www.free-islam.com

Hadith & Sunnah - The house of Allah in the eyes of the aloners on free-minds

- Sat 21 Oct, 2006 9:39 am
Post subject: The house of Allah in the eyes of the aloners on free-minds
Hello All

This is an important subject, its importance is a result of a lot of conjectures those called quran aloners are promoting on their web site free-minds.org, they claim that Mecca is a place for idol worshipping and all muslims who go there as Allah ordered us to do in His Quran are Kafiroon, let 's look at the article which was authored by someone named Layth, and i believe he is the cult leader of free-minds.org:

A Quran aloner claims:

where was mohammed? (Part 1)

Written by Layth (e-mail: laytth@hotmail.com)

[DISCLAIMER: THIS ARTICLE IS CONTROVERSIAL IN ITS FINDINGS AND ONLY REPRESENTS THE VIEWS OF THE AUTHOR. IT MAY NOT REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF OTHER FREE-MINDS MEMBERS. HOWEVER, IT HAS BEEN POSTED FOR ITS THOUGHT-PROVOKING CONTENT]

Preface: This article has been written with the intent of looking into humankind's history through the legacy of the Patriarch Abraham and some of the messengers that followed. The search for the actual Mohammed will take us to several locations in the Middle East, ending with conclusions that are quite different from todays perceived history.

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

Over 1,400 years ago a new 'Scripture' was introduced to the World which re-confirmed man's covenant with God and re-introduced the laws of God that were similarly revealed to Abraham, Moses and Jesus.

This Scripture was known as the Quran, and its recipient (an Arab speaker) was to spread the word to all regions - starting with his own.

And this is a Scripture which We have sent down, blessed, authenticating what is present with him, and that you may warn the capital of the towns and those around it. And those who believe in the Hereafter believe in it, and they are dedicated to their contact-method. (The Message 6:92)
This new Prophet was Mohammed (see 48:29) , and in this article we will attempt to separate 'Myth' from 'Reality' and piece together the correct narration of where he lived, and where he preached, from the Scripture itself...

Part I - History of Messengers.
The revelations in the Scripture serve to provide us with much information about communities of the past and about their lives without which we would be left fumbling for information.

We relate to you the best stories through what We have inspired to you in this Quran; and before it you were of those who were unaware. (The Message 12:3)

1. Noah.
Our search for Mohammed takes us back to the times of Noah and the Great Flood. This was the time when all civilization on Earth was simply 'wiped-out' and man-kind had to start again.

They denied him (Noah), so We saved him and those with him in the Ship, and We drowned those who denied Our revelations; they were a blind people. (The Message 7:64)
Thus, the slate was wiped clean.

So We saved him (Naoh) and the people on the ship, and We made it (the Ark) a sign for the worlds. (The Message 29:15)
Once the Ark settled, then Noah and those with him had the difficult task of re-establishing a human community on Earth.

2. 'Aad - People of Hud.
After Noah's community, the next nation that we hear about from the Scripture being established is that of Aad (Hud is there messenger).

Hud tells his people:

Are you surprised that a reminder has come to you from your Lord through a man from amongst you to warn you? And recall that he made you successors after the people of Noah, and He increased you in status. So recall Gods grace, that you may succeed. (The Message 7:69)


As for Aad, they turned arrogant on Earth, without any right, and they said: Who is mightier than us in strength? Did they not see that God, who created them, was mightier than they in strength? And they were denying Our revelations. (The Message 41:15)
This indicates to us that although other people may have been roaming the Earth, Aad was a power unto its own which earned them the status of a nation and earned them the right to be sent a messenger (only nations large enough to have capitals are sent messengers 28:60).

Their Punishment:
Consequently, We sent upon them violent wind, for a few miserable day, that We may let them taste the humiliating retribution in this life, and the retribution of the Hereafter is more humiliating; they can never win. (The Message 41:16)

Other Clues:
And Aad and Thamud (were annihilated). Much was made apparent to you from their dwellings. The devil had adorned their works in their eyes, thus he diverted them from the path, even though they could see. (The Message 29:38)

The above verse tells us that the remains of 'Aad (as well as the nation of Thamud which will be covered next) were still VISIBLE at the time of the Scriptures revelation. Thus, we can say that this is a place we can still find (i.e. it is not buried or fully destroyed).

Do you build on every high place a symbol, for the sake of vanity! And you take for yourselves strongholds, perhaps you will live forever? And if you attack, you strike ruthlessly? (The Message 26:128-130)
We are also told that 'Aad was building 'Alters' or 'Symbols' on every hill and were very merciless towards their enemies.

Did you not see what your Lord did to Aad? Irum, with the great columns? The one which was like no other in the land? And Thamud who carved the rocks in the valley? (The Message 89:6-9)
The town of 'Irum' mentioned in the verse above is always thought to be a town separate from Aad. However, in the context of the verse, and the way it follows the introduction of 'Aad (and how it is sandwiched-in before Thamud) leaves no doubt that Irum with the Great Columns is the name of Aad's main town or enclave.

Summary of 'Aad:
1. Inherited the land after Noah (7:69);

2. Powerful Nation (41:15);

3. Homes are still visible (29:38);

4. Alters were built on 'High-Points' (26:128);

6. Main City 'Irum' boasts great columns (89:6-9).

3. 'Thamud' - People of Saleh.
The next in the line of Nations are the people of 'Thamud'.

And recall that He made you (Thamud) successors after Aad, and He established you in the land so that you make palaces on its plains, and you carve homes in the mountains. So recall Gods grace, and do not roam the Earth as corrupters. (The Message 7:74)
In the above verse, it is made clear to us that Thamud were carving their homes from the Mountains, and making Palaces in the flat of the Valley.

And He is the One who destroyed `Aad the first. And Thamud, He did not let remain. (The Message 53:50-51)
The above verse (by calling Aad the 1st) seems to indicate that Thamud is a continuation of the Empire that Aad began.

Other Clues:
And Thamud who carved the rocks in the valley? (The Message 89:9)
Here we find more confirmation that Thamud were a Sculpture community who had advanced to make homes from the rock as well as mansions...This also tells us that Thamud is situated in a 'Valley' area.

Has news come to you of the soldiers? Pharaoh and Thamud? (The Message 85:17-18)
And that Thamud was a 'Military' Nation.

Will you be left secure in that which you have here? In gardens and springs. And green crops and palm trees laden with fruit. (The Message 26:147-149)

With enough provisions...

And Aad and Thamud (were annihilated). Much was made apparent to you from their dwellings. The devil had adorned their works in their eyes, thus he diverted them from the path, even though they could see. (The Message 29:38)
And that there homes are still standing!

Summary of Thamud:
1. Inherited the land after 'Aad (7:74);

2. Homes carved out of mountain (7:74);

3. Is a Continuation of the Empire of 'Aad (53:50-51);

4. Situated in a Valley (89:9);

5. Military Community (85:17-18);

6. Provisions of water and gardens available (26:147-149);

7. Homes still standing (29:38).

The above list of clues makes our search much easier for these lost communities...

Conclusion for Aad & Thamud:

All the information found in the Quran draws us to one single finding:

Aad & Thamud have continued after one another IN-THE-SAME place.

There are only two places in the Middle East that have distinct stone carvings (we chose Middle East because that is where civilization first began after the Earth's re-birth in Mesopotamia, and where the Arabs and Arabic language originated from - 26:195):

Medien Saleh - Northern Arabia;
Petra - South of Dead Sea.

Although both places are remnants of the 'Nabataean' Kingdom (the fathers of the Arabs), our research eliminates 'Medien Saleh' as being the central city for the following reasons:

'§ Medien Saleh has 'tombs' carved out of the rock, whereas Scripture tells us they carved 'homes' (7:74);

'§ Medien Saleh is situated in a 'flat-land' with 'rock-peaks' around it. The Scripture tells us to look for a 'Valley' (89:9);

'§ Medien Saleh has no water water source to host crops and gardens, while Petra has an advanced water system used for irrigation (26:147-148).

Petra.
Thus we are left with 'Petra' which fits all our clues for being 'Irum' with the Great Columns (89:6-9):

Petra also happens to be situated in a 'Valley' (89:9) and is well described by all archeologists as being a 'Military Complex' (85:17-18).

Also, an 'advanced' hydraulic water system was in place with the walls of the narrow entrance 'Siq' lined with channels (originally fitted with chamfered clay pipes of efficient design) to carry drinking water to the city, while a dam to the right of the entrance diverted an adjoining stream through a tunnel to prevent it flooding the Siq (26:147-149).

Petra has only recently been attracting archeological excavations; however, excavations have only been done on less than 2% of the ancient city. According to some archeological research, Petra dates back to 3,500 BC:

"In Abrahams time, Petra was known as Salah. It is located in the mountains of Seir, the land of the Edomites. Petra is the Greek name for Sela, or Selah, a city of ancient Edom. The Hebrew word sela means "lofty, craggy rock, fortress, stronghold, cliff."

The site of Petra seems to indicate the presence of multiple civilizations, the last of which were the Nabateans (Arabs) and the Romans (Byzantines) upto the 6th century A.D. when it was struck by a devastating earthquake in 551 A.D. and the city fell out of disuse (http://nabataea.net/lhistory.html).

Thus, in conclusion to this part of the research, it can be said with some certainty that the ancient city of Petra is indeed the location where the civilizations of Aad and Thamud once lived and flourished.

4. Abraham.
Now that we have seen the development of nations after Noah, we will move on to the story of Abraham in which many developments take place.

-> Abraham leaves the town he lived in due to his people idolatry;

And he (Abraham) said: You have taken idols besides God in order to preserve some friendship among you in this worldly life. But then, on the Day of Resurrection, you will disown one another, and curse one another. Your destiny is Hell, and you will have no victors. (The Message 29:25)
-> Abraham is shown the location of the 'Shrine/Sanctuary';

And We have appointed to Abraham the location of the Sanctuary: Do not set up anyone with Me, and purify My Sanctuary for those who will partake, and those who will enforce, and those who kneel and prostrate. (The Message 22:26)
-> The Sanctuary is in a blessed land also called 'Bakka';

The first Sanctuary established for the people is the one in Bakka, blessed, and a guidance for the worlds. (The Message 3:96)
-> Abraham with Ismail raise the foundations of the Sanctuary;

And as Abraham raised the foundations for the Sanctuary with Ishmael: Our Lord accept this from us, You are the Hearer, the Knowledgeable. (The Message 2:127)
-> The Sanctuary is declared for Pilgrimage;

The Safa and Marwa are amongst Gods symbols. So whosoever makes Pilgrimage to the Sanctuary, or is merely passing through, commits no error that he should traverse them. And whoever donates for goodness, then God is Appreciative, Knowledgeable. (The Message 2:158)
-> One of Abraham's progeny resides in an area near the Sanctuary:

Our Lord, I have resided part of my progeny (Zuriya) in an uncultivated valley near your Restricted Sanctuary. My Lord, so that they may uphold the contact-method. So let the hearts of the people incline towards them and give provisions to them of the fruits that they may give thanks. (The Message 14:37)
5. Lot.

The story of Lot is given certain clues in the Scripture that we can piece together to draw our findings.

-> Lot emigrates with Abraham;
Thus, Lot believed with him and said: I am emigrating to my Lord. He is the Noble, the Wise. (The Message 29:26)
-> Lot settles around a community which turns wicked:

And Lot, when he said to his people: You commit a lewdness that no others in the world have done before! You sexually approach men, and you commit highway robbery, And you bring all vice to your society. But the only response from his people was to Say: Bring us God's retribution, if you are being truthful! (The Message 29:28-30)

-> Lots people/story comes in succession after that of Noah, Aad, and Thamud.

And my people, let not your hatred towards me incriminate you that you suffer the fate of what afflicted the people of Noah, or the people of Hud, or the people of Saleh; and the people of Lot were not far off from you. (The Message 11:89)
-> The town of Lot is near/on an established path:

And it (town of Lot) was on an established path. In that is a sign for the believers. (The Message 15:76-77)

-> The people of Lot rebel and are destroyed:
He said: Here are my daughters if it is your intention. By your life, they are in their drunkenness, blundering. So the scream took them at sunrise. Thus We turned it upside down, and rained upon them with fiery projectiles. (The Message 15:71-74)

They said: O Lot, we are your Lords messengers; they will not be able to harm you, so travel with your family during the cover of the night and let not any of you look back except for your wife, she will be afflicted with what they will be afflicted. Their appointed time will be the morning. Is the morning not near? (The Message 11:81)
-> Lot's town is left partially standing as a 'Sign':

And We left remains of it as a clear sign for a people who understand. (The Message 29:35)

And We have left in it a sign for those who fear the painful retribution. (The Message 51:37)

Where Was Lots Town?
With regards to the location of the town of Lot (Sodom & Gomorrah), it is generally viewed that the area around the Dead Sea in Jordan/Palestine is where the historic events took place. In-fact, if we use the marker that we have established Petra and then measure using the information we are given in the Scripture, we can draw our own similar conclusions as follows:

'§ Lots story, as well as that of Aad and Thamud, were known in the town of Medain - located east of the Sinai area, in which Moses sought refuge during his initial flee from Egypt http://www.wyattmuseum.com/images/wpe97.jpg

'§ The town of Lot was on an established path (15:76-77);

'§ Signs are left from the town for all to see (51:37, 29:35);

The key information from the points above that will help is the one about the established path. If we look at the current evidence of ancient highways/paths that used to intersect the region, then we find that there is indeed the Kings Highway that dates back to before the time of Moses and is still in existence today.

The Kings Highway crossed half the Fertile Crescent, from Egypt to Syria, spreading goods and culture throughout the Middle East. It has been a favored trail since before history was recorded and today is paved for the most part. (http://www.ancientroute.com/HeadrFtr/tkingshwy.htm)

Taking ourselves back to the 6th century A.D. in order to recreate the time-line of the revelation, we find that the path known as the Kings Highway was still in use with a number of towns established on its path as shown in the Madaba map below dating back to that period:

As such, and in staying within some proximity of the town of Petra, we find that the towns around the Dead Sea (Zoara, Karak and Madaba) are potential candidates. Further research would indicate that both towns are inhabited by the Moabites who have their origin traced to the messenger Lot.
(http://198.62.75.1/www1/ofm/mad/legends/legends029.html)

For reasons which will be relevant later on in this article, we will settle on this path east of the Dead Sea as the place where the messenger Lot was situated and where the remains of the people of Lot should be found.
-> Lot is from Abraham's Progeny;

It is mistakenly assumed that whenever the 'Progeny/Zuria' of Abraham was mentioned, it only referred to Ismail or Isaac or their descendants. However, this is not the case:

And We granted him (Abraham) Isaac and Jacob, both of whom We guided; and Noah We guided from before; and from his progeny is David, and Solomon, and Job, and Joseph, and Moses, and Aaron. It is such that We reward the good doers. And Zachariah and John, and Jesus, and Elias; all were from the upright. And Ishmael and Elisha and Jonah and Lot; and each We have preferred over the worlds. (The Message 6:84-86)
This is the part that most Muslim scholars totally missed, although in Christian and Jewish scriptures Lot is recognized as Abraham's nephew.
-----------------------------------------
End of part 1
- Sat 21 Oct, 2006 9:50 am
Post subject:
A Quran aloner claims:

where was mohammed? (Part 2)

Written by Layth (e-mail: laytth@hotmail.com)

[DISCLAIMER: THIS ARTICLE IS CONTROVERSIAL IN ITS FINDINGS AND ONLY REPRESENTS THE VIEWS OF THE AUTHOR. IT MAY NOT REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF OTHER FREE-MINDS MEMBERS. HOWEVER, IT HAS BEEN POSTED FOR ITS THOUGHT-PROVOKING CONTENT]

Part II - Mohammed
Now that we have looked at the sequences and clues with regards to the previous messengers, it is time to move on to the seal of the prophets, Mohammed:

And if Our revelations are recited to them, they Say: We have listened, and if we wish, we could have said the same thing. This is nothing but tales of the ancients! And they said: Our god, if this is the truth (this Quran) from You, then send down upon us a rain of stones from the sky or bring on us a painful retribution. But God was not to punish them while you (Mohammed) are with them, nor will God punish them while they continue to seek forgiveness. And why should God not punish them when they are turning others away from the Restricted Temple, and they were never its protectors! Its protectors are the righteous; but most of them do not know. And their contact-method at the Sanctuary was nothing but noise and aversion. Taste the retribution for what you have rejected. (The Message 8:31-35)

Here we have a number of conclusive points which need to be looked at:

-> Revelations are newly being revealed through Mohammed (8:31);

-> The Restricted Temple/Sanctuary is at this location/place (8:34-35);

-> Mohammed is living amongst these people (8:33);

Taking all the previous information into account, this would mean that Mohammed began his mission in Baca where Abraham originally with Ismail established God's Restricted Temple/Sanctuary.

Now, according to the Sunnis and Shia, we are told that this location is Mecca (Arabia) where the great Kabaa (cube) is located and where millions of pilgrims have made their way for centuries to visit this shrine while performing the rituals/rites of pilgrimage.

However, we must pause here for a moment and ask some vital questions:

1. Since the pilgrimage was first called to by Abraham and was known by the prophets who came after him (e.g. Moses making an oath measured by the years of pilgrimage), then why are the so-called followers of Moses and Jesus (Jews & Nazarenes) unaware of the significance of Mecca or the need to visit the Temple there?

2. If Mecca was the place where Abraham first raised the Shrine, then why do the Sunnis and Shia claim in their history that the prophet and his followers were facing Jerusalem in their daily Salat before switching to Mecca a few years later?

3. If the Sunnis and Shia are fabricating the history of the Jerusalem qibla (focal point), then why is there physical evidence found in the form of a mosque with two qiblas located in Medina and dating back to the prophet's time?

4. What benefit do the Sunnis and Shia have in promoting (to this day) that Jerusalem was the 1st qibla?

The reason for the above questions and the obvious doubt that is being placed on Mecca's authenticity is not due to any secret conspiracy or hidden agenda, but is due to the existence of evidence in the Scripture which has been totally ignored by the masses.

-> Mohammed is situated near Lot's town (Soddom);

And you pass by their ruins (Sodom) in the morning; And in the night. Do you not understand? (The Message 37:137-138)

And they have come upon the town (Sodom) that was showered with a miserable shower. Did they not see it? No, they do not expect any resurrection. (The Message 25:40)
How can someone pass-by the remains of another people EVERY MORNING & EVERY EVENING?

The only way you can achieve that, is if you LIVED NEAR THERE!

Thus, we can determine, with certainty, that Mohammed was indeed within the vicinity (possibly with a day's journey) of the ancient town of Lot.

-> Jerusalem City of God?
In looking to the area surrounding the location where the town of Lot may have once stood, we find ourselves near the historic city of Jerusalem which is claimed by all descendants of the Abrahamic faith to be a site of importance for monotheism.

The Jews give the site value as being where Abraham was about to sacrifice his son and as being the site of David and Solomon's Temple to God.

The Christians believe that this where Jesus spent his last days, preaching at the Temple, praying at the Mt. of Olives, then crucified by the Jews/Romans.

The Muslims claim that Jerusalem was location of the 1st qibla' (focal point) that they performed the Salat toward for a period of time before shifting away; they also believe this was the site where the Prophet Mohammed ascended to heaven during the miraculous night journey'.

-> More clues for Jerusalem;

And you pass by their ruins (Sodom) in the morning; And in the night. Do you not understand? (The Message 37:137-138)
If the towns to the east of the Dead Sea (Moab) are indeed where the remains of Lot's town are to be found, then interestingly enough, from the city of Jerusalem, which is situated over 2,500 ft above sea level, the Dead Sea and the mountains of Moab are visible from the mount of olives in Jerusalem itself. Thus, if the people of Jerusalem were looking out in the morning, or upon returning in the evening, they would be able to glimpse the land where Lot's town stood and was destroyed by the Lord!

Clear view of the Dead Sea and beyond as seen from Jerusalem

The Mount of Olives, which generally parallels the city on the east side, across the Kidron Valley, comprises a line of three low hills, averaging approximately 2,700 feet in elevation. From here, the drop to the Dead Sea, twenty-five miles to the east, is 4,200 feet. Because of this extreme difference in elevation, the Dead Sea and the mountains of Moab beyond are clearly visible from the Mount of Olives.
(http://www.ancientsandals.com/overviews/jerusalem.htm)

-> More clues for Jerusalem;

And call out to mankind with the Pilgrimage, they will come to you walking and on every transport, they will come from every deep enclosure. So that they may witness benefits for themselves and recall God's name in the appointed days over what He has provided for them of the animal livestock. So eat from it and feed the needy and the poor. (The Message 22:27-28)
Looking at the verse above which speaks of pilgrimage, it is noted that the location of the pilgrimage is clearly elevated hence people are coming to it from every deep enclosure'. As already pointed out, Jerusalem is located well above sea level (averaging 2,700 ft), making it an ideal description for people which would be approaching it from the low lands.

-> Jerusalem Trade Route;
This should be cherished by Quraysh. The way they cherish the journey of the winter and summer. So let them serve the Lord of this sanctuary. The One who fed them from hunger. And protected them from fear. (The Message 106:1-4)
Located on the Ridge Route,' Jerusalem was on or near three active trading center for both sea and land routes that stretched between East & West.

An architectural masterpiece, the Dome was built in 687 A.D. by AbdulMalik Bin Marwan in what is still a puzzle to historians as the Dome was not constructed like any mosque, but more like a temple/shrine':

What is so unique is that the Dome of the Rock was never built as a mosque and was never used for this purpose. The character of the building is not that of a typical mosque. No similar building can be found anywhere else in the Islamic world. It was not built facing Mecca but as an octagonal form corresponding to the points of the compass. The main entrance is from the south, not the south-east (the direction of Mecca) as in other mosques. The builders did not build a Michrab (showing the direction of Mecca) in the southern part of the building. Even today, when the Arabs pray on the Temple Mount they do not do it in this building. Only in 1947 did the Mufti Hajamim el Husseini, who made a covenant with Hitler agreeing to kill all the Jews in the land of Israel, decide to build a Michrab. He explained that the Jews were going to rebuild the Temple on the same location of the Dome of the Rock, the site of the First and Second Temples; in this way he believed he would be able to prevent it. However, this act never made the Dome into a mosque and the Moslems continued to pray in the El Aqsa mosque on the southern part of the Temple Mount. (source)

Some historians (such as Al-Yaqubi) have attributed this strange structure to the political situation at the time and the desire of Abdel Malik to retain the power base of Islam in having the pilgrimage located at Jerusalem rather than Mecca:

`Abd al-Malik prevented the people of Sham from the hajj and this is because Ibn al-Zubayr was taking the pledge of allegience from the pilgrims. When `Abd al-Malik had found out about this, he prevented them from setting out to Makkah. But the people protested and said: "Do you prevent us from doing the pilgrimage to the Sacred House of Allah while it is a duty from Allah upon us ?" He said: "Here is Ibn Shihabuddin al-Zuhri narrating to you that the Messenger of Allah said: "The caravans should not be set out except for three mosques, the Sacred Mosque, my present Mosque and the Mosque of Jerusalem" [which] stands for the Sacred Mosque for you. And here is the Rock on [which] it is narrated that the Prophet set his foot before ascending to the heavens, it stands for the Ka`bah. Then he built a Dome on the Rock, suspended silk curtains on it and appointed servants for it. And told the people to revolve around it like they revolve around the Ka`bah and so it was during the rule of Bani Umayyah.[ Ahmad b. Abu Ya`qub Ibn Wadih al-Ya`qubi (Ed. M. T. Houtsma), Tarikh, 1883, Volume II, Leiden, p. 311.1]

-> The Kaaba Jerusalem;

God has made the Kaaba to be the Restricted Sanctuary, to enforce for the people, and for the restricted month, and for the donations, and for regulation; that is so you know that God knows what is in heavens and what is in Earth, and that God is aware of all things. (The Message 5:97)

We are told that the word Kaaba' means a cube shape' and that the site in Mecca has been constructed in accordance with this design requirement.

