God or Allah – truth or bull? – chapter 24

Chapter 24

 Non-Muslim readers who are unaware of some of the claims advanced relating to Islam or the Koran [Quran] may find the information given here, albeit meager, illuminating or interesting. Was Islam started strictly on religious grounds, or on religious and political grounds?

 Basic differences in beliefs – Judaism/Christianity/Islam

 Are religions faced with “external” contradictions? The answer is yes, in the sense that the beliefs or doctrines of one religion may be at odds with those of another religion even though their followers are worshipping the same God, for example, the God of Islam and Judaism. Any religion can be seen as contra if its fundamental doctrines or beliefs are clearly different from those of another religion. In terms of the Principle of Contradiction, contradictory statements cannot both at the same time be true, for example, the two propositions A is B and A is not B are mutually exclusive. “Jesus is God” is true to mainstream Christians but “Jesus is not God” is also true to Muslims and Judaists. Obviously, both statements cannot be true; if one is true the other must be false; and there is the plausibility that both are false. A Christian who was discussing with me about some aspects of Christianity tried to circumvent the contradiction by saying that Jesus was both God and man, but arguing this way would still not resolve the contradiction.

Despite having a common belief in their “bible” being a collection of divine revelations, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are professing different or contrasting doctrines; for example, Islam and Judaism [and several other religions] do not recognize the divinity of Jesus. Where Muslims are concerned, he was only a human prophet, a messenger of God, on the same level with so-called prophets, for example, Abraham, Moses and Muhammad, and he was never crucified and did not physically rise to life after having died. From an Islamic viewpoint, the title “son of God” is apparently one that had been conferred on others before Jesus and was merely an indication of their role as emissaries of God.

The Koran [The Koran (with parallel Arabic text) by N.J.Dawood (1990)] is clear about the role being played by Jesus, as these passages imply:

 To Moses We gave the Scriptures and after him We sent other apostles. We gave Jesus son of Mary veritable signs and strengthened him with the Holy Spirit. Will you then scorn each apostle whose message does not suit your fancies, charging some with imposture and slaying others? – sura 2.87, page 12.

Unbelievers are those who declare: ‘God is the Messiah, the son of Mary.’ Say: ‘Who could prevent God, if He so willed, from destroying the Messiah, the son of Mary, his mother, and all the people of the earth? God has sovereign over the heavens and the earth and all that lies between them. He creates what he will; and God has power over all things.’ – sura 5.17 page 109.

The Messiah, the son of Mary, was no more than an apostle: other apostles passed away before him. His mother was a saintly woman. They both ate earthly food. – sura 5.75 page 119.

 However, to mainstream Christians, the title “son of God” is not merely a title bestowed on Jesus; let’s hear what Jesus allegedly said as recorded in the gospel of John:

 8.58: “I tell you the truth, before Abraham was born, I am”.

10.30: “I and the Father are one”.

14.6: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”.

 One can argue that since Islam is firm that Jesus was only a human prophet, Islam must accept that Jesus was lying by claiming to be divine or “the way, the truth and the life.” If Jesus had indeed lied on such a significant aspect, can Jesus be deemed to be a human prophet of God? Can Jesus be accused of blasphemy? The answers to these questions would be debatable, no doubt. Muslims can, however, counter that what Jesus was, from an Islamic viewpoint, is based on what is stated in the Koran, not the Christian Bible. Muslims are of the view that the Judeo-Christian Bible has been so corrupted through inaccurate translations that it can no longer be taken as a credible or trustworthy record of God’s revelations. Taking such an approach, Muslims can counter anything reportedly said by Jesus as recorded in the New Testament that may appear to be in conflict with their beliefs or dogma, for example, Jesus’ consistent and frequent use of the term “Father” when making reference to God. Presumably, Muslims will also reject the Genesis account of God appearing physically as a man to Abraham and eating the food prepared by members of Abraham’s household and the story of the physical wrestling match between God and Jacob.

Muslims and Judaists believe that God is a being without any sort of association or connection, in outright contradiction of the belief of the majority of Christians in the so-called Trinity. For Muslims and Judaists, the belief in God incarnating as Jesus is the ultimate heresy. Several other differences in dogma and beliefs exist between Islam and Christianity, but the non-recognition by Muslims of the alleged divinity of Jesus is a very significant one and can be said to be a critically huge distinguishing difference in conceptual beliefs between Islam and Christianity. Other differences, for example: 

  • [1] Allah [God] is neither male nor female; this is also a doctrine of Judaism but in Christianity God is a “he.” However, the Islamic belief that Allah is neither male nor female appears to be self-contradictory in terms of the Koranic text stating that the Torah and the Scripture are revelations of God, as God is portrayed as a father figure in the Torah and the Scripture; and in sura 16.11, the Koran (with parallel Arabic text) by N. J. Dawood (1990), God is referred to as “He.”
  • [2] Muslims do not pray to the so called Virgin Mary or to “saints”, in contrast with Catholics, who believe in praying to her and to saints.
  • [3] Muslims flatly reject the doctrine of the Trinity which, in their opinion, can be equated to polytheism.
  • [4] The sacrament of the Holy Eucharist is something alien to Muslims, in line with their belief in God as a stand-alone entity without any affiliation.
  • [5] Muslims are required to face Mecca while praying.
  • [6] Friday to a Muslims is a day of congregation; it is obligatory for adult Muslim males to attend Friday congregational prayer at noon and this practice can be viewed as a contrast to Church attendance for Mass on Sundays by Christians
  • [7] In Islam, the Holy Spirit is understood to be the “angel Gabriel”, and therefore is considered to be distinct and separate from God, not part of God; however, in mainstream Christian doctrine, the Holy Spirit and the angel Gabriel are two distinct beings; to mainstream Christians the Holy Spirit is the “3rd Person” of the Trinity whereas the angel Gabriel is one of the angels allegedly created by God.

