Answering Islam - A Christian-Muslim dialog

And the Moon remains … out of reach

How an Islamic dawah miracle self-destructs

Jochen Katz

Several Muslim propagandists claim that the Qur’an predicted man’s journey to the moon, and they bring forward several passages to support this claim. I highly recommend Masud Masihiyyen’s masterful article, Islamic humor reaching for the moon, as a comprehensive examination of many aspects of these claims as they are put forward by Harun Yahya.

In this article I will examine Caner Taslaman’s version1 of the same claim, comment on some of his peculiar details, and add a few important aspects into the discussion that have not been touched upon by Masud Masihiyyen.

In the following, we will see how Taslaman corrupts the Qur’an by twisting the clear structure and meaning of the passage, and then, ironically, doesn’t even take this own manipulated interpretation seriously since it results in a blatantly false prophecy for the Qur’an.

Let’s go through Taslaman’s sermon paragraph by paragraph.


18- And the Moon when it is full
19- You will surely ride from stage to stage
20- So, why do they not believe?
  84-The Splitting, 18-20

The moon is associated in our minds with beautiful scenes and romantic landscapes. For those who use the lunar calendar, it is a precision calculator. The ebb and tide it causes have always been a mystery for men. It is used to symbolize mathematics, astronomy, art and romanticism. Throughout history the moon has been the symbol of the unattainable. All these features also existed at the time of the Prophet.

Rhetorically, this paragraph is nicely done. But none of this has any relevance for showing that the Qur’an predicts a journey to the moon. And the second sentence is really scientific nonsense. In the lunar calendar the moon is the reference point. Does Taslaman want to tell us that the moon calculates itself? Moreover, one of the problematic features of the Islamic lunar calendar is that it cannot ever be calculated precisely because it depends on the visibility of the moon, not only its (calculated and actual) position. Most websites offering an Islamic calendar also add a precaution in that regard (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4, ...).

The next three paragraphs provide the essence of Taslaman’s argument:

For 1400 years the meaning of the above quoted verses remained unraveled. In the Quran, the conjunction “and” (wa) is frequently used to stress a point; sometimes it is rendered in English by the preposition “by” when making serious promises, taking an oath or calling someone to witness. Commentators dealt differently with the “ride from stage to stage.” The reason was the inaccessibility of the moon at the time. Going to the moon was beyond imagination.

This “riding from stage to stage” had the association for some of spiritual ascension, symbolizing the passage from this world to the other world, the stages of development of man from an embryo to adolescence and senescence. Yet, the verse foresees that human beings will pass from stage to stage in the future. Spiritual ascension and man’s biological development were nothing new. Therefore, I am of the opinion that these interpretations of the past do not reflect reality. The context of the verse connotes the anticipation that a particular phenomenon will take place in the future and the verse questions the reason why the people do not believe when this event takes place. The Arabic word “tabaq” (stage) also mentioned in the sura 67, 3rd verse, and the sura 71, 15th verse, refers not to spiritual, but concrete things. The use of the word “ride” clearly connotes a journey.

Having thus explained the 19th verse in this fashion, the thing that our attention is drawn to, the moon in the 18th verse, supports the idea that “riding from stage to stage” is done by means of a shuttle from the earth to the moon.

Taslaman again proves himself to be a master manipulator of the text of the Qur’an. The word “and” (wa) is called a conjunction because it conjoins or connects what comes before with what comes after. It does not stress or emphasize what comes after, it simply connects two pieces. If “wa” emphasizes anything at all, then it emphasizes the need for the reader to look at what comes before and not start the quotation in mid-sentence lest he misunderstands what the text intends to say.

So then, let us take the “wa” seriously and start quoting from the beginning of the sentence.2

16    But nay! I swear by (bi) the twilight glow,
17    and the night and what it envelops,
18    and the moon when it is full,
19    you will surely ride from stage to stage.
20    So, why do they not believe?
21    And when the Quran is recited to them they do not bow?