However, the meaning of cube' associated to this word has no basis in the Scripture itself nor even to the Arabic language still in use today (the word for cube is mu'ka'ab, not kaaba or kaab).

The word Kaab/Kaaba' are associated in Arabic to any feature that is protruding, such as the bones to the side of the ankles as can be seen below:

O you who believe, if you rise to attend the contact-method, then wash your faces and your hands up to the elbows, and wipe your heads and your feet to the ankles (Kaabain); and if you have had intercourse, then you shall bathe. And if you are ill, or traveling, or you have excreted feces, or you have had sexual contact with the women, and you could not find water, then you shall select from the clean soil; you shall wipe your faces and your hands with it. God does not want to make any hardship over you, but He wants to cleanse you and to complete His blessings upon you that you may be appreciative. (The Message 5:6)

Thus, any construct, regardless of its shape can be called a Kaaba' as long as it stands out from the plain.

What we need to ask to be more detailed is: are there any special features that are protruding at the site of the temple of Mecca or Jerusalem that would give it the description of being a Kaaba'

With regards to the temple of Mecca, we have no apparent evidence of any special structure, however, with regards to the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, we have as the name indicates, a special feature that is the presence of a Rock Formation that protrudes from the earth as part of the original mount and upon which the Dome was built.

What is interesting to note regarding the stone is that it is attributed as the spot where Abraham attempted to sacrifice his son in fulfillment of the vision he had seen. This would technically make the stone the marker given the name by God of Maqam Ibrahim (place/location of Abraham) which we are told would be found within the Temple/Sanctuary:

The first Sanctuary established for the people is the one in Bakk'a, blessed, and a guidance for the worlds. In it are clear signs: the place of Abraham (maqam Ibrahim). And whoever enters it will be secure. And God is owed from mankind to make Pilgrimage to the Sanctuary, whoever can make a path to it. And whoever rejects, then God has no need of the worlds. (The Message 3:96-97)

Please note the apparent discrepancy for the site of Mecca where the alleged Maqam Ibrahim has been placed outside the alleged sanctuary/temple:

-> Back to Lot;
Our Lord, I have resided part of my progeny (Zuriya) in an uncultivated valley near your Restricted Sanctuary. My Lord, so that they may uphold the contact-method. So let the hearts of the people incline towards them and give provisions to them of the fruits that they may give thanks. (The Message 14:37)
If Jerusalem is indeed the location of the original Temple (which the author believes to be the case), and if Lot's town/area was within sight of Jerusalem, then the above verse would fit more perfectly with Lot (who is from Abraham's progeny 6:84-86) rather than the alleged tradition of it being Ismail who was charged with establishing a town that people would converge upon possibly on their way to the pilgrimage call (Lot's town was on an established path, so people stopping there before moving on to Jerusalem, as well as Lot promoting the pilgrimage to travelers on that path, would make perfect sense).

Note: The above information narrows down Lot's town to one situated in a valley' on the established path.
-------------------------------------------------

End of part 2
- Sat 21 Oct, 2006 9:59 am
Post subject:
A Quran aloner claims:

where was mohammed? (Part 3)

Written by Layth (e-mail: laytth@hotmail.com)

[DISCLAIMER: THIS ARTICLE IS CONTROVERSIAL IN ITS FINDINGS AND ONLY REPRESENTS THE VIEWS OF THE AUTHOR. IT MAY NOT REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF OTHER FREE-MINDS MEMBERS. HOWEVER, IT HAS BEEN POSTED FOR ITS THOUGHT-PROVOKING CONTENT]

Part III - Mohammed Emigrates.
This is where the Sunnis and Shia begin to agree with the narration taken from the Scripture. After preaching the message of God to his own community of Baca; and after finding much resistance and oppression...Mohammed Emigrates from his home after all attempts to establish a 'God Alone Community' are met with failure and defeat.

And many a town was stronger than your own town, which drove you out. We destroyed them, and there was none who could help them. (The Message 47:13)

-> The Migration/Hijra:
O prophet, We have made lawful for you the wives to whom you have already given their dowry, and the one who is committed to you by oath, as granted to you by God, and the daughters of your father's brothers, and the daughters of your father's sisters, and the daughters of your mother's brothers, and the daughters of your mother's sisters, of whom they have emigrated with you. Also, the believing woman who had decreed herself to the prophet, the prophet may marry her if he wishes, as a privilege given only to you and not to the believers. We have already decreed their rights in regard to their spouses and those who are still dependant. This is to spare you any hardship. God is Forgiver, Merciful. (The Message 33:50)

God has pardoned the prophet and the emigrants and the supporters that followed him in the darkest hour, even though the hearts of some of them nearly deviated, but then He pardoned them. He is towards them Compassionate, Merciful. (The Message 9:117)

We can clearly read that Mohammed (and his followers/supporters & family members) all emigrated from their town of Baca ...

-> Medina/Yathrib:
This place of Emigration was known as 'Yathrib':'

And a group of them said: O people of Yathrib, you cannot make a stand; therefore, retreat. And a small party of them sought permission from the prophet, saying: Our homes are exposed, while they were not exposed. They just wanted to flee. (The Message 33:13)

There is nothing in the Scripture to contradict the current city of Medina (Western Saudi Arabia) from being the historic Iatribu/Yathrib that Mohammed immigrated to as per the archeological remains (graves, homes, mosques, etc..).

Jurisdiction of Rome around the period 600 A.D.

In-fact, looking at the map of Rome's jurisdiction at the time, it would make perfect sense that Mohammed would migrate south away from Rome's influence towards a place where they had no jurisdiction.

-> Beca/Jerusalem is still Mohammed's Focal Point.
The first sanctuary established for the people is the one in Bakka, blessed, and a guidance for the worlds. (The Message 3:96)
Although Mohammed has been evicted, he is still upholding the focal point of the Temple in Jerusalem'¦This would explain why the Sunnis and Shia record until today that the prophet did indeed face Jerusalem for the first part of his stay in Medina (as evidenced by the mosque with two qiblas) and why they still call Jerusalem the 1st qibla.

But the question still remains: how was the qibla changed?

-> God Establishes a new Focal Point (Qibla):
The foolish from amongst the people will Say: What has turned them away from the focal point that they were on? Say: To God is the east and the west, He guides whomsoever He wishes to a straight path. (The Message 2:142)

Here is a clear 'turning' away from the existing focal point to newer one.

In-fact, this is where traditions and archeology meet with the Scripture as they relate that when the prophet came to Medina, he set the focal point towards the North East (in this case they claim Jerusalem), and that after a period of time he set it in the opposite direction.

What is an interesting point to note is that if we drew a straight line from Medina to Jerusalem (in-line with the original qibla as per the Scripture), and then we extend the same line completely in the opposite direction (in-line with the turning away from the qibla as per the Scripture), we see that the alleged temple of Mecca, contrary to what the Sunnis and Shia claimed, does not come onto this path.

An imaginary line drawn from Medina to Jerusalem and opposite.

-> Why Change to a New Focal Point?
Establishing a new 'Focal Point' (or Qibla) has precedence in the Quran and was done during the time of the Exodus when Moses and his companions were on the run from Pharaoh and needed to face towards the direction where their enemy would come from during their Salat.

And We inspired to Moses and his brother: Let your people leave their homes in Egypt, and let these homes be your focal point (Qibla) and uphold the contact-method. And give good news to the believers. (The Message 10:87)

As for Mohammed's people...it was a 'test' of sorts:

And as such, We have made you a balanced nation so that you may be witness over the people, and that the messenger may be witness over you. And We did not make the focal point that you became on except to distinguish who follows the messenger from those who will turn on their heels. It was a great thing indeed except for those whom God had guided; God was not to waste your belief. God is Merciful and Compassionate over the people. (The Message 2:143)

-> The Medina/Yathrib Expansion:
During his time in Yathrib, Mohammed and his followers were forced into a number of conflicts which gave them governance over lands/areas they had previously not been involved with.

And He inherited you their land, their homes, their money, and lands you had never stepped on. God is able to do all things. (The Message 33:27)

And recall when you were but a few who were weak in the land, you were fearful that men might capture you. But He sheltered you, and He supported you with His victory, and He provided you with good provisions, so that you may be thankful. (The Message 8:26)

-> Financial Growth & Development:
You should know: Of anything you gain, that one-fifth shall go to God and the messenger, and the relatives, and the orphans, and the poor, and the wayfarer. You will do this if you believe in God and in what We revealed to Our servant on the day of the Criterion, the day the two armies clashed. God is able to do all things. (The Message 8:41)

-> Military Strategy & Experience:
It was during this Yathrib Campaign' that it would seem most of the warfare' verses were revealed (4:77, 47:20, 2:217).

And prepare for them all that you can of might, and from the steeds of war, that you may instil fear with it towards Gods enemy and your enemy, and others beside them whom you do not know but God knows them. And whatever you spend in the cause of God will be returned to you, and you will not be wronged. (The Message 8:60)

-> Rome was to be fought!
This was a prediction of the inevitable battle against an organized and well trained army...The results as we shall see were quite disastrous.

Say to those Nomads who lagged behind: You will be called on to fight a people who are very powerful in warfare, unless they surrender. Then if you obey, God will grant you a good reward, but if you turn away as you turned away before, He will punish you with a painful retribution. (The Message 48:16)
--------------------------

End of part 3
- Sat 21 Oct, 2006 10:04 am
Post subject:
where was mohammed? (Part 4)

Written by Layth (e-mail: laytth@hotmail.com)

[DISCLAIMER: THIS ARTICLE IS CONTROVERSIAL IN ITS FINDINGS AND ONLY REPRESENTS THE VIEWS OF THE AUTHOR. IT MAY NOT REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF OTHER FREE-MINDS MEMBERS. HOWEVER, IT HAS BEEN POSTED FOR ITS THOUGHT-PROVOKING CONTENT]

Part IV Baca/Jerusalem is liberated

Roman Victory, Muslim Loss;
The Romans have won*, at the lowest point** on the Earth. But after their victory, they will be defeated. In a few more years. The decision before and after is for God, and on that day the believers will rejoice. (The Message 30:2-4)

* Most translation have made a mistake in the vowels of 30:2-4 thinking (or making us think) that Rome was 'Defeated' then 'Won'. They claim that the reason the Muslims rejoiced' during the victory of Rome was because it was a war between Rome and Persia, and the Muslims rejoiced that Rome had won since Rome was a Christian nation and thus closer to their beliefs. If we put this nonsense explanation aside and simply reverse the vowel markings, then we can see that the proper context becomes Rome winning' and then losing' at which point the Muslims rejoice.

**Note that the 'lowest part of the earth' is a dead giveaway that the battle was fought near the Dead Sea as it is the lowest body of water on Earth, lying 408 meters (1,340 feet) below sea level.

The battle where Rome defeated the Muslims could be the archeologically supported battle of 'Mutah' of 632 A.D. In this first major battle between the Muslims and Rome, the Muslim army was decimated with a retreat called to save as many lives as possible. The battle has been reported as follows:

One hundred thousand Roman soldiers, sent by the Roman king were armed to teeth with war equipment. They were also skilled at various war methodologies. They formulated contingents of six thousand soldiers, each called a "Legion". The Legion was divided into thirty groups, each of which was called "Manipool". Each Manipool consisted of two hundred soldiers. This was further subdivided into two groups each with one hundred soldiers and was called "Century". All the Roman soldiers wore steel helmets and armour. Their shields were large and their spears and swords extraordinarily long. They were also familiar with the formation of flanks.

The commander of the Islamic army, Zayd bin Harith zealously said, "We have come to fight in the way of Allah, if we kill the enemy for victory, Paradise is our reward. The same is ours if we die and are defeated. Only those fear the enemy numbers who lack Faith in the hereafter. Why should we be afraid of the numbers of the enemy?" These words of Zayd bin Harith induced rejuvenation among the Muslims and they became prepared for the battle. " (http://www.usf.edu.pk/wyw-35.html)

The results of the battle of Mut'ah (according to history) were disastrous for the Muslim army. Zeid and a large number of his comrades were killed, while the leadership of the army fell by default to Khalid Bin Al-Waleed who, in the face of defeat, called for an immediate retreat of all remaining fighters/soldiers. The remains of some of the most prominent figures who took part in the battle of Mut'ah are still found at that location:

"The most important companions of the Prophet buried in Jordan include: Zeid ibn al-Haritha; Ja'far bin Abi Talib (cousin of the Prophet and elder brother of Ali, who was the husband of the Prophet's daughter Fatima and the father of al-Hassan and al-Hussein); Abu Ubaydah Amer Ibn al-Jarrah (one of the "Blessed Ten" companions promised Paradise); Mu'ath bin Jabal (the Prophet's governor in Yemen); Shurhabil bin Husna (the Scribe of the Qur'anic Revelation), and Dirar bin al-Azwar (a great general). In fact, many more companions of the Prophet are buried in Jordan." (http://www.kinghussein.gov.jo/tourism7.html)

*It should be mentioned that 'Zeid' (the prophet's adopted son) is one of the few people mentioned by name in the Scripture (33:37)

However, after a few more years, the prophesized victory did come...

Roman Loss, Muslim Victory;.
The Romans have won, at the lowest point on the Earth. But after their victory, they will be defeated. In a few more years. The decision before and after is for God, and on that day the believers will rejoice. (The Message 30:2-4)
In fulfillment of God's promise, and in confirming the truth of the prophecy, the Muslim army once again set out to battle mighty Rome. This event fits the description of the historic 'Battle of Tabuk' that has been reported as the Prophet Mohammed's final military campaign before his death.

The army, with Mohammed at its head, found a complete collapse of Roman fighting spirit and will:

"Muhammad had been giving to Byzantium a good portion of his thought and careful planning. He was convinced that Muslim power at the northern frontier with al Sham should be firmly established if those who had been evacuated from the Peninsula and who had emigrated to Palestine were not to return and attack again. It was in consequence of this care that Muhammad mobilized a very massive army when he heard that the Byzantines were about to advance on the northern frontier, and he himself led that army all the way to Tabuk. The Byzantines had withdrawn toward the interior upon hearing of the march of that army." (click here for source).

The Restricted Temple is finally liberated:
After what seems like an impossibility...Mohammed is finally home...The Temple at Baca/Jerusalem is liberated:

God has fulfilled with truth His messenger's vision: You will enter the Restricted Temple, God willing, secure*, with your heads shaven and shortened, having no fear. Thus, He knew what you did not know, and He has coupled with this a near victory. (The Message 48:27)
* Please note that 'secure' could be understood as the prophecy that there would be no resistance, and that Rome would capitulate and give-up the land of God's Temple.

The son/prophet of Baca has now returned to his homeland, and has finally been able to defeat those that fought to suppress and oppress him and his people...

The Focal Point (Qibla) is Shifted Back to Baca/Jerusalem.
It can be hypothesized that the change in qibla away from Jerusalem was one of the largest single contributors to the situation we see today where Muslims do not follow God's system. This hypothesis would make the most sense especially of the re-shifting of the qibla back to Jerusalem did not take place until close to the end of the prophet's life, soon after or during his liberation of Baca/Jerusalem:

The foolish from amongst the people will Say: What has turned them away from the focal point that they were on? Say: To God is the east and the west, He guides whomsoever He wishes to a straight path. (The Message 2:142)

And as such, We have made you a balanced nation so that you may be witness over the people, and that the messenger may be witness over you. And We did not make the focal point that you became on except to distinguish who follows the messenger from those who will turn on their heels. It was a great thing indeed except for those whom God had guided; God was not to waste your belief. God is Merciful and Compassionate over the people. (The Message 2:143)

We see the shifting of thy face towards the sky; We will thus set for you a focal point that will be pleasing to you: You shall set yourself towards the Restricted Temple; and wherever you may be, you shall all set yourselves towards it. Those who have been given the Scripture know it is the truth from their Lord. And God is not unaware of what you do. (The Message 2:144)

And wherever you go out, you shall set yourself towards the Restricted Temple. And wherever you may be you shall set yourselves towards it; that the people will have no room for debate with you, except those of them who are wicked. You shall not fear them, but fear Me; so that I may complete My blessings upon you and that you may be guided. (The Message 2:150)

The Muslims today are confused to the above verses in thinking that the shift towards the Restricted Temple' was God's command for Mohammed when he shifted away from Jerusalem (and they assume towards the shrine of Mecca). The problem with this understanding is that in 2:142 the change had already taken place and the people were commenting about it (i.e. 'what made them change from their Qibla?'). While in 2:144 the Prophet is given new instructions to use the focal point of the Restricted Temple (which cannot be Mecca because the first change of Qibla that was meant to be a test has already happened and thus the people were all facing the focal point opposite Jerusalem).

The prophet foretold in the 'Scriptures' has finally come to pass:
And when Jesus, son of Mary, said: O children of Israel, I am God's messenger to you, authenticating what is present with me of the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be most acclaimed.' But when he showed them the clear proofs, they said: This is clearly magic' (The Message 61:6)

And the prayer of Abraham has been answered...
Our Lord, and send amongst them a messenger from among themselves, that he may recite to them Your revelations and teach them the Scripture and the wisdom, and purify them. You are the Noble, the Wise. (The Message 2:129)
------------------------------------

End of part 4
- Sat 21 Oct, 2006 10:10 am
Post subject:
A Quan aloner claims:

where was mohammed? (Part 5)

Written by Layth (e-mail: laytth@hotmail.com)

[DISCLAIMER: THIS ARTICLE IS CONTROVERSIAL IN ITS FINDINGS AND ONLY REPRESENTS THE VIEWS OF THE AUTHOR. IT MAY NOT REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF OTHER FREE-MINDS MEMBERS. HOWEVER, IT HAS BEEN POSTED FOR ITS THOUGHT-PROVOKING CONTENT]

Part V Mecca Arabia

What of Mecca?

And He is the One who withheld their hands against you, and your hands against them in the interior of Mecca, after He had made you victorious over them. God is Seer of what you do. They are the ones who rejected and barred you from the Restricted Temple, and barred your donations from reaching their destination. And there had been believing men and women whom you did not know, and you may have hurt them, and on whose account you would have committed a sin unknowingly. God will admit into His mercy whomever He wills. Had they become separated, We would then have punished those of them who rejected with a painful retribution. (The Message 48:24-25)

Mecca at the time of the Prophet seems to have been an insignificant town that was causing a nuisance to the mission of monotheism. This city was not on any significant trade-route at the time nor does its name even have mention in any historical manuscripts which covered the area. Also, it becomes very clear from the context of 48:24 that the prophet and those with him are already inside the very interior of the town called Mecca, yet they remain blocked from the Restricted Sacred Temple (i.e. Mecca is not where their destination is).

Mecca appears to have been a pagan center where the religion of the Nabataens (worship of Allat, Uzzah, and Manaat) flourished like other Nabataen towns. The Kaba (cube) which was used as the center of pagan rituals, is an emulation of the Kaba of Abraham which the Nabataens may have certainly come to know through the call of Abraham to the pilgrimage many centuries ago.

Points that are worth reflecting when studying the subject of Mecca include:

1. The mosque in Medina with 2 qiblas has been demolished and rebuilt.

The physical evidence which shows that the turning of the qibla away from Jerusalem was simply in the opposite' direction and not towards Mecca has been conveniently destroyed by the Saudis and a new mosque has been rebuilt with two qiblas, but with the second qibla aligned towards Mecca.

2. A number of mosques built in the early days after the prophet's death have their qiblas aligned away from Mecca and further north, closer to Jerusalem.

"According to archaeological research carried out by Creswell and Fehervari on ancient mosques in the Middle East, two floor-plans from two Umayyad mosques in Iraq, one built at the beginning of the 8th century by the governor Hajjaj in Wasit (noted by Creswell as, "the oldest mosque in Islam of which remains have come down to us" - Creswell 1989:41), and the other attributed to roughly the same period near Baghdad, have Qiblas (the direction which these mosques are facing) which do not face Mecca, but are oriented too far north (Creswell 1969:137ff & 1989:40; Fehervari 1961:89; Crone-Cook 1977:23,173). The Wasit mosque is off by 33 degrees, and the Baghdad mosque is off by 30 degrees (Creswell 1969:137ff; Fehervari 1961:89)." - http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/qurarch.htm

3. The location of the Kaaba in Mecca at the floor of a valley (where it is prone to flash floods) is more in-line with pagan rites than those of offering people sanctuary and safety at God's Temple.

The Ka'bah is situated in a wadi between two low hills, Marwah and Safa and was thus frequently exposed to flash floods caused by upper Meccan rainwater which ran down into the wadi and was channeled towards the Ka'bah. It is on the face of it, strange to find a religious center built in such a dangerous position, but it is precisely in such a position ?? low on the slopes of a wadi subject to flash floods ?? that cult centers were situated in the Negev. (The Origins of the Muslim Descriptions of the Jahili Meccan Sanctuary; Yehuda D. Nevo, Judith Koren, Jan. 1990)

4. The rituals associated with Mecca until today are all indicative of the pagan rites known and recorded for the region at the time.

Pagan elements associated with the Kaba in Mecca.

The precise alignment of the Black Stone with the winter sunrise is not coincidental. Allat, the main idol of the prophet's people, was a fertility goddess and this is confirmed by archaeological evidence from Nabataean sites. As typical of such fertility goddesses their symbols and rituals are related to the sun. In this case, the direction of the winter sunrise marks the location where the sun is "reborn". Now if you take a closer look, you will see that the enclosure of the Black Stone is in the shape of a dilated female vulva and the Black Stone is in the shape of the crown of the head of the newborn baby deity as it is coming out of the vulva.

Come closer yet and you will see that people are kissing the head of the newborn baby deity. Kissing the head is an ancient Arab tradition for asking for forgiveness. So kissing the top of the head of the newborn idol as traditionally done to ask for forgiveness, results in the pagan's sins being wiped out as if he or she was a newborn.

