Ezra (Uzair) and the next Quran error

Let's go to the third Quran (Koran) error I use in my opening with Muslims:

009.030
YUSUFALI: The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
PICKTHAL: And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they!
SHAKIR: And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!

The Quran claims that Jews called Ezra (Uzair) "the son of Allah." BTW, you'll notice Yusuf Ali trying to soft-pedal the point by using "a son" instead of "the son." Clearly, this is an attempt to obfuscate the matter because here's the original Arabic:

Waqalati alyahoodu AAuzayrun ibnu Allahi
waqalati alnnasara almaseehu ibnu Allahi 

Notice that the phrase referring to the Jews (al yahoodu) and the phrase referring to the Christians (al nnasara) look exactly the same.

It is common knowledge that Jews do not have a specific person who they believe in "the son of God." This is a key contentious point between Jews and Christians, and a blasphemous comment for a Jew to make. The closest you can get in the Bible are references to one of three things (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_God):

• Angels are sometimes referred to as sons - "Benei Elohim"
  
• The real king of Israel -( II Samuel 7: 14, with reference to King David and those of his descendants who carried on his dynasty; comp. Psalm 89:27, 28)
• Israel as a people (comp. Exodus 4: 22 and Hosea 11:1)

Remember this quote from the Old Testament:

Do not have any other gods before Me. Do not represent [such] gods by any carved statue or picture of anything in the heaven above, on the earth below, or in the water below the land. Do not bow down to [such gods] or worship them. I am God your Lord, a God who demands exclusive worship

It's blasphemous to refer to any other gods but YHWH. That's it.

Even the coming of Messiah is referred to as God or "king. " Let's even consider the blasphemous thought that maybe, possibly, the Messiah could be referred to as the "son" of God...still, there is no mention of Ezra as either the Messiah or "The Son of God" in modern or ancient Judaism. None. Thus, a clear mistake.

I think Edward Henry Palmer said it best

The Moslem tradition is that Ezra, after being dead 100 years, was raised to life, and dictated from memory the whole of the Jewish Scriptures which had been lost during the captivity, and that the Jews said he could not have done this unless he had been the son of God. There is no Jewish tradition whatever in support of this accusation of Mohammed's, which probably was entirely due to his own invention or to misinformation.

Muslim Apologetics

What do the Muslim apologists have to say? Has anybody found a single Jew in history that said Ezra was the son of God? Funny enough, I can only find one response on the Net: http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/ezra.html

Unfortunately for Muslims, not even this response is able to quote a single Jew referring to Ezra as the son of God. Basically, the best part of this response is just a quote of another Muslim apologist, this one from the 300 years after Mohammad. Apologists quoting apologists do not quite solve a critical mistake made in a supposedly "perfect" book by a supposed infallible God.

Let me take this response apart in more detail:

It opens with a discussion of Ezra's life, and a quote discussing where he might be buried. The point here is that Ezra was a key figure in reforming Jewish law.

G. D. Newby

Next, it continues with a quote from Newby where an attempt is made to place a connection between Ezra, the human, and Enoch, the angel:

It is easy, then, to imagine that among the Jews of the Hijaz who were apparently involved in mystical speculations associated with the merkabah, Ezra, because of the traditions of his translation, because of his piety, and particularly because he was equated with Enoch as the Scribe of God, could be termed one of the Bene Elohim. And, of course, he would fit the description of religious leader (one of the ahbar of the Qur'an 9:31) whom the Jews had exalted

So Newby is trying to explain the verse by equating Ezra to Enoch, and angel. Now, "Benei Elohim" literally means "sons of God," and refer to angels, as described above. Nowhere is he saying that Jews referred to Ezra as "the Son of God." Also, as the reader can easily see, Newby is engaging in a rather convoluted train of thought to help him understand the verse not to assert that "the Jews" believe Ezra is "the Son of God."

Ibn Hazm

Next, we get another quote that appears to be the most damaging at first light:

"H. Z. Hirschberg proposed another assumption, based on the words of Ibn Hazm, namely, that the 'righteous who live in Yemen believed that 'Uzayr was indeed the son of Allah.' According to other Muslim sources, there were some Yemenite Jews who had converted to Islam who believed that Ezra was the messiah. For Muhammad, Ezra, the apostle (!) of messiah, can be seen in the same light as the Christian saw Jesus, the messiah, the son of Allah.[4]"

Let's look at the Quran again:

"The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah."

It doesn't say some Jews, it says "The" Jews.

Now, let's look at the quote. The quote speaks of Muslim converts not "The Jews"!

OK, even then, the text says "proposed another assumption" - so it is not a well-known conclusion among Jews, but an assumption. Second, it says, "based on the words of Ibn Hazm" - Ibn Hazm was a Muslim philosopher who was born in Spain 300 years after Mohammad. Using the words of a Muslim apologist to prove Islam without a fact basis is called circular reasoning.

