Currently amidst my explorative phase of regions and religions that are not well covered by Euro-Anglo educational systems. As luck would have it, my mom got this years and years ago in Istanbul and found it again while we were house cleaning.
Perfect timing as I started exploring Islam to better understand the hostility towards it and how certain regimes utilise certain parts of their religion to demonise them. Plus, all the other context that gets glossed over due religious elitism and historical conflicts.
So, after devouring this book and checking most sources, a lot has been learned.
This is basically a glorified pamphlet which makes it case for Islam and as every Abrahamic religion, there's some insanity and glaring biases. The presentation of the book itself is well enough but because of my issues with religions in general, I will now air my grievances in overly long manner. You've been warned.
In theory, all of the A-three are peaceful and propagate values that are universal and well-meaning. However, there is always an exclusive, key verse that announces that this religion and only this one is THE one and every other is false for this God and viewing of it is the correct one. This is the where the issues start.
Its this certainty and elitism that the Qu'ran mentions in Surah 112:1-4 which the book highlights.
Old Testament does the same in Isaiah 45:5 and 45:21 and of course the first Commandment says the same thing, that there is only true God.
Interestingly, whereas Christianity morphed, split and adopted throughout the years with numerous translations and interpretations, Muslims primarily worship the eternal, unwavering and correct form of the Qu'ran. And to circumvent any potential misinterpretations or disagreements, no translation of the Qu'ran is the Qu'ran. Only the original Arabic form that was shown to Muhammad is the true Qu'ran per Sunnah 15:59.
Of course, after his death, there was a schism and multiple sacred sources, like the sunnah.
These are "safe-proof" because they are "reliably tranlsated" by Muhammad's companions.
Additionally, Muhammad went over all the Qu'ranic verses once per year with angel Gabriel and two times in his last year of existence to ensure the Qu'ran is perfect which is the belief today shared by all Muslims.
Let's now focus on the scientific aspect of the Qu'ran which the book covers in its first chapter. I've never seen or heard these claims prior so it was very interesting reading about how the Qu'ran talks about embryonic development, mountains, the invisible barriers between large bodies of water, origin of the universe, clouds and the cerebrum.
It is at this very first chapter that I immediately understood how this book will function and Islam and its proponents as a whole.
To legitimise the Qu'ran and its teachings, I've seen Muslims berate and lessen the amount of knowledge that was available in the 7th century to prove that indeed the word of God is final and that the illiterate, humble and kind Muhammad received this divine knowledge way before modern science found a way.
In case of the embryo, per Surah 23:12-14, man was created by clay being extracted and turned into a drop before becoming an "alaqah" which is a leech-shaped thing, a suspended thing and a blood clot before becoming "mudghah", a chewed substance.
Thusly, the Islamic embryologists claim that the Qu'ran perfectly describes how we come into this world because these shapes are similar enough to the embyro and how it morphs.
This is false and has been disputed and there are more elements like Gabriel waiting before claiming what gender the foetus shall become that further dispute the "science" behind this. As proof, the book lists some scientists and accentuate their successes in their respective field and quote them.
The issue is that these quotes basically disregard historical context and previous advancements in science prior to Muhammad and state that there is now way this illiterate, humble prophet could've known this so this must be God's work and proof that he exists because these statements are true.
If you are a scientist and quote any form of religious text or lean on it, I will immediately disregard your opinion as I have with these names the book referenced.
I've also checked out a discussion between two Islamic embryologists and PZ Myers which showed their bias and how they skew certain words to fit their narrative.
They also, troublingly, disregarded the historical context and underplayed the Arabic tribes and their knowledge that existed prior to Muhammad.
Aristotle, Galen of Pergamon and ancient Indian kingdoms all undertook these topics and a lot of the scientific claims of the Qu'ran were visible and easily distinguished if you could read or discuss with people who did.
Also, the book slyly disregards the number zero and that the Indians discovered it and instead attribute it to Muslim scholars, this irked me but I understand because of the racism and targeted propaganda from the 20th century as well as before that demonises Islam.
Still, some troubling surah exist, biggest ones for me being 3:91 and 6:27 which condemn the non-believers to Hellfire and eternal suffering as this life exists only to worship Allah. Christianity does the same by the way but the phrasing is a tad different. Same shit really.
Fundamentally, the idea that women and man are the same and you should take care of your parents and never resort to racism are great and valid.
Some of these the Qu'ran mentions per surahs 49:13, 17:23-24. But some of these values, like the equality of women are not in the Qu'ran but in Hadiths that came later which are also considered sacred and something to worship.
The issue is that this is relevant only if you, again, worship the "only true God".
And the way one becomes Muslim, the shahada is very clever. You publicly exclaim your loyalty to the "one true God" and you are absolved of ALL your previous sins. That is if you truly mean what you said. Plus you MUST believe that the Day of Judgement is true and is imminent per God's promise in the Qu'ran.
Much is made of the afterlife in the Abrahamic three and all are amazing tools to control and further their agendas.
During times of strife, wars and violence (aka forever), the promise that your suffering will be remedied by living forever in Heaven is an amazing way to get more people for your cause.
This is why Islam and Christianity spread as wide as they did while Judaism remained very strict and even more elitist which is showcased in how one becomes a Jew. It's a complex, rigid system of tests while Christianity and Islam require much less effort and purge your previous sins which secures you a safe spot in their versions of Heaven.
As an atheist, I am fucked and destined for eternal Hellfire (surah 3:85, 3:91 which the book mentions) or the first circle of hell (per Dante) or Hell after being finally judged per the Bible.
Shit like surah 51:56 or psalm 150:6 and others alike pisses me off to no end.
But, even though I am against the three and note the violence that has been done in their name and continues to, one does not need to abide by these words to a tee. Some would argue that this does not make you a proper (insert name of the member of the religion here) but like Al-Qadar says, freewill exists but is under scrutiny by God. You will be judged at the end of the day.
Super interesting stuff and very glad I read this, even though the book skews some things to present Islam in a better light but that is no fault of Islam as each of the A-three does this.
Two stars for the presentation and fluidity of the text.