Hang around for a while and you will observe that people spin seven times around the Black Stone. A pre-quranic manuscript written by Epiphanius in the fourth century CE describes the ritual of spinning seven times as part of the birth festivals of the Nabataean idols Allat and Dhushara around the winter solstice. The number seven was considered sacred in Arab and pagan symbolism in general because of the five sacred planets plus the sun and the moon that the ancients venerated. To this day many people in the Arab world celebrate what is termed in Arabic Subu', which is a traditional festival that takes place on the seventh day after the birth of a newborn and on the seventh day after a pilgrims' return. Like the pagan pilgrimage that we observed and Epiphanius described, as part of the Subu' birth celebrations, people traditionally go around the house seven times while carrying the newborn baby. (http://free-minds.org/articles/history/ayman1.htm)

What of the Safa & Marwa and other sites at Mecca?
The Safa and Marwa are amongst God's symbols. So whosoever makes Pilgrimage to the Sanctuary, or is merely passing through, commits no error that he should traverse them. And whoever donates for goodness, then God is Appreciative, Knowledgeable. (The Message 2:158)

The entire Abraham married his slave girl Hajar and then left her in the wilderness with Ismail based on the wishes of his wife Sarah' not only has no basis whatsoever in the Book of God, but also conflict greatly with the character of a Prophet who is devoted to God and who would never be pressured by any human into abandoning or harming another person(s). As far as we can ascertain, Abraham was married to one woman, the same woman who gave him Ismail and then, many years later, Isaac. We can also ascertain that Abraham lived near the area of the Temple (Jerusalem) and therefore would not have traveled many thousands of kilometers to carry out such an act of inhumanity.

With regards to Jerusalem, if we are looking for two high points, then they are easily located. The site where the Temple is situated is a hill known as Mt. Moriah' (Marwah?) while to the east is an adjacent, but higher, mount known as Mt. of Olives' where a commanding view towards the Dead Sea and the mountain of Moab can be gained.

What of the People of the Elephant'
Have you not seen what your Lord did to the people of the elephant? Did He not cause their schemes to go astray? And He sent upon them formations of birds in flight. Striking them with fiery projectiles. Until He turned them like devoured hay. (The Message 105:1-5)

The Mecca propagandists have attributed he above verses to their religious town claiming that God, before the birth of Mohammed, sent birds to destroy the elephant army of Abraha, who had journeyed all the way from Africa (Habasha) to destroy the temple at Mecca since it was competing with his call for an organized religion.

However, upon closer examination of the verses, it appear that the people who are being referred to as people of the elephant' are none other than the people of Lot who were identified in the Scripture as being destroyed by fiery projectiles':

Have you not seen what your Lord did to the people of the elephant? Did He not cause their schemes to go astray? And He sent upon them formations of birds in flight. Striking them with fiery projectiles. Until He turned them like devoured hay. (The Message 105:1-5)

They said: O Lot, we are your Lord's messengers; they will not be able to harm you, so travel with your family during the cover of the night and let not any of you look back except for your wife, she will be afflicted with what they will be afflicted. Their appointed time will be the morning. Is the morning not near?' So when Our command came, We turned it upside down, and We rained on it with hardened fiery projectiles. (The Message 11:81-82)

Thus We turned it upside down, and rained upon them with fiery projectiles. (The Message 15:74)
----------------------------------------

End of article


Ahmed says:

I will read the above throughly letter by letter and will respond to this allegation Inshaallah,

Please stay tuned

Cheers
- Sat 21 Oct, 2006 10:34 am
Post subject:
Salam Bro,

My first question bro, these couple of so called quran alone, god alone people, are they new ? If Im not wrong founder of bahai religion belonged to muslim family, then in last centry ahmedi from india. I see a commoness in them, thats these people have distanced themselves from their culture and from fellow muslims. What is your view on this that these sort of people have exisited throughout the history.
- Sat 21 Oct, 2006 10:53 am
Post subject:
life wrote:
Salam Bro,


Salam mate

life wrote:

My first question bro, these couple of so called quran alone, god alone people, are they new ?


I don't think so bro, I believe many years ago many claimed the same, I actually agree with the concept of God alone, as long as there will be no violation to what the God said in His Quran

life wrote:

If Im not wrong founder of bahai religion belonged to muslim family, then in last centry ahmedi from india. I see a commoness in them, thats these people have distanced themselves from their culture and from fellow muslims. What is your view on this that these sort of people have exisited throughout the history.


Bro, Satan is there to flaw his main enemy, and guess what?, his main enemy are the Muslims, therefore it is not strange to see many of them flawed and trying to create theor own Satanic concepts, they are the Mushrikoon indeed and I'm sure they will be exposed by Allah as time goes by

Take care bro
- Sun 05 Nov, 2006 12:04 am
Post subject:
Hello All

I'm sorry that I haven't started to reply to the above article by FM webmaster, I actually want it exposed as long as possible so others have a chance to comprehend what it suggests, obviously what it suggests is that the 1.5 billion Muslims are idols worshippers and Mecca is a place for idol worshipping, this is a huge claim by the webmaster of FM, however it seems that it was not his, the above is nothing but a short version of a 193 pages article that was written by someone who sounds like a jew, the author of this 193 page is not a Muslim, you can clearly see this fact in every page that he wrote, I also found that there is msitakes in almost every page in those 193 pages but I'm not going to waste my time and respond to it, I will only respond to the short version of it as exctracted by the webmaster of FM, I will attach this word document to this thread to give the reader a chance to see how the suppoose to be Muslim who is alleging the above non sense is actually basing it on the work of a clear cut enemy of Allah

Salam
- Sun 05 Nov, 2006 4:33 pm
Post subject:
As Salaamu Alaykum Ahmed:

I know that your rebuttle to Layth article will be dynamic and can't wait until you come out with it. Similiarly I've been thinking of writing a rebuttle to one of the Free-Minds members who teach that there is not a Qiblah.

Salaam
- Mon 06 Nov, 2006 11:29 pm
Post subject:
Hello All,

Two expeditions to Oman were mounted; one in 1990 and one in 1991. The expedition team included Nicholas Clapp, Dr. Ronald Blom, archaeologist Dr. Juris Zarins, and British explorer Sir Ranulph Fiennes, who had been on previous Ubar searches. The team investigated the area around Ash Shisr, and soon an archaeological excavation began

The excavations uncovered a large octagonal fortress with thick walls ten feet high and eight tall towers at the corners. The archaeologists also found Greek, Roman, and Syrian pottery, the oldest of which was dated at more than 4,000 years old. The discovery of these types of artefacts from far away places indicated that this was indeed a major center for trade and likely the fabled Ubar.

A picture of Iram 's castles that were found on a depth of 10 meters under layers of sands. It is characterized by its huge pillars. The picture was taken via an American satellite.


One startling result of the excavation was that it appears that Ubar did meet with a catastrophic end, as many of the legends describe. The excavation revealed a giant limestone cavern beneath the fortress. The scientists believe that Ubar may have been destroyed when a large portion of it collapsed into the cavern.

There is still much to be discovered at the site and many questions remain. What is certain is that Mr. Clapp and his team took ancient stories and modern technology and from them wrung a significant archaeological discovery.

The search for Ubar is a good example of how remote sensing can be used with a more traditional discipline like archaeology. Radar imaging is one of the most important types of remote sensing in arid regions and it is has seen wide application in archaeology. In the search for Ubar, however, the limited coverage provided by the space shuttle-based imaging radar necessitated the use of other remotely sensed data.

Landsat imagery played a very important role in the search for Ubar. Using a sensor known as the Thematic Mapper, Landsat produced images that the team could use to identify features like surface tracks. Landsat imagery covers a large area in a single scene, over 30,000 square kilometres, allowing the team to analyse vast portions of the desert at one time.

Data from the French satellite known as SPOT were also used. The SPOT data provide the most detailed, or highest resolution, images available to the team

The researchers used these and other data in their search. Sophisticated image processing techniques were used to highlight the important features. Data from different sources were combined to yield more clues. The result was that the expedition was able to exclude large regions of the desert from consideration, and narrow the search to the most promising sites

In reality, Ubar was not the name of the city, but the name of the region. In the 2nd century A.D. Ptolemy made a map which called the area "Iobaritae", i.e. the Ubarites. The Quran called them "the people of 'Ad". Later legends referred to the fabulous wealth of the city and used the region name Ubar to designate it.

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

This image from space shows a portion of the southern Empty Quarter of the Arabian Peninsula in the country of Oman. On the left is a radar image of the region around the site of the fabled Lost City of Ubar.




Below, we read that the Quran specified the location of Aad in Al-Ahqaaf:

And mention the brother of Ad; when he warned his people in the sandy plains,-- and indeed warners came before him and after him-- saying Serve none but Allah; surely I fear for you the punishment of a grievous day.

[The Quran ; 46:21]

وَاذْكُرْ أَخَا عَادٍ إِذْ أَنذَرَ قَوْمَهُ بِالْأَحْقَافِ وَقَدْ خَلَتْ النُّذُرُ مِن بَيْنِ يَدَيْهِ وَمِنْ خَلْفِهِ أَلَّا تَعْبُدُوا إِلَّا اللَّهَ إِنِّي أَخَافُ عَلَيْكُمْ عَذَابَ يَوْمٍ عَظِيمٍ (21)


Looking at the followings facts about Aad from the Quran:
1) The people of Hud were living in Al-Ahqaaf which means the Dunes, and the historians said that it is located between Yemen and Oman.
2) Aads people were having groves, livestocks, and springs.
3) Aad 's people built an enormous city called Iram, which had tremendous palaces and huge pillars. That is why, Allah described it in the Quran as: Iram; the city with huge pillars.
4) When they accused Hud of lying, Allah sent a stormy wind loaded with dust that killed them and immersed their city in sands.

This must conclude that the discovered city of Ubar is the city of Iram mentioned in the Quran

There is no doubt that what the author is trying to prove (that Thamud people lived in the same place as Aad's people) is nothing but dust in thin air, he provided not a single merited conclusive evidence

Quote:
Petra also happens to be situated in a 'Valley' (89:9) and is well described by all archeologists as being a 'Military Complex' (85:17-18).


Also it must be surrounded with a few mountains hence Petra is the city of Thamud but it can't be the city of Aad

Quote:
Also, an 'advanced' hydraulic water system was in place with the walls of the narrow entrance 'Siq' lined with channels (originally fitted with chamfered clay pipes of efficient design) to carry drinking water to the city, while a dam to the right of the entrance diverted an adjoining stream through a tunnel to prevent it flooding the Siq (26:147-149).


Hmmmm, based on that logic then, the location where Ibrahim dropped his family in a valley without cultivation at the first House of Allah on earth can't be near Jerusalem because Jerusalem is cultivated hill not an uncultivated valley, can you see how the author of this confusing article is double faced?

Quote:
Petra has only recently been attracting archeological excavations; however, excavations have only been done on less than 2% of the ancient city. According to some archeological research, Petra dates back to 3,500 BC:


So what, it seems this guy is running out of words, fine Petra is the city of Thamud, however what Petra has to do with Aad exactly?, I really don't get it

Quote:
"In Abraham's time, Petra was known as Salah. It is located in the mountains of Seir, the land of the Edomites. Petra is the Greek name for Sela, or Selah, a city of ancient Edom. The Hebrew word sela means "lofty, craggy rock, fortress, stronghold, cliff."


So what again, come on, the Muslims agree that Petra is the city of Thamud, but it can't be the city of Aad

Quote:
The site of Petra seems to indicate the presence of multiple civilizations, the last of which were the Nabateans (Arabs) and the Romans (Byzantines) upto the 6th century A.D. when it was struck by a devastating earthquake in 551 A.D. and the city fell out of disuse (http://nabataea.net/lhistory.html).


Great and what that has to do exactly with Aad or Al Masjid Al Haram?, bloody confusing hey

Quote:
Thus, in conclusion to this part of the research,


I won't call it research though, I may call it a clear cut case of confusion

Quote:
it can be said with some certainty that the ancient city of Petra is indeed the location where the civilizations ofAad and Thamud once lived and flourished.


Hahahahahaha, that was a clear cut conjecture, all the Quran and archaeological evidences suggest that the two cities are hundreds of miles apart

Quote:
4. Abraham.
Now that we have seen the development of nations after Noah,


I guess the author should have said:

Now that we have seen the manipulated development of nations after Noah

Quote:
we will move on to the story of Abraham in which many developments take place.


Possibly he should have said it like this:

we will move on to the story of Abraham in which many manipulated developments take place.

Quote:
Abraham leaves the town he lived in due to his people idolatry;
And he (Abraham) said: You have taken idols besides God in order to preserve some friendship among you in this worldly life. But then, on the Day of Resurrection, you will disown one another, and curse one another. Your destiny is Hell, and you will have no victors. (The Message 29:25)


Quote:
Abraham is shown the location of the 'Shrine/Sanctuary';
And We have appointed to Abraham the location of the Sanctuary: Do not set up anyone with Me, and purify My Sanctuary for those who will partake, and those who will enforce, and those who kneel and prostrate. (The Message 22:26)


Great, I wonder where that location is?

Quote:
The Sanctuary is in ablessed land' also called 'Bakka';
The first Sanctuary established for the people is the one in Bakk'a, blessed, and a guidance for the worlds. (The Message 3:96)


Cool, now we have to pause a bit, why not Becca is Mecca?, in fact we know that Mohammad is Ahmed as the Quran explained to us. Cities and people can have more than one name, also the Quran was revealed without dots, and we know that the Ba in Becca needs a dot underneath, while the Mim in Mecca does not have any dots, therefore why not the dot was mistakenly added to the word and became Becca?

If the author of this article agrees that the Quran was revealed without dots then the dot under the word Becca is man made, therefore it is quite possible that it is a typo,

Quote:
Abraham with Ismail raise the foundations of the Sanctuary;
And as Abraham raised the foundations for the Sanctuary with Ishmael: Our Lord accept this from us, You are the Hearer, the Knowledgeable. (The Message 2:127)


Quote:
The Sanctuary is declared for Pilgrimage;
The Safa and Marwa are amongst God's symbols. So whosoever makes Pilgrimage to the Sanctuary, or is merely passing through, commits no error that he should traverse them. And whoever donates for goodness, then God is Appreciative, Knowledgeable. (The Message 2:158)


Great

Quote:
One of Abraham's progeny resides in an area near the Sanctuary:


actually it should be at the Sanctuary

Quote:
Our Lord, I have resided part of my progeny (Zuriya) in an uncultivated valley near your Restricted Sanctuary. My Lord, so that they may uphold the contact-method. So let the hearts of the people incline towards them and give provisions to them of the fruits that they may give thanks. (The Message 14:37)


Here we need to stop a bit because the author of this article is double faced indeed:

Firstly he used the argument that Thamud people must have been living in an area where plants find water Cultivated, and in here he deliberately ignores that Ibrahim dropped his family at the house of Allah where the area is an uncultivated valley as he stated بِوَادٍ غَيْرِ ذِي زَرْعٍ, in an uncultivated valley, this uncultivated valley must be at Al Masjid Al Haram: عِندَ بَيْتِكَ الْمُحَرَّمِ, at your Restricted Sanctuary, obviously the author translation is flawed because Inda Baytaka Al Muhrram means AT your Sacred House and NOT NEAR your restricted Sanctuary as he falsely translated

See how the author has double standards, now he wants the location where Ibrahim dropped his family to be a cultivated hell in Jerusalem and not an uncultivated valley as 14:37 told us

Quote:
5. Lot.
The story of Lot is given certain clues in the Scripture that we can piece together to draw our findings.


I hope the author does not mean by piecing together is to manipulate the well known and proven history

Quote:
Lot emigrates with Abraham;
Thus, Lot believed with him and said: I am emigrating to my Lord. He is the Noble, the Wise. (The Message 29:26)


A clear cut lie, let's look at the Arabic verse:

And Lut believed in him, and he said: I am fleeing to my Lord, surely He is the Mighty, the Wise.

[The Quran ; 29:26]

فَآمَنَ لَهُ لُوطٌ وَقَالَ إِنِّي مُهَاجِرٌ إِلَى رَبِّي إِنَّهُ هُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الْحَكِيمُ (26)

-> See, 29:27 NEVER EVER suggested that Lut migrated with Ibrahim, it only said that Lut believed in Ibrahim : فَآمَنَ لَهُ لُوطٌ, And Lut believed in him, then 29:26 told us that Lut migrated to His Lord : إِنِّي مُهَاجِرٌ إِلَى رَبِّي, : I am fleeing to my Lord, the verse never suggested that Lut migrated with Ibrahim as the confused author is trying to tell us, you can see his confusion when he translated : فَآمَنَ لَهُ لُوطٌ to Lot believed with him instead of : Lot believed in him

Quote:
Lot settles around a community which turns wicked:
And Lot, when he said to his people:You commit a lewdness that no others in the world have done before! You sexually approach men, and you commit highway robbery, And you bring all vice to your society.' But the only response from his people was to Say: Bring us God's retribution, if you are being truthful! (The Message 29:28-30)


Great, but why Ibrahim is not with him then if the author just told us that Lut migrated with Ibrahim?

Quote:
Lot's people/story comes in succession after that of Noah,Aad, and Thamud.
And my people, let not your hatred towards me incriminate you that you suffer the fate of what afflicted the people of Noah, or the people of Hud, or the people of Saleh; and the people of Lot were not far off from you. (The Message 11:89)


So what?, bloody irrelevant by the author

Quote:
The town of Lot is near/on an established path:
And it (town of Lot) was on an established path. In that is a sign for the believers. (The Message 15:76-77)


Great

Quote:
The people of Lot rebel and are destroyed:
He said: Here are my daughters if it is your intention. By your life, they are in their drunkenness, blundering. So the scream took them at sunrise. Thus We turned it upside down, and rained upon them with fiery projectiles. (The Message 15:71-74)


Quote:
They said: O Lot, we are your Lord's messengers; they will not be able to harm you, so travel with your family during the cover of the night and let not any of you look back except for your wife, she will be afflicted with what they will be afflicted. Their appointed time will be the morning. Is the morning not near? (The Message 11:81)


Hmmm, I guess they were homos

Quote:
Lot's town is left partially standing as a 'Sign':
And We left remains of it as a clear sign for a people who understand. (The Message 29:35)
And We have left in it a sign for those who fear the painful retribution. (The Message 51:37)


Great

Quote:
Where Was Lot's Town?


Yeh, where the hell is it?

Quote:
With regards to the location of the town of Lot (Sodom & Gomorrah), it is generally viewed that the area around theDead Sea' in Jordan/Palestine is where the historic events took place. In-fact, if we use the marker that we have establishedPetra' and then measure using the information we are given in the Scripture, we can draw our own similar conclusions as follows:


Man, that author must be confused, what the hell Petra the city of Thamud has to do with the city of Lut in determining the location of the House of Allah?, opps forgot to mention Noah's people as well.

Quote:
'§ Lot's story, as well as that ofAad and Thamud, were known in the town of Medain - located east of the Sinai area, in which Moses sought refuge during his initial flee from Egypt http://www.wyattmuseum.com/images/wpe97.jpg


Hmmm, so if the people of the town of Median knew about Aad and Thamud, would that mean Aad and Thamud lived in the same place?, I guess this is what the confused author is trying to say

Quote:
'§ The town of Lot was on an established path (15:76-77);


Great

Quote:
'§ Signs are left from the town for all to see (51:37, 29:35);


Great, everyone should go there and have a look

Quote:
The key information from the points above that will help is the one about theestablished path'. If we look at the current evidence of ancient highways/paths that used to intersect the region, then we find that there is indeed theKing's Highway' that dates back to before the time of Moses and is still in existence today.


Quote:
The King's Highway crossed half the Fertile Crescent, from Egypt to Syria, spreading goods and culture throughout the Middle East. It has been a favored trail since before history was recorded and today is paved for the most part. (http://www.ancientroute.com/HeadrFtr/tkingshwy.htm)


No problem, let's just conjecture it is King's HWY, so?

Quote:
Taking ourselves back to the 6th century A.D. in order to recreate the time-line of the revelation


Hmmmm, recreate the time line of the revelation, hmmmm again, I really don't get it, possibly the author means to recreate the time line of the stories mentioned in the revelation, and if so then I see it that he means to manipulate the time line of the stories mentioned in the revelation

Quote:
we find that the path known as the King's Highway was still in use with a number of towns established on its path as shown in the Madaba map below dating back to that period:


Great, while it is a conjecture, I have no problem to accept that, I hope accepting that conjecture is not a sin though

Quote:
As such, and in staying within some proximity of the town of Petra,


Bloody confusing man, what Petra has to do with it?, if Lut's people knew the story of Thamud, that does not mean that Thamud people lives next to them nor Aad people for that matter

Quote:
we find that the towns around the Dead Sea (Zoara, Karak and Madaba) are potential candidates. Further research would indicate that both towns are inhabited by the Moabites who have their origin traced to the messenger Lot. (http://198.62.75.1/www1/ofm/mad/legends/legends029.html)


Cool

Quote:
For reasons which will be relevant later on in this article, we will settle on this path east of the Dead Sea as the place where the messenger Lot was situated and where the remains of the people of Lot should be found.


I hope the reasons are not to only serve the author's low desires

Quote:
Lot is from Abraham's Progeny;


So?, I really don't et it with this author, he is a clear cut confuser obviously this is because he is confused himself

Quote:
It is mistakenly assumed that whenever the 'Progeny/Zuria' of Abraham was mentioned, it only referred to Ismail or Isaac or their descendants. However, this is not the case:


I never heard of such claim by the author about the assumed mistake,

Zurria of Ibrahim means all his descendants, for Lut being one of them or not, it really does not matter or does it?

Quote:
And We granted him (Abraham) Isaac and Jacob, both of whom We guided; and Noah We guided from before; and from his progeny is David, and Solomon, and Job, and Joseph, and Moses, and Aaron. It is such that We reward the good doers. And Zachariah and John, and Jesus, and Elias; all were from the upright. And Ishmael and Elisha and Jonah and Lot; and each We have preferred over the worlds. (The Message 6:84-86)


Great, so the author is saying that Lut is not one of Ibrahim descendents according to the above verses?, he really said nothing other than false accusations to the Muslims scholars, let's look:

Quote:
This is the part that most Muslim scholars totally missed, although in Christian and Jewish scriptures Lot is recognized as Abraham's nephew.


