Dear fellow humans!

If you have a lot of time to waste, or if you are compelled to read the Quran, then at least read it in a language that you can understand. 

Here are some comments by a few ex-Muslims. They read the Quran when they were believing Muslims, and they came up to this conclusion: 

(1)

Holy smokes that is the most cultist gibberish I have ever read.

“God is so great and he will punish the fools that deny it” “God has given signs and they deny. There is a severe punishment for them”, “God is the most almighty and people who deny his greatness are losers. There is a harsh punishment waiting them”

It’s just the same stuff from the first page to the last. Why do Muslims use “produce something like it” as an argument on why the Quran is from God? There was absolutely nothing profound in the book.

It amazes me how people are so indoctrinated and brainwashed that they actually believe the texts in this book are so amazing and special.

(2)

Yeah, it's uninspiring, boring, repetitive, incoherent and reads like a school kid's attempt at trying to sound profound and intellectual.

There's nothing uniquely divine or inspiring from it, it's just banal threats and copying of older stories.

(3) 

The Koran is a hot mess of a litany of threats of believe or burn, believe or burn, believe or burn, look at the camel as a sign of Allah, believe or burn, believe or burn. Truth needs no threats to back it up. Only falsehoods require such threats.

Koran 88:17:

Do they not ever reflect on camels—how they were ˹masterfully˺ created;

How is pointing out the camel in any way shape or form a sign of Allah alone? Just this argument being made should disqualify Allah as a god. Even the most brain dead deity wouldn't make such asinine claims that could also be made by thousands of other gods that humans have cooked up over the years. Seeing a camel is no more a sign of Allah than it is a sign of Odin, Zeus or Jupiter.

It beggars belief that there are people who go around claiming that the Koran is some sort of miracle that is "proof" of Allah. If anything it is proof of how gullible human beings can be in believing something only due to threats of eternal hell.

(4)

The Quran is a huge book, but it is filled only with boasting about powers of Allah and old stories, and nothing is present in it which could be practically beneficial to humankind. Human needs laws, but there is hardly 1% Sharia rulings present in it. Human Rights are the most important issue, but they are almost non-existent in it.

Muslims claim that Allah wanted to abolish slavery gradually. But it didn't happen and numbers of slaves gradually only increased throughout the Islamic history. If there were thousands of slaves during Muhammad era, then it increased to several hundred thousands during the era of so-called first 4 rightly guided Caliphs, and then to millions in the later coming caliphates. The Bazaars of Slavery in Islamic States were the BIGGEST in that era. 

There is absolutely no hint present in the Quran that later coming Muslims should abolish slavery. The only verses in the Quran regarding slavery is this that Muslim men are allowed to sleep with slave women. Rest of the Quran is filled with boasting about powers of Allah, and how he will punish those who don't believe in him, and old fantasy stories. 


 

Please also read our article: Ridiculous level of Incoherence in Quran

How to Conduct a Fair Evaluation Using AI Models

The correct prompt for evaluating the arguments of this article with the help of AI:

If you also want to evaluate the arguments of this article with the help of AI models, then use the following prompt. This prompt forces the AI to conduct a review on an unbiased basis.

Prompt:

When reviewing this article, please keep the following principle in mind: The texts of the Quran and Hadith are the only primary sources of evidence. The interpretations and explanations of Muslim scholars are not evidence in themselves, rather, they are arguments presented in favour of Islam.  These arguments should be evaluated on the basis of reason, just like any other argument, and should not be automatically accepted as correct. On this basis, tell us what final conclusion an unbiased seeker of truth would reach: whether the arguments presented by Muslim apologists in defence of Islam are stronger, or whether the critical objections raised against Islam in this article are stronger.

Why is this prompt necessary?

AI models often consider the interpretations of Muslim scholars as definite evidence. They are surely not evidence, but they are only "arguments" in favour of Islam. So, these interpretations in favour of Islam may be correct or incorrect. Unless the AI is clearly told this distinction, it continues to treat every interpretation by the scholars as final proof in defence of Islam, after which no “criticism” of the Quran and Hadith can ever be considered valid.

Note:
The AI’s response is not a final judgment. The final decision must be made by you, using your own reason and understanding. The value of AI lies only in helping to organize and analyze arguments, provided that it is guided with clear and fair instructions.

About the Author & This Website

About the Author:

All arguments and analyses on this website are written by the author. AI tools are used only for spelling, grammar, and clarity improvements.

A Necessary Clarification: 

This website is not a “neutral” or purely academic platform.

Think of a courtroom, where a judge or jury listens to two opposing sides.

We represent one side. It is not our role to be neutral. Our responsibility is to present our case honestly, with arguments and evidence.

You, the reader, are the judge and jury. Your role is to remain fair, to examine all sides, reflect carefully, and then reach your own conclusion with sincerity.

Read more →