George Sale (or Al-Baidawi)

OK, now the last major quote from George Sale, and 18th century orientalist. This quote, funny enough, actually looks to disprove the Quran by saying that it was not "The Jews," but "some ancient heterdox Jews, or else of some Jews of Medina" that declared Ezra were the Son of God. And it gets worse because it is not George Sale declaring this fact, rather he is repeating "the commentators" that "endeavour to support" the charge against the Jews. Who are the commentators? Let's go to the original source to find out who is claiming the Jews declared Ezra the Son of God. In the original source, you will find that George Sale footnotes Al Beidawi (Baidawi) making the claims. Who is Al Baidawi? A 13th century Muslim scholar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baidawi). This 13th century scholar claims to know "this verse was read to the Jews and they did not contradict it." That's the best he has to offer. So, we are back to circular reasoning again because we see just hearsay by Muslim apologists and no new facts.

The conclusion: an error

So what are we left with? A bunch of smoke and mirrors from Muslim apologists. There is no proof from a single Jew in history that "The Jews" refer to Ezra as "the Son of God." Moreover, there is proof that ancient and modern Jews do not refer to Ezra as the Son of God. Thus, we can only conclude that the Quran is in error again.

Finally, if Allah was all-knowing, he would have created a perfect book. A perfect book would be timeless and always perfect. Thus, even if the Muslim apologists were correct, the Quran should've said, "some Jews at the time of Mohammad believed that Ezra could have been a son of God." The Quran is not perfect for two reasons, 1. It incorrectly asserts that "the Jews" believe Ezra to be "the son of God." 2. It is not timeless in its assertions. The Quran is just a book.

The inheritance mistake in detail - Part 4

Usual responses to Quran inheritance math mistakes

Inheritance math mistakes are very cut and dry. The apologetic responses are, frankly, not very good here, which is why it's a good place to start in a logical discussion on Islam. Let me go further, I have shown just a fraction of the total math mistakes that exist here (go here for some more: http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/i001.html and http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/inheritance.htm ). Here's a fun one - what do you do for pregnant wife? Anyway, if you have an afternoon free, find some more on your own. I encourage you to do so and comment on this blog post.

Here are the standard responses:

You have not looked at all the verses. This is my favorite response because it actually opens up more issues. The other verses are 2:180-182, 2:233, 2:240, 4:33. None of them go through any math except for 2:240:

002.240
YUSUFALI: Those of you who die and leave widows should bequeath for their widows a year's maintenance and residence; but if they leave (The residence), there is no blame on you for what they do with themselves, provided it is reasonable. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.
PICKTHAL: (In the case of) those of you who are about to die and leave behind them wives, they should bequeath unto their wives a provision for the year without turning them out, but if they go out (of their own accord) there is no sin for you in that which they do of themselves within their rights. Allah is Mighty, Wise.
SHAKIR: And those of you who die and leave wives behind, (make) a bequest in favor of their wives of maintenance for a year without turning (them) out, then if they themselves go away, there is no blame on you for what they do of lawful deeds by themselves, and Allah is Mighty, Wise.

So, if you include this verse in your calculations. You have to make sure that you leave behind one year's provisions for their wives. And now we have another contradiction! Remember, 4:12 is very detailed;

In what ye leave, their share is a fourth, if ye leave no child; but if ye leave a child, they get an eighth; after payment of legacies and debts.

So which is it, one year's provisions or 1/8? What if the 1/8 didn't include enough for even a fraction of a year? What if you had to take away a portion from somebody else to provide that one year provision? Well, you get a contradiction between verse 2:240 and 4:12.

Men should get more than women. This excuse is funny because, you may have noticed already, I don't bring this up as an issue. I just focus on the math mistake. However, I get this one a lot. My theory is that Muslims are just repeating apologetics without even listening to the issue.

Unfortunately for the Muslim, another contradiction pops up when taking this angle. 4:11 states:

as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females:

So the men always get twice as much as the women according to silly Allah. First of all, I believe all readers can see that this makes no sense as a definitive rule for all times (simple example: the son is wealthy and the daughter is an extremely poor widow with 5 kids). Let's follow on, though, and see if there's another contradiction.

In 4:11, it says, "if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half." What happens if there are sons? Do they get 4/3 and 2/2? You can quickly see the problems. What happens if there are sons and daughters? Say 1 son and 3 daughters.

3 daughters: 2/3
1 son: twice that of the female or 2 x ( (2/3)/3) = 4/9

Total = 10/9. Another contradiction!

I think you can see that it's possible to do this all day long. What about if it's the reverse, 3 sons and 1 daughter? It's not even clear because the verse seems to specify the split for just daughters, but we know that sons get twice that of daughters. You can clearly see, though, that the daughter will get nothing close to 1/2. More confusion!

Anything left over goes to the nearest male relative. This excuse is also funny because Muslims have stated this is a counterargument when my two simple cases were for situations where the opposite occurred (more than 100% given away). Anyway, this is the law of "Usbah" from the following Hadith:

Sahih Bukhari 8. 80. 724
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
The Prophet said, "Give the Fara'id (the shares of the inheritance that are prescribed in the Qur'an) to those who are entitled to receive it. Then whatever remains, should be given to the closest male relative of the deceased."

