Truth be told, most Muslims have never perused the Quran, a book they (in any case) will murder and pass on over. Their conviction depends on what they get notification from different Muslims, especially as they are growing up.

A target peruser would probably reason that the Quran is less a result of awesome root than Muhammad's creative energy and the conditions in which he got himself.

Here are ten quick cases:

  1. As specified, regardless of being a little book, the Quran should be the immortal, unchangeable expression of God. Why might God utilize valuable and significant space on the individual existence of one man - a similar one who happens to portray the "disclosure"?

    Consider verse 33:53:

    O you who believe! Enter not the Prophet's houses, except when leave is given to you for a meal, (and then) not (so early as) to wait for its preparation. But when you are invited, enter, and when you have taken your meal, disperse, without sitting for a talk. Verily, such (behaviour) annoys the Prophet, and he is shy of (asking) you (to go), but Allah is not shy of (telling you) the truth.

    That must be deified on a tablet in paradise?

    Significant bits of the Quran (especially suras 33 and 66) are similarly self-serving and address the sex, cash or regard from his spouses to which Muhammad is entitled. Additionally, a few such sections are redundant.

    Couldn't Allah have thought about a more critical message for humanity than letting us know (a few times over) that Muhammad may lay down with a boundless number of ladies?

  2. The Quran says that composed duplicates of the Bible (Torah and Gospel) existed at the season of Muhammad (29:46, 3:3, 3:78) and a considerable number verses "affirm" that those duplicates are valid (regardless of the possibility that the Jews and Christians were later blamed for misconstruing them "with their tongues"). Parts of the Quran clearly depend on the Bible for culmination and numerous verses demand that the Word of God can't be changed or debased.

    Here's the issue:

    There are several New Testament original copies that pre-date the season of Muhammad, all found at various times and better places by various individuals. There are hundreds a greater amount of the Torah. All concur splendidly with the current adaptation of the Bible, which repudiates the Quran.

    In the meantime, not a solitary duplicate or part of either the Torah or Gospel from any period has ever been discovered which veers off in a way that concurs with the Quran.

    How is that the "genuine" Bible - the one that as far as anyone knows affirms the Quran - never made due in any shape, while such a large number of "defiled" duplicates did?

    Is it safe to say that it isn't more probable that Muhammad basically made it up as he came and later blamed Christians and Jews as a main story for his own particular missteps?

  3. Not at all like the Old Testament prophets, Muhammad described negligible safeguards of his claim as a prophet (and even his own particular rational soundness) that are strikingly excess.

    For instance, no less than 8 entries (83:13, 27:68, 46:17, 16:24, 6:25, 26:137, 25:5 and 23:83) say that "Allah's messenger" is blamed for rehashing "tales of the ancients," yet that any individual who doesn't trust him will smolder in Hell. Is there any good reason why allah wouldn't simply say it once and afterward utilize the rest of the space for something all the more illuminating?

    Isn't this a greater amount of what one would anticipate from an excessively cautious poseur than from an interminable disclosure of God to man?

  4. The Quran says that it is "clear", yet then says somewhere else (3:7) that lone Allah comprehends the importance of a few verses (which makes one wonder of why they are there). It says that it clarifies "all things" (16:89), however then advises Muslims to take after the case of Muhammad (33:21) - without saying what that is.

    In down to earth terms, it is difficult to comprehend the Quran without references to outer sources, for example, the Hadith and Sira (generally laid out in voluminous commentaries). However these sources are regularly conflicting and never concurred on.

    Indeed, even in the Quran, passionate Muslim researchers induce drastically extraordinary implications from similar verses. For instance, most elucidations of 38:33 say that Solomon sliced at his own steeds, disjoining their legs and necks. Notwithstanding, some contemporary interpreters, including a standout amongst the most regarded (Yusuf Ali) say that Solomon truly just ignored his hand their bodies affectionately.

    Additional disturbing (and shockingly more run of the mill) are verses like 5:33, which orders killing the individuals who "wage war on Allah"... without truly clarifying what this implies.