 In the past, being a heretic could invite dire consequences, even death, as exemplified by at least three cases: Michael Servetus aka Miguel Servet or Miguel Serveto [1511-1553], Giordano Bruno [1548-1600] and Galileo Galilei [1564-1642]; while Galileo was only put under house arrest, thus escaped death, Servetus and Bruno lost their lives by being burnt at the stake. Servetus was tried and convicted by the Protestant Geneva governing council for spreading and preaching Nontrinitarianism and anti-paedobaptism (anti-infant baptism). Servetus’ death was reportedly engineered by John Calvin, an influential French theologian and pastor during the Protestant Reformation and a principal figure in the development of the system of Christian theology later called Calvinism; Bruno was tried and convicted by the Roman Inquisition [system of tribunal developed by the Catholic Church] for numerous charges including holding opinions considered to be erroneous about [a] Christ’s divinity and Incarnation [b] Transubstantiation and Mass, and denying the virginity of Mary.

 In saying the Torah and the Scripture are divine revelations, the Koran is directly or by implication attesting to the “truth” of the events described or narrated in the Torah or the Scripture. Yet, as we have noted above, where Muslims are concerned, the Judeo-Christian Bible has ceased being a credible or trustworthy record of God’s revelations. Paradoxically, despite their skepticism of biblical accuracy, they embrace belief in God’s so-called prophets named in the Bible. Cherry-picking! What other explanations can there be? Besides the differences cited above, there are umpteen differences in content between the Koran and the Christian Bible. Apart from being religious books, they are separate and distinct from each other. The mosques in Mecca and Medina are considered by Muslims to be the “holiest places” on Earth. If God is supposed to be everywhere [omnipresent?], then it may appear fair to say that every place is “holy”.

Judaists, however, do not believe in the concept of the Trinity or in the Koran or in Muhammad being a prophet. The non-recognition of Muhammad as a prophet by Judaists is representative of a critical disparity in dogma between Judaism and Islam; the implication here is that Judaism does not recognize Islam or the Koran. One similarity between Judaism and Islam is that both groups of followers believe that God does not have a body, in other words God is a spirit, hence neither male nor female. If this belief in God being a spirit is true, then the Christian or Jewish biblical accounts of God appearing in person [as a man on several occasions and being allegedly addressed as Lord] to human beings cannot be true. The many inconsistencies and contradictions in so-called religious revelations or dogma cannot by definition be simultaneously true; if one is considered true, any contradiction of it must be considered false. What is clear is that worshippers of God/Allah are embracing doctrines and beliefs that are radically different from each other and that such differences have been prevalent for centuries.

If we insist on using a logical approach and accept Islam as true, then we shall have no choice but to reject Christianity as false, or if we accept Christianity as true, then we shall have no choice but to reject Islam as false. If you happen to be a mainstream Christian with a firm belief in the Trinity, then you will have to reject Muhammad as a false prophet, as it would be illogical to conceive of Muhammad as a prophet sent by God-Trinity for the purpose of starting a new religion with clearly different doctrines and beliefs. Being different is not only a major concern, but Islamic doctrines and beliefs can be seen as a countervailing force to Christianity by, inter alia, claiming that Jesus was only a human procreated by human parents. And, of course, if we accept Christianity as true, we must reject Judaism as false or if we accept Judaism as true we must reject Christianity as false, notwithstanding that parts of the Christian Bible are said to be adoptions from the Jewish Bible. Christianity was evidently started not by Jesus but by his disciples, and Paul was the principal architect for its development, following the death of Jesus, who allegedly forfeited his life for claiming to be the Christ, the Messiah or the Son of God [Mark 14, Matthew 26 and Luke 22]. Arguably, Paul’s preaching and proselytizing contributed much to the rise of Christianity and Paul [Galatians 1.12 and Ephesians 3.3] allegedly claimed that the gospel he preached was received through revelation from Jesus. If we can believe Paul, others can believe Muhammad. But there is a chance they are all illusory and hence all false. Any belief based on unfounded claims is suspect and should be viewed with suspicion.

 Judaism is no doubt considered as a religion founded by Abraham long before the birth of Jesus or Christianity, yet today, Judaism is nowhere near Christianity or Islam, in terms of the number of followers. Despite the fact that Judaism is essentially a religion of the Jews, or so-called God-chosen people, Jews presently number about 14 million only, equivalent to about 0.2% of the total world population of about 6.5 billion and definitely a far cry from the promise allegedly made by God to Abraham to make his descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky; Genesis 15.4-5: Then the word of the LORD came to him: “This man will not be your heir, but a son coming from your own body will be your heir.” He took him outside and said, “Look up at the heavens and count the stars—if indeed you can count them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your offspring be.” In terms of our scientific observation about the universe, of the number of stars in our galaxy alone being estimated at between 100 and 400 billion and of the existence of galaxies in the universe in the billions, whether we take only Jews or Jews and all other people as descendants of Abraham, the figures for people and stars are worlds apart. Moreover, there is the plausibility that many people, perhaps in the billions, who know nothing about Abraham and/or the Bible God and have no wish to consider the creation story in Genesis, which may be pure myth to them, as having anything to do with their lives.

 Arguably, one can produce biblical excerpts to show that Judaism was supported or embraced by Jesus, by quoting, for example, Matthew 5.17: Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. Jesus might have told his disciples to preach to all nations but his disciples were divided as to whether new converts should follow strictly to Judaism’s strict laws concerning circumcision and diet. Are there any followers of Judaism who are non-Jews? If there are they are probably a very small minority, with the vast majority being Jews. That said, it is probably true that not every Jew is a Judaist. For Jews who have been acculturated in countries to which they have emigrated there is the plausibility that they, or at least some of them, may no longer be affiliated to the religion of their ancestors. What the figures are telling us is that Judaism appears to have a zero or near-zero attraction for non-Jews, despite the numerous miracles allegedly performed by Yahweh, as described in the Old Testament. Maybe non-Jews have no desire to be involved in Judaism’s circumcision rites and/or dietary laws; maybe they have heard about Yahweh being a barbaric, bloodthirsty, cruel, malevolent, manipulative, racist and revengeful god with a genocidal instinct. Maybe Yahweh’s inveterate capriciousness or amnesia can be said to be the cause of his own apparent attempt to gain exclusivity for his chosen people in the current environment, or maybe it is simply a case of the majority of humankind not interested in joining the ranks of his so-called chosen people or the new club allegedly started by disciples of his so-called Son. One can rationally argue that rational people can distinguish between fact and fiction, or between myth and reality.