Before we take one step further, let's immediately recognize that the "perfect" Quran is again imperfect and therefore false. We have to go to the Hadith to find the answer because the Quran can't stand on its own.

If we continue, I'm sure the reader can come up with quick examples of unfairness and contradiction. For unfairness, imagine the widow has 5 children to support and will receive only 1/4 of the inheritance while the distant male relative (maybe even wealthy) receives 3 X that amount or 3/4! For a contradiction, imagine the case where there is only a widower - he should receive 1/2, but now has 2/2 because he also receives the remainder. This is a clear contradiction between the Quran and the Hadith.

You need to interpret properly. This one is a fallacy, and has already been discussed. Either the Quran is a word of a God and, therefore, perfect for all time or it's not. Additionally, in these inheritance verses, the Quran even states, "Allah makes clear to you." So we get one more contradiction...if three Muslims give three different answers and all three answers require changing the text of the Quran to make it work, well, then...Allah didn't make it clear.

The inheritance mistake in detail - Part 2

Two historical attempts at the mistake

Now, what happened when Muslims discovered the inheritance math mistake in the Quran? They needed to follow Sharia law in order to divide the inheritance, yet they took the Quran as divine with no mistakes. There could only have been two results: mass deconversion from Islam or "fixes" that allowed for peaceful division of the inherited property.

Al-Awl (or Aul)

Well, it turns out, I wasn't the first to discover this mistake. In fact, the 4th Caliph, Ali, saw it in 7th century A.D. His attempted fix, known as Al-Awl (or Aul), is basically a normalization. So, let's look at this example from the last post: A man dies and leaves behind 3 daughters, 2 parents and 2 wives. Let's see how Ali would change things (http://www.muslim.org/english-quran/quran.htm under section 4:11):

"The ‘aul was first legalized by ‘Ali, the fourth Caliph, who, being questioned about the share of a wife, the other heirs being the two parents and two daughters, gave the answer “without premeditation” that the wife’s one-eighth had become one-ninth, for the two parents should take one-third, the two daughters two-thirds, and the wife one-eighth, which make up nine-eighths, and hence ‘Ali decided that each of the heirs should take less than was due,
so that the proportion might remain the same "

Now, keeping in mind that nowhere in the Quran does it say to normalize, let's look at the resultant math:

Quran's literal words give a total of 9/8:

3 daughters: 2/3
2 parents: 1/3
2 wives: 1/8

Using Al-Awl rules to normalize, you get:

3 daughters: 16/27
2 parents: 8/27
2 wives: 1/9

The first set of numbers were multiplied by 8/9 so that the total could equal 100%. That's it folks. A quick fix with no basis in the Quran.

Residues and Remainders

Another idea was to take remainders after each calculation. Let me be more clear by quoting from the same Muslim website above:

"In this case the parents first take their respective shares,
and the residue goes to the children, if there are any, failing which, the share of the
parents is increased. "

So, instead of following the Quran literally, that "Allah makes clear to you," Muslims invented words that didn't exist in the 4:11, 4:12 and 4:176 of the Quran...specifically, "first take" and "residue." There is no mention of order in the Quran's inheritance calculation, nor is there a mention of residue. Just for fun, let's go through the calculation:

2 parents first: 1/3, then daughters? No, actually, those who follow this fix actually calculate the 2 wives first at 1/8 total. Yes, I know that the wives are mentioned in a whole other (later) verse, so it's even sillier for them to get their share first but so be it. OK, so now, we've given away 1/3 + 1/8 = 11/24, leaving a balance of 13/24. Now, the daughters get their 2/3 of 13/24 = 13/36. In summary:

3 daughters: 13/36
2 parents: 1/3
2 wives: 1/8

Now, 13/36 + 1/3 + 1/8 = 59/72 <1 style="font-style: italic;" size="2">"The balance (i.e., 1-59/72 = 13/72) shall be given to the person bequeathed by the deceased; in the absence of such a person, it shall be given to the closest male relative of the deceased; in the absence of such a relative, the balance shall be distributed as per the regulations of the state of residence of the deceased."
I interpret this to mean "we don't know because we just made up the fix anyway." LOL Seriously, there is still a math problem, and, I imagine, some very angry relatives.

Let's revisit this fix. An order was added to the calculation whereby shares were taken of residues rather than the whole. However, this solution also has no basis in the Quran. Nowhere does it say to follow a particular order, especially in reverse of how shares are presented in the Quran (children first, then parents, then wives as opposed to parents and wives then children in the fix).

Islamic Math Mistakes With Fixes

Now, even if we were to accept the fixes, and even if we believed that the justification (of which there is none within the "perfect" Quran). Are we still left with a contradiction? Yes. Simply put, the followers of said fixes are not following the perfect Quran. Muslims who you debate actually know this, and will therefore refuse to give you the final percentages in a debate. If they do, go through this:

"4:11 says "if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance," does it not?"

The answer: yes

"OK, well you're giving those 3 daughters in this example 16/27 or 13/26 (depending on which fix they're using). Doesn't that violate the Quran?"