How they bloody missed it?, did the author care to tell us?, he didn't, he only referred to the Bible that Lot is recognized as Abraham's nephew, hmmm, even if he is a nephew as the Bible told us, did the Quran tell us that Lut is a descendants of Ibrahim, let's have a look:

84: And We gave to him Ishaq and Yaqoub; each did We guide, and Nuh did We guide before, and of his descendants, Dawood and Sulaiman and Ayub and Yusuf and Haroun; and thus do We reward those who do good (to others)

85: And Zakariya and Yahya and Isa and Ilyas; every one was of the good;

86: And Ismail and Al-Yasha and Yunus and Lut; and every one We made to excel (in) the worlds:

[The Quran ; 6:84-86]

وَوَهَبْنَا لَهُ إِسْحَقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ كُلاًّ هَدَيْنَا وَنُوحًا هَدَيْنَا مِن قَبْلُ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِهِ دَاوُودَ وَسُلَيْمَانَ وَأَيُّوبَ وَيُوسُفَ وَمُوسَى وَهَارُونَ وَكَذَلِكَ نَجْزِي الْمُحْسِنِينَ (84)
وَزَكَرِيَّا وَيَحْيَى وَعِيسَى وَإِلْيَاسَ كُلٌّ مِّنَ الصَّالِحِينَ (85)
وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَالْيَسَعَ وَيُونُسَ وَلُوطًا وَكُلاًّ فضَّلْنَا عَلَى الْعَالَمِينَ (86)

-> Verse 84 tells us that Isaq and Yaqoub are descendents of Ibrahim : And We gave to him Ishaq and Yaqoub[], then verse told us a fact about those two sons of Ibrahim: [b] each did We guide, the verse then started a new sentence with a Waw about Noah, and Nuh did We guide before, then the verse is telling us about the descendents of Noah: and of his descendants, now all the prophets listed in rest of 84 as well 85 and 86 are descendents of Noah: , Dawood and Sulaiman and Ayub and Yusuf and Haroun; and thus do We reward those who do good (to others), and the following are descendents of Noah : And Zakariya and Yahya and Isa and Ilyas; every one was of the good;, and also the following are descendents of Noah : Ismail and Al-Yasha and Yunus and Lut; and every one We made to excel (in) the worlds:, therefore it seems that the author is the confused one in here because the verses above never told us that Lut is a descendent of Ibrahim rather it told us that Lut along with others are descendents of Noah, 6:84 only told us that Isaq and Yaqoub are descendents of Ibrahim

Quote:
End of part 1


What an end that was, the above took me 48 hours exactly, while I really believe that I'm wasting my time with that Muslim author who submitted to a clear cut enemy of Allah who put a 193 pages article full of lies and manipulations, then that Muslim author picked what he liked from it and created his silly 5 parts article where was mohammed, there is no doubt that the Muslim author ignorance is obvious from the many mistakes he made, at the end of my 5 comments I have to summarize his mistakes and I'm sure there will be many, my reply to his part 1 is more than enough to demolish this non sense that he is following and promoting on his web site and causing many young and na'¯ve Muslims to be mislead, therefore I will continue inshallah refuting the rest of his 5 parts article to absolutely prove to every one that this man has gone astray after his Islam:

They swear by Allah that they said nothing (evil), but indeed they uttered blasphemy, and they did it after accepting Islam; and they meditated a plot which they were unable to carry out: this revenge of theirs was (their) only return for the bounty with which Allah and His Messenger had enriched them! If they repent, it will be best for them; but if they turn back (to their evil ways), Allah will punish them with a grievous penalty in this life and in the Hereafter: They shall have none on earth to protect or help them.

[The Quran ; 9:74]

يَحْلِفُونَ بِاللّهِ مَا قَالُواْ وَلَقَدْ قَالُواْ كَلِمَةَ الْكُفْرِ وَكَفَرُواْ بَعْدَ إِسْلاَمِهِمْ وَهَمُّواْ بِمَا لَمْ يَنَالُواْ وَمَا نَقَمُواْ إِلاَّ أَنْ أَغْنَاهُمُ اللّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ مِن فَضْلِهِ فَإِن يَتُوبُواْ يَكُ خَيْرًا لَّهُمْ وَإِن يَتَوَلَّوْا يُعَذِّبْهُمُ اللّهُ عَذَابًا أَلِيمًا فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالآخِرَةِ وَمَا لَهُمْ فِي الأَرْضِ مِن وَلِيٍّ وَلاَ نَصِيرٍ (74)


I really hope that Allah guides him back to His path

Salam
- Mon 20 Nov, 2006 2:10 pm
Post subject:
Hello All

Quote:
where was mohammed? (Part 2)


Great, let's move to part 2, I guess part 1 was slam dunked hey

Quote:
Part II - Mohammed
Now that we have looked at the sequences and clues with regards to the previous messengers,


Wow, the previous messengers, I guess the author means a few of the previous messengers

He talked about Noah, Hud, Saleh, Ibrahim and Lut, yep that's a few of the thousands of messengers Allah sent


Quote:
it is time to move on to the seal of the prophets, Mohammed:
And if Our revelations are recited to them, they Say: We have listened, and if we wish, we could have said the same thing. This is nothing but tales of the ancients! And they said: Our god, if this is the truth (this Quran) from You, then send down upon us a rain of stones from the sky or bring on us a painful retribution. But God was not to punish them while you (Mohammed) are with them, nor will God punish them while they continue to seek forgiveness. And why should God not punish them when they are turning others away from the Restricted Temple, and they were never its protectors! Its protectors are the righteous; but most of them do not know. And their contact-method at the Sanctuary was nothing but noise and aversion. Taste the retribution for what you have rejected. (The Message 8:31-35)


Quote:
Here we have a number of conclusive points which need to be looked at:


Sure, let's see the conclusive points

Quote:
Revelations are newly being revealed through Mohammed (8:31);


What is that exactly?, bloody hell man, what a waste of my time, actually the verse never said what the author is trying to say above, however it is just so silly that I won't even discuss it

Quote:
The Restricted Temple/Sanctuary is at this location/place (8:34-35);


Another silly point, man the author seems to me is only stretching non sense, yep it is at the location where Mohammed first lived in Mecca

Quote:
Mohammed is living amongst these people (8:33);


What a load of non sense man,

Let me ask:

So?

Didn't the author suggest something similar in his walkthrough to 8:31

Quote:
Taking all the previous information into account,



Hmmm, not the previous info in part 1 because most if not all are flawed:

1) Noah flood was local and not global, as well Noah story is irrelevant to finding Al Masjid Al Haram
2) Aad location is hundreds of miles south of Thamud location and the Quran never said that they built houses on mountains, in fact the Quran told us that Aad lived in an area called Al Ahqaaf and they built signs on hills for fun
3) The Quran didn't say that Lut migrated with Ibrahim
4) Ibrahim left members of his family in an uncultivated valley and not in a cultivated hill
5) The Quran never said that Lut is from Zuriah Ibrahim rather it said Lut is from Zuriah Noah

Quote:
this would mean that Mohammed began his mission in Baca where Abraham originally with Ismail established God's Restricted Temple/Sanctuary.


Hahahah, yep in the author Barbie world of imagination

Ibrahim established the first house of Allah in an uncultivated valley and not a cultivated hill, this is enough to demolish the author non sense

Quote:
Now, according to the Sunnis and Shia, we are told that this location is Mecca (Arabia) where the great Kabaa (cube) is located and where millions of pilgrims have made their way for centuries to visit this shrine while performing the rituals/rites of pilgrimage.


Of course they are truthful

Quote:
However, we must pause here for a moment and ask some vital questions:


Sure, let's pause and ask

Quote:
1. Since the pilgrimage was first called to by Abraham and was known by the prophets who came after him (e.g. Moses making an oath '¬' measured by the years of pilgrimage),



But did Moses say he did the Hajj in the same spot where Ibrahim built the first house of Allah, never ever, Moses did his Hajj in Sinai which is a blessed land and full of sacred places, one of these places is the Valley of Towa where Moses spoke directly to Allah, therefore most likely Moses did his hajj in Sinai

Quote:
then why are the so-called followers of Moses and Jesus (Jews & Nazarenes) unaware of the significance of Mecca or the need to visit the Temple there?


Of course there is no significance for then because they were never required to face it as a focal point, another childish question by the author really

Also Jesus never mentioned that he did Hajj in the Quran, see

Quote:
2. If Mecca was the place where Abraham first raised the Shrine, then why do the Sunnis and Shia claim in their history that the prophet and his followers were facing Jerusalem in their daily Salat before switching to Mecca a few years later?


They don't claim it, they only state a fact that is very well known in the sirah of Mohammad and part of it is documented in the Quran, therefore the sunni and shia are only claiming what is known about Islam at its early stages

Quote:
3. If the Sunnis and Shia are fabricating the history of the Jerusalem qibla (focal point),


No they are not, it is very well known in the history as well there is no doubt that the house of Allah is in Mecca after most of the author repeated arguments have been debunked

Quote:
then why is there physical evidence found in the form of a mosque with two qiblas located in Medina and dating back to the prophet's time?


Because they had a first qiblah then it was changed to a second one, therefore they used to pray in the mosque facing the first qiblah then they faced the second qiblah, i.e. that mosque had two qiblahs

Quote:
4. What benefit do the Sunnis and Shia have in promoting (to this day) that Jerusalem was the 1st qibla?


Is it a requirement to have a benefit?, what crap is this man, ok it is for the benefit of the truth

Quote:
The reason for the above questions and the obvious doubt that is being placed on Mecca's authenticity is not due to any secret conspiracy or hidden agenda, but is due to the existence of evidence in the Scripture which has been totally ignored by the masses.


Oh yeh the existing evidences in the Quran that the author got it all wrong

Quote:
Mohammed is situated near Lot's town (Soddom);


Really?, I didn't know that, let's see the author argument:

Quote:
And you pass by their ruins (Sodom) in the morning; And in the night. Do you not understand? (The Message 37:137-138)



137: Verily, ye pass by their (sites), by day-
138: And by night: will ye not understand?

[The Quran ; 37:137-138]

وَإِنَّكُمْ لَتَمُرُّونَ عَلَيْهِم مُّصْبِحِينَ (137)
وَبِاللَّيْلِ أَفَلَا تَعْقِلُونَ (138)

In here I got the author red handed big times, let me bring the Arabic verses:

-> See the two verses never ever suggested the following:

1) The night time mentioned in 37:138 is in the same day as the day time mentioned 37:137
2) The same people who saw the ruins at night time a re the same ones who saw it at day time

The author is just manipulating the clear Arabic Quran to suits his law desires that the prophet must be living near Lut's town to be able to see it twice a day , indeed even if I accept the flawed argument that the same people saw the ruins in the same bloody day twice at day and at night, the prophet and his people still can be living hundreds of miles away from the ruins and see it twice a day, here is how it can happen:

1) A group of people travelled from Mecca to Jerusalem to do some business
2) Let's assume the trip on camels will take them months
3) Let's assume they arrived on 1/1/580 (day time), they saw the ruines just before they arrived
4) They spent the whole day doing business then they started to head back home at night and they saw the ruins again after they departed

i. bloody e. the same people saw the ruins twice in the same day while they still live hundreds of miles away

The author have no bloody point whatsoever,

Quote:
And they have come upon the town (Sodom) that was showered with a miserable shower. Did they not see it? No, they do not expect any resurrection. (The Message 25:40)


Quote:
How can someone pass-by the remains of another people EVERY MORNING & EVERY EVENING?


What a manipulator the author is

The verses never said EVERY DAY AND EVERY NIGHT

It only said: you see the ruins at night time and you see the ruins at day time, i.e. the ruins are visible at day and night time, it is all about the ruins not about them seeing it twice a day, the author is 100% confused or have an agenda

Quote:
The only way you can achieve that, is if you LIVED NEAR THERE!


Yeh in the author Barbie world of delusions

Quote:
Thus, we can determine, with certainty, that Mohammed was indeed within the vicinity (possibly with a day's journey) of the ancient town of Lot.


What a clear cut manipulator

I'm really sick of the non sense that silly author is suggesting, it is so stupid man

I have to bloody break and continue later

This is sick

Salam
- Sat 09 Dec, 2006 10:33 pm
Post subject:
Salam Brothers and Sisters

I may respond to the rest of the article later on inshallah, for the mean time, i would like to share this article that shades some light regarding Al Masjid Al Aqsa:

It seems that a lot of Muslims lack knowledge regarding Al Masjid Al Aqsa, some even claim that the name does not refer to the mosque in Jerusalem near the Doom of the Rock, therefore I hope this article will shade some light regarding Al Masjid Al Aqsa

The patriarch of all the believers of Allah, i.e. Jews, Christians, and Muslims is Prophet Ibrahim. He built the Kaba in Makkah with his firstborn son Ismael. This was an order from Allah that Ibrahim and Ismael construct this Holy House of Allah as a place of worship for all the believers on earth. Ismael was 17 at the time he and his father built the Kaba. Prophet Muhammad (a descendent of Prophet Ismael) would come nearly 2,500 years after Kaba was built and repurify it as a holy place of worship according to the teachings of Prophet Ibrahim. As stated in the Torah and in the Holy Quran "all the generations will be blessed through Ibrahim":

1: Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
2: And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
3: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
4: So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.
5: And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came.
6: And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem, unto the plain of Moreh. And the Canaanite was then in the land.
7: And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him.
8: And he removed from thence unto a mountain on the east of Bethel, and pitched his tent, having Bethel on the west, and Hai on the east: and there he builded an altar unto the LORD, and called upon the name of the LORD.
9: And Abram journeyed, going on still toward the south.
10: And there was a famine in the land: and Abram went down into Egypt to sojourn there; for the famine was grievous in the land.
11: And it came to pass, when he was come near to enter into Egypt, that he said unto Sarai his wife, Behold now, I know that thou art a fair woman to look upon:
12: Therefore it shall come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see thee, that they shall say, This is his wife: and they will kill me, but they will save thee alive.
13: Say, I pray thee, thou art my sister: that it may be well with me for thy sake; and my soul shall live because of thee.
14: And it came to pass, that, when Abram was come into Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman that she was very fair.
15: The princes also of Pharaoh saw her, and commended her before Pharaoh: and the woman was taken into Pharaoh's house.
16: And he entreated Abram well for her sake: and he had sheep, and oxen, and he asses, and menservants, and maidservants, and she asses, and camels.
17: And the LORD plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai Abram's wife.
18: And Pharaoh called Abram, and said, What is this that thou hast done unto me? why didst thou not tell me that she was thy wife?
19: Why saidst thou, She is my sister? so I might have taken her to me to wife: now therefore behold thy wife, take her, and go thy way.
20: And Pharaoh commanded his men concerning him: and they sent him away, and his wife, and all that he had.

[Genesis 12]

1: And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;
2: And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground,
3: And said, My Lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:
4: Let a little water, I pray you, be fetched, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree:
5: And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort ye your hearts; after that ye shall pass on: for therefore are ye come to your servant. And they said, So do, as thou hast said.
6: And Abraham hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and said, Make ready quickly three measures of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes upon the hearth.
7: And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetcht a calf tender and good, and gave it unto a young man; and he hasted to dress it.
8: And he took butter, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat.
9: And they said unto him, Where is Sarah thy wife? And he said, Behold, in the tent.
10: And he said, I will certainly return unto thee according to the time of life; and, lo, Sarah thy wife shall have a son. And Sarah heard it in the tent door, which was behind him.
11: Now Abraham and Sarah were old and well stricken in age; and it ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women.
12: Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, After I am waxed old shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?
13: And the LORD said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child, which am old?
14: Is any thing too hard for the LORD? At the time appointed I will return unto thee, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son.
15: Then Sarah denied, saying, I laughed not; for she was afraid. And he said, Nay; but thou didst laugh.
16: And the men rose up from thence, and looked toward Sodom: and Abraham went with them to bring them on the way.
17: And the LORD said, Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do;
18: Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?
19: For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the LORD, to do justice and judgment; that the LORD may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.
20: And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous;
21: I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.
22: And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD.
23: And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?
24: Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein?
25: That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?
26: And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes.
27: And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes:
28: Peradventure there shall lack five of the fifty righteous: wilt thou destroy all the city for lack of five? And he said, If I find there forty and five, I will not destroy it.
29: And he spake unto him yet again, and said, Peradventure there shall be forty found there. And he said, I will not do it for forty's sake.
30: And he said unto him, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak: Peradventure there shall thirty be found there. And he said, I will not do it, if I find thirty there.
31: And he said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord: Peradventure there shall be twenty found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for twenty's sake.
32: And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake.
33: And the LORD went his way, as soon as he had left communing with Abraham: and Abraham returned unto his place.

[Genesis18]

123: And be on your guard against a day when no soul shall avail another in the least neither shall any compensation be accepted from it, nor shall intercession profit it, nor shall they be helped.
124: And when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words, he fulfilled them. He said: Surely I will make you an Imam of men. Ibrahim said: And of my offspring? My covenant does not include the unjust, said He.
125: And when We made the House a pilgrimage for men and a (place of) security, and: Appoint for yourselves a place of prayer on the standing-place of Ibrahim. And We enjoined Ibrahim and Ismail saying: Purify My House for those who visit (it) and those who abide (in it) for devotion and those who bow down (and) those who prostrate themselves.
126: And when Ibrahim said: My Lord, make it a secure town and provide its people with fruits, such of them as believe in Allah and the last day. He said: And whoever disbelieves, I will grant him enjoyment for a short while, then I will drive him to the chastisement of the fire; and it is an evil destination.
127: And when Ibrahim and Ismail raised the foundations of the House: Our Lord! accept from us; surely Thou art the Hearing, the Knowing:
128: Our Lord! and make us both submissive to Thee and (raise) from our offspring a nation submitting to Thee, and show us our ways of devotion and turn to us (mercifully), surely Thou art the Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful.
129: Our Lord! and raise up in them a Messenger from among them who shall recite to them Thy communications and teach them the Book and the wisdom, and purify them; surely Thou art the Mighty, the Wise.
130: And who forsakes the religion of Ibrahim but he who makes himself a fool, and most certainly We chose him in this world, and in the hereafter he is most surely among the righteous.
131: When his Lord said to him, Be a Muslim, he said: I submit myself to the Lord of the worlds.
132: And the same did Ibrahim enjoin on his sons and (so did) Yaqoub. O my sons! surely Allah has chosen for you (this) faith, therefore die not unless you are Muslims.
133: Nay! were you witnesses when death visited Yaqoub, when he said to his sons: What will you serve after me? They said: We will serve your god and the god of your fathers, Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq, one Allah only, and to Him do we submit.
134: This is a people that have passed away; they shall have what they earned and you shall have what you earn, and you shall not be called upon to answer for what they did.
135: And they say: Be Jews or Christians, you will be on the right course. Say: Nay! (we follow) the religion of Ibrahim, the Hanif, and he was not one of the polytheists. `
136: Say: We believe in Allah and (in) that which had been revealed to us, and (in) that which was revealed to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and (in) that which was given to Musa and Isa, and (in) that which was given to the prophets from their Lord, we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him do we submit.
137: If then they believe as you believe in Him, they are indeed on the right course, and if they turn back, then they are only in great opposition, so Allah will suffice you against them, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing.
138: (Receive) the baptism of Allah, and who is better than Allah in baptising? and Him do we serve.
139: Say: Do you dispute with us about Allah, and He is our Lord and your Lord, and we shall have our deeds and you shall have your deeds, and we are sincere to Him.
140: Nay! do you say that Ibrahim and Ismail and Yaqoub and the tribes were Jews or Christians? Say: Are you better knowing or Allah? And who is more unjust than he who conceals a testimony that he has from Allah? And Allah is not at all heedless of what you do.
141: This is a people that have passed away; they shall have what they earned and you shall have what you earn, and you shall not be called upon to answer for what they did.

[The Quran ; 2 :123-141]

In Jerusalem, Prophet Ibrahim also established a place of worship. This place would later be known as The House of Allah, or Beteyel. Forty years after the construction of Kaba, Prophet Ibrahim expanded this place of worship. Isaac, Prophet Ibrahim's younger son, worshiped in Beteyel, but also made journeys to Kaba in Makkah for Hajj as did Ibrahim. Jacob the second son of Isaac, extended Beteyel as a place of worship for all the believers of Allah in the region. The natives of the land, the Palestinians, believers in the teachings of Prophet Ibrahim also worshipped in Beteyel or The House Of Allah. Ibrahim referred to Beteyel as Masjid Al-Aqsa, which means the farthest place of worship of the One God. Prophet Ibrahim was stating that Masjid Al-Aqsa was the farthest place of worship west of Kaba in Makkah.

Some years later, Prophet Joseph, the son of Jacob attained a high position of power in Egypt, he sent for all of his family to come live with him in Egypt away from the poverty of Palestine. There were 33 in all, Jacob, his children and his grandchildren.

1: And Israel took his journey with all that he had, and came to Beer-sheba, and offered sacrifices unto the God of his father Isaac.
2: And God spake unto Israel in the visions of the night, and said, Jacob, Jacob. And he said, Here am I.
3: And he said, I am God, the God of thy father: fear not to go down into Egypt; for I will there make of thee a great nation:
4: I will go down with thee into Egypt; and I will also surely bring thee up again: and Joseph shall put his hand upon thine eyes.
5: And Jacob rose up from Beer-sheba: and the sons of Israel carried Jacob their father, and their little ones, and their wives, in the wagons which Pharaoh had sent to carry him.
6: And they took their cattle, and their goods, which they had gotten in the land of Canaan, and came into Egypt, Jacob, and all his seed with him:
7: His sons, and his sons' sons with him, his daughters, and his sons' daughters, and all his seed brought he with him into Egypt.
8: And these are the names of the children of Israel, which came into Egypt, Jacob and his sons: Reuben, Jacob's firstborn.
9: And the sons of Reuben; Hanoch, and Phallu, and Hezron, and Carmi.
10: And the sons of Simeon; Jemuel, and Jamin, and Ohad, and Jachin, and Zohar, and Shaul the son of a Canaanitish woman.
11: And the sons of Levi; Gershon, Kohath, and Merari.
12: And the sons of Judah; Er, and Onan, and Shelah, and Pharez, and Zerah: but Er and Onan died in the land of Canaan. And the sons of Pharez were Hezron and Hamul.
13: And the sons of Issachar; Tola, and Phuvah, and Job, and Shimron.
14: And the sons of Zebulun; Sered, and Elon, and Jahleel.
15: These be the sons of Leah, which she bare unto Jacob in Padan-aram, with his daughter Dinah: all the souls of his sons and his daughters were thirty and three.
16: And the sons of Gad; Ziphion, and Haggi, Shuni, and Ezbon, Eri, and Arodi, and Areli.
17: And the sons of Asher; Jimnah, and Ishuah, and Isui, and Beriah, and Serah their sister: and the sons of Beriah; Heber, and Malchiel.
18: These are the sons of Zilpah, whom Laban gave to Leah his daughter, and these she bare unto Jacob, even sixteen souls.
19: The sons of Rachel Jacob's wife; Joseph, and Benjamin.
20: And unto Joseph in the land of Egypt were born Manasseh and Ephraim, which Asenath the daughter of Poti-pherah priest of On bare unto him.
21: And the sons of Benjamin were Belah, and Becher, and Ashbel, Gera, and Naaman, Ehi, and Rosh, Muppim, and Huppim, and Ard.
22: These are the sons of Rachel, which were born to Jacob: all the souls were fourteen.
23: And the sons of Dan; Hushim.
24: And the sons of Naphtali; Jahzeel, and Guni, and Jezer, and Shillem.
25: These are the sons of Bilhah, which Laban gave unto Rachel his daughter, and she bare these unto Jacob: all the souls were seven.
26: All the souls that came with Jacob into Egypt, which came out of his loins, besides Jacob's sons' wives, all the souls were threescore and six;
27: And the sons of Joseph, which were born him in Egypt, were two souls: all the souls of the house of Jacob, which came into Egypt, were threescore and ten.
28: And he sent Judah before him unto Joseph, to direct his face unto Goshen; and they came into the land of Goshen.
29: And Joseph made ready his chariot, and went up to meet Israel his father, to Goshen, and presented himself unto him; and he fell on his neck, and wept on his neck a good while.
30: And Israel said unto Joseph, Now let me die, since I have seen thy face, because thou art yet alive.
31: And Joseph said unto his brethren, and unto his father's house, I will go up, and shew Pharaoh, and say unto him, My brethren, and my father's house, which were in the land of Canaan, are come unto me;
32: And the men are shepherds, for their trade hath been to feed cattle; and they have brought their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have.
33: And it shall come to pass, when Pharaoh shall call you, and shall say, What is your occupation?
34: That ye shall say, Thy servants' trade hath been about cattle from our youth even until now, both we, and also our fathers: that ye may dwell in the land of Goshen; for every shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians.