For the Jews, Saturday is the Sabbath, while for Christians, Sunday is the Sabbath. Vide NewScientist, Jul 5, 2008 [Commentary by Lawrence Krauss]: On Judaism and the idea of Jews as chosen people, Einstein says: “For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people… have no different quality for me than all other people…although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything ‘chosen’ about them.” What seems to be mysterious as well as ironic is the fact that Jesus’ disciples have been unable to convince the majority of the Jews [barring exceptions] despite having been instructed by Jesus: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.”  [Matthew 10.5/6]. At any rate the claim by Jesus of being the Son of God can be seen as nothing unique, in the context of Genesis 6.1-2: When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose – as so-called sons of God allegedly existed long before him. Anyone can claim to be a son of God but such a claim can in no way be taken to mean that God exists. As we have noted in a previous chapter, to some people the Bible is the biggest catalogue of myths, including of course the myth of sons of God marrying daughters of men.

The concept of resurrection in Judaism is not similar to that in Christianity or Islam. To mainstream Jews or Judaists, resurrection would occur in the “messianic age” – following the birth on Earth of their messiah, who, as prophesied in their religious text, would be a direct descendant of King David and who would, among other things, oversee the rebuilding of Jerusalem and bring Jewish people from all over the world back to Israel, their homeland. However, the various claims of Jesus being divine and his own admission to being the Christ or Messiah [Mark 8.29/30, Matthew 16.16/17 and Luke 9.20/21] have no place in the dogma or beliefs of Judaism. Judaists can argue that the claim of Jesus being the Son of God is something alien to them, as they have never made such a claim. They believe that when their messiah comes to make this world a world of peace and prosperity, the righteous will be brought back to life but the wicked will not be resurrected. This may or may not seem queer, but what is clear is that while they strongly believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, whom Jesus was literally professing or referring to as his Father when he was allegedly preaching and working miracles, they have never believed in Jesus being the Son of God or being the Messiah, notwithstanding the overwhelming conversion to Christianity. The Jews are, apparently, still waiting for the appearance of their messiah.

 The Koran/Shortcomings of some prophets

While the Koran is said to be the output of about two decades of labor and is revered by Muslims as revelations made directly to Muhammad by God through Gabriel, so-called angel of God, the Christian Bible – there are currently so many versions – is considered by most Christians as the human record of human responses to God’s purported revelations and as the output of numerous human storytellers and writers spanning more than a thousand years. To ask whether angels exist is no different from asking whether God exists. Notwithstanding the skepticism that exists with regard to the accuracy of Muhammad’s life history or even whether he lived at all, the fact remains that there are biographies of his life [ca. 570/571 – 632] written by different people. But whether all or any of the statements made in the Koran or, for that matter, in the Christian Bible or any bible can be considered as truth is an entirely different matter. Undeniably, religious claims about the metaphysical or spiritual realm are not possible or capable of verification in a scientific way.

In contrast with the Bible [New Testament], where casting out of evil spirits from people believed to have been so afflicted is a common theme, the Koran, if I am not mistaken, says nothing about exorcism of evil spirits from human beings. According to Joseph McCabe [in parenthesis], in his The Sources of the Morality of the Gospels, “… Babylonia is the classic source of the belief in evil spirits, and in this respect the Gospels are Babylonian literature.” Babylonia, according to Wikipedia, was a civilization in Lower Mesopotamia (central and southern Iraq), with Babylon as its capital. Did Jesus or the Gospel writers get the idea of demons or evil spirits from Babylonian literature or from some other source[s]? Answer: Maybe. The Koran, however, is not short on text giving warning of severe punishment for non-believers, for example: As for the unbelievers, neither their riches nor their children will in the least save them from God’s judgment. They shall become the fuel of the Fire. They are like Pharaoh’s people and those before them; they denied Our revelations, and God smote them in their sin. God is stern in retribution. Say to the unbelievers: “You shall be driven into Hell – an evil resting place!” [p 50 sura 3.10-12, The Koran (with parallel Arabic text) by N. J. Dawood (1990)], and sura 5.10, p.108: As for those who disbelieve and deny Our revelations, they are the heirs of Hell. Now, why should anyone be punished or consigned to Hell just for refusing to be stupid or to believe in stupidity? If God exists and has given us intelligence and free will to act, then why should the mere exercise of this so-called free will cause him anger or dissatisfaction? There is no logic in this.

The Koran, however, is also not short on text praising believers and promising them the rewards of Paradise, including, for male believers, perks like “dark-eyed” houris [beautiful virgin women] allegedly, specially created by God for the purpose of becoming their wives. One version of the bliss that believers or righteous can expect is of being “well provided for, feasting on fruit, and honoured in the gardens of delight. Reclining face to face upon soft couches, they shall be served with a goblet filled at a gushing fountain, white, and delicious to those who drink it. It will neither dull their senses nor befuddle them. They shall sit with bashful, dark-eyed virgins, as chaste as the sheltered eggs of ostriches”. [p 446, sura 37.38-50, The Koran (with parallel Arabic text) by N. J. Dawood (1990)].  And in page 497 sura 44.51-56 you can find the following text: As for the righteous, they shall be lodged in peace together amid gardens and fountains, arrayed in rich silks and fine brocade. Even thus; and We shall wed them to dark-eyed houris. Secure against all ills, they shall call for every kind of fruit, and having died once, they shall die no more.

It appears, therefore, that Muslims can look forward to their rewards or perks in Paradise but the bliss of being wedded to dark-eyed houris may not appeal to all Muslim believers in view of the differences, physical or intellectual, existing between individuals; hence what is deemed desirable by A may not be deemed desirable by B. If some have a preference for “green-eyed” or “brown-eyed” or “blue-eyed” virgins, it would be a matter of personal preference. Some Muslims may be green-eyed or brown-eyed or blue-eyed and thus may have a preference for someone with eye-color similar to their own. What about Muslim women? Surely, they would not be interested in “dark-eyed” houris? The answer to this question is not a simple Yes or No, if you are familiar with the term “lesbianism”, or if you are a skeptic too familiar with beliefs in mythology. Is there anything in the Bible or Koran about heavenly rewards created specifically for women? I cannot recall. Maybe, Allah would also reward righteous Muslim women but not in the way righteous Muslim men would be rewarded. Getting wedded to a dark-eyed houri may be something unthinkable to a righteous Muslim woman. For the men, what if they desire the women who were their wives when they were on Earth? What if the women desire their previous husbands? We have to ask Allah. As a religious follower you can always try ascertaining, assuming this is possible, whether your Heavenly reward would be in line with your expectations. If you agree with the view that God/Allah is a male chauvinistic prick or freak you would probably think you have already got the answer, and you are probably right.