The answer: uhh...but...uhh...you have to calculate shares after normalizing (or based on residues).

"OK, but the Quran never says to calculate shares after normalizing (or based on residues). In fact, there isn't even a word that is close to normalizing (or residues, nor any mention of order in the calculation). Let's return to 4:11..."

And so the debate will go on ad infinitum. The point stays though - silly Allah can't do math.

In the next post, I will go through some of the other rebuttals and lead into more inheritance mistakes.

The inheritance mistake in detail - Part 1

The verses

There are a number of verses that tell Muslims how to manage inheritance: 2:180, 2:233, 2:240, 4:12, 4:13, 4:176 and 5:106. However, the verses that go through the detailed mathematics are 4:12, 4:13, and 4:176:

004.011
YUSUFALI: Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half. For parents, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children; if no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third; if the deceased Left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth. (The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Al-wise.
PICKTHAL: Allah chargeth you concerning (the provision for) your children: to the male the equivalent of the portion of two females, and if there be women more than two, then theirs is two-thirds of the inheritance, and if there be one (only) then the half. And to each of his parents a sixth of the inheritance, if he have a son; and if he have no son and his parents are his heirs, then to his mother appertaineth the third; and if he have brethren, then to his mother appertaineth the sixth, after any legacy he may have bequeathed, or debt (hath been paid). Your parents and your children: Ye know not which of them is nearer unto you in usefulness. It is an injunction from Allah. Lo! Allah is Knower, Wise.
SHAKIR: Allah enjoins you concerning your children: The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females; then if they are more than two females, they shall have two-thirds of what the deceased has left, and if there is one, she shall have the half; and as for his parents, each of them shall have the sixth of what he has left if he has a child, but if he has no child and (only) his two parents inherit him, then his mother shall have the third; but if he has brothers, then his mother shall have the sixth after (the payment of) a bequest he may have bequeathed or a debt; your parents and your children, you know not which of them is the nearer to you in usefulness; this is an ordinance from Allah: Surely Allah is Knowing, Wise.

004.012
YUSUFALI: In what your wives leave, your share is a half, if they leave no child; but if they leave a child, ye get a fourth; after payment of legacies and debts. In what ye leave, their share is a fourth, if ye leave no child; but if ye leave a child, they get an eighth; after payment of legacies and debts. If the man or woman whose inheritance is in question, has left neither ascendants nor descendants, but has left a brother or a sister, each one of the two gets a sixth; but if more than two, they share in a third; after payment of legacies and debts; so that no loss is caused (to any one). Thus is it ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Most Forbearing.
PICKTHAL: And unto you belongeth a half of that which your wives leave, if they have no child; but if they have a child then unto you the fourth of that which they leave, after any legacy they may have bequeathed, or debt (they may have contracted, hath been paid). And unto them belongeth the fourth of that which ye leave if ye have no child, but if ye have a child then the eighth of that which ye leave, after any legacy ye may have bequeathed, or debt (ye may have contracted, hath been paid). And if a man or a woman have a distant heir (having left neither parent nor child), and he (or she) have a brother or a sister (only on the mother's side) then to each of them twain (the brother and the sister) the sixth, and if they be more than two, then they shall be sharers in the third, after any legacy that may have been bequeathed or debt (contracted) not injuring (the heirs by willing away more than a third of the heritage) hath been paid. A commandment from Allah. Allah is Knower, Indulgent.
SHAKIR: And you shall have half of what your wives leave if they have no child, but if they have a child, then you shall have a fourth of what they leave after (payment of) any bequest they may have bequeathed or a debt; and they shall have the fourth of what you leave if you have no child, but if you have a child then they shall have the eighth of what you leave after (payment of) a bequest you may have bequeathed or a debt; and if a man or a woman leaves property to be inherited by neither parents nor offspring, and he (or she) has a brother or a sister, then each of them two shall have the sixth, but if they are more than that, they shall be sharers in the third after (payment of) any bequest that may have been bequeathed or a debt that does not harm (others); this is an ordinance from Allah: and Allah is Knowing, Forbearing.

004.176
YUSUFALI: They ask thee for a legal decision. Say: Allah directs (thus) about those who leave no descendants or ascendants as heirs. If it is a man that dies, leaving a sister but no child, she shall have half the inheritance: If (such a deceased was) a woman, who left no child, Her brother takes her inheritance: If there are two sisters, they shall have two-thirds of the inheritance (between them): if there are brothers and sisters, (they share), the male having twice the share of the female. Thus doth Allah make clear to you (His law), lest ye err. And Allah hath knowledge of all things.
PICKTHAL: They ask thee for a pronouncement. Say: Allah hath pronounced for you concerning distant kindred. If a man die childless and he have a sister, hers is half the heritage, and he would have inherited from her had she died childless. And if there be two sisters, then theirs are two-thirds of the heritage, and if they be brethren, men and women, unto the male is the equivalent of the share of two females. Allah expoundeth unto you, so that ye err not. Allah is Knower of all things.
SHAKIR: They ask you for a decision of the law. Say: Allah gives you a decision concerning the person who has neither parents nor offspring; if a man dies (and) he has no son and he has a sister, she shall have half of what he leaves, and he shall be her heir she has no son; but if there be two (sisters), they shall have two-thirds of what he leaves; and if there are brethren, men and women, then the male shall have the like of the portion of two females; Allah makes clear to you, lest you err; and Allah knows all things.