Clearly, it is not the “wa” that is translated as “by” but the preposition “bi” in verse 16 that rules or spans all those nouns and expressions from verse 16 to 18 which together make up the full list of witnesses to this oath. The moon is simply one of the elements in the oath formula in verses 16-18.3

Let’s illustrate this with a little story. Assume that Caner Taslaman has a friend by the name of Mesut, who had promised him for a long time that he would visit him, but somehow the visit happened. Mesut doesn’t have a car, so he has to take the bus, and even has to change buses a number of times. Caner calls Mesut on the phone and the latter makes this vow: “I swear by the moon when it is full,4 next week I will surely ride from station to station.” Are we then supposed to understand that Caner Taslaman lives on the moon, and that in Turkey one can take a bus to travel to the moon?5 Or that the public transport system in Istanbul6 has a bus stop named “The Moon” which happens to be the one next to Taslaman’s home?

That would be a ridiculous interpretation, but that is essentially what Taslaman wants us to believe when reading this passage from Surah 84.

By ripping the moon out of the witness part of the oath formula and attaching it to the next clause that constitutes the content statement, Taslaman is tearing up the text of the Qur’an and re-assembling it again in order to inject into the text a meaning that is not there. Is Taslaman really only a semi-literate person who does not know the structure of an oath? Here is the Wikipedia definition:

An oath (…) is either a statement of fact or a promise calling upon something or someone that the oath maker considers sacred, usually God, as a witness to the binding nature of the promise or the truth of the statement of fact. To swear is to take an oath, to make a solemn vow.   (Wikipedia, Oath; accessed 17 October 2011)

In other words, an oath consists of two parts, (1) an appeal to a witness (one or more, someone or, in the case of the Qur’an, something), and (2) the content of the statement (of fact or promise). In our case, verses 16-18 are the “calling upon”, the appeal to the witness, and verse 19 presents the content, the statement that is affirmed and made serious by prefacing it with “I swear by … (that …)”  The moon is called upon to be a witness,7 but it has nothing whatsoever to do with the content of the statement. To mix up the two parts of an oath is to expose oneself as uneducated and ignorant, or as a deliberate manipulator and corrupter of the meaning of the text. And if the text is passage of the Qur’an, this is surely a serious matter.

Taslaman then uses many words to force his pet idea:

Commentators dealt differently with the “ride from stage to stage.” The reason was the inaccessibility of the moon at the time. Going to the moon was beyond imagination.

…  I am of the opinion that these interpretations of the past do not reflect reality. … The use of the word “ride” clearly connotes a journey.

Having thus explained the 19th verse in this fashion, the thing that our attention is drawn to, the moon in the 18th verse, supports the idea that “riding from stage to stage” is done by means of a shuttle from the earth to the moon.

Whatever the exact meaning of Sura 84:19 – and we will look into that shortly –, we have already seen that Taslaman has committed several serious linguistic errors, exposing either his considerable ignorance or his evil intent in a deliberate manipulation of the text.

The first of these errors was that he destroyed the structure of the text by starting the quotation of the passage in mid-sentence, hiding the beginning of the statement so that readers cannot clearly see the oath-structure of it. The second piece of corruption is that he removes the reference to the moon from the “witness part” of the oath and binds it to the “statement part” which is an unacceptable manipulation.

With this approach to interpretation, a Mafiosi’s vow, “By my father, I am going to kill this guy”, speaking of one of his competitors or even a police detective who prevented one of his drug deals, would then mean that his father is actually the object of the action, i.e. that he is threatening to kill his own father. Even if Taslaman should refuse to understand the flaw in his method of interpretation, and will not correct his errors but continue to spread the same claim, I am sure the majority of the readers have grasped the problem by now.

These observations alone effectively refute Taslaman’s interpretation and the discussion could end here. But just in case some Muslim readers are not convinced yet, let us continue as more blunders and contradictions are to be found in Taslaman’s exposition of the Qur’an.

[Readers who do not want to plough through each and every one of the many errors made by Taslaman, may want to jump directly the main scientific reason why his interpretation results in a false prophecy of the Qur’an.]

The third piece of his manipulation is the nonsense statement:

In the Quran, the conjunction “and” (wa) is frequently used to stress a point; sometimes it is rendered in English by the preposition “by” when making serious promises, taking an oath or calling someone to witness.

For somebody who writes a voluminous book about the Qur’an,8 who is a “Qur’an expositor”, and who even claims to know better than the earlier commentators,9 it is more than embarrassing that he does not even know the most basic linguistic rules and features of language. It is shameful. If he doesn’t know it, he is grossly ignorant. On the other hand, if he knows it but manipulates the meaning of words and sentence structures deliberately, then that is even worse and he needs to be publicly exposed for his fraud and deception that he actively spreads to a wide audience.