 Text repetitions are common in the Koran as well as in the Bible. While the Koran refers to the Torah [Five Books of Moses known as the Pentateuch: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy] and the Scripture [Bible] as revelations of God, it also makes the claim that “The only true faith in God’s sight is Islam”. What can we deduce from this assertion? Can it be considered logical? In other words the Koran is saying that followers of Judaism or Christianity [and other religions, presumably] are not embracing the true faith. But what, precisely, is “true faith”? Whether Islam can be considered the true faith is subjective and highly debatable.

If there is any truth in the Koran and the Bible being revealed words of God, then there is no truth in God declaring Islam as the only true faith and God can be accused of making an irrational contradiction, regardless of whether the Bible has been subjected to numerous translations and various interpretations. But such a premise is good only for argument’s sake, has no empirical basis and thus the whole argument is utterly futile as proof for the existence God or that the Koran or Bible was an outcome of his revelation or inspiration. However, to continue with the argument, even if we allow for errors in translation or interpretation, the blame must still fall on God for not ensuring perfection in translation or interpretation, given the Koran or Bible being an output of divine revelation or inspiration. But God, in the context of his portrayal in biblical script, is a case of hopeless imperfection with evil or psychopathic tendencies. And since Judaism and Islam worship God, it would be mere cherry-picking, with no logical justification, to claim that Islam is the only true faith in God’s sight. Christianity, while worshipping God, has made the claim of God being a plural entity comprising three persons in terms of the Trinity in Unity or Unity in Trinity doctrine. A theist can argue for all he wants, but any religion insisting on God [or god or goddess] as the absolute truth needs to be treated with absolute caution.

Appended are excerpts taken from the Koran [with parallel Arabic text] by N. J. Dawood [1990]: 

  • If you doubt what We have revealed to Our servant, produce one chapter comparable to it. Call upon your idols to assist you, if what you say be true. But if you fail [as you are sure to fail], then guard yourselves against the Fire whose fuel is men and stones, prepared for the unbelievers – sura 2.23-24, page 3.  


  •  Such are they who buy the life of this world at the price of the life to come. Their punishment shall not be mitigated, nor shall they be helped [sura 2.86]
  • To Moses We gave the Scriptures and after him We sent other prophets. We gave Jesus son of Mary veritable signs and strengthened him with the Holy Spirit. Will you then scorn each apostle whose message does not suit your fancies, charging some with imposture, and slaying others? [sura 2.87]
  • They say: ‘Our hearts are sealed.’ But God has cursed them for their unbelief. They have but little faith. [sura 2.88]

These three paragraphs can be found on page 12.

  •  And now that a Book confirming their own has come to them from God, they deny it, although they know it to be the truth and have long prayed for help against the unbelievers. God’s curse be upon the infidels! Evil is that for which they have bartered away their souls. To deny God’s own revelations, grudging that He should reveal his bounty to whom He chooses from among His servants! They have incurred God’s most inexorable wrath. Ignominious punishment awaits the unbelievers – sura 2.89-90, page 13. 
  • You will please neither the Jews nor the Christians unless you follow their faith. Say: ‘God’s guidance is the only guidance.’ And if after all the knowledge you have been given you yield to their desires, there shall be none to help you from the wrath of God – sura 2.120, page 18. 
  • But the infidels who die unbelievers shall incur the curse of God, the angels, and all mankind. Under it they shall remain for ever; their punishment shall not be mitigated, nor shall they be reprieved – sura 2.161-162, page 23. 
  • Say to the unbelievers: ‘You shall be overthrown and driven into Hell – an evil resting place!’ – sura 3.12, page 50. 
  • Such are the bounds set by God. He that obeys God and His apostle shall dwell for ever in gardens watered by running streams. That is the supreme triumph. But he that defies God and his apostle and transgresses His bounds, shall be cast into a Fire wherein he will abide for ever, Shameful punishment awaits him – sura 4.13-14, page 78. 
  • They would have you disbelieve as they themselves have disbelieved, so that you may be all alike. Do not befriend them until they have fled their homes in the cause of God. If they desert you, seize them and put them to death wherever you find them – sura 4.89 page 91. 
  • The unbelievers are your inveterate foe – sura 4.101, page 93
  • He that disobeys the Apostle after guidance has been revealed to him, and follows a path other than that of the faithful, shall be given what he has chosen. We will burn him in the fire of Hell: an evil end – sura 4.115, page 96. 
  • Those that deny God and His apostles, and those that draw a line between God and His apostles, saying: ‘We believe in some, but deny others,’ – thus seeking a middle way – these indeed are the unbelievers. For the unbelievers We have prepared a shameful punishment – sura 4.150-151, page 101. 
  • Unbelievers are those who declare: ‘God is the Messiah, the son of Mary.’ Say: ‘Who could prevent God, if He so willed, from destroying the Messiah, the son of Mary, his mother, and all the people of the earth? God has sovereignty over the heavens and the earth and all that lies between them. He creates what He will; and God has power over all things’ – sura 5.17, page 109. 
  • Believers, take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends. They are friends with one another. Whoever of you seeks their friendship shall become one of their number. God does not guide the wrongdoers – sura 5.51, page 116. 