Here, I have included all the translations so that there is no discrepancy in understanding. While we're on this point, please note the last line of the last verse:
"Allah makes clear to you, lest you err; and Allah knows all things."
OK, so let's all remember that Allah makes it all clear to you because he knows all things. So, if we notice that three Muslims give three different answers (and they will), then there must be another contradiction...simply that Allah is not clear after all.

The Math and the mistake

So let's go back to the original question:

Now, calculate how to split the inheritance for a man how dies and leaves behind: 3 daughters, 2 parents and two wives.

3 daughters: x%
2 parents: y%
2 wives: z%

Here's the answer with the supporting quotes.

3 daughters: 2/3
4:11 : "if only daughters, 2 or more, their share is 2/3 of the inheritance"

2 parents: 1/6+1/6=1/3
4:11 : "For parents, a 1/6 share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children"

2 wives: 1/8
4:12 : "in what ye leave, their share is 1/4, if ye leave no child; but if ye leave a child, they get an 1/8"

Now, let's add up the inheritance divisions up:
2/3+1/3+1/8 = 9/8 >1

Mistake! Allah can't do math. How can you possibly give away more inheritance than you have? Now, I pointed out just one math mistake, but there are many. In the next set of posts I will go through the typical, albeit false, objections to Islamic mathematics.

The mathematical, scientific and historical errors

There are almost too many errors and contradictions in the Quran from which non-Muslims must choose. Here is my favorite opening salvo when messaging a Muslim:

"1. Let's start with a mathematical mistake. This one is best to do on your own so that you can see the problems yourself. Go to the inheritance verses (4:11, 4:12 and 4:176), read them here: http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/004.qmt.html

Now, calculate how to split the inheritance for a man how dies and leaves behind: 3 daughters, 2 parents and two wives. It should take about 15 minutes.

3 daughters: x%
2 parents: y%
2 wives: z%

--------------

2. Historical mistake. The Quran plagiarizes much of the Bible. In the process of copying, sometimes Mohammad and his buddies got creative. In the following example, their creativity caused them to leave behind an obvious historical error. From the story of Joseph...

Here's the Bible:

40:18 Then Joseph answered and said, "This is its interpretation: the three baskets are three days;

40:19 within three more days Pharaoh will lift up your head from you and will hang you on a tree, and the birds will eat your flesh off you."

Now, here's the Quran (different translations listed below to make it easy):
012.041
YUSUFALI: "O my two companions of the prison! As to one of you, he will pour out the wine for his lord to drink: as for the other, he will hang from the cross, and the birds will eat from off his head. (so) hath been decreed that matter whereof ye twain do enquire"...
PICKTHAL: O my two fellow-prisoners! As for one of you, he will pour out wine for his lord to drink; and as for the other, he will be crucified so that the birds will eat from his head. Thus is the case judged concerning which ye did inquire.
SHAKIR: O my two mates of the prison! as for one of you, he shall give his lord to drink wine; and as for the other, he shall be crucified, so that the birds shall eat from his head, the matter is decreed concerning which you inquired.

Did you see the difference? The Bible talked about decapitation followed by hanging. The Quran talked about crucifixion. That's where the error occurs. You see, archaeologists point out 6th century BC Persia as the earliest occurrence of crucifixion, yet the story of Joseph was over 10 centuries before that. The ancient Egyptians did not do crucifixion before the Roman's brought the practice over. Mohammad should be more careful when he plagiarizes.

------------------------

3. How about another obvious one. You see Mohammad knew that the Christians believed in a son of god, so he assumed the Jews did too:

009.030
YUSUFALI: The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
PICKTHAL: And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they!
SHAKIR: And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!

Mistake! Find me a Jew that talks about Ezra. You can't. Especially one that talks about Ezra being the son of god. You see, the Jews find the whole son of god thing to be blasphemous. They would not say it. Another Quran mistake."

There is enough here to start a conversation. In the next set of posts, I will go through the common counterarguments from Muslims and show you why they are false. First the Quran inheritance mistakes.

Violent sexism and wife beating in Islam - Part 2

Mohammad found wife beating quite alright, almost a fan you might say. Let's go to the Hadith: (read it carefully, a wife is bruised so green that she matches her clothing, but it is ok...Mohammad actually criticizes the woman in the end!). A thank you to answering-islam.org for finding it.

"Narrated Ikrima: 'Rifaa divorced his wife whereupon Abdur-Rahman married her. Aisha said that the lady came wearing a green veil and complained to her (Aisha) and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by the beating. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's messenger came, Aisha said, "I have not seen any woman suffering as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes! When Abdur-Rahman heard that his wife had gone to the prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him, but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment. Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's messenger! She has told a lie. I am very strong and can satisfy her, but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifaa." Allah's messenger said to her, "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifaa unless Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you." The prophet saw two boys with Abdur-Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that Abdur-Rahman said, "Yes." The prophet said, "You claim what you claim (that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow.""