[Genesis 46]

Because there was no one left from Jacob's tribe to care for Beteyel, Jacob, intrusted care of Beteyel or Masjid Al-Aqsa to the natives of the area, the Palestinians. This was acceptable due to the fact that the natives were also followers of the Patriarch Prophet Ibrahim. The Israelites remained in Egypt for four hundred years as slaves to the Egyptians with no connection to Palestine, the land from which they immigrated:

13: And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;
14: And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance.
15: And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age.
16: But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.
17: And it came to pass, that, when the sun went down, and it was dark, behold a smoking furnace, and a burning lamp that passed between those pieces.

[Genesis 15:13-17]

This choice was not forced on them; they simply chose to leave Palestine for the sake of the wealth and riches in Egypt.

In the time of Prophet Moses, the Israelites were still slaves to the Egyptians. Allah ordered Moses, after freeing the Israelites from bondage, to lead them to Palestine. The Israelites rejected this order from Allah, and preferred to live in the desert of Sinai, rather than to sacrifice themselves for the sake of Allah. They believed this land belonged to the Palestinians, the natives of the area.

For forty years, the Israelites wandered in the desert of Sinai. A new generation was born, and from it came Prophet David, he would lead this generation of believers to Palestine. Prophet David established his kingdom in part of Palestine, and controlled Jerusalem. His son, Prophet Soloman (King Solomon) rebuilt Masjid Al-Aqsa with the help of the natives, and next to it he built the ruler's palace. After Prophet Solomon's death, his two sons divided his kingdom amongst themselves. Each son established his own kingdom and each had its own capital. From both of these kingdoms, Allah raised prophets. According to Jewish history, these kingdoms existed for nearly two hundred years.

In 586 B.C., King Je-hoia-chin of Jerusalem saw that he might lose his kingdom. He was the last Jewish king who tried to resist the Babylonians in Jerusalem. In his struggle, his kingdom was surrounded by the Babylonians who cut off supplies from the outside world. When the inhabitants of Jerusalem ran out of food and water, the king made a tunnel to enable his soldiers to escape and retrieve supplies from the outside world. Part of the tunnel collapsed, the resistance led by King Je-hoia-chin was defeated, and the Babylonians took over Jerusalem. The tunnel used by King Je-hoia-chin, is the same tunnel being excavated today in Jerusalem. After the Babylonians conquered Jerusalem, they took its inhabitants as slaves to Babylon.

The Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar destroyed what King Solomon had built in Jerusalem :

1: In his days Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up, and Jehoiakim became his servant three years: then he turned and rebelled against him.
2: And the LORD sent against him bands of the Chaldees, and bands of the Syrians, and bands of the Moabites, and bands of the children of Ammon, and sent them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of the LORD, which he spake by his servants the prophets.
3: Surely at the commandment of the LORD came this upon Judah, to remove them out of his sight, for the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he did;
4: And also for the innocent blood that he shed: for he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood; which the LORD would not pardon.
5: Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?
6: So Jehoiakim slept with his fathers: and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead.
7: And the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his land: for the king of Babylon had taken from the river of Egypt unto the river Euphrates all that pertained to the king of Egypt.
8: Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.
9: And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his father had done.
10: At that time the servants of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up against Jerusalem, and the city was besieged.
11: And Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came against the city, and his servants did besiege it.
12: And Jehoiachin the king of Judah went out to the king of Babylon, he, and his mother, and his servants, and his princes, and his officers: and the king of Babylon took him in the eighth year of his reign.
13: And he carried out thence all the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king's house, and cut in pieces all the vessels of gold which Solomon king of Israel had made in the temple of the LORD, as the LORD had said.
14: And he carried away all Jerusalem, and all the princes, and all the mighty men of valour, even ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen and smiths: none remained, save the poorest sort of the people of the land.
15: And he carried away Jehoiachin to Babylon, and the king's mother, and the king's wives, and his officers, and the mighty of the land, those carried he into captivity from Jerusalem to Babylon.
16: And all the men of might, even seven thousand, and craftsmen and smiths a thousand, all that were strong and apt for war, even them the king of Babylon brought captive to Babylon.
17: And the king of Babylon made Mattaniah his father's brother king in his stead, and changed his name to Zedekiah.
18: Zedekiah was twenty and one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Hamutal, the daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah.
19: And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that Jehoiakim had done.
20: For through the anger of the LORD it came to pass in Jerusalem and Judah, until he had cast them out from his presence, that Zedekiah rebelled against the king of Babylon.

[Kings 2 ; 24]

1: And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came, he, and all his host, against Jerusalem, and pitched against it; and they built forts against it round about.
2: And the city was besieged unto the eleventh year of king Zedekiah.
3: And on the ninth day of the fourth month the famine prevailed in the city, and there was no bread for the people of the land.
4: And the city was broken up, and all the men of war fled by night by the way of the gate between two walls, which is by the king's garden: (now the Chaldees were against the city round about:) and the king went the way toward the plain.
5: And the army of the Chaldees pursued after the king, and overtook him in the plains of Jericho: and all his army were scattered from him.
6: So they took the king, and brought him up to the king of Babylon to Riblah; and they gave judgment upon him.
7: And they slew the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes, and put out the eyes of Zedekiah, and bound him with fetters of brass, and carried him to Babylon.
8: And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, which is the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzar-adan, captain of the guard, a servant of the king of Babylon, unto Jerusalem:
9: And he burnt the house of the LORD, and the king's house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, and every great man's house burnt he with fire.
10: And all the army of the Chaldees, that were with the captain of the guard, brake down the walls of Jerusalem round about.
11: Now the rest of the people that were left in the city, and the fugitives that fell away to the king of Babylon, with the remnant of the multitude, did Nebuzar-adan the captain of the guard carry away.
12: But the captain of the guard left of the poor of the land to be vinedressers and husbandmen.
13: And the pillars of brass that were in the house of the LORD, and the bases, and the brasen sea that was in the house of the LORD, did the Chaldees break in pieces, and carried the brass of them to Babylon.
14: And the pots, and the shovels, and the snuffers, and the spoons, and all the vessels of brass wherewith they ministered, took they away.
15: And the firepans, and the bowls, and such things as were of gold, in gold, and of silver, in silver, the captain of the guard took away.
16: The two pillars, one sea, and the bases which Solomon had made for the house of the LORD; the brass of all these vessels was without weight.
17: The height of the one pillar was eighteen cubits, and the chapiter upon it was brass: and the height of the chapiter three cubits; and the wreathen work, and pomegranates upon the chapiter round about, all of brass: and like unto these had the second pillar with wreathen work.
18: And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second priest, and the three keepers of the door:
19: And out of the city he took an officer that was set over the men of war, and five men of them that were in the king's presence, which were found in the city, and the principal scribe of the host, which mustered the people of the land, and threescore men of the people of the land that were found in the city:
20: And Nebuzar-adan captain of the guard took these, and brought them to the king of Babylon to Riblah:
21: And the king of Babylon smote them, and slew them at Riblah in the land of Hamath. So Judah was carried away out of their land.
22: And as for the people that remained in the land of Judah, whom Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had left, even over them he made Gedaliah the son of Ahikam, the son of Shaphan, ruler.
23: And when all the captains of the armies, they and their men, heard that the king of Babylon had made Gedaliah governor, there came to Gedaliah to Mizpah, even Ishmael the son of Nethahiah, and Johanan the son of Careah, and Seraiah the son of Tanhumeth the Netophathite, and Jaazaniah the son of a Maachathite, they and their men.
24: And Gedaliah sware to them, and to their men, and said unto them, Fear not to be the servants of the Chaldees: dwell in the land, and serve the king of Babylon; and it shall be well with you.
25: But it came to pass in the seventh month, that Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, the son of Elishama, of the seed royal, came, and ten men with him, and smote Gedaliah, that he died, and the Jews and the Chaldees that were with him at Mizpah.
26: And all the people, both small and great, and the captains of the armies, arose, and came to Egypt: for they were afraid of the Chaldees.
27: And it came to pass in the seven and thirtieth year of the captivity of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the twelfth month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, that Evil-merodach king of Babylon in the year that he began to reign did lift up the head of Jehoiachin king of Judah out of prison;
28: And he spake kindly to him, and set his throne above the throne of the kings that were with him in Babylon;
29: And changed his prison garments: and he did eat bread continually before him all the days of his life.
30: And his allowance was a continual allowance given him of the king, a daily rate for every day, all the days of his life.

[Kings 2 ; 25]

According to the word of God in the Torah, the Israelites were made to be slaves in both the Nile and in the Euphrates.

After seventy years of slavery in Babylon, King Cyrus of Persia gave the Israelites their freedom. At that time very few of the Israelites returned to Palestine. These few Israelites worshipped only in The House Of Allah. For generations, the Israelites took care of Beteyel or Masjid Al-Aqsa. During the period when the Roman Empire was in constant battle with the Persean Empire, the Israelites aided the Perseans, and benefited when the Perseans had control of Jerusalem. Because the Israelites supported the Persean Empire as spies and in other ways, the Romans treated them as enemies of the Roman Empire.

In 70 A.D., the Romans destroyed (burned) Beteyel, and converted it into a place of Roman idol worship (Jupitor,etc.). In 315 A.D., when the Roman Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity, the Romans had no regard for Beteyel. It became a place were the inhabitants of Jerusalem, including the Jews threw their garbage. The Jews no longer considered Beteyel a Holy Shrine.

The Persean Empire defeated the Romans in 614 A.D., the Jews were now able to worship where they wished, but chose not to worship in Beteyel or Masjid Al-Aqsa. The Perseans controlled Jerusalem until 624 A.D. The Jews, who were in a position of power during this period, tortured the Arab Christians. Jerusalem was in need of a just ruler. Both the Christians and the Jews had suffered under different empires, and both knew that the Holy Scriptures promised the coming of a ruler to save them from all this unjust torture and aggression.
The Israelites were awaiting the coming of the Messiah, who would be king and ruler, and would defeat all the evil empires, as promised by Allah. The only Prophet in history to have accomplished this task, was Prophet Muhammad. Prophet Muhammad and his followers defeated all the empires of the time, establishing the Kingdom Of God throughout the region. This included Jerusalem as promised by Allah to the Muslims

44: And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

[Daniel 2:44]

43: Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

[Mathew ; 21:43]

The Israelites had tried to fulfil this prophecy in 165 B.C., under the leadership of Judah Makabi. Within three years, he was defeated by the Romans, who regained complete control of Jerusalem. Prophet Jesus was also unable to accomplish this task mentioned in the Holy Scriptures. It was a Prophet from Arabia, indeed Prophet Muhammad was the only one who fulfilled this prophecy.

In 621 A.D., Prophet Muhammad travelled to Al Masjid Al Aqsa then ascended to the heavens in the night known as Israa and Miraj to the Muslims

1: Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to this temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.
2: But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap:
3: And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness.
4: Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years.
5: And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts.
6: For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
7: Even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordinances, and have not kept them. Return unto me, and I will return unto you, saith the LORD of hosts. But ye said, Wherein shall we return?
8: Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
9: Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.
10: Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
11: And I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, and he shall not destroy the fruits of your ground; neither shall your vine cast her fruit before the time in the field, saith the LORD of hosts.
12: And all nations shall call you blessed: for ye shall be a delightsome land, saith the LORD of hosts.
13: Your words have been stout against me, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, What have we spoken so much against thee?
14: Ye have said, It is vain to serve God: and what profit is it that we have kept his ordinance, and that we have walked mournfully before the LORD of hosts?

[Malachi ; 3:1-14]

In that night, Prophet Muhammad led all Prophets of Allah in prayer in the Holy Mosque (Masjid Al-Aqsa). For this reason, Masjid Al-Aqsa is a holy place of worship for the Muslims, along with Kaba in Makkah and Prophet's Mosque in Medina. These are the three most important Mosques to the Muslims.

In 637 A.D., the Christian leader of Jerusalem, Snaifors, realized through the holy Scriptures

9: Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.
10: And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off: and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from river even to the ends of the earth.

[Zeckariah ; 9:9 -10]

that the second leader of the Islamic State, Umar ibn Al-Khatab, fits the description of the one who would open Jerusalem and free it from the evil empires. Snaifors surrendered peacefully. Umar ibn Al-Khatab and the Muslims, after securing Jerusalem, again established Masjid Al-Aqsa as a holy place of worship. Both the Christians and the Jews were pleased with the arrival of Umar and the Muslims, and with the just rule under the Islamic State.

In the eleventh century, the European Christians in the crusades tortured the Jews and the Muslims. They burned the Jews in their Temples and they burned the Muslims in Masjid Al-Aqsa. The European Christians even tortured the Arab Christians and destroyed their churches. The Jews fled to Andulis (Spain), to receive protection under Islamic rule or a Muslim society. In 1189 A.D., the leader of the Muslim army Salah Aldeen Al-Ayobi expelled the European Christians from Jerusalem, and returned Jerusalem to Islamic rule. The Christian, Jews, and Muslims lived in harmony under Islamic rule.

In 1948, with the help of the western powers, the Jews were able to fulfil the promise of the British foreign minister, Bill Ford. This promise was made in 1917 regarding the Jews' return to the holy land, Palestine. In the time of Moses, when ordered by Allah to return to Palestine, the Israelites disobeyed the will of Allah. Once the Jews again controlled Jerusalem, they expelled and tortured the natives of Palestine from their land, and the area returned to a state of unrest

7: And I will shake all nations, and the desire of all nations shall come: and I will fill this house with glory, saith the LORD of hosts.
8: The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, saith the LORD of hosts.
9: The glory of this latter house shall be greater than of the former, saith the LORD of hosts: and in this place will I give peace, saith the LORD of hosts.

[Haggie ; 2 :7-9]

In the 1980's, the Israelis started an archaeological project in the area of the Dome of the Rock (Masjid Al-Aqsa). They began excavation claiming that they were searching for the Temple Of King Solomon. They were unable to locate the Temple Of King Solomon, but in the process discovered the tunnel of King Je-hoia-chin. The Israelis claimed that the search was a success only because they discovered the collapsed tunnel of King Je-hoia-chin, which is in no way related to the Temple of King Solomon. This tunnel has no religious significance, it only has historical significance.

Thanks for reading
- Mon 15 Jan, 2007 3:19 am
Post subject:
# that's a pretty comprehensive rebuttal to the lies bro!

...and its not at all surprising that they claim to write something on scripture alone, yet try to sneak in any extra-quranic information!

# like u said about the flood...the deluge being a global catastrophe is a biblical idea...and how they use the bible as the basis for a quran-alone article!

# tells a lot about them..doesnt it! (-;
- Sun 11 Mar, 2007 8:34 pm
Post subject:
# i remember asking the guy about his claim that quran tells us to seek archeological "proof" (of what, i dunno)!

...anyway, he had posted some verses and claimed that those verses ask us to seek archeological proof...

...i asked him what exactly in those verses tell him to seek archeological "proofs", and he never answered my q...he hemmed and hawed and tried hard to evade the q...but attempted to answer it he did not! : lolz :
- Mon 12 Mar, 2007 8:04 am
Post subject:
The wrote:
# i remember asking the guy about his claim that quran tells us to seek archeological "proof" (of what, i dunno)!

...anyway, he had posted some verses and claimed that those verses ask us to seek archeological proof...

...i asked him what exactly in those verses tell him to seek archeological "proofs", and he never answered my q...he hemmed and hawed and tried hard to evade the q...but attempted to answer it he did not! : lolz :


I think they are stretching it bro

The Quran only said walk in the land to witness what happened to previous generations,

Let's just call it "evidences"

Take care
- Tue 13 Mar, 2007 12:48 am
Post subject:
Quote:
ahmedbahgat wrote:
I think they are stretching it bro

The Quran only said walk in the land to witness what happened to previous generations,

Let's just call it "evidences


# right bro...and the fact remains that none of the verses he presented ask us to seek archeological "proofs"....yet, after being told the truth, instead of correcting his error, he simply wanted to evade it....typical wannabe attitude! :-S

nor was i surprised at his attitude...even before i finished the first page, i expected little else from him....he seems pretty set on distorting quran and history...li'l wonder that he keeps evading and distorting the truth!

...what i was surprised about was that save ur rebuttal nobody (including traditionalists) shoved in his face (for his hypocrisy) the fact that he was barefacedly drawing upon extra-quranic sources - and even resorting to distorting the text- while claiming that it was an understanding based on "clues" from the scripture! what makes it even more embarrassing is the fact that he draws from arab history where it suits him, and trust me, that is typical of (some) non-muslims and (most) munafiqs i come across! it maybe that by "scripture" he means the jewish bible, and his idea of history is the crone-wansbrough propoganda! (-;

# this is 1 of the scriptural "clues" he is talking about.....many munafiqs i come across quote patricia: some of them are honest about it; some others, not:


In addition, the Qur'an twice describes its opponents as living in the site of a vanished nation, that is to say a town destroyed by God for its sins. There were many such ruined sites in northwest Arabia. The prophet frequently tells his opponents to consider their significance and on one occasion remarks, with reference to the remains of Lot's people, that "you pass by them in the morning and in the evening". This takes us to somewhere in the Dead Sea region. Respect for the traditional account has prevailed to such an extent among modern historians that the first two points have passed unnoticed until quite recently, while the third has been ignored. The exegetes said that the Quraysh passed by Lot's remains on their annual journeys to Syria, but the only way in which one can pass by a place in the morning and the evening is evidently by living somewhere in the vicinity.


...this is exactly what inspires the non-muslims and munafiqs i encounter, when they try to re-construct history, and seemingly doesnt leave too many of their ilk uninspired! (-:

# on a side not: decidedly, djinns do exist in judaism (they are recorded as demons in jewish literature)! (-;
- Thu 24 May, 2007 6:38 am
Post subject:
Hello All

Sorry for leaving this thread for a ong time without finalising it, I wanted to have a break from the non sense spewed every day by the Aloners. I was actually involoved in another struggle with the boys and girls on faithfreedon web site Very Happy anyway the reaosn I want to get this thread back on track is to keep exposing the aloners and their cult leaders on free-minds.org, they are so bias that if you try to expose them on their web site they ban you, for example there a confused freak in there named Lobster, he is also a membetr here named "Phoniex", this guy does the following on free-minds.org web site:

1) Call himself Allah
2) Call Allah a liar
3) Says he knows better than Allah
4) Says the Qutan is full of non sense

Yeterday, when he called Allah a liar, i wen off at him, and guess what?, the tyrats of that Kuffar place called free-minds.org banned me for the third time Laughing

See, they dont ban the freaks who insult and mock Allah, but they ban those who insult those freaks who insults Allah and mock His message

Sounds like a very guided bunch of aloners

Any way, free-islam main mission is to expose those freaks Muslims or not who lie about out great religion, the aloners think that by banning me they can shut me up, they need to think again because actiing low as such will make me more determined to expose their non sense and warn the young Muslims from that Kuffar web site, therefore I have to finish this refute soon inshaallah so i move on to epoxse more of their daily non sense


Salam all
- Thu 24 May, 2007 11:49 am
Post subject:
Hello All

Sorry for the not continuing to reply to this allegation by free-minds cult leader due to a lot of commitments I have in minds, while I still have more in hand to do I believe finishing this refute is a matter of urgency as those tyrants on FM try to always shut me up when I expose them on their web site, they use the childish excuse that I insult some kafirs in there while on te other hand they allow those kafirs that I insult to insult Allah and mock His message, I was going to post this refute on their web site as I promised one member in there who was almost being dragged under the fake charm they drug the young Muslims with, on the other hand their Tyrancy is evident, for example two moderators in there Savage_carrot & Nadeem was caught red handed many times being bias and abusing their power, if you compare them with faithfreedom web site (a clear cut anti islam web site) you should see with ease that even the kafirs and moderators on faithfreedom have far more integrity than those kafirs on free-minds.org, unfortunately for them if they succeed in shutting me up on their web site, they will never be able to shut me up on free-islam so let's get the ball rolling and try to finish this refute despite I honestly believe that my refutes to the first two parts were enough to demolish this non sense and satanic allegation by free-minds cult leader:

Quote:
Part III - Mohammed Emigrates.


Yep let's see what you have to say regarding this very well documented history

Quote:
This is where the Sunnis and Shia begin to agree with the narration taken from the Scripture.


Hmmmm, only the Sunni and Shia?, well I guess most Muslims (regardless of sects) and most Kafirs agree on that too.

Can you see the bias in that Author confused mind?


Quote:
After preaching the message of God to his own community of Baca;



The Quran never told us that the community of Mohammad was in Baca, it only said that the first Bayt of Allah is in Beca,

Why the author is so manipulative, I wonder?

Quote:
and after finding much resistance and oppression...


That resistance and the war they went through was clearly documented in the history and agreed on by most Muslims and Kafirs that it was Mecca high ranked people who resisted and oppressed the prophet.

Quote:
Mohammed Emigrates from his home after all attempts to establish a 'God Alone Community' are met with failure and defeat.


LOL, establish God Alone Community, what a jerk that author is really, as if that God Alone Community was buried for 400 years and suddenly appeared under Messiah Ayman and Santa Layth (of free minds), it is ironic that the author put all first letters in these words in capital letters while he wrote Mohammad with a small letter, yep it looks good that way especially if it is his community in his Barbie world, writing it pinkish colour would have been great too.

Quote:
And many a town was stronger than your own town, which drove you out. We destroyed them, and there was none who could help them. (The Message 47:3)


Well, the above translation is not 00% accurate, these words in the verse : قَرْيَةٍ and قَرْيَتِكَ, pronounced Qarriah and Qarriatak, should be village and your village

What a useless introduction by the author, the only verse he posted was the verse that we all agree on its context, looks like he was filling a bit of an empty space in his third part of compelling non sense.