No, “wa” never means “by”, not even in the Qur’an. The conjunction simply extends the reach of “by” (in this case) or any other preposition over two or more entities. If I say, “I am going to travel through Germany and Switzerland next year”, then the conjunction “and” extends the reach of the preposition “through” to cover also the object “Switzerland”, i.e. “through Germany” and “through Switzerland”, but “and” does not mean “through,” and never will mean “through.” Taslaman’s explanation of Arabic is simply ludicrous.10

Taslaman is correct to say that earlier commentators on the Qur’an had different opinions about the meaning of Q. 84:19. And I agree that the statement in this verse is somewhat vague or mysterious – as the Qur’an often is. However, the fact that a passage is not entirely clear that does not mean we can do with it whatever we like. The fact that earlier commentators had different opinions on it is no justification for twisting the passage into a prophecy of a journey of the moon by destroying its literary structure.

Ironically, even where Taslaman is correct, he condemns himself. By reporting the interpretations of earlier commentaries he admits that he has studied their explanations and cannot plead ignorance about the syntax, grammar and literary structure of this passage. His manipulation of the meaning is not an honest mistake, because he did not know better, but he has consulted the commentaries and studied the passage. His subsequent corruption of it can only be called deliberate.

Even though the statement in verse 19 is somewhat mysterious,11 that does not mean that we cannot be certain about anything or that it can mean anything we like. Let’s take a closer look.

16    But nay! I swear by (bi) the twilight glow,
17    and the night and what it envelops,
18    and the moon when it is full,
19    you will surely ride from stage to stage.
20    So, why do they not believe?
21    And when the Quran is recited to them they do not bow?

Verses 16-18 are the “witness” part of the oath, verse 19 is the emphatic statement, the content of the oath, and verses 20-21 then ask the question why certain people do not believe the message of Muhammad / the Qur’an.

It is obvious that in regard to the original audience, the author of the Qur’an expected faith and submission to be the normal response to the statement made in verse 19. Note that verses 20-21 are in the present tense! Even though verse 19 may not be entirely clear to us, it was certainly supposed to be clear to the original hearers, as otherwise it would not make any sense to expect immediate faith from them based on this statement! In other words, we may not have the full context of the statement, not enough information to fully understand what verse 19 meant to the original audience, but it must be a meaning that made sense in their time. A prophecy of a journey to the moon 1400 years later is not such a statement. This cannot possibly have been the intended meaning. Just as Taslaman said, this would have been “unimaginable” and thus not a basis upon which to call people to faith in Muhammad’s time. The meaning of the statement must be such that people in the time of Muhammad could easily agree with it and would consider it to be a true statement – even if they did not all agree with the desired implication that they should therefore believe in Muhammad’s message and embrace the religion of Islam.

In fact, when we look at the pronouns, then Taslaman is guilty of corruption again. Verse 19 makes a general statement about “you”, i.e. speaking to all listeners. All of you will “ride from stage to stage” (and therefore the classical interpretation of “childhood to adulthood to old age to the next life” makes sense even if it is not explicit). Therefore, just as you have stages in this life, isn’t it natural to assume that there is another stage in a life to come, i.e. the hereafter? Therefore, when you think of life after death, of the resurrection and the judgment, how can you refuse to believe? How can you refuse to believe (my message) against common sense, against good evidence?

That is the inner logic of this dawah sermon. As the text itself says, (all of) you will go from this life to the next, but only some of you believe. There are others, “they”, who do not believe. The Muslims are those who believe this message, and the non-Muslims are those who do not believe (v. 20) and do not bow (v. 21). The “you” (v. 19) addresses all people, but the “they” (vv. 20-21) are the “unbelievers” and thus the “outsiders”, of whom is spoken in the third person.

Again, the text says YOU all will ride from stage to stage, but THEY do not believe. This makes clear that this ride is not restricted to a few people but refers to all people and cannot refer to Armstrong’s journey to the moon, but refers to a journey all of us take. And the split between believers and unbelievers that is in view in this passage happened already in Muhammad’s day, not only many centuries later.

In order to obtain Taslaman’s interpretation, the pronouns “you” and “they” need to be switched. THEY (some people far away) will take a ride; why then do YOU (here) not believe? Taslaman wants us to believe that verse 19 speaks not of the original audience (“you”) but of some other people in the distant future (“they”) who will travel to the moon. And based on this journey to the moon of a very few people (three people in Apollo 11), the Qur’an asks now all of us: Why then do you not believe?

No way, José! Dear readers, realize that you are taken for a ride. Switch on your critical thinking, detox your mind, and do not let the dawagandists and Qur’an manipulators deceive you!

If the author of the Qur’an had intended to say that “one day, some men will travel to the moon”,12 nothing could have hindered him to state this. The words needed to say it clearly were all available; many of them are even present in these couple of verses and all of them are found in the Qur’an. It is not something that would have been “impossible to express” at the time of Muhammad.13

However, we are not done yet.

Taslaman continues:


The Russian spacecraft Luna 2 was the first probe to hit the moon (September 12, 1959), and Luna 3 took the first photographs of the far side of the moon. But the most important event was the landing on the moon on July, 21, 1969 by Neil Armstrong and his companions aboard the Apollo 11. The scene of landing on the blurred TV screen was surely one of the most spectacular events in human history. What had been thought impossible had come true. There were positivists, however, who pointed to this event as a scientific achievement and used it as an argument against religion. Certain bigoted scholars of Islam contended that it was a lie that there had been such an event, and that anybody who claimed that man was on the moon would be cursed.

The miraculous prediction had come true, showing once again God’s art and power. …

Verse 20 that comes after verses 18 & 19 in which the journey to the moon is predicted, which reads: “So, why do they not believe?may refer to the unbelievers and atheists who remained blind to God’s splendour and wisdom, considering this a victory of science over religion. … (Underline emphasis mine)

All of the above is irrelevant. It is already refuted. There is no prediction of a journey to the moon in this passage of the Qur’an. They only reason I wanted to quote these paragraphs, is to point out that with the words “may refer …” Taslaman finally admits that he is not so sure after all that his interpretation is actually correct.

Furthermore, there is one final but highly important detail that seems to have escaped Taslaman’s attention. Although I am clearly beating a dead horse by now, here comes the final blow.

A false Prophecy?

The verse Q. 84:18 does not simply mention “the moon”, but speaks about a specific phase of the moon. The very first line of Taslaman’s chapter states:

18        and the moon when it is full,

Why does Taslaman only import “the moon” from verse 18 into verse 19 but does not pay any attention to the specification of “what kind of a moon” is spoken about in verse 18? Let us rectify this careless oversight.

Taslaman clearly connects this “prophecy of the Qur’an” not with moon missions in general, but with one particular journey to the moon, when he writes:

But the most important event was the landing on the moon on July, 21, 1969 by Neil Armstrong and his companions aboard the Apollo 11.

Therefore, let us find the answer to the question: What was the phase of the moon during the journey of Apollo 11?

Gladly, the internet provides us today with wonderful tools, such as the “Moon Phase Calculator” that allows us to query for the phases of the moon in any year and country. Choosing the year 1969 and London as location since Universal Time is based on the Prime Meridian through Greenwich14 we get a table that contains the following line:


New Moon

First Quarter

Full Moon

Third Quarter



14. Jul 15:12

22. Jul 13:10

29. Jul 03:45

5. Aug 02:39

29d 15h 05

Noting that Apollo 11 was launched on July 16 (13:32:00 UT), arrived on the moon on July 20 (20:17:40 UT), departed the moon on July 21 (17:54:01 UT), and arrived back on earth on July 24 (16:50:35 UT), it is obvious that the “Journey TO the Moon” (Taslaman’s title) took place in its entirety while the moon, as viewed from the earth, was visible even less than half! In fact, Apollo 11 already left the moon for its return journey before the moon became half-visible from the earth!

In other words, if we accept Taslaman’s (manipulative and false) interpretation of the text, we obtain a blatantly false prophecy of the Qur’an. Neil Armstrong aboard Apollo 11 did not “ride from stage to stage” towards the moon when the moon was full, but when it was visible less than half. Thus, Taslaman failed on all counts to inject a scientific-prophetic miracle into the Qur’an.

Odds and ends

What about the other moon missions?

It is easy enough to obtain the list of all manned moon missions (*), i.e. Apollo 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and find their dates of departure and return, and then check with the Moon Phase Calculator whether these flights had a full moon or not.