Notice that the believing women suffer more than the rest. They get green bruises, but the prophet is ok with it.

Violent sexism and wife beating in Islam

Battered Saudi TV Host, Ranya Al-Baz and Abusive Husband

Posted Nov 14, 2005

A glimpse into women's rights in Saudi Arabia.

As I said in an earlier post, a great way to get a Muslim woman thinking is by starting with Mohammad's pedophilia or Islam's violent sexism. Muslim's will generally deny the first (in the face of all evidence), but eventually succumb to the existence of sexism although twisting and turning with respect to the violent aspect.

General sexism

The sexism is obvious, as can be found in the Skeptics Annotated Quran's section on Women. It's quite a long list, here is a subset of really loony verses:

• A woman is worth one-half a man. 2:282 ; and males are to inherit twice that of females. 4:11
• Lewd women are to be confined to their houses until death. 4:15 ; but the wives of Mohammad will be punished double for lewdness! 33:30
• You can't have sex with married women, unless they are slaves obtained in war (with whom you may rape or do whatever you like). 4:24
• Don't pray if you are drunk, dirty, or have touched a woman lately. 4:43
• A husband can accuse his wife of adultery with only one witness. 24:6
• The wives of Mohammad are not like other women. They must not leave their houses. 33:32-33 [a little controlling, aren't we Mohammad?] ; oh, and Allah says it is lawful for Muhammad to marry any women he wants. 33:50-51
• If men must speak to Muhammad's wives they must speak from behind a curtain. And no one must ever marry one of his wives. 33:53

These are just nutty (now we know what Mohammad liked fair, young virgins with wide eyes):

• The single-minded slaves of Allah will enjoy a Garden filled with lovely-eyed virgins. 37:40-48
• Allah will reward faithful Muslims after they die with "fair ones with wide, lovely eyes." 44:54
• Those in the Garden will be attended by immortal youths with wide, lovely eyes. 56:17-23

Most of us are aware of this one:

• Believing women must lower their gaze and be modest, cover themselves with veils, and not reveal themselves except to their husbands, relatives, children, and slaves. 24:31
  

But not everybody is aware of this one:

• Men are in charge of women, because Allah made men to be better than women. Refuse to have sex with women from whom you fear rebellion, and scourge them. 4:34

Wife beating

The last verse mentioned is responsible for some horrific domestic violence, so let's examine further with the full translation:

004.034
YUSUFALI: Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).
PICKTHAL: Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.
SHAKIR: Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.

For those doubters, I bolded the key parts. If you fear disloyalty, desertion or rebellion...beat your wives (of course after admonishing them and not sleeping with them). Now, in Yusuf Ali's version, the word "lightly" is added, but this was added for palatability not because the word is actually there. In the video at the top, you can see how "lightly" some are beaten.

In fact, the word in the Quran in 4:34 used for "beat" is "idreb". It is a conjugate of the word "daraba" which primarily means "to beat, strike, to hit" - Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, page 538.

Here is a Quranic verse in which "idreb" is used:

8:12 - ""Strike" off their heads, "strike" off the very tips of their fingers!"

Don't believe the Muslim apologists. In the next post, I'll go through what Mohammad actually thought when "revealing" the Quran.

Mohammad's pedophilia - Part 4

Other pedophilia examples

You see, Mohamed the pedophile liked the young girls: Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: When I got married, Allah's Apostle said to me, "What type of lady have you married?" I replied, "I have married a matron." He said, "Why, don't you have a liking for the virgins and for fondling them?" Jabir also said: Allah's Apostle said, "Why didn't you marry a young girl so that you might play with her and she with you?" (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 17). Ah yes, and that is you can "thigh" an infant in many Muslim countries - thank you Mohammad:



Muhammad also had eyes for an infant girl, promising to marry her when she grows up. Ibn Ishaq places this event during the time of the Battle of Badr in 624 AD when Muhammad was roughly 54 years old. (Guillaume, pp. 310-312)

And so there is no Allah

Here's the main problem with "Mohammad was a victim of the times" excuse. Besides the fact that we demonstrated the excuse to be false (sex with 9 year olds was not customary), it also demonstrates the lack of a divine Allah. If there really were an omniscient, omnipotent being and a prophet named Mohammad, the duo would've created a religion for all times and Mohammad would've set an example for all times. A true divinely inspired prophet sets the custom not follows the custom. Mohammad's pedophilia justified pedophilia for ages and continues to justify it today. His example emboldened pedophiles in Muslim countries until this day. If Allah exists, he should be ashamed.

Mohammad's pedophilia - Part 3

Last typical Muslim responses to Aisha

5. It was customary to marry that young

Fact: There is no record in ancient times demonstrating that it was customary to marry as young as Aisha. Nor does any historical record show such an age disparity between a 51 year old man and his marriage to a six year old. Finally, and most importantly, it was not customary for a 54 year old man to have sex with a 9 year old (especially one that played with dolls).