  5. The Quran tells Muslim men that they may engage in sexual relations with ladies caught as slaves. Far more terrible: the entry is rehashed in four better places. By differentiation, there is not a solitary verse that advises Muslims that they are to supplicate five times each day.

  6. The Quran confounds Mary the mother of Jesus with Mary the sister of Aaron (and Moses) in Sura 19.

    In spite of tormented rational theology, the least difficult and most evident clarification is that Muhammad was mixed up. This would likewise clarify why the Quran that he described wrongly expresses that Christians revere the Virgin Mary as a divine being (5:75, 5:116) when they never have.

  7. Regardless of being a moderately little book, the Quran contains pointless repetitions. Moses is specified 136 times. A few sections of misquoted Bible stories are almost word-for-word indistinguishable (e.g. Suras 20 and 26).

    Why might God squander space saying basically a similar thing in regards to something dark when he could have offered clear good standards about peace, resistance (or sex with youngsters)?

  8. Such an extensive amount the Quran is committed to repetitive cases and dangers about Muhammad's status as a prophet, yet there is not a solitary unique good esteem. No place does it advise men not to assault ladies or forgo sex with kids. Actually, it gives men consent to assault their slaves and suggests that sex with kids is passable (verse 65:4).

    Wouldn't a flawless book show consummate ethical quality?

  9. Verse 5:3 says that the Islamic religion was "perfected" and "finished" on "this day", yet 249 more verses tail it, including two extra Suras (9 and 110).

    Additionally, how could the Quran be interminable if sometime in the past it was not finished?

  10. Verse 27:91 peruses "For me, I have been commanded to serve the Lord of this city." If these are the expressions of Allah, then it would imply that somebody is "commanding" him to serve another god. The verse just bodes well if Muhammad is talking from his own particular point of view.

    (This would likewise clarify why "Allah" guarantees to Allah in no less than seven different verses).

Timeless... unchangeable... perfect?
Mmm... maybe not.

 

The Quran: Fantasy and Reality

QuranAlmost everything get found in the Quran: compassion and hate; Peace and violence; Tolerance and intolerance; Forgiveness and revenge; Coexistence and expulsion of other believers. By using the Quran, any assertion can either be defamed or disproved. This is also known from the Bible: as better one is familiar with one or another holy script, as better he would be able to underline his arguments with the appropriate quotation.

It begins with a historical classification and explains the emergence and spread of the Holy Scriptures of the Muslims. The Quran, composed of 114 chapters (sections with a different number of verses), is divided into a Mecca and a Medina period. That first one produced the peaceful verses and the one have produced the violent passages, is not quite true, the sections are only a rough classification. Muslims believe that the Quran was dictated to the Prophet Muhammad by an angel (Gabriel) as the direct word of Allah. Unlike the Bible his chapters follow no thematic or narrative structures.

The Quran is a work that is strongly embedded in its period of development: the respective political and social circumstances influenced the "recitations" of Muhammad (he did not write them down, but dictated them). However, as more time passed from the time of the Prophet as more untouchable became the Quran.

Statements and regulations were no longer subject to necessary revelations. In addition to this, different from the Jewish and Christian sacred texts, which are regarded as revelations but which were written down by men (...), believing Muslims are taking the Quran as an "eternal book", available in the same language and with the same content since creation, and has been kept with God.

The Quran arose in several phases, which brought a more or less quarrelsome or even xenophobic orientation in the Holy Scriptures according to the situation in which Muhammad and his community found themselves. Many, detractors and proponents of Islam, nevertheless "understand these divergent passages not as a mirror of their period of origin."

Most of the Quran's rules are concrete responses to certain events of the past. One can say that Allah did not create Mohammed according to his model, but Muhammad had put those sentences that were just fitting for him in his particular life situation into the mouth of God.

The prophet had changed his attitude towards the "unbelievers" several times. As more women Mohammed had, as more the principle of equal rights disappeared which has been available in former chapters. It also looks that Mohammad has been shaming himself about his much younger wives as he has been coming in the age of 60, because at this time he started with the topic of veiling for women.