  • If the People of the Book accept the true faith and keep from evil, We will pardon them their sins and admit them to the gardens of delight. If they observe the Torah and the Gospel and what has been revealed to them from their Lord, they shall enjoy abundance from above and from beneath – sura 5.65-66
  • Say: ‘People of the Book, you will attain nothing until you observe the Torah and the Gospel and that which has been revealed to you from your Lord.’ That which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase the wickedness and unbelief of many among them. But do not grieve for the unbelievers. – sura 5.68
  • Believers, Jews, Sabaeans and Christians – whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does what is right – shall have nothing to fear or to regret. – sura 5.69  These four paragraphs can be found on page 118. 
  • The Messiah, the son of Mary, was no more than an apostle: other apostles passed away before him. His mother was a saintly woman. They both ate earthly food. See how We make plain to them Our revelations. See how they ignore the truth – sura 5.75, page 119
  • Let not the unbelievers think that they will ever get away. They have not the power so to do. Muster against them all the men and cavalry at your command, so that you may strike terror into the enemy of God and your enemy, and others besides them who are unknown to you but known to God. All that you gave in the cause of God shall be repaid to you. You shall not be wronged – sura 8.59-60, page 183.


  • Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate – sura 9.73.
  • They swear by God that they said nothing. Yet they uttered the word of unbelief and renounced Islam after embracing it. They sought to do what they could not attain. Yet they had no reason to be spiteful; except perhaps because God and His apostle had enriched them through His bounty. If they repent, it will indeed be better for them; but if they pay no heed, God will punish them, both in this world and in the world to come. They shall have none on earth to protect or help them – sura 9.74.

These paragraphs can be found on page 198. [End of excerpts]

 It seems we have a language problem here. If the reader thinks some of these passages are vague or inconsistent, he is probably not alone. Can all this verbal output be claimed to have emanated from God/Allah but spoken through so-called “angel Gabriel”? What can be gleaned from reading these passages may be expressed as follows: that they appear to be nothing short of saying [1] Islam is the true faith [2] all non-adherents of Islam – the unbelievers – will go to Hell [3] Muslims should not befriend Jews and Christians [4] notwithstanding [2], Jews, Sabeans and Christians should, however, have nothing to fear or regret if they believe in God/Allah and the Last Day and do what is right [5] unbelievers [presumably non-Muslims] are to be considered the enemies of God/Allah [6] Apostasy will be subject to punishment by God/Allah in this world and in the world to come.

 The passage about striking terror into the enemy of God can be interpreted as a mandate for terrorism, for suicide bombing as a means of achieving one’s ends. Which reminds me of a comment made by Professor Weinberg [chapter 8]: With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. That there are Koranic passages encouraging exclusiveness is not something exceptional. Paul of the New Testament also preached exclusiveness in one of his epistles [2 Corinthians 6.14-18] and Judaism is a great example of exclusiveness in terms of Old Testament   script encouraging “smashing or destroying of symbols and other artifacts of other religions.”

 Further excerpts from the Koran, also taken from N. J. Dawood’s translation, evidencing inconsistency or contradiction: 

p.151, sura 7.12-18:

‘Why did you not prostrate yourself when I commanded you?’ He asked.

‘I am nobler than he,’ he replied. ‘You created me from fire, but You created him from clay.’

He said: ‘Get you down hence! This is no place for your contemptuous pride. Away with you! Humble you shall henceforth be.’

He replied: ‘Reprieve me till the Day of Resurrection.’

‘You are reprieved,’ said He.

‘Because You have led me into sin, ‘ he declared, ‘I will waylay Your servants as they walk on Your straight path, then spring upon them from the front and from the rear, from their right and from their left. Then You will find the greater part of them ungrateful.’

‘Begone!’ He said. ‘A despicable outcast you shall henceforth be. As for those that follow you, I shall fill Hell with you all.’

 p.263, sura 15.32-43:

‘Satan,’ said God, ‘why do you not prostrate yourself?’

He replied: ‘I will not bow to a mortal whom You created of dry clay, of black moulded loam.’

‘Get you hence,’ said God, ‘you are accursed. The curse be on you till Judgement-day.’

‘Lord,’ said Satan, ‘reprieve me till the Day of Resurrection.’

He answered: ‘You are reprieved till the Appointed Day.’

‘Lord,’ said Satan, ‘since You have thus seduced me, I will tempt mankind on earth: I will seduce them all, except those of them who are your faithful servants.’

He replied: ‘This is My straight path. You shall have no power over My servants, only the sinners who follow you. They are all destined for Hell.’ [End of excerpts].

 In one section it is reported that God’s servants would be waylaid but in the other it is reported that with the exception of God’s faithful servants all would be seduced. The Koran can do with some fine tuning from a human editor but this is not possible as it is held to be an exact copy of the original believed to be stored in Heaven. Hence there is no possibility of subjecting it to any human revision.

 Some so-called prophets of God – Moses, Joshua, Elijah, Elisha, Samuel, Saul and King David, for example – can be said to have something in common – a cruel, killing instinct, not unlike the vengeful, malevolent, genocidal instinct of God. Another common feature about God’s so-called prophets is that they were apparently all males, a testimony to God being a misogynistic prick. Has anyone come across a Jewish woman named as a Jewish prophet or Jewish queen? Presumably the answer is No. Maybe God remembered how Eve, a human female, exposed his stupidity in the Garden of Eden. One can argue, in the context of biblical script, that these prophets were allegedly instructed by God and that the free will allegedly bestowed on them was merely for executing his so-called will or, more precisely, his malevolent instructions. Whether they were acting with free will or not, they were a bunch of killers or maniacs, cruel and malevolent, not unlike their God. The inability of some people in distinguishing right from wrong or between good and evil because of the evil [for destroying others] inherent within themselves is, fortunately, not something that can be said to be widespread but it is there, nonetheless, as it was prevalent in times past and history can attest to that. Moses, one can observe from Numbers, had no problem in making an assessment of the value or non-value of being a human female virgin or non-virgin. As we have noted in chapter 12, he allegedly prized virgin women or girls over non-virgin ones and he allegedly gave instructions to kill every non-virgin Midianite woman or girl. We have through the presentation of Exodus and other biblical examples provided a comprehensive account of the evils perpetrated by Moses and his God. Let’s now review some of the activities of these other so-called prophets, as narrated in the Bible:


  • 10.26. Then Joshua struck and killed the kings and hung them on five trees, and they were left hanging on the trees until evening.
  • 10.28. That day Joshua took Makkedah. He put the city and its king to the sword and totally destroyed everyone in it. He left no survivors. And he did to the king of Makkedah as he had done to the king of Jericho.
  • 10.38. Then Joshua and all Israel with him turned around and attacked Debir.
  • 10.39.They took the city, its king and its villages, and put them to the sword. Everyone in it they totally destroyed. They left no survivors. They did to Debir and its king as they had done to Libnah and its king and to Hebron.