Proof - let's take a look at other ancient cultures:

Ancient Greece and Rome
Around AD 530, and at least as far back as the reign of Augustus, the legal minimum age of marriage for girls was 12 and for boys 14, and Roman children of the aristocracy married youngest.

In Ancient Greece, "[t]hough the marriage of a girl to a man twenty years her elder was common, sexual relations between the very young and very old were a standard subject for mirth". However, marriage was not as early as in Rome, possibly at age 18 for girls, but also to men a decade older, but at least 25.

Middle Ages Europe
Women were marriageable right after puberty, marriage arrangements were made while they were in infancy; they were wed at the age of twelve or fourteen to men in their twenties and thirties. The arrangements were often loveless political unions, certainly abusive by contemporary standards and conducive of great gaps in learning and maturity between wives and husbands.

Ancient Jewish culture
"For Jewish women--as for women in antiquity generally--marriage was often entered into early. We do not have many inscriptions recording the age at which women were married, but the few who record it mention ages varying from 12 to 18 years. 15 was probably an average age for a girl to marry.

Footnote: See Horsley, New Documents 4 (1987)222-227, on age at marriage. He states that the few data we have seem to suggest a higher marriage age for Jewish than for pagan girls."

Ancient Egypt
...most Egyptian men were eager to follow the advice of the wisdom literature urging them to take a wife while still young so they could found a household and raise a family. Most men were married by the age of twenty to girls who might have been as young as fifteen. There was an age difference, but usually not more than two or three years.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So you see, you're instincts are right. It's unusual and sick to for a 54 year old man to have sex with a pre-pubescent 9 year old that is playing with dolls.

Next post...more examples of pedophilia in Islam.

Mohammad's pedophilia - Part 2

Common responses from Muslims on Aisha

1. Ages are wrong for any number of reasons usually that the Hadith are unreliable.

Fact: The Hadith I quoted are key to Islam and are considered part of the Sunnah accepted by all Muslims.

2. She was at puberty already

Fact: You read her own words - she was playing with dolls when she entered Mohammad's house as a bride. You can also see the narrator say that dolls were allowed only for girls before puberty

3. People matured at a faster rate in that region.

Fact: Average age for the first period is ~13 years, and it barely changes around the world.
http://www.mum.org/worldmen.jpg Also, puberty is a process taking 4 years on average, and a 9 year old wouldn't have the emotional maturity to handle it. It was rape for that reason. Mohamed should at least have waited until Aisha was done with puberty.

4. Aisha's parents agreed with her marrage

Fact: Her father objected:
Sahih Bukhari 7.18
Narrated 'Ursa:
The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry."

Next post typical objections to Muhammad's pedophile history

Mohammad's pedophilia

Updated:
This ended up taking a number of posts. Also, I've forgotten a Quran passage, which I have added below. This is from Sura 65 on rules for divorce. Notice below that you can divorce a woman who hasn't menstruated yet ("not had their courses"). Well, how can you divorce a prepubescent woman if you didn't marry a prepubescent woman in the first place? I think the reader can fill in the blanks.

65:4 And (as for) those of your women who have despaired of menstruation, if you have a doubt, their prescribed time shall be three months, and of those too who have not had their courses; and (as for) the pregnant women, their prescribed time is that they lay down their burden; and whoever is careful of (his duty to) Allah He will make easy for him his affair.

When you read about Mohammad's own pedophilia below, you'll understand why he made sure to have the above verse "revealed" to him.

Aisha

Let's continue with Aisha. The key Hadith sections about Aisha because they are pretty clear (remember when you are reading that Mohammad was 51 when Aisha was 6):

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3310:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64
Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65
Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)." what you know of the Quran (by heart)'

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88
Narrated 'Ursa:
The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

Pretty straightforward, right? From Aisha's own words, she was 6 when they married and 9 when they consummated the marriage. Child brides are one thing, but consummation at 9 years old is another.

Let's continue:

Sahih Bukhari 5.236.
Narrated Hisham's father:
Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.

Sahih Bukhari 5.234
Narrated Aisha:
The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

And in another Hadith we read.

Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 41, Number 4915, also Number 4916 and Number 4917
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:
The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) married me when I was seven or six. When we came to Medina, some women came. according to Bishr's version: Umm Ruman came to me when I was swinging. They took me, made me prepared and decorated me. I was then brought to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him), and he took up cohabitation with me when I was nine. She halted me at the door, and I burst into laughter.

In the above hadith we read that Ayesha was swinging, something children do. Any other children's activities? Pay attention to what the interpreter wrote in the parenthesis. (She was a little girl, not yet at the age of puberty)

Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151
Narrated 'Aisha:
I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3311
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

So, at the age of nine when the marriage was consummated, she was still playing with dolls and not yet at puberty.