Quote:
-> The Migration/Hijra:
O prophet, We have made lawful for you the wives to whom you have already given their dowry, and the one who is committed to you by oath, as granted to you by God, and the daughters of your father's brothers, and the daughters of your father's sisters, and the daughters of your mother's brothers, and the daughters of your mother's sisters, of whom they have emigrated with you. Also, the believing woman who had decreed herself to the prophet, the prophet may marry her if he wishes, as a privilege given only to you and not to the believers. We have already decreed their rights in regard to their spouses and those who are still dependant. This is to spare you any hardship. God is Forgiver, Merciful. (The Message 33:50)


Let me bring the Arabic text:
[b]
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ إِنَّا أَحْلَلْنَا لَكَ أَزْوَاجَكَ اللَّاتِي آتَيْتَ أُجُورَهُنَّ وَمَا مَلَكَتْ يَمِينُكَ مِمَّا أَفَاء اللَّهُ عَلَيْكَ وَبَنَاتِ عَمِّكَ وَبَنَاتِ عَمَّاتِكَ وَبَنَاتِ خَالِكَ وَبَنَاتِ خَالَاتِكَ اللَّاتِي هَاجَرْنَ مَعَكَ وَامْرَأَةً مُّؤْمِنَةً إِن وَهَبَتْ نَفْسَهَا لِلنَّبِيِّ إِنْ أَرَادَ النَّبِيُّ أَن يَسْتَنكِحَهَا خَالِصَةً لَّكَ مِن دُونِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ قَدْ عَلِمْنَا مَا فَرَضْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِي أَزْوَاجِهِمْ وَمَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُمْ لِكَيْلَا يَكُونَ عَلَيْكَ حَرَجٌ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا (50)

[The Quran ; 33:50]


Quote:
God has pardoned the prophet and the emigrants and the supporters that followed him in the darkest hour, even though the hearts of some of them nearly deviated, but then He pardoned them. He is towards them Compassionate, Merciful. (The Message 9:7)



لَقَد تَّابَ الله عَلَى النَّبِيِّ وَالْمُهَاجِرِينَ وَالأَنصَارِ الَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُوهُ فِي سَاعَةِ الْعُسْرَةِ مِن بَعْدِ مَا كَادَ يَزِيغُ قُلُوبُ فَرِيقٍ مِّنْهُمْ ثُمَّ تَابَ عَلَيْهِمْ إِنَّهُ بِهِمْ رَؤُوفٌ رَّحِيمٌ (7)

[The Quran ; 9:7]


Quote:
We can clearly read that Mohammed (and his followers/supporters & family members) all emigrated from their town of Baca


What a lie by that confused author, the two verse above never mentioned Becca again, for him to say the above and use the wod CLEARLY then end his lie with all emigrated from their town of Baca, even the English translation provided by him never mentioned that the prophet and his family migrated from a village named Becca

Again he added nothing to his argument but a clear cut lie

Quote:
-> Medina/Yathrib:
This place of Emigration was known as 'Yathrib':'


I agree on that and all Muslims and Kafirs also agree on that. So the author is telling us that we all agree (including the kafirs and him) regarding the destination but regarding the origin of migration, Muslims and the Kafirs agree that it was Mecca while the author tells us it is another town. The odds must be against that freak.

Quote:
And a group of them said: O people of Yathrib, you cannot make a stand; therefore, retreat. And a small party of them sought permission from the prophet, saying: Our homes are exposed, while they were not exposed. They just wanted to flee. (The Message 33:3)


Let bring the Arabic text just in case:

وَإِذْ قَالَت طَّائِفَةٌ مِّنْهُمْ يَا أَهْلَ يَثْرِبَ لَا مُقَامَ لَكُمْ فَارْجِعُوا وَيَسْتَأْذِنُ فَرِيقٌ مِّنْهُمُ النَّبِيَّ يَقُولُونَ إِنَّ بُيُوتَنَا عَوْرَةٌ وَمَا هِيَ بِعَوْرَةٍ إِن يُرِيدُونَ إِلَّا فِرَارًا (3)

[The Quran ; 33:3]

Quote:
There is nothing in the Scripture to contradict the current city of Medina (Western Saudi Arabia) from being the historic ????????Iatribu/Yathrib' that Mohammed immigrated to as per the archeological remains (graves, homes, mosques, etc..).


Quote:
Jurisdiction of Rome around the period 600 A.D.


Quote:
In-fact, looking at the map of Rome's jurisdiction at the time, it would make perfect sense that Mohammed would migrate south away from Rome's influence towards a place where they had no jurisdiction.


Hmmm, well the prophet was not migrating from the oppression and resistance of the Romans, the prophet was migrating from the bloody oppression and resistance of the Arabs, see another conjecture to cook a lie

So what exactly the author told us about Yathrib, yep, nothing really much if you read his non sense above again.

[b]-> Beca/Jerusalem is still Mohammed's Focal Point.[/b]

Well, did the Quran say that?, if not and the author is basing it on the corrupt hadith to serve his own low desires then the author is a clear cut hypocrite, double faced and we know that he also willing to lie to serve his own low desires in his Barbie world

Quote:
The first sanctuary established for the people is the one in Bakk'a, blessed, and a guidance for the worlds. (The Message 3:96)


Quote:
Although Mohammed has been evicted, he is still upholding the focal point of the Temple in Jerusalem????????????????????????????¦


Is there any archaeological evidence by the author or just the hadith by the Sunni and Shia?, see, there is nothing in the Quran that tells us the Mohammad was using Jerusalem as his focal point, what a clear cut Munafiq he is.

Quote:
This would explain why the Sunnis and Shia record until today that the prophet did indeed face Jerusalem for the first part of his stay in Medina (as evidenced by the mosque with two qiblas) and why they still call Jerusalem the ????????st qibla'.


So he is using the Sunni and Shia evidences to support his non sense, again tne Quran never said that the prophet was facing Juresalem as his Qiblah.

Quote:
But the question still remains: ????????how was the qibla changed?'


No smartass, the question is :

How the hell do you know from the Quran or your archaeological evidences that the prophet was facing Jerusalem

Again the author added absolutely nothing

Quote:
-> God Establishes a new Focal Point (Qibla):
The foolish from amongst the people will Say: What has turned them away from the focal point that they were on? Say: To God is the east and the west, He guides whomsoever He wishes to a straight path. (The Message 2:42)


Quote:
Here is a clear 'turning' away from the existing focal point to newer one.


But again, did the Quran tell us that it was Jerusalem or the Sunnia and Shia are the ones who told us so?

Quote:
In-fact, this is where traditions and archeology meet with the Scripture as they relate that when the prophet came to Medina, he set the focal point towards the North East (in this case they claim Jerusalem), and that after a period of time he set it in the opposite direction.


Well, the traductions don't say that, they say it was turned from Jursalem to Mecca, I guess the author is trying to built a dsilly argument that Mecca, Yathrib and Jerusalem are not on a straight line, LOL, what a load of non sense.

Forget the traditions, did the Quran tell us that when the qibalah has changed it was set to the opposite side to where it was directed to?, IT NEVER DID, see the author pick and choose what he likes and what he does not like from the traditions, on the other hand he tells us NEVER EVER FOLLOW THE TRADICTIONS.

Quote:
What is an interesting point to note is that if we drew a straight line from Medina to Jerusalem (in-line with the original qibla as per the Scripture), and then we extend the same line completely in the opposite direction (in-line with the turning away from the qibla as per the Scripture), we see that the alleged temple of Mecca, contrary to what the Sunnis and Shia claimed, does not come onto this path.


Hahahahahahaha, see what he said contrary to what the Sunnis and Shia claimed, but the Sunni and Shai claimed that it was turned from Jerusalem to Mecca, DIDN'T THEY SAY THAT?, however who care about what they say, what we need from that confused author is where in the Quran it says the qiblah was changed to the opposite side of what it was

Quote:
An imaginary line drawn from Medina to Jerusalem and opposite.





Quote:
-> Why Change to a New Focal Point?
Establishing a new 'Focal Point' (or Qibla) has precedence in the Quran and was done during the time of the Exodus when Moses and his companions were on the run from Pharaoh and needed to face towards the direction where their enemy would come from during their Salat.


Quote:
And We inspired to Moses and his brother: Let your people leave their homes in Egypt, and let these homes be your focal point (Qibla) and uphold the contact-method. And give good news to the believers. (The Message 0:87)


What a clear cut liar Layth is, 0:87 never said that it was a qiblah change for the Jews, here it is:

وَأَوْحَيْنَا إِلَى مُوسَى وَأَخِيهِ أَن تَبَوَّءَا لِقَوْمِكُمَا بِمِصْرَ بُيُوتًا وَاجْعَلُواْ بُيُوتَكُمْ قِبْلَةً وَأَقِيمُواْ الصَّلاَةَ وَبَشِّرِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ (87)

[The Quran ; 0:87]
-> See, it was only an order to take a their homes as qiblah, and let these homes be your focal point (Qibla), the verse never said that this was a new qiblah in place of an older one, Layth is a clear cut liar and manipulator

Quote:
As for Mohammed's people...it was a 'test' of sorts:


Of course for the believers, it was 00% a test AND STILL IS A TEST till this moment, a test that Layth failed and at the same time is contributing to misguiding many young and na????????????????????????????????????¯ve Muslims

Quote:
And as such, We have made you a balanced nation so that you may be witness over the people, and that the messenger may be witness over you. And We did not make the focal point that you became on except to distinguish who follows the messenger from those who will turn on their heels. It was a great thing indeed except for those whom God had guided; God was not to waste your belief. God is Merciful and Compassionate over the people. (The Message 2:43)


Clear enough that the qiblah change is a test.

Quote:
-> The Medina/Yathrib Expansion:
During his time in Yathrib, Mohammed and his followers were forced into a number of conflicts which gave them governance over lands/areas they had previously not been involved with.


That is right and it is well klnown by the Muslims and the Kafirs that the first few of those conflicts were with the people of Mecca which Mohammad fled from.

Quote:
And He inherited you their land, their homes, their money, and lands you had never stepped on. God is able to do all things. (The Message 33:27)


What a flawed translation that is, look what the message says above He inherited you their land, does that make sense?, well it should be He made you inherit their land, on the other hand what that verse has to do with the city of Yathrib expansion?, ABSOLUTELY NOTIHNG, it is another dose of confusion by Santa Layth

Quote:
And recall when you were but a few who were weak in the land, you were fearful that men might capture you. But He sheltered you, and He supported you with His victory, and He provided you with good provisions, so that you may be thankful. (The Message 8:26)


Yep that victory was over te people of Mecca as Muslims and Kafirs agree on.

Quote:
-> Financial Growth & Development:
You should know: Of anything you gain, that one-fifth shall go to God and the messenger, and the relatives, and the orphans, and the poor, and the wayfarer. You will do this if you believe in God and in what We revealed to Our servant on the day of the Criterion, the day the two armies clashed. God is able to do all things. (The Message 8:4)

-> Military Strategy & Experience:
It was during this ????????Yathrib Campaign' that it would seem most of the warfare' verses were revealed (4:77, 47:20, 2:27).

And prepare for them all that you can of might, and from the steeds of war, that you may instil fear with it towards God's enemy and your enemy, and others beside them whom you do not know but God knows them. And whatever you spend in the cause of God will be returned to you, and you will not be wronged. (The Message 8:60)

-> Rome was to be fought!
This was a prediction of the inevitable battle against an organized and well trained army...The results as we shall see were quite disastrous.

Say to those Nomads who lagged behind: You will be called on to fight a people who are very powerful in warfare, unless they surrender. Then if you obey, God will grant you a good reward, but if you turn away as you turned away before, He will punish you with a painful retribution. (The Message 48:6)
--------------------------

End of part 3


All the above is clear cut non sense and confusion by Santa Layth, I really have to dismiss it and move on to Part 4

Salam all
- Mon 19 May, 2008 4:58 pm
Post subject:
Salam all,

This is a very good vdeo, it certainly proves that the freak minders are wrong:


Link

- Tue 06 Apr, 2010 1:05 am
Post subject:
@ahmedbahgat: let 's look at the article which was authored by someone named Layth, and i believe he is the cult leader of free-minds.org

This particular dissimulator's article is a great example of what was said in the other threads, being a restatement of a handful of Orientalists' conjecture, and exemplifies the dissimulators' approach of attempting every dirty trick in the book. There are more errors and lies in this article then I would bother to comment on, so let's look at just one of the many instances of his unabashed and dumb plagiarism:


Mohammed is situated near Lot's town (Soddom);

“And you pass by their ruins (Sodom) in the morning; And in the night. Do you not understand?” (The Message 37:137-138)

“And they have come upon the town (Sodom) that was showered with a miserable shower. Did they not see it? No, they do not expect any resurrection.” (The Message 25:40)

How can someone pass-by the remains of another people EVERY MORNING & EVERY EVENING?

The only way you can achieve that, is if you LIVED NEAR THERE!



The word used in the verse 138 is "al layl," and in his quoted translation the word is correctly translated as "night". Yet, mysteriously, he then uses the word "evening" in his clever rhetoric that follows. Can we glean something from it, or is this a usual stumbling disbeliever?

A little later he writes:


Thus, if the people of Jerusalem were looking out in the morning, or upon returning in the evening, they would be able to glimpse the land where Lot’s town stood and was destroyed by the Lord!


As we see here, our clever dissimulator has once again used "evening" instead of "night," and one time too many has this dissimulator slipped for it to be insignificant. As mentioned earlier, he has simply reproduced the rejected conjecture of some Orientalists, so let us see if we can locate his source of inspiration.

Here is what Crone has to observe about the ruins of Lot's town:


In addition, the Qur'an twice describes its opponents as living in the site of a vanished nation, that is to say a town destroyed by God for its sins. There were many such ruined sites in northwest Arabia. The prophet frequently tells his opponents to consider their significance and on one occasion remarks, with reference to the remains of Lot's people, that "you pass by them in the morning and in the evening". This takes us to somewhere in the Dead Sea region. Respect for the traditional account has prevailed to such an extent among modern historians that the first two points have passed unnoticed until quite recently, while the third has been ignored. The exegetes said that the Quraysh passed by Lot's remains on their annual journeys to Syria, but the only way in which one can pass by a place in the morning and the evening is evidently by living somewhere in the vicinity.


Observe how Crone, referring to 37:138, mistakenly talks about "evening" instead of "night". Evidently, the Crone goddess is among those who have been illuminating our clueless disbeliever. And her devotee has reproduced not only her "historical" conjectures, but also copied over, faithfully, her misconception of the Quranic verse.

Let us put it in another form:

Crone Goddess: The prophet frequently tells his opponents to consider their significance and on one occasion remarks, with reference to the remains of Lot's people, that "you pass by them in the morning and in the evening".

Dissimulator: How can someone pass-by the remains of another people EVERY MORNING & EVERY EVENING?

Crone Goddess: The only way in which one can pass by a place in the morning and the evening is evidently by living somewhere in the vicinity.


: grin :

Talk about a disbeliever's dissimulation and devotion, blind or otherwise.
- Fri 09 Apr, 2010 7:39 pm
Post subject:
Salam mate

I have to say, that was a clear slam dunk of one of the many crap spewed by the freak minders

Thanks a lot for your investigation
- Wed 14 Apr, 2010 7:13 pm
Post subject:
This disbeliever could not even stick to his (originally Crone's) "pass by every morning and evening" theory, because she proposes by "somewhere in the vicinity" locations in northwest Arabia (a trail picked up by another set of disbelievers and dissimulators).

To fit Jerusalem in the picture, this one suggests getting on top of Mount Olives and catching a glimpse of Bab edh-dhra (one of the places proposed as Lot's site), which is a little under 50 miles away. Add to it the fact that the Mount is some 2700 feet above sea level and Bab edh-dhra some 800 feet below sea level, and anybody can imagine just how well one might be able to see down that drop at a distance of nearly 50 miles. Observe how this dirty disbeliever has gone from twisting the verse to "every morning and evening" to "living there" to "catching a glimpse from an impossible distance".

We have Jerusalem pretty well documented, and there are no records of Muhammad and his mission over there. Further, the Quran states that it was revealed in manifest Arabic. I think it's a safe bet to say that this Jew lookalike would have next liked to propose that Arabic is not Arabic and that Muhammad never existed as there are no records of him in Jerusalem's annals.
- Fri 19 Nov, 2010 5:33 pm
Post subject:
The Cat wrote:
A thread inviting AB to refute the following:
http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?p=132612#p132612


Hello the Cat

This was refuted 4 years ago on the freak minders web site http//free-minds.org; let me tell you briefly how it happened, I joined the freak minders web site possibly in 2003/2004; firstly, I liked their stance and supported most of what they said, however when I digged deep into their writings, I realized quickly that these people cannot be right, they simply invented a totally new religion attracting many young Muslims who never had a chance to understand their religion but were excited, as I was, seeing them throwing all the hadith in the rubbish bin.

Later on, when I read them inventing a new place for Hajj and different numbers of Salat and different ways of Fasting (three of the basics of Islam), I concluded that those freak minders are yet another enemy of Islam that should be fought and exposed with no mercy, so I went on the attack and for two years replied harshly to most of their crap which was mostly by Layth (the web site owner) and his clown Ayman. So they banned me for good, and that is why I launched free-islam.com in 2006. This means what I am going to talk about was talked about already 4 years ago. But this time is no like 4 years ago. So let the show begins:

The Cat wrote:
The term 'makkata' in 48.24 must be questioned as meaning Mecca/Becca (3.96) like Muslims ascertain....


Sure let's question the word

The word is a name of a place; being a place name means it has no meaning but to refer to that place. Like the human names for example, a person may be named مؤمن , Mu'min, which means Believer , but that person may be an unbeliever. Therefore, applying the meaning of the word on proper names cannot be a valid action or argument. This means when this human name is written in English, it has to be Mu'min and not Believer.

Another example is the capital of Egypt, its name is قاهرة , Qahira, which means Compelling or Prevailing, yet that does not mean that this city is compelling or prevailing over something, in fact Qahira is translated in English to Cairo, why is that , Cat? What Cairo means in English, pal? It means the city of Qahira in Egypt, it does not mean Compelling or Prevailing.

We don't you see the English speaking people calling Cairo, Prevailing. Google Translate confirms that; let me put the image to build on it an irrefutable argument afterward:

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


Now, the same word is also a feminine adjective to mean Prevailing, an example goes like this:

Susan is Qahira the problems, i.e. Susan is prevailing over the problems. But Google translate used the proper name in English Cairo as the translation instead of common name, so let me trick Google Translate and remove the last letter from the word قاهرة , Qahira to be قاهر , Qahir, this will make the word masculine, so let's see how Google Translate will translate it:

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


And that is exactly what I am talking about, the word Qahira means prevailing, but when used as a proper name of a place or a person, then its meaning must be ignored and will have absolutely no effect upon what the word refer to. That is why Qahira is written in English as Cairo, which I believe is wrong, it should be written in English as it is pronounced in Arabic because it is a proper name, i.e. Qahira and not Prevailing or Compelling or even Cairo. I believe they used the English meaningless word Cairo to just make it easy to pronounce the name instead of Qahira. See how Google Translate translates Mecca:

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


So based on these, why the confused and manipulative freak minders want to translate the name of a city to the meaning of its root? They are doing so to serve their main objective of supporting with deception the new man made religion they invented.

The Cat wrote:
For, historically, Mecca was unknown until around 710


As I said, wishful thinking is not admissible, now I will show you two sources of information about how far Mecca was traced, the first source is from the book The Life of Mahomet by a very known Christian author William Muir who only attacks Islam, this is what He said in his book, (I am happy to consider this evidence inadmissible):

History of Mecca already traced to 570 A.D

In the Introduction, I have traced the history of History of Mecca and the ancestors of Mahomet, from the earliest times of which we have any account, down to the famous Year of the Elephant, which marks the deliverance of the sacred city from the invading army of Abraha the Abyssinian viceroy of Yemen. Before proceeding farther, I propose briefly to describe Mecca, and the country immediately surrounding it.


Source The first words in the first chapter.

There will be no chance in hell that this Christian author enemy of Islam and Google are working with the Muslims along that alleged conspiracy theory invented by some freaks.

The second source of information is your favourite one, Wiki:

The early Arabian population consisted primarily of warring nomadic tribes. When they did converge peacefully, it was usually under the protection of religious practices.[16] Writing in the Encyclopedia of Islam, Wensinck identifies Mecca with a place called Macoraba mentioned by Ptolemy. His text is believed to date from the second century AD, before the foundation of Islam,[17] and described it as a foundation in southern Arabia, built around a sanctuary. The area probably did not start becoming an area of religious pilgrimage until around the year AD 500. It was around then that the Quraysh tribe (into which Muhammad was later born) took control of it, and made an agreement with the local Kinana Bedouins for control.[18] The sanctuary itself, located in a barren valley surrounded by mountains, was probably built at the location of the water source today known as the Zamzam Well, an area of considerable religious significance.


Source

See, Wiki even traces Mecca to the second century AD. Are all these people conspiring with the Muslims for 1400 years but only those two con-artists Layth and Ayman came 1400 years later to expose them? It cannot be. Those two freaks are only using the ignornace of many Muslims with the Arabic langauage to fool them into the flawed root method to understand the Arabic words, for which I proved with no doubt that proper names (like human names, or places) cannot be translated.

The freak minders replied to the above known fact through their FFI sidekick CAT with nothing but wishful thinking; see:

The Freak Minders wrote:
MAKKA(T)
It is not surprising that the inscription of Abraha doesn't mention or even allude to a town called Maka(t). There is zero evidence for a town named Maka(t) prior to the revelation of the great reading and all sides of the debate on the historicity of Maka(t) agree that the name Maka(t) doesn't occur in any "pre-quranic" inscriptions. Those promoting the historicity of Makka are forced to bring the only one reference by Ptolmey to an insignificant town by the name of Macoraba and not Maka(t) for the simple reason that they know very well that there are absolutely no references to the supposedly important town of Maka(t). This despite the fact that there are many references, including the above Abraha's inscription, to far less important towns in Arabia than this alleged Makka(t).


Well, how about the enemy of Islam William Muir who traced Mecca back to year 570? Yeh he too conspired with the Muslims?

Well, let me just consider all the above evidences inadmissible, including your favourite Wiki. (I am just saving you the long time to refute everything I said, as later on you will be hit with the irrefutable)

The Cat wrote:
and the oldest qiblas weren't pointing there but way up North.


What the Qiblas have to do with it? This is the nature of the freak minders, they always confuse the subject with nothing but irrelevant crap, I guess to confuse the listeners away from exposing their irrational thinking. Well, what they are saying above makes no sense, it is not like those early Qiblas were always north from any place on earth, I am sure they were also east to those living in the west side. I will just dismiss this crap of an argument.

The Cat wrote:
The explanation for Mkk(t) in 48.24 as meaning 'destruction' comes from the Classical Arabic dictionaries, as per:
http://www.free-minds.org/language (A Koraner site)


You mean the manipulation by the freak minders who translated it this way to confuse by deception; let me bring the verse in here and walk you through my translation bit by bit:

وَهُوَ الَّذِي كَفَّ أَيْدِيَهُمْ عَنْكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ عَنْهُمْ بِبَطْنِ مَكَّةَ مِنْ بَعْدِ أَنْ أَظْفَرَكُمْ عَلَيْهِمْ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرًا (24)
And it is He Who withheld their hands from you and your hands from them in the valley of Mecca after He made you victorious over them. And ever is Allah over what you do, Seeing.
[Al Quran ; 48:24]

- وَهُوَ الَّذِي كَفَّ أَيْدِيَهُمْ عَنكُمْ, i.e. And it is He Who withheld their hands from you , very clear that Allah made the kafirs to stop fighting the Muslims; sounds like a peace treaty. It is not like the kafirs will all of a sudden fall in love with the Muslims so they stopped fighting them.

- وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ عَنْهُم , and your hands from them, this confirms the assumed peace treaty above, because Allah also made the Muslims to stop fighting the kafirs. This peace treaty is very well documented in history and is called: Treaty of Hudaybiyyah. See what your favourite source Wiki says about it:

In 628 AD, a group of 1,400 Muslims marched towards Mecca, in an attempt to perform Hajj (pilgrimage). They were forced to perform an Umrah (small pilgrimage). The group was prepared with animals of sacrifice, as they hoped that the Quraish made them honor the Arabian custom of allowing converts to enter the city. According to Lewis, Muhammad felt strong enough to attempt an attack on Mecca; but on the way, it became clear that the attempt was premature and the expedition was converted into a peaceful pilgrimage.[2] Andrae disagrees, writing that the Muslim state of ihram (which restricted their freedom of action) and the paucity of arms carried indicated that the pilgrimage was always intended to be pacific.[3] The Quraish intercepted the Muslim party well outside Mecca. By this time, all of Arabia was aware of the military strength of the Muslims.[citation needed] Muhammad wanted to avoid bloodshed in or near the holiest city of worship.

The two parties decided to resolve the matter through diplomacy rather than warfare. Hence the Quranic reference to the Sakina (tranquillity).


Source

The Quran also referenced this treaty in the same sura 48; the sura that starts by telling us about the conquest of Mecca (Makka):
إِنَّا فَتَحْنَا لَكَ فَتْحًا مُبِينًا (1)
Indeed, We have given for you an obvious conquest.
[Al Quran ; 48:1]

لِيَغْفِرَ لَكَ اللَّهُ مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ ذَنْبِكَ وَمَا تَأَخَّرَ وَيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكَ وَيَهْدِيَكَ صِرَاطًا مُسْتَقِيمًا (2)
That Allah may forgive for you what preceded of your sin and what will follow and complete His favour upon you and guide you to a straight path.
[Al Quran ; 48:2]

وَيَنْصُرَكَ اللَّهُ نَصْرًا عَزِيزًا (3)
And that He may help you with a mighty help.
[Al Quran ; 48:3]

هُوَ الَّذِي أَنْزَلَ السَّكِينَةَ فِي قُلُوبِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ لِيَزْدَادُوا إِيمَانًا مَعَ إِيمَانِهِمْ ۗ وَلِلَّهِ جُنُودُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا (4)
It is He Who sent down tranquillity into the hearts of the believers that they would increase in faith along with their (present) faith. And to Allah belong the soldiers of the heavens and the earth. And ever is Allah Knowing, Wise.
[Al Quran ; 48:4]

-> The peace treaty is evident in 48:4, It is He Who sent down tranquillity into the hearts of the believers that they would increase in faith along with their (present) faith.

Now, where that peace treaty took place? The answer lies in the next part of 48:24

- بِبَطْنِ مَكَّةَ , i.e. in the valley of Mecca

Now this is where we have a problem, the freak minders say it means in the midst of destruction, but most Muslims and the history records say it meansa place in Mecca.

The important note is this, there was no destruction, in fact it was a state of peace because the treaty of Hudaybiyyah was in place starting from year 628 and supposed to be running for 10 years. The word midst must mean that you are in the middle, or in the centre of doing something, or in the midst of something that is happening to you. In our case, the midst of destruction as the confused freak minders allege was not there.

AGAIN WHERE IS THAT BLOODY DESTRUCTION THAT THEY WERE IN ITS MIDST?

The answer is simple: There was no destruction, rather there was Sakina, i.e. Tranquillity as 48:4 told us: It is He Who sent down tranquillity into the hearts of the believers that they would increase in faith along with their (present) faith , and as 48:24 told us: And it is He Who withheld their hands from you and your hands from them in the valley of Mecca. But let's assume that before such peace treaty, there was a war, yet the same verse 48:24 tells us that the Muslims were not in a status of destruction, rather in a status of winning and being victories as seen in the next part of the verse:

- مِن بَعْدِ أَنْ أَظْفَرَكُمْ عَلَيْهِمْ , after He made you victorious over them., i.e. the last war, before this peace treaty, was won by the Muslims. I.e. the Muslims at that moment of time WERE NEVER IN THE MIDST OF DESTRUCTION; quite the contrary, THEY WERE IN THE MIDST OF COMPLETE VICTORY.

Now, if we analyse how the Preposition Bi in the words بِبَطْنِ مَكَّةَ , Bi-Batn Mecca was used in the Quran and what should come after it, we get the following list:

The Preposition Bi ب
The preposition Bi ب has various usages. It is used to express adhesion إلصاق; time and place ظرفية; swearing قسم; companionship and connection مصاحبة or ملابسة; to render an (intransitive) verb transitive تعدية or نقل; to indicate the instrument of whose aid we avail ourselves استعانة; to express the reason of cause علة or سبب, and to state the recompense, equivalent, or price given for anything تعويض , مقابلة, or ثمن [A Grammar of the Arabic Language by W. Wright]. It has diverse significations, including 'in', 'by', 'at', 'with', 'from', 'to', 'into', 'upon', 'for', or 'by reason of' [A Dictionary and Glossary of the Koran by John Penrice]. Some examples of various usages of Bi ب are given as follows:

1. To denote adhesion (and adjunction, or association) of the verb to its objective complement, or of a noun or verb to that to which it is itself prefixed. It indicates whether one thing is attached, affixed, neighbouring, bordering, adjoining, in contact, meeting or touching, connected or contiguous to another.
Amsaktu bi-Zeydin: 'I laid hold upon or seized somewhat of the body of Zeyd, or what might detain him, as an arm or a hand, or a garment, or the like.'
Whereas Amsaktuhu may mean 'I withheld him or restrained him from acting according to his own free will'.
Marartu bi-Zeydin: 'I passed by Zeyd'; 'I made my passing to adhere to Zeyd'.
Bihi daa'un: 'In him is a disease', i.e. 'a disease is cleaving (or adhering) to him'.
Aqsamtu Billah: 'I swear by God'.
Ashraka Billahi: 'He associated another with God'.
Wakkaltu bifulanin: 'I associated a wakeel with such a one'.
Alaika bi-Zeydin: 'Keep thou to Zeyd or Take thou Zeyd'.
جلس به Jalasa bihi: He sat beside (or by) him.

2. To render a verb transitive.
In such cases, it must be translated into English by transitive verbs.
فَأْتُوا بِسُورَةٍ مِنْ مِثْلِهِ : 'then bring (lit. come with) a sura like it'. [2:23, 10:38]
ذَهَبَ اللَّهُ بِنُورِهِمْ : 'Allah took away (lit. went away with) their light'. [2:17]

3. It also denotes employing a thing as an aid or instrument.
كتبت بالقلم katabtu bilqalam: 'I wrote with the pen'.
قَاتِلُوهُمْ يُعَذِّبْهُمُ اللَّهُ بِأَيْدِيكُمْ : 'Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands' [9:14].

4. To denote concomitance as syn. with مع.
وَقَدْ دَخَلُوا بِالْكُفْرِ وَهُمْ قَدْ خَرَجُوا بِهِ : 'and indeed they come in with unbelief and indeed they go forth with it' [5:61].
ادْخُلُوهَا بِسَلامٍ آمِنِينَ: 'Enter you here with peace and security' [15:46].

5. It is also syn. with 'fi' before a noun signifying a place or a time.
Fi فى (in) shows that one thing is actually in the midst of another, surrounded by it on all sides; whereas bi ب indicates that one is close by the other or in contact with it.
وَلَقَدْ نَصَرَكُمُ اللَّهُ بِبَدْرٍ :'And Allah did certainly assist you at Badr' [3:123].
وَهُوَ الَّذِي يَتَوَفَّاكُمْ بِاللَّيْلِ وَيَعْلَمُ مَا جَرَحْتُمْ بِالنَّهَارِ 'And He it is Who takes your souls at night (in sleep), and He knows what you acquire in the day' [6:60].


6. It also denotes substitution, meaning 'instead of' or 'in place of'
لقيت بزيد بحرا laqeetu bi-zyedin bahran: 'I found, in the place of Zyed, a man of abundant generosity.'

7. It also denotes requital, or the giving or doing in return.
أُولَئِكَ الَّذِينَ اشْتَرَوُا الضَّلالَةَ بِالْهُدَى : 'These are they who have bartered Guidance for error' [2:16].
إِنَّ اللَّهَ اشْتَرَى مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَنْفُسَهُمْ وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ بِأَنَّ لَهُمُ الْجَنَّةَ: 'Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise)' [9:111].

8. It is also syn. with عن 'an' and is said to be peculiar to interrogation.
فَاسْأَلْ بِهِ خَبِيرًا : 'so ask respecting it one aware' [25:59].
يَا أَيُّهَا الإنْسَانُ مَا غَرَّكَ بِرَبِّكَ الْكَرِيمِ: 'O Man! What has lured you away from your Sustainer, the Bountiful?' [82:6]

9. It is also syn. with على 'ala'.
لَوْ تُسَوَّى بِهِمُ الأرْضُ : 'That the ground were made even over them' [4:42]

10. It also denotes part of a whole, as syn. with 'min' مِنْ.
عَيْنًا يَشْرَبُ بِهَا عِبَادُ اللَّهِ: 'A fountain from which the servants of Allah shall drink' [76:6]
عَيْنًا يَشْرَبُ بِهَا الْمُقَرَّبُونَ: 'A fountain from which drink they who are drawn near (to Allah)'. [83:28]

11. It is also used to denote swearing.
Billah or uqsimu billah: I swear by God
لا أُقْسِمُ بِهَذَا الْبَلَدِ : 'I do call to witness this City' [90:1]

12. It is also syn. with 'ila' إِلَى as denoting the end of an extent or interval.
Examples:
Ahsana bi: 'he did good to me'.

13. It is also sometime redundant (expletive). Mostly in case of the agent كَفَى
Examples:
وَكَفَى بِاللَّهِ حَسِيبًا : 'Allah is sufficient as a Reckoner' [4:6].
وَكَفَى بِاللَّهِ وَلِيًّا وَكَفَى بِاللَّهِ نَصِيرًا : 'Allah is enough as a protector, and Allah is enough as a Helper' [4:45].
وَكَفَى بِاللَّهِ عَلِيمًا : 'And sufficient is Allah as the Knower' [4:70].
Also see 4:50, 4:55, 4:79, 4:81, 4:132, 4:166, 4:171, 10:29, 13:43, 17:14, 17:17, 17:65, 17:96, 21:47, 25:31, 25:58, 29:52, 33:3, 33:39, 33:48, 46:8, 48:28.
Ahsinu bi-zaidin: 'Zaid became possessed with goodness or beauty.'
Bi-hasbika dirhamun: 'A thing sufficing thee is a dirhem.'
وَمَا اللَّهُ بِغَافِلٍ عَمَّا تَعْمَلُونَ : 'And Allah is not unmindful of what you do'. [2:74]
وَالَّذِينَ كَسَبُوا السَّيِّئَاتِ جَزَاءُ سَيِّئَةٍ بِمِثْلِهَا : 'And (as for) those who have earned evil, the punishment of an evil is the like of it' [10:27]
Also see 2:137, 17:88, 18:109, 25:33.

14. It also denotes a reason or cause علة or سبب (means for obtaining something; reason; cause; motive) translated e.g. as because of; on account of; due to; by
فَبِظُلْمٍ مِنَ الَّذِينَ هَادُوا حَرَّمْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ طَيِّبَاتٍ أُحِلَّتْ لَهُمْ وَبِصَدِّهِمْ عَنْ سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ كَثِيرًا : 'Because of the wrongdoing of the Jews We forbade them good things which were (before) made lawful unto them, and because of their much hindering from Allah's way' [4:160].
It is also used to denote a cause when prefixed with anna أَنَّ and ma مَا
ذَلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ قَوْمٌ لا يَعْقِلُونَ : 'that is because they are a people without understanding' [5:58].
ذَلِكَ بِمَا عَصَوْا : 'that is because they disobeyed' [2:61, 3:112].

Source
--------------

The Preposition Bi used in 48:24 falls under item 5 above, here it is again:

5. It is also syn. with 'fi' before a noun signifying a place or a time.

Fi فى (in) shows that one thing is actually in the midst of another, surrounded by it on all sides; whereas bi ب indicates that one is close by the other or in contact with it.


I.e. in the valley of Mecca. and I don't mind translating it to in the midst of Mecca.

Yet, the deluded explanation described by the freak minders will never be found there, I remember when I challenged Ayman 4 years ago, he came up with some made up sentences that made absolutely non sense and a complete fool of himself, I think I laughed at him at that time after realizing that I am dealing with a complete dumb bum of a manipulator.

The Cat wrote:
According to classical Arabic dictionaries, the word "maka(t)" mainly means "destruction/wearing down", among other meanings. It is listed in classical Arabic dictionaries under either MKK or MK.


This is a clear cut lie as we are going to see in all classical Arabic dictionaries under both roots:

A- مكك ,MKK

B- مك MK

The Cat wrote:
Al-Mohit lists it under MKK, the meaning given is destruction and wearing down which is consistent with the context of standoff in 48:24. It also lists the meaning of TMKK as an adversary's insistence on something, which is also consistent with the standoff in 48:24.


Let me bring Al-Muheet in here:

Source
Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


The above explanation by Al-Muheet for the root MKK never ever mentioned any type of destruction; see:

مَكَّكَ يُمَكِّكُ تَمْكِيكًا , MKK; YAMKKUK; TAMKKIKA : Used with bones to mean excessively sucking it; used with an opponent to mean others insisting on requests from him.

How about, pussy cat, you take the above to the con-artist of the freak minders Ayman and shove it into his eyes and ask him: Where the hell is that destruction you are talking about in Al-Muheet dictionary? If he cannot answer you, then I advice you to shove it up his arse.

Well how about we look in the same dictionary for the other root MK:

Source
Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


مَكَّ يَمُكُّ مُكَّ أو اُمْكُكْ مَكًّا , MK; YAMMUK MAKK; or AMKKUK MAKKA : Used with bones to mean sucking everything therein; used with an opponent to mean others insisting on requests from him; used with anything to mean decreasing and destroying it.

While the meaning of to destroy is mentioned in this dictionary under MK, it was never the main meaning, in fact it was the last in the list, and was only as a verb but never as a common noun as the liars of freak minders are alleging to the fools.

Let's look at the third dictionary named Al-Qamus Al-Muheet in which we find 7 different variations of Arabic words derived from the root MK:

Source
Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


1- مَكَّهُ): (وامْتَكَّهُ وتَمَكَّكَهُ ومَكْمَكَهُ , MAKKAHU; AMTTAKAHU; TAMAKKAKAHU; MAKMAKAHU: Sucked it all, and what is sucked is called MAMMKUK; MUKAK is a male or female Crow (bird).

2- مَكَّهُ , MAKKAHU: Destroyed and decreased from it; and from it comes MAKKA to mean the sacred city, or to mean the whole sacred place (including its sacred surroundings), the city was called so because it decreases or destroys sins; or it destroys the unjust people therein.

Now, we have the meaning of to destroy as the meaning for the root of the proper name MAKKA; but does it destroy the sincere believers? Of course not, if we take the meaning of the proper name MAKKA to mean destruction, then it is only the destruction of the following:

a- Destruction of sins, because believers living therein should refrain themselves from committing sins and/or sincerely seek forgiveness of Allah for their existing sins in order to decrease or destroyed some of them, if Allah wills.

b- Destruction of unjust people who commit crimes (BELIEVER OR UNBELIEVER) by enforcing the punishment of Allah upon the unjust from among them therein.

It is never referring to the destruction of believers through a war or a fight as the lying con-artists of freak minds are alleging.

3- تَمَكَّكَ , TAMAKKAK: Insisted on requests from an opponent.

4- المَكْمَكَةُ , AL-MAKKMAKA: Rolling while walking

5- المَكُّوكُ , AL-MAKKOK: Like a cup used for drinking; or different weight measurements.

6- المَكَّانَةُ , AL-MAKKANA: The slave woman

7- مَكَّ , MAKKA: Throw (the weapon at target)

What you should find to be very funny about those ignorant con-artists of freak minds like Ayman, Layth, the Cat and their likes, that according to them, all the above variations of the root MK should mean 'destruction'. How ridiculous by those fake and freak so called Muslims and their fellow kafirs.

And if we take a meaning from the above list to be the common meaning, then logically speaking it has to be the first one in the list according to the author of that classical dictionary, i.e. it has to be:

1- مَكَّهُ): (وامْتَكَّهُ وتَمَكَّكَهُ ومَكْمَكَهُ , MAKKAHU; AMTTAKAHU; TAMAKKAKAHU; MAKMAKAHU: Sucked it all, and what is sucked is called MAMMKUK; MUKAK is a male or female Crow.

However, because the above is my assumption, then the most logical course of action should be not to assume one as a common meaning, rather all the above are equally common. But we have seen the freak minders lying to us by telling us ALL CLASSICAL DECTIONARIES LISTED THE MEANING OF DESTRUCTION AS THE COMMON MEANING. How deluded they are..

Continue below........
- Fri 19 Nov, 2010 5:34 pm
Post subject:
Read above first ^^^^

The Cat wrote:
Lisan Al-Arab lists it under MK and the meaning of MK(t) is given as "destruction" and TMK as "destroy".


Let's bring Lisan Al-Arab dictionary in here:

Source
Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


Lisan Al-Arab lists 9 different variations of Arabic words for the root MK:

1- مكَّ , MKK: Used with brains to mean sucking it all; and used with anything to mean destroying and decreasing it; and used with a bird to mean throwing its weapon.

2- تمكَّك , TAMAKKAK: Sucking the whole brain.

3- امتكّ , AMTTAK: The baby drank all that his mother have (in her breasts)

4- تمكَّك , TAMAKKAK: Insisted on requests from an opponent

5- المُكَاك والمُكَاكَة, AL-MUKKAK and AL-MUKKAKA : What is being sucked, and it is used with brains because brains are sucked

6- المَكَّانُ , AL-MAKKAN : This is what the baby sheep suckle from.

7- المَكَّانَةُ , AL-MAKKANA: The slave woman

8- مَكَّهُ , MAKKA: The sacred city, or as the whole sacred place, and it is being called BAKKA with a 'BA' as an alternative but it was said with a 'BA' because of the 'BA in Bayt (House) and with a 'MIM' to mean the vicinity around the House; it was also said with a 'BA' because of the words 'Batn Makka'. The city was called MAKKA because it decreases or destroys sins, or destroys the unjust people therein.

Again and again, if we take the meaning of the proper name MAKKA to mean destruction, then it is only the destruction of the following:

a- Destruction of sins, because believers living therein should refrain themselves from committing sins and/or sincerely seek forgiveness of Allah for their existing sins in order to decrease or destroyed some of them, if Allah wills.

b- Destruction of unjust people who commit crimes (BELIEVER OR UNBELIEVER) by enforcing the punishment of Allah upon the unjust from among them therein.

It was never referring to a destruction of believers through a war as the lying con-artists of freak minds and their sidekick pussy cat are alleging.

9- المَكُّوكُ , AL-MAKKOK: Like a cup used for drinking; or different weight measurements.

The same laugh goes at those confused freaks and their brainwashed kafir pal, that for them all those 9 different meanings should be 'destruction'.

The Cat wrote:
Al-Wasit lists it under MK, the meanings given are: sucking everything out, insisting on revenge from an adversary, and the thing, which is worn down or destroyed.


Let's bring Al-Wasit dictionary in here:
Source
Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


Al-Waseet lists 7 different variations of Arabic words derived from the root MK:

1- مكَّ , MKK: Used with bones to mean sucking all what is therein; and used with an opponent to mean others insisting on requests from that opponent; and used with anything to mean decreasing or destroying it.

2- مَكَّكَ, MAKKAK: Insisted on requests from an opponent.

3- امتكّ , AMTTAK: The bones being sucked; the baby sucked all that his mother have (in her breasts).

4- تمكَّك , TAMAKKAK: Insisted on requests from an opponent.

5- المُكَاك , AL-MUKKAK: The brain that is being sucked, likewise the milk that is being sucked.

6- المُكَاكَة, AL-MUKKAKA: The brain that is being sucked, likewise the milk that is being sucked.

7- المَكُّوكُ , AL-MAKKOK: Like a cup used for drinking; or different weight measurements. It is also used with sewing machines.

From all those 7 different meanings, the confused freak minders want the first one, yet the first one has three different meanings: Used with bones to mean sucking all what is therein; and used with an opponent to mean others insisting on requests from that opponent; and used with anything to mean decreasing or destroying it. The last of them is 'destruction', this cannot make it the most common meaning.

But again, for those dumb bums of freak minders, all the above should mean destruction. So how long are we going to laugh at those idiots and their confused sidekick kafir pussy cat?.

The Cat wrote:
Al-Ghani lists it under MKK, the meanings given are: sucking, insisting with demands on an adversary.


Let's bring Al-Ghani dictionary in here:
Source
Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


مَكَّكَ , MKK: Sucking; used with an opponent to mean others insisting on requests from him.

So what is the point of those confused freak minders? Destruction was never mentioned. How foolish and dumb.

Would that be all classical Arabic dictionaries? Of course not, we have another one called Muheet Al-Muheet explaining to us the different words derived from the root MK, let me bring it in here:

Source
Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


The dictionary listed all the meaning we discussed, sucking brains, sucking milk, sucking bones, and last was to destroy, then they said the following:

مَكَّةُ معروفة ، البلد الحرام ، قيل : سميت بذلك لقلة مائها ، وذلك أَنهم كانوا يَمْتَكُّون الماء فيها أي يستخرجونه ، وقيل : سميت مكة لأنها كانت تَمُكُّ من ظَلَم فيها وأَلْحَدَ أي تهلكه

MAKKA is known, it is the sacred city; it was said that they called it so due to the little water it has as they used to suck that water by extracting it from the land; it was also said that they called it so because it destroys anyone who commits injustice therein.

So what else we need to look at? There should be nothing conclusive than the same dictionaries those dumb bums of ignorant freaks are using. In which we read that the destruction they are talking about was never the destruction of the believers, rather the destruction of sins or the destruction of those who commit injustice in Mecca. It is never the destruction of the believers through any act of war as the lying freaks are telling us.

The Cat wrote:
Here is a translation of 48:24 using Classical Arabic dictionaries and the context of war from the verses to translate the common description "maka(t)":
And it is He Who has restrained their hands from you and your hands from them in the midst
of destruction after that He gave you the victory over them. And Allah sees well all that ye do.


You confused manipulated manipulator, three of the above dictionaries already defined what MAKKA is, it is a city which has a proper name; and yet, if we translate its root, we end up with numerous meanings, not just destroy; and yet, if we assume destruction to be the meaning, it will never fit in the context of verse 48:24 because the destruction your classical dictionaries are talking about are any of the following destructions:

a- Destruction of sins, because believers living therein should refrain themselves from committing sins and/or sincerely seek forgiveness of Allah for their existing sins in order to decrease or destroyed some of them, if Allah wills.

b- Destruction of unjust people who commit crimes (BELIEVER OR UNBELIEVER) by enforcing the punishment of Allah upon the unjust from among them therein.

It is never referring to the destruction of believers through a war or a fight as the lying con-artists of freak minds are alleging.

Let me bring the whole verse again and apply your dictionaries destruction meaning in the context and see for ourselves:

وَهُوَ الَّذِي كَفَّ أَيْدِيَهُمْ عَنْكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ عَنْهُمْ بِبَطْنِ مَكَّةَ مِنْ بَعْدِ أَنْ أَظْفَرَكُمْ عَلَيْهِمْ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرًا (24)
And it is He Who withheld their hands from you and your hands from them in the midst of destruction after He made you victorious over them. And ever is Allah over what you do, Seeing.
[Al Quran ; 48:24]

-> So it should be:

And it is He Who withheld their hands from you and your hands from them in the midst of destruction (of sins)

Or

And it is He Who withheld their hands from you and your hands from them in the midst of destruction (of the unjust people)

So where is the destruction of the believers, you filthy and retarded con-artists?

It cannot be any of the above, you pinhead freaks. It can only be:

And it is He Who withheld their hands from you and your hands from them in the valley of Makka.

And I am happy to accept the following too:

And it is He Who withheld their hands from you and your hands from them in the midst of Mecca.

The Cat wrote:
I used Yusuf Ali's translation but while he left "maka(t)" un-translated I didn't. As one can see, the clear classical Arabic meaning fits perfectly in the context of the military standoff in verse 48:24.


If you will ever get a perfect fit, you should get it by shoving the crap and lies by the freak minders along with Yusuf Ali translation up your arse. I am sure you are going to get a perfect fit, because they spew a lot of crap and lies which need a big and abused arse to fit.

The Cat wrote:
Based on the context from the great reading/"quran",


What happened here, confused? Is it called Quran or great reading? You funny clowns.

The Cat wrote:
linguistic evidence from Arabic dictionaries,


Yes, I have seen it in Barbie classical dictionary, you brainwashed mentally disabled freaks.

The Cat wrote:
and the lack of any evidence supporting that there was a "pre-quranic" town by the name of Maka(t), the only logical unbiased conclusion is that "maka(t)" is not the name of "pre-quranic" town but is simply a mundane common noun like thousands of others in the great reading/"quran".


Yeh, like the lack of this evidence by the enemy of Islam William Muir in his book'The Life of Mahomet'

Or the lack of Wiki's evidences, your favourite encyclopaedia:

Kaaba

Treaty of Hudaybiyyah

Conquest of Mecca

The Cat wrote:
Sticking to makkata as a location named Mecca is thus -chronologically- devastating for Muslims.


What is devastating should be all the compelling evidences presented above; your wishful thinking along with the freak minders' who molested and brainwashed you in their premises cannot be admissible.

The Cat wrote:
The proofs of its nonexistence, up to the 6th century at the very least, are simply overwhelming.


What we should have proofs for by now, is the irrefutable fact that your brain along with the brains of those who molested and enslaved you to promote their lies, are non-existent

The Cat wrote:
Thus the hadiths making the equation Abraham-Ishmael-Mecca (with Buraq!) are mythological !


Oh, come on, you may shove the hadith up your arse along with the lies and crap of the freak minders.

The Cat wrote:
Yep, archeolgy, dectionries and encycolpedias will all slam dunk me.


Well, as I told you before, you can shove your archaeological evidences up your arse, or up Layth's, or up Ayman's, or up yekee's. All of you as dumb stupid bums deserved and earned it.

I only refuted you with your dictionaries (remember), your encyclopaedia (Wiki) and of course the Quran..

The Cat wrote:
Go for it, Ahmed.


I certainly did and still have far more to say, but I did not want it to be too long for the pinheads.

Now, here is the deal, you will get only one chance to refute the above, take all the time you need (a year if you want), I am not going to tell you, you ran away, coward. But you have to use this chance really well, i.e. you need to refute all the above as I always do. And while you struggling to do so, keep in mind the following:

Only Dictionaries, Encyclopaedias, Google online Translation, Quran and Bible evidences will be allowed; your wishful thinking and your so called archegonial evidences will never be allowed, so don't even think about presenting them.

But if you find my evidences to be overwhelming, then I expect you to be a man and concede that those freak minders are indeed a bunch of con-artists who only fool the fools and ignorant.

Finally keep this in mind:

1- I still have more evidences including other compelling grammatical concerning the two words Batn Makka which constitute what is called Genitive Construction in the Arabic language, but again I did not want to be very complicated upon the pinheads)

2- Have more Quran and Bible evidences

3- If you failed to refute logically and with merit, you will be dismissed and the logo of the Grandmother of all Slams will be stamped

Salam
- Sat 20 Nov, 2010 12:10 am
Post subject:
Hello, Ahmed

That was a precision bombing and a superb demolition.

I would like to read and see how the FFI goons and Clowns can put any spin over this utter demolition.

The Cat appears to be a sensible Qur'aan Only Kafir, so he may concede. Please ignore other FFI minions.

Well done, mate.

Salaams
BMZ
- Sun 21 Nov, 2010 12:23 am
Post subject:
AhmedBahgat wrote:
Hello the Cat


The Cat wrote:
Hi AB! Thanks for the well researched post, the time and trouble you took for it is duly appreciated.


Hello

I still have more. But let me see what you have to say

AhmedBahgat wrote:
Qahira is translated in English to Cairo, why is that , Cat? What Cairo means in English, pal? It means the city of Qahira in Egypt, it does not mean Compelling or Prevailing.


The Cat wrote:
A word can have different meanings when use as a noun, a proper noun, an adjective or a verb.


But the word you have is a proper noun. It seems you are eager to take a very complicated lesson in the Arabic grammar. Are you ready for it?

The Cat wrote:
It is thus the case for makkata in 48.24. A proper noun in Arabic is usually indicated by -ism- and we do not find it there.


What the hell was that exactly?

The word Makkata is Ism already, i.e. proper noun. i.e Ism of a place. When I walk you through the very tough Arabic grammar lesson later, you should know how ignorant you are. But you should be excused because you know no Arabic, the ones who should never be excused are the con-artists of freak minds Layth and Ayman who know Arabic but yet continue to deceive the ignorant like you.

The Cat wrote:
So it must be considered as a noun of which meaning we'll look at and NOT as a proper name indicating a location.


So far, you are talking pure rubbish, again, the name Makka is a proper Ism, i.e. a proper noun, and I showed you 3 dictionaries stating so, that it is a proper noun of a place, and they even explained through different opinions why it is called so. Now, what you need to do is prove those 3 dictionaries wrong, but you cannot because you are using the same dictionaries to prove your deluded case.

The Cat wrote:
This goes with the Koran's habit not to mention locations, except a few exceptions of which 'makkata' isn't.


How stupid again, firstly there is no such thing called Quran habit, this is just pure stupidity. However I have to corner you in here waiting to upper cut you, you need to bring all those exceptions where the Quran mentioned places (numerous places), then explain why Mecca is not one of them

Stating such dull and dumb statements is not going to work with me, pal.

AhmedBahgat wrote:
So based on these, why the confused and manipulative freak minders want to translate the name of a city to the meaning of its root?


The Cat wrote:
Thanks for acknowledging that 'destruction' is a ROOT form of 'makkata'


Are you that manipulated manipulator?

Destruction was only one of the meanings of the roots, the last one to be precise

How about the main meaning which is SUCKING, like sucking brains, sucking milk, sucking bones, for which the dictionaries said Mecca got its name from because the people used to suck water from the ground with difficulty.

Yet, even if we take destruction to be the meaning, then as I said numerous time in my irrefutable reply, it was the destruction of:

1- Sins
2- The bad people

It was never the destruction of believers, you lying fool.

The Cat wrote:
Since this is a ROOT form,


Again you blind fool, it is not the root, it is one of the meanings of the root, and I showed you that all dictionaries said that it means SUCKING, while not all of them said that it means Destroy, consequently the main meaning of the root should be SUCKING and not DESTROYING. This fits Makka well because it has no water and they used to suck it with difficulty from the ground.

Your manipulated and wishful thinking crap holds no water. Just dust in thin air.

The Cat wrote:
one must prove that it differs like by showing the -ism- indicating a proper name. So here we face a conjecture stemming out from the wishful desire of the translators,


Total BS

The two words 'Batn Makka', constitute what is called Genitive Construction, genitive means that the last letter in the second word must end with a KASRAH vowel, so let me put a big image of the two words and see if it Makka ends with a KASRAH under the last letter in it:

Source of Image


The image above shows three words:

1- The Preposition Bi: بِ, Bi, i.e. In
2- The first word in the Genitive Construction: بَطْنِ , Batni, i.e. the midst of
3- The second word in the Genitive Construction: مَكَّةَ , Makkata, i.e. Mecca

Now, listen carefully, pal:

Genitive Construction in the Arabic grammar has very restrict rules, one of its rules is this:

- The second word MUST be genitive, hence its name 'Genitive Construction'. This means that the second word in the genitive construction MUST have a KASRAH under the last letter.

- Now, look at the image above from Quran verse 48:24, I highlighted the last letter of the second word of the Genitive Construction in red. However, it does not have a KASRAH under it, i.e. it is not genitive which violates the rule of the Genitive Construction that the last letter in the second word must be genitive. Well, the rest of the rule is as follow:

- The last letter of the second word in the Genitive Construction must be genitive with a KASRAH under it, unless the second word is ممنوع من الصرف , Mamnoo Mn Al-Sarf. I don't know how to translate this exactly to English, but in simple terms: Prohibited for Noonation and must be genitive with a FATHA above the last letter in lieu of a KASRAH under the last letter.

- Now, look at the word Makka again in the Quran photo above, we have that FATHA (Accusative) above the last letter, seen in red. i.e. the word Makka is ممنوع من الصرف , Mamnoo Mn Al-Sarf; see below from An Arabic grammar web site:

Source of Image
Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


What they are saying above in simple terms: أن مكة ممنوعة من الصرف , i.e. Because Makka is Mamnoo Mn Al-Sarf

- This should take us to the next question, when is a noun will be ممنوع من الصرف , Mamnoo Mn Al-Sarf? The answer is as follow from the same grammar web site, :

Source of Image
Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


What they are saying, it happens when it is : العلم المؤنث المختوم بتاء التأنيث , i.e. A proper feminine name that is ending with the feminine Ta.

Guess what, pal, Makka is an Arabic word that is:

1- Proper name
2- Feminine
3- Ending with the feminine Ta, the highlighted letter in red seen in the first Quran image.

In fact they even listed the word مكة circled in blue as an example.

Here you have it, pal, I just showed you that Makka is a proper feminine name. This should shut your ignorant mouth for good along with your deceitful con-teachers Layth and his clown Ayman.

It also means that the Grandmother of all slams have been executed. i.e. Game Over.

I.e. this is my final serious session in this debate. You may reply afterward but as for me, Game is Over.

And I am sorry to tell you that it became evident to me that I have to dismiss the rest of your crap without even reading it, and I am really serious here, I have not read it. But if you feel that there is in it a strong point that you made, please copy that point only in a new comment and I will reply to it inshaallah. Salam

The Cat wrote:
Makkata is nowhere else written, not even in 2.125 and 2.196 where it would have been plainly stated according to self-logic.
Yet, it wasn't there so HAD to be added in man-made ADDED brackets:

2:196 Perform the pilgrimage and the visit (to Makka) for Allah.
No 'makkata': Wa 'Atimmū Al-Ĥajja Wa Al-`Umrata Lillāhi.

2:125 And when We made the House (at Makka) a resort for mankind and sanctuary, (saying): Take as your place of worship
the place where Abraham stood (to pray). And We imposed a duty upon Abraham and Ishmael, (saying): Purify My house
for those who go around and those who meditate therein and those who bow down and prostrate themselves (in worship).


No 'makkata' either: Wa 'Idh Ja`alnā Al-Bayta Mathābatan Lilnnāsi Wa 'Amnāan Wa Attakhidhū Min Maqāmi 'Ibrāhīma

This HUGE silence, the total absence of -makkata- where it's badly needed is a Koranic prove that it can't be a location!

AhmedBahgat wrote:
The Cat wrote:
and the oldest qiblas weren't pointing there but way up North.

What the Qiblas have to do with it?

Everything! Before around 710, they weren't pointing toward nowadays Mecca !

http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/FredericDecat50722.htm
Quote:
If it was such an important place, certainly those to whom the trade was going would have noted its existence. Yet, WE FIND NOTHING, though the Greeks refer to the towns of Ta'if and Yathrib (later Medina ), as well as Khaybar in the north. The unmentioned of Mecca is indeed troubling for the historicity of a city whose importance lies at the center of the nascent Islam....

According to the Islamic tradition, the prayer's direction was finalized towards Mecca for all Muslims in or around 624. But the archaeological evidence, which has been and is continuing to be uncovered from the first mosques built in the 7th century, by archaeologists Creswell and Fehervari concerning two Umayyad mosques in Iraq and one near Baghdad, had Qiblas not facing Mecca but oriented too far north. The Wasit mosque is off by 33 degrees, and the Baghdad mosque by 30 degrees.

This agrees with Balahhuri's testimony (called the Futuh) that the Qibla of the first mosque in Kufa, Iraq, supposedly constructed in 670 lay to the west, while it should have pointed almost directly south. The Amr b. al As mosque outside Cairo in Egypt shows also that the Qibla again pointed too far north and had to be corrected by the governor Qurra b. Sharik. All above instance position the Qibla not towards Mecca but much further north, possibly to the vicinity of Jerusalem .

We find further corroboration for this direction of prayer by the Christian writer and traveler Jacob of Edessa, who, writing as late as 705 was a contemporary eye-witness in Egypt . He maintained that the Mahgraye (Greek name for Saracens) in Egypt prayed facing east and not south or south-east. His letter (still found in the British Museum ) is indeed revealing.

Therefore, as late as 705, the direction of prayer towards Mecca had not yet been canonized.


So, where were they pointing? We now have some computerized truly amazing result. LOOK!
Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

They point to the al-Ula (Dedan)-Hijr (Hegra) area, best explaining Muhammad's own Hijr (Hegira).

AhmedBahgat wrote:
AGAIN WHERE IS THAT BLOODY DESTRUCTION THAT THEY WERE IN ITS MIDST?
The answer is simple: There was no destruction, rather there was Sakina, i.e. Tranquillity

Surah 48 (Conquest/Victory, al-Fath) is clearly in the context of a battle to be as per 48.20-22.
But, generally speaking, surah 48 talks about the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, in 628, as a 'victory'.
As per the treaty enacted bloodshed was spared, thus the Sakina mentioned, i.e. Tranquility !

AhmedBahgat wrote:
according to them, all the above variations of the root MK should mean 'destruction'.

On this you've made a fairly good point :up: for at Hudaybiyyah there was negotiations, thus:
Al-Qamus Al-Muheet
Used with an opponent to mean others insisting on requests from him
Lisan Al-Arab & Al-Wasit:
4- تمكَّك , TAMAKKAK: Insisted on requests from an opponent
Al-Ghani
مَكَّكَ , MKK: Sucking; used with an opponent to mean others insisting on requests from him.

For 'what is sucked' should be understood as what is obtained/lost in such a negotiation.
It can refers to destruction (or enmity) avoided, still NOT as the proper name of a place.

If harsh negotiation
48:24 And He it is Who hath withheld men's hands from you, and hath withheld your hands from them,
in the midst of negotiations, after He had made you victors over them. Allah is Seer of what ye do.


If enmity avoided
48:24 And He it is Who hath withheld men's hands from you, and hath withheld your hands from them,
in the midst of enmity, after He had made you victors over them. Allah is Seer of what ye do.


AhmedBahgat wrote:
The Cat wrote:
Sticking to makkata as a location named Mecca is thus -chronologically- devastating for Muslims.

What is devastating should be all the compelling evidences presented above

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Hudaybiyyah
The treaty that took place between the state of Medina and the Quraishi tribe of Mecca in March 628CE.

There was no Quraishi tribe affected to a big pilgrimage center named Mecca. Such an important place would have been known
from external sources. Ta'if was so known, Yathrib and even Khaybar, but NOT MECCA. So it is all an obvious apologetic fabrication
mainly from the man-made Sira of Ibn Ishaq (that is rather from Ibn Hisham) and from the Hadiths. Do we trust them? NO.

AhmedBahgat wrote:
The Cat wrote:
Thus the hadiths making the equation Abraham-Ishmael-Mecca (with Buraq!) are mythological !

Oh, come on, you may shove the hadith up your arse along with the lies and crap of the freak minders.

free-minds.org is a Koraner site, thus they reject the hadiths. But since you admit that the hadiths are corrupted,
I ask you to extand this to the LIE of Mecca. Basically, they were first concocted by the Abbasid to legitimate their
usurpation through a forged al-Muttalib/Muhammad/Abbas blood lineage...

The forged genealogy at the base of the (political) hadiths:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaiba_ibn_Hashim
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbas_ibn_Abd_al-Muttalib
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_Caliphate
The Abbasid caliphate was founded by the descendants of the Islamic prophet Muhammad's youngest uncle, Abbas ibn Abd al-Muttalib,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/As-Saffah
As-Saffah the head of one branch of the Banu Hashim, who traced their lineage to Hashim, a great-grandfather of Muhammad, via al-Abbas.

All this fabulation (Ishmael/al-Muttalib/Muhammad/Mecca) has been debunked by the inscription of king Abraha
Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


The inscription dated 552CE reads:
"With the power of the Almighty and His Messiah, King Abraha Zeebman, the King of Saba'a, Zuridan, and Hadrmaut and Yemen
and the tribes (on) the mountains and the coast wrote these lines on his battle against the tribe of Ma'ad (in) the battle of al-Rabiya
in the month of "Dhu al Thabithan" and fought all of Bani A'amir and appointed the King Abi Jabar with Kinda and Al, Bishar bin Hasan
with Sa'ad, Murad, and Hadarmaut in front of the army against Bani Amir of Kinda. and Al in Zu Markh valley and Murad and Sa'ad in
Manha valley on the way to Turban and killed and captured and took the booty in large quantities and the King and fought at Halban
and reached Ma'ad and took booty and prisoners, and after that, conquered Omro bin al-Munzir. (Abraha) appointed the son (of Omro)
as the ruler and returned from Hal Ban (halban) with the power of the Almighty in the month of Zu A'allan
in the year sixty-two and six hundred.
"

-- Abraha won.
-- No mention of Mecca whatsoever, while the province of Kinda is...
-- No mention of elephants (they would have needed a ton of water supply).
-- No mention of al-Muttalib nor of the Quraysh tribe.
--The inscription is ascertained 552AD, destroying the whole hadiths fabrications.




The Cat wrote:
Thanks again for the time and trouble you took in your researched presentation.


No worries. Take care
- Sun 21 Nov, 2010 2:27 am
Post subject:
AhmedBahgat wrote:
AhmedBahgat wrote:
Hello the Cat


Anyway, the point is, you have clearly shown that Makkata refers to Makka and the words Bi-Batne-Makkata mean "in the valley of Mecca".

Another important point, which non-Muslims who do not know Arabic at all, is that the word Makka is not at the end of the verse or a sentence. The recitation goes on.

You have already demolished the two points.

It is good that you referred to a well-known polemic Christian William Muir and the FFI goons, specially yeezevee and others cannot discard the ignorant fool, who coined the term Satanic Verses. Muir, the enemy of Islam, was the one who came up with that.

I believe there is nothing more to discuss in that dismissal. There is no need to talk about Qibla and other matters.

Well done, mate
BMZ
- Sun 21 Nov, 2010 3:39 pm
Post subject:
Hello the Cat

I will look at this one for now, then I will look at the other one later inshaallah:

The Cat of FFI said to Ahmed:
All this fabulation (Ishmael/al-Muttalib/Muhammad/Mecca) has been debunked by the inscription of king Abraha
Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


The inscription dated 552CE reads:
"With the power of the Almighty and His Messiah, King Abraha Zeebman, the King of Saba'a, Zuridan, and Hadrmaut and Yemen
and the tribes (on) the mountains and the coast wrote these lines on his battle against the tribe of Ma'ad (in) the battle of al-Rabiya
in the month of "Dhu al Thabithan" and fought all of Bani A'amir and appointed the King Abi Jabar with Kinda and Al, Bishar bin Hasan
with Sa'ad, Murad, and Hadarmaut in front of the army against Bani Amir of Kinda. and Al in Zu Markh valley and Murad and Sa'ad in
Manha valley on the way to Turban and killed and captured and took the booty in large quantities and the King and fought at Halban
and reached Ma'ad and took booty and prisoners, and after that, conquered Omro bin al-Munzir. (Abraha) appointed the son (of Omro)
as the ruler and returned from Hal Ban (halban) with the power of the Almighty in the month of Zu A'allan
in the year sixty-two and six hundred.
"

-- Abraha won.
-- No mention of Mecca whatsoever, while the province of Kinda is...
-- No mention of elephants (they would have needed a ton of water supply).
-- No mention of al-Muttalib nor of the Quraysh tribe.
--The inscription is ascertained 552AD, destroying the whole hadiths fabrications.

Thanks again for the time and trouble you took in your researched presentation.
-------------------

Ahmed says
Apparently you do not see the flaw in your logic above concerning your so called archaeological evidence of the inscription of King Abraha.

King Abraha was living in Sanaa Tamen, therefore he was an Arabic speaker. Your Barbie scripture is written in a language that you did not even tell us about, but certainly not Arabic, it is not like someone will come with some chicken shit or rubbish and claim this is the inscription of Abraha and so it is a fact.

The above so called inscription looks to me a forgery, a photo shop job, you can see how the letters are so bright which makes no sense especially with the two different directions of the rows which are overlapping each other in the middle, as seen with the three arrows I added to this forged photo shop image.

Now, Abraha lived for some time and conquered many villages as told in this funny inscription, therefore it is not like these only 10 lines or so are telling us all his history and what he did or heard about, just thinking this way is totally insane and ridiculous. It is not like we should have read in this unknown language of a few words that Abraha heard of Kabba and he is going to destroy it.

The un-mentioning of Kabba in this funny so called archaeological evidence does not really mean that Abraha did not know about it. And certainly he could have never added it after after he was killed in the battle of Mecca as the Quran told us. One guy whom I know responded to one of the deluded idiots like Cat concerning the same archaeological Abraha crap. So I would like to copy it but direct it at the Cat instead:

Here is the Cat believing in wild stories about Abraha's army advancing on Arab tribes that was written on some alleged rock that was discovered some years before Muhammad's time. And the fact that he leaves out who and when this archaeological discovery was found, or proof that such a discovery was made probably has the audience on the edge of their seats in suspense of his magical rock. I mean what Arabs would agree