1 Kings

  • 18.40. Then Elijah commanded them, “Seize the prophets of Baal [450 of them]. Don’t let anyone get away!” They seized them, and Elijah had them brought down to the Kishon Valley and slaughtered there.

2 Kings

  • 1.9. Then he sent to Elijah a captain with his company of fifty men. The captain went up to Elijah, who was sitting on the top of a hill, and said to him, “Man of God, the king says, ‘Come down!’ “
  • 1.10. Elijah answered the captain, “If I am a man of God, may fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty men!” Then fire fell from heaven and consumed the captain and his men.
  • 1.11. At this the king sent to Elijah another captain with his fifty men. The captain said to him, “Man of God, this is what the king says, ‘Come down at once!’ “
  • 1.12 “If I am a man of God,” Elijah replied, “may fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty men!” Then the fire of God fell from heaven and consumed him and his fifty men.
  • 1.13. So the king sent a third captain with his fifty men. This third captain went up and fell on his knees before Elijah. “Man of God,” he begged, “please have respect for my life and the lives of these fifty men, your servants!
  • 1.14. See, fire has fallen from heaven and consumed the first two captains and all their men. But now have respect for my life!”
  • 1.15. The angel of the LORD said to Elijah, “Go down with him; do not be afraid of him.” So Elijah got up and went down with him to the king.
  • 1.16. He told the king, “This is what the LORD says: Is it because there is no God in Israel for you to consult that you have sent messengers to consult Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron? Because you have done this, you will never leave the bed you are lying on. You will certainly die!”
  • 1.17. So he died, according to the word of the LORD that Elijah had spoken.
  • 10.17. When Jehu came to Samaria, he killed all who were left there of Ahab’s family; he destroyed them, according to the word of the LORD spoken to Elijah.

 So Elijah can be seen as a prophet with a propensity for killing or wishing death for others, with the alleged participation, assistance, or power of his God, who can be described as having a similar propensity. Killing appears to have been something right or fun for Elijah and his God. If you cannot read the Bible with honesty, you are not honest with yourself.


2 Kings

  • 2.23. From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some youths came out of the town and jeered at him. “Go on up, you baldhead!” they said. “Go on up, you baldhead!”
  • 2.24. He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths.
  • 5.26. But Elisha said to him, “Was not my spirit with you when the man got down from his chariot to meet you? Is this the time to take money, or to accept clothes, olive groves, vineyards, flocks, herds, or menservants and maidservants?
  • 5.27. Naaman’s leprosy will cling to you and to your descendants forever.” Then Gehazi went from Elisha’s presence and he was leprous, as white as snow.

 But Elisha to his credit had allegedly done some good for humanity; in 2 Kings 4.17-37 we are presented with an image of him performing a miracle by raising a dead boy to life, but whether this story formed the basis for a subsequent miracle allegedly performed by Jesus – the raising of a dead girl back to life [Mark chapter 5, Matthew chapter 9 and Luke chapter 8] is for the reader to decide.

 Samuel [1 Samuel 7.9-11]

  • Then Samuel took a suckling lamb and offered it up as a whole burnt offering to the LORD. He cried out to the LORD on Israel’s behalf, and the LORD answered him.
  • While Samuel was sacrificing the burnt offering, the Philistines drew near to engage Israel in battle. But that day the LORD thundered with loud thunder against the Philistines and threw them into such a panic that they were routed before the Israelites.
  • The men of Israel rushed out of Mizpah and pursued the Philistines, slaughtering them along the way to a point below Beth Car.


[1 Samuel 11.11]

  • The next day Saul separated his men into three divisions; during the last watch of the night they broke into the camp of the Ammonites and slaughtered them until the heat of the day. Those who survived were scattered, so that no two of them were left together.

[1 Samuel 14.36]

  • Saul said, “Let us go down after the Philistines by night and plunder them till dawn, and let us not leave one of them alive.”


[2 Samuel 5.19]

  • so David inquired of the LORD, “Shall I go and attack the Philistines? Will you hand them over to me?”       The LORD answered him, “Go, for I will surely hand the Philistines over to you.”

[2 Samuel 5.23]

  • so David inquired of the LORD, and he answered, “Do not go straight up, but circle around behind them and attack them in front of the balsam trees.

The passages cited above [2 Samuel 5.19 and 5.23] give impressions [1] of God promising David some form of assistance in overcoming the Philistines and [2] of God giving military instructions to David.

Kind David can be accused of violating two of the so-called Ten Commandments of God [not to commit adultery and not to covet your neighbor’s wife] when he allegedly sent for Bathsheba, wife of Uriah, and had sexual intercourse with her. And King David allegedly contrived the death of Uriah by intentionally putting him on the front battle lines to get him killed, vide 2 Samuel 11.14-15: In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it with Uriah. In it he wrote, “Put Uriah in the front line where the fighting is fiercest. Then withdraw from him so he will be struck down and die.” Hence King David can also be accused of further sinning against his God for violating another Commandment not to kill. When we recall the earlier accounts of God “hardening” Pharaoh’s heart [Exodus] and intervening when King Abimelech tried mating with Sarah [Genesis], it seems strange that God with his omniscience did not intervene when King David was manipulating to get Uriah killed or when it was clear that without his pre-emptive whisper-in- the-ear or some such so-called divine intervention, King David would be breaking one or some of his commandments. King David, we are told [2 Samuel 5.13] “took more concubines and wives in Jerusalem, and more sons and daughters were born to him.”

 Can anyone be faulted for calling God an imbecile, for his apparent stupidity for not knowing when or when not to intervene or for acting capriciously? Plausible answer: What can you expect from a moronic, war-mongering god? Free will? Dream on.