Only when we understand the Quran as a human work with everything that belongs to humans than then the negative aspects of violence can get neutralized and the positive aspects of the spiritual passages that the faithful believers need to feel comfort and love can get emphasized.

 

Another view about the Bible and the true human history

Human HistoryBible and evolution theory: these are two spheres which seem like opposites. But as the history of mankind in the "book of books" leads to different opinions.

Is the story of Adam and Eve to be understood as a metaphor for the existence of early human hunter-gatherers in paradise? Cain kills Abel - an image of conflicts between nomadic herders and sedentary farmers? At first glance, it seems unlikely that events so far in the "darkness of our primate past" were, should have found their way into one of the most important books of mankind. When the Bible was the big change in the lives of early humans was mixed farming finally been largely completed.

Ancient myths as a basis

However, evolutionary biologist and historian, argue the Bible was not over night or out of nothing. Rather, it is the result of many different stories, myths and oral traditions, which already had been ancient in part at times of the formation of the old testament.

May be a reflection of traditions from the early days of Homo sapiens ranged into at the time of the creation of the Bible, is her thesis. It is believed this condition as a likely you can discover actually much perplexing in the Bible. The expulsion of Adam and Eve from the garden of Eden is a metaphor for "the strongest a event in the history of mankind: the transition from egalitarian of hunter and collector groups to the sedentary way of life with agriculture and animal breeding".

This change to living conditions, for which people have been biologically not prepared and actually were until today ill-suited is the basis for many of the most memorable stories of the Bible. "The Bible is probably the most ambitious attempt to get those human problems that plague the Homo sapiens since the settle down."

Change of circumstances

In anthropology, called an inadequate adaptation to the environment "Mismatch". By the radical change in the quality of life of Homo sapiens and to agriculture and animal breeding a number of problems was surfaced abruptly could not get explained by themselves in another way.

The hitherto nomadic groups were now far more dependent on the vagaries of weather than before, because they had an impact on the harvest. The Biblical Flood might well have had a real "model" in the form of flooding or a tsunami.

Epidemics as God's punishment

Also the early farmers had been afflicted much more frequent and more intense of infectious diseases and epidemics. Domestic animals living in close proximity to were carriers of pathogens, which eventually went over to the people. They had searched for explanations for the new, terrible plagues.

Even the "emergence" a powerful, single God from an animistic world view inhabited by ghosts, the early humans had probably explained as a necessary "adjustment performance". It had to be a more powerful, more irritable God in the game, and people had to have somehow attracted his anger. From this got born a "catalog of sins" in addition to a number of commandments which should govern the life pleasing to God. The observance of the commandments in biblical societies was flanked by draconian penalties.

One sins and all need to suffer

Behind it is the belief that the sin of an individual, can entail penalties for society as a whole. Viewed in this light cruel punishments for crimes considered today as a minor can understand: the sinner or the sinner endanger finally with their behavior the whole community.

The other reason for the strict laws in the area of marriage and sexuality is simply the rapid spread of sexually transmitted diseases through the close coexistence of many people: monogamy and the constraint of sexuality of particularly women should remedy. Also the cleanliness rules fall into the category of disease prevention.

Jesus softens again

The New Testament with its message of charity in the reasoning in a way to the beginnings of the people returns: the doctrine of Jesus does not take back the commandments of God, she mitigate them but with the recommendation to mercy.

Based on the story of the woman taken in adultery makes it clear: Jesus won't defend the sin, but with his testimony he claimed something "who is without sin among you, let him throw the first stone at her", which was probably natural in "Old hunter and collector culture": solidarity in the Group and a certain sense of proportion in terms of punishment.

Back to the roots

With Jesus back in the prehistoric times? That would shorten the theory too much. But what the Bible, particularly the Jesus story, "demanded by the people in terms of charity, is so simple to behave like hunters and gatherers in the own community always so conciliatory".