In the next post I will discuss common responses from Muslims over the issue of Aisha and why they are false

Where to start

Culture of ignorance

Where to start in your discussion is important. Muslims do not see any flaws in their faith, so you have to understand where they could be most receptive and/or most impressed. The first filter, receptivity, is important because Muslims run from challenging discussion faster than any other group I've seen. Most Muslims would rather live with a lie than confront any illogic in their faith. The culture is very different than other faiths and the root is in the Quran:

004.140
YUSUFALI: Already has He sent you Word in the Book, that when ye hear the signs of Allah held in defiance and ridicule, ye are not to sit with them unless they turn to a different theme: if ye did, ye would be like them. For Allah will collect the hypocrites and those who defy faith - all in Hell:-
PICKTHAL: He hath already revealed unto you in the Scripture that, when ye hear the revelations of Allah rejected and derided, (ye) sit not with them (who disbelieve and mock) until they engage in some other conversation. Lo! in that case (if ye stayed) ye would be like unto them. Lo! Allah will gather hypocrites and disbelievers, all together, into hell;
SHAKIR: And indeed He has revealed to you in the Book that when you hear Allah's communications disbelieved in and mocked at do not sit with them until they enter into some other discourse; surely then you would be like them; surely Allah will gather together the hypocrites and the unbelievers all in hell.

Above you can read three translations of 4:140 - they all say the same thing. Don't talk to those who reject or deride the Quran. It is in the culture to run from conversations that challenge the Islam. Why? Well, the Quran answers that too with circular reasoning:

004.082
YUSUFALI: Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other Than Allah, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy.
PICKTHAL: Will they not then ponder on the Qur'an? If it had been from other than Allah they would have found therein much incongruity.
SHAKIR: Do they not then meditate on the Quran? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy.

You see there are no discrepancies because the Quran says so. So not only must you not speak with those that challenge the Quran, but you shouldn't even ask the questions yourselves:

005.101
YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! Ask not questions about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble. But if ye ask about things when the Qur'an is being revealed, they will be made plain to you, Allah will forgive those: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing.
PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Ask not of things which, if they were made unto you, would trouble you; but if ye ask of them when the Qur'an is being revealed, they will be made known unto you. Allah pardoneth this, for Allah is Forgiving, Clement.
SHAKIR: O you who believe! do not put questions about things which if declared to you may trouble you, and if you question about them when the Quran is being revealed, they shall be declared to you; Allah pardons this, and Allah is Forgiving, Forbearing.

005.102
YUSUFALI: Some people before you did ask such questions, and on that account lost their faith.
PICKTHAL: A folk before you asked (for such disclosures) and then disbelieved therein.
SHAKIR: A people before you indeed asked such questions, and then became disbelievers on account of them.

Emphasis above is mine again. There are more passages like those above, but I believe that the message is already clear - remain in ignorance or risk losing your faith.

Quran barely read and Arabic myopia

Now, most Muslims have not read much of the Quran in their native language even if they speak Arabic so they won't run from conversation because of the above quotes. They will run because the culture has already been created by those quotes. Funny, in fact, that if you don't want them to run - be as direct in your rejection as possible.

Many of those that have read the Quran, are non-native speakers following this doctrine from Mohammad:

"Verily the one who recites the Qur'an beautifully, smoothly, and precisely, he will be in the company of the noble and obedient angels. And as for the one who recites with difficulty, stammering or stumbling through its verses (because he doesn't know how to read it but is trying to), then he will have TWICE that reward."

However, even if they memorize the Quran, they usually do it in Arabic. On a side note, it is important to remember why - that the Quran places Arabic above all languages:

016.103
YUSUFALI: We know indeed that they say, "It is a man that teaches him." The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.
PICKTHAL: And We know well that they say: Only a man teacheth him. The speech of him at whom they falsely hint is outlandish, and this is clear Arabic speech.
SHAKIR: And certainly We know that they say: Only a mortal teaches him. The tongue of him whom they reproach is barbarous, and this is clear Arabic tongue.

The Quran goes on further with a little racism:

026.198
YUSUFALI: Had We revealed it to any of the non-Arabs,
PICKTHAL: And if We had revealed it unto one of any other nation than the Arabs,
SHAKIR: And if we had revealed it to any of the foreigners

026.199
YUSUFALI: And had he recited it to them, they would not have believed in it.
PICKTHAL: And he had read it unto them, they would not have believed in it.
SHAKIR: So that he should have recited it to them, they would not have believed

So...back to the point...where to start

When a Muslim starts telling me about the "scientific miracles" in the Quran, I challenge them to send me a single one. Simultaneously, I ask them to explain a few of the top mathematical, historical and scientific errors.

With female Muslims, especially those with kids, I usually ask them if they're ok with the sometimes violent sexism or with Mohammad's pedophilia. This tactic sometimes works with men, but you'll be surprised at how many men are ok with these issues. More on that later.

There are many other passages of the Quran or Hadith that would have most of us either laughing or in horror, but I promise you that many of them will have little effect on the average Muslim. These include passages of torture, murder, unscientific nonsense, racism, Antisemitism, etc.

In the next post, I'll start with key quotes from the Hadith on Mohammad's pedophilia. Although this is not in the Quran (except for some strange verses about young boys and wide-eyed girls in heaven), it helps to go here quickly because it often comes up right away. Again, though, I don't recommend this issue as a starting point for all discussions.