Date of Full Moon

Apollo 11

16-24 July 1969

29 July

Apollo 12

14-24 November 1969

23 November

Apollo 13

11-17 April 1970

21 April

Apollo 14

31 Jan to 9 February 1971

10 February

Apollo 15

26 July to 7 August 1971

6 August

Apollo 16

16-27 April  1972

28 April

Apollo 17

7-19  December 1972

20 December

[Note: Due to technical problems, the team of Apollo 13 did not land on moon as intended but returned after a single pass around the moon.]

Conclusion: It seems that, just to annoy the Islamic propagandists, God orchestrated the moon missions in such a way that not even one of the flights TO the moon would happen at the time of a full moon, and even most of the return flights were completed before the full moon arrived on the scene. Only at two missions, Apollo 12 and 15, the astronauts had a full moon “behind them” on the day before they arrived on earth again, i.e. they travelled “from stage to stage” towards the earth when the moon became full.

What about the rest of the oath?

If the last one of the witnesses to the oath, the moon, is included in the content statement, what about the first two witnesses? If the moon in v. 19 is turned into the destination of the ride, then surely the first two verses,

16   But nay! I swear by the twilight glow,
17    and the night and what it envelops,

give additional prophetic information that (a) this journey would be started at twilight and (b) the travelling would then take place during the night!?15

Therefore, we ask: At what time did Apollo 11 start? The already referenced Apollo 11 facts page gives the answer:

 Launch:July 16, 1969
13:32:00 UT (09:32 a.m. EDT) Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39A

So, we have a double contradiction regarding the time of the day. In the month of July, 9:32 AM local time is already bright day in Florida, certainly not “twilight”. Furthermore, the start was not late evening when the sun goes down and night falls, but in the morning and Apollo 11 flew into the day, not into and during the night.

Next we ask: What does “night” actually mean? A place being “in the night” means that it is in the shadow of the earth, so that the rays of the sun cannot reach it. However, in outer space, in most places there is no night because there are no bodies large enough to cover the sun.16 Moreover, the Lunar Module of Apollo 11 landed on the side of the moon that was illuminated by the sun, i.e. on the “day side” of the moon.17 No night there either.

Take a careful look at this graphic:

(Source: Wikipedia, Moon; 24 October 2011)

The journey of Apollo 11 towards the moon took place during the Waxing Crescent interval.18 The mission started from the day side of the earth and they landed on the day side of the moon. Looking at the above picture, it should be obvious that any reasonably direct trajectory does remain in full view of the sun and does not pass through the shadow of either the earth or the moon.

Since the above image is not drawn to scale, let’s also look at an approximation of the trajectory that shows the correct proportions.

(Source: Apollo 11's Translunar Trajectory; 24 October 2011)

The Sun would be located far away to the bottom of the “Top View” image, or above the “Side View” image of the trajectory, again illustrating that Apollo 11 would be at no time in the shadow.

To summarize, Apollo 11 started in bright day, and as soon as it was far enough from the earth, the likelihood for the trajectory to cross the earth shadow is quite small anyhow.19

And the return journey was no darker either:

 Returned to Earth:July 24, 1969
16:50:35 UT (12:50:35 p.m. EDT)

Conclusion: the whole journey happened in bright day light. It seems that only thing “enveloped by the night” (v. 17) in connection with the Apollo 11 mission is Caner Taslaman’s mind.

Why Christians?

If this event is really so crucial to Islam as some Muslim propagandists want to make it appear (see the articles, “Allah’s timing?” and “Splitting the Moon”), and since there are not only one but several Qur’an miracles / prophecies claimed for the historical event of the Apollo 11 moon mission,20 should Muslims not be baffled and find it rather strange that God would predict this event in multiple ways and code several details of it into the Qur’an and then send non-Muslims (“unbelievers”) to the moon, among whom was at least one very committed Christian,21 Edwin Aldrin,22 who celebrated the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ by taking Holy Communion on the moon? (1, 2)

Yet another hoax!

Somehow the triumph of Islam must be found in every major event of world history. Islam must harvest some of the fruits and get some of the glory, … somehow. Thus, it is not too surprising that some Muslim(s) invented the tale that Neil Armstrong heard the Adhan on the moon and later converted to Islam, cf. the article “How Neil Armstrong became a Muslim”.



1 My rebuttal is based on the printed edition: Caner Taslaman, The Quran: Unchallengeable Miracle, 2006, p. 86-87; the chapter is also online in a slightly different formatting, but with essentially the same text. And it is spread from there to other sites as well (*, *, *, *, *, *, *, *, etc.). Google lists several dozens of places.)

2 I use Taslaman’s translation as given in his book for verses 18-20, and supply the rest from the translations by Arberry (*) and Qur’an Corpus (*).

3 The connecting “wa” simply extends the reach of the “bi” (by) in verse 16 until “the moon” in verse 18. Some translators may write “and by the moon …”, but it is still not the “wa” that is translated as “by”, but simply the recognition that the “by” of v. 16 reaches until v. 18, and the desire to make this explicit.

4 I apologize for suggesting that Taslaman has a friend who makes such an idolatrous oath which is strictly forbidden in Islam. But this scenario was necessary for the sake of illustration.

5 And/or Mesut visits Caner so that they can moonwalk together?

6 Note, I do not know where Taslaman lives, I simply took the name of the largest city in Turkey.

7 This by itself is highly problematic, for both logical and theological reasons. Logic: What is the moon going to do if he was abused as a witness for a false oath? Nothing! It simply does not make sense to swear by inanimate objects. For a careful discussion of the theological problems in the oaths of the Qur’an, the reader may want to consult the Index entry “Oaths” for a list of articles dedicated to this issue.

8 His book, The Quran: Unchallengeable Miracle, has 430 pages!

9 Stating, “Commentators dealt differently with the ‘ride from stage to stage.’ The reason was the inaccessibility of the moon at the time. Going to the moon was beyond imagination”, means that they had the wrong interpretation because the true one was beyond imagination at the time. In contrast, he now presents the true meaning.

10 And I daringly venture to claim that this isn’t any different for the Turkish language!

11 Masud Masihiyyen’s above mentioned article discusses the possible meanings in more detail, so that I do not need to repeat this here.

12 Why not even more precisely: “In less than one thousand and four hundred years some Christians will be the first people who travel to the moon.” That should not be asking for too much, when we remember that Muslims even claim the year of the Apollo 11 mission is found in the Qur’an (*), and some of them going so far as to claim that the date, and even the minute and second of the departure time from the moon is coded into the Qur’an! Cf. the article “Allah’s timing?” for a discussion of these particular claims.

13 For contrast, a prophecy of the internet would have been quite difficult to express with the vocabulary of the time in such a way that it is clearly understood.

14 Choosing the country “Saudi Arabia” merely adds two hours, and even switching to Mecca Time would merely shift everything by about 2.5 hours but makes no difference for our conclusion.

15 Notice that the three witnesses belong together and they are a logical sequence: twilight, night, full moon.

16 Perhaps the author of the Qur’an did not know that? On the other hand, even if Apollo 11 had started at night, the journey to the moon took about four days. It was not possible to complete it during one “earth night”. Perhaps the author of the Qur’an did not realize how long this journey would take and that it was impossible to complete in a night?

17 Apart from the fact that it simply makes sense to land on the part of the moon where you have light, the pictures of the lunar module and the astronauts on the moon clearly show shadows, which means that the sun is shining at that time. Moreover, the sunny part of the “moon day” has about the length of about 14 earth days (24 hour periods) since the moon rotates so slowly around its own axis. One moon day = one lunar month on earth. In reality, there were very strict conditions on the exact times when a moon mission could be executed. The NASA website offers a detailed article on this matter: Apollo lunar landing launch window: The controlling factors and constraints

18 As already stated above, New Moon was on 14 July, First Quarter Moon on 22 July, and the outbound part of the journey lasted from 16-20 July.

19 Even if the sun were located anywhere else on the above trajectory images, the shadow portion of the journey would be very small (at most 5% of the trajectory), so that there would be no justification to claim that it took place “during the night”.

20 For example, articles by Harun Yahya (1, 2, 3), Caner Taslaman (1, 2), the Submitters (1), and Abduldaem Al-Kaheel (1) who is the most sober of them all.

21 Neil Armstrong does not speak publicly about his religious convictions, but according to the official biography, First Man: The Life of Neil A. Armstrong by James R. Hansen, his mother Viola was taking her Christian faith very seriously. His mother and father originally met at a Reformed Church (p. 23), and Neil Armstrong was not only baptized as a child (p. 29) but married his first wife Janet at a church (p. 127), so that he could be considered at least a nominal Christian for a good part of his life.

22 Oftentimes mentioned by his nickname, Buzz Aldrin.

Rebuttals to Caner Taslaman
Answering Islam Home Page