 Men created superior to women vide Koran/Bible

 The Koran is emphatic about Allah’s bias in favor of men over women, as exemplified in this excerpt: Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. [sura 4.34, p. 83, The Koran (with parallel Arabic text) by N. J. Dawood (1990)]. Another example of God’s decree concerning male superiority or female inferiority can be found in Leviticus: A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days.. Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding… If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean… Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding [Leviticus 12.2, 4-5]. If it is a person between one month and five years, set the value of a male at five shekels of silver and that of a female at three shekels of silver [Leviticus 27.6]. And in Exodus we can see God laying down the ground rules as to how a man can acquire a girl or woman, say a virgin, as his wife, by simply seducing her [raping?] and paying the bride-price; If a man seduces a virgin who is not pledged to be married and sleeps with her, he must pay the bride-price, and she shall be his wife [Exodus 22.16]. 

In fact, where the Christian Bible is concerned, the role of women is subservient to that of men. And there is of course no question of any woman being eligible to participate in the voting process for a new pope or to contemplate of taking charge of the papacy; voting for a new pope is restricted to Cardinals [below the age of 80 years] and, until the rules are changed, women cannot be validly ordained; the pope, is by definition, the Bishop of Rome. Even for what can be perceived as a non-religious area, the political domain, for instance, women’s suffrage – the right to vote and to run for political office – started in a small way in the 19th century with a few countries granting suffrage to some women on a restrictive basis, for example, for local but not national elections, and it was only during the 20th century that women’s suffrage was granted a status similar to that of men, in most if not all countries.

That God [or Allah] can be characterized as chauvinistic or misogynistic can also be inferred from a reading of some of Paul’s epistles, for example, 1 Corinthians 11.2-9, Ephesians 5.22-24, Colossians 3.18, 1Timothy 2.11-15. Through these passages we can see that Paul, a chauvinist or misogynist like his God, was unequivocally preaching that wives should submit to their husbands or live in “quietness and full submission.” It seems that Paul was confirming his God’s view of female inferiority. A spirit-being believed by Muslims to be neither male nor female is also believed by them to have created men superior to women. Did Muhammad get his cue from reading Old Testament stuff? Muhammad allegedly had 9 or more wives in his lifetime, presumably before the establishment of an Islamic edict limiting the number of wives for any Muslim man to a maximum of 4. The Koran, however, does not allow the same privilege to Muslim women; hence a Muslim woman is limited to one husband at any one time, even though she may have the means to maintain more than one.

The legal age for marriage for Muslim females may vary from country to country, notwithstanding that in Iran the legal age for marriage for a Muslim female is 9 years. Iran is apparently following in the footsteps of Muhammad, who is reported to have married a girl, Aisha, when she was only 9 years’ old, after having allegedly been engaged to her since she was six years of age. Being at the age she was when she was allegedly engaged or married to Muhammad, one could be forgiven for asking whether Aisha herself agreed willingly to the engagement or marriage or whether she was capable of understanding the nature of what she was getting or being led into. The answer, doubtless, can be open to all sorts of subjective interpretation, regardless of any biography that may exist concerning Muhammad’s life or Aisha’s life. Some people can point out that what Muhammad did was guided by the customs or local customs prevalent at the time, present conditions or customs notwithstanding. On the other hand, Muslims are steadfast in their cherished view of the Koran being the revealed word of Allah and therefore should be considered as being applicable for all time, from the time the Koran came into production, regardless of changes, if any, in customs or practices not governed by the Koran.

 It may be safe to say that some modern women may not take kindly to the view of women being inferior to men. Either it is prejudice that has led to this kind of thinking or belief or such thinking or belief has given rise to prejudice against women. In either case such thinking or belief has been proved to be nonsense. And no woman can be faulted for calling God a chauvinistic pig or prick and he all but deserves such denigration if he exists and is precisely none other than the capricious, egotistic, misogynistic, malevolent and genocidal maniac portrayed in the Bible or the Allah of the Koran with the aggressive tendency for sending infidels to the so-called fire of Hell. We cannot deny that vast physical differences exist between a man and a woman, but in the intellectual sphere, differences where exist are deemed slight or insignificant, hence cannot be prejudged.

People who firmly believe in the Koran as a revelation of God may insist that women are inferior to men because the Koran says so, not for any other reasons, not even for the fact that many modern women are not financially dependent on men for their livelihood or maintenance, nor for the fact that many women are superior to many men in more ways than one. Maybe there are exceptions; maybe in our modern age there are Muslim men who do not look upon women as inferior. And maybe Saudi Arabia, a Muslim country governed by Islamic laws, is one of the few exceptions on the flip side. Subject to the caveat that we may not always be up to date with the latest information or situation, it appears that in Saudi Arabia women are not allowed to go out without guardians, unrelated men and women cannot go to restaurants together, they are separated in offices, and women are not permitted to drive. Afghanistan under the Taleban can be seen as another Muslim country with strict “Islamic” restrictions for their womenfolk. To be sure, not all Muslim countries practice the same severe restrictions for Muslim women. Some have taken a far more liberal approach, with Muslim women and men sharing many equal rights or privileges.

 Indisputably, the Islamic claim of men being superior to women is a value judgment, underpinned apparently by a couple of dubious claims: [1] that God made men superior to women, and [2] that men spend their wealth to maintain women. In terms of what we have said so far concerning God and creation, if we are non-theistic we can discount the first supporting claim including the term “God” as non-factual, non-empirical and irrelevant. As for the second, the claim or notion of men spending their wealth to maintain women, we have to admit that it is true that some men are the sole or main breadwinner in a family and that in certain respects they are superior to some women. But that’s only part of the whole story; to be fair we also have to admit that some women are superior to some men in some ways. Personally, I think women sing far better than men and I seem to derive more enjoyment hearing a song being sung by a good female singer than by a good male singer; from my perspective, a woman’s voice sounds more melodious than that of a man. We cannot deny that, generally, men have greater muscle bulk and higher bone mass and are physically stronger. On the other hand, we cannot deny that women, generally, live longer than men, and some have outlived their spouses by five years or longer; and among centenarians women outnumber men nine to one.

 It seems there is a physical difference where the brain is concerned; women on the average have 10 per cent more fibers compared with men and they can switch between the two hemispheres of the brain much faster than the average man. Before cow’s milk emerged as a suitable infant feed, babies were greatly dependent on their mothers’ milk. And the woman, the mother, is usually, but not always, the one who invests more heavily in terms of physical care than the father in taking care of their child or children from birth to a certain age. While women tend to have heart attacks much later than men, they are more susceptible to other health problems like lump in the chest and osteoporosis. Although men are less susceptible to such health problems, they are prone to the problem of prostate enlargement once they are in their sixties or seventies. We can, therefore, say there are differences between men and women, but we are unable to support the Koranic claim of men being superior to women, for several reasons. Any man who cannot do without a woman’s love or cannot live without a woman may think of male superiority as just a myth.

Apart from the wealth aspect, are there other ways in which men were allegedly created superior to women? The Koran does not say. What cannot be refuted is that there are women who are earning more than many of the men and contributing as the sole breadwinner or as a major contributor to family upkeep. And I suppose there are many women who are totally, financially independent. If crime commitment, for example, murder, manslaughter, aggravated assault, rape, robbery, burglary, kidnapping, motor vehicle theft, drug-smuggling, illegal drug consumption, etc can be used as a yardstick for measuring inferiority, and every single crime committed is assigned a point as an act of inferiority, then some men can be said to be hopelessly inferior to many women, or many women can be clearly seen to be superior to some men. Should you have any doubt that men commit more crime than women, just check the crime stats with the police dept.

 What, possibly, can be our conclusion to all this? We can conclude that the Koranic claim of men being superior to women is under present circumstances all hogwash, or history if you like, if you wish to insist that the claim was in respect of an era long gone, when men were setting the rules and women’s role was merely to stay at home as a housewife, to take care of the children and do housework, such as cooking, cleaning and washing etc. But even in those conditions, thoughts of male superiority probably stemmed from male prejudice or chauvinism. It is from a woman’s body that a baby is produced, so who is superior or inferior? If the Koran is not applicable in certain respects to modern times, then should the Koran be updated to reflect the current situation? As we have said, the answer is No; the Koran is believed to be an exact copy of the original stored in Heaven hence it cannot be subject to any human input or editing. Despite being claimed as a collection of divine revelations, the Koran is subject to variant interpretations within the Islamic community, hence can be seen as equivocal rather than univocal. Any religious text that can give rise to variant interpretations can give rise to conflicting interpretations.

 The most beautiful thing in God’s whole creation is the body of a human female

 If we reflect on this claim, made presumably by someone with a profound appreciation for beauty, we can say there’s some truth in it, although it can also be said to be subjective, thus controversial. If you are a non-theist you might promptly say that you know nothing, or something, about God or his “whole creation” and that insofar as you are concerned any assertion of God as Creator is not an assertion of fact but an expression of a religious belief meaningful only to its supporters.  You might, however, agree that the body of some human females is indeed very beautiful but you might qualify that not all human females have a beautiful body. Others may agree with your opinion but whether the body of a human female is the most beautiful thing in the world would require polling the opinion of a large group of people. Even if the majority is in support, it is still a matter of opinion. What if every adult were to agree that the most beautiful thing in the world is the body of a human female? Then it would be correct to say that it is a fact of life that we all agree that the body of a human female is the most beautiful thing in the world. Why do people appear to be more interested in organizing beauty contests for women than say, good-looks contests for men? Plausible answer: A woman’s beauty, rather than the good-looks of a man, generally commands a higher level of attention, admiration or interest from the general public. Hence, should we accept Jesus’ claim of God having the image of a man, vide John 14.9: “…Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father…,” we can by extension say that a beautiful woman may look far more beautiful than the image of God.

 Ms Hauwa Ibrahim and Syariah [or Sharia] law

 Some Muslim countries, for example, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and Sudan have adopted Syariah law [considered to be “Islamic” law] as the law of the land. It appears that in March 2002 a Syariah Court in Funtua, Nigeria sentenced a Nigerian woman by the name of Amina Lawal to death by stoning for adultery for conceiving a child out of wedlock. According to Wikipedia [partially excerpted, July, 19, 2007]:

 The father of the child was not prosecuted for lack of evidence. Her conviction was overturned and she has since remarried. Baobab for Women’s Human Rights, an NGO based in Nigeria took up her case, which was argued by Nigerian lawyers trained in both secular and Sharia law. Amina’s lawyers included Hauwa Ibrahim, a prominent human rights lawyer known for her pro bono work for people condemned under Sharia law [End of excerpt].

According to a report [The Straits Times, July 19, 2007, p 1 and 2, article captioned: Taking the road less travelled to fight justice], Ms Ibrahim [a winner of the European Parliament’s Sakharov Prize in 2005], was in Singapore to give a talk to staff of Citi Singapore about her work as a human rights lawyer in Nigeria. Apparently, Citi’s Women’s Diversity Council would regularly extend invitations to inspirational and motivational speakers to talk about women’s issues at the workplace. Ms Ibrahim was reported to have said: I don’t know about clashes of civilisation. What I know is that the law has condemned a woman [Amina] to death by stoning. What I can do is to interpret the law to help her. It’s not about religion or color or sex. It’s about our humanity, our dignity – in response to foreign journalists who allegedly asked her if what was happening in her country represented a clash of civilisations.

I beg to differ. I think Ms Ibrahim was talking erroneously when she said: “It’s not about religion or color or sex”. This statement has to be evaluated in the context of the two preceding statements made by her and the background to the case. Amina was initially convicted of having committed a crime under Islamic law and this crime was allegedly the conceiving of a child out of wedlock. Then she was allegedly sentenced by Islamic law to death by stoning. The case allegedly dragged on for a year before the conviction was finally overturned by an Islamic appeals court. I may err here on the side of ignorance, but I have never heard or come across a “non-Islamic” civil law that clearly spells out that conceiving a child out of wedlock is a crime, or any legal system established on non-religious grounds that would prosecute a woman for merely conceiving a child out of wedlock. Therefore, the initial conviction of Amina was a religious issue, about a religion, whether wholly or only partially, and the subsequent overturning of this conviction by an Islamic appeals court was also a religious issue, or about a religion, wholly or partially, notwithstanding it might have been a case of her lawyers arguing convincingly that resulted in the overturning of her conviction. However, as the case involved human beings, it was also, undeniably, a matter of humanity or human dignity.

One Response to “God or Allah – truth or bull? – chapter 24”

  1. Tatyana Didyk Says:

    Thanks for this site. Very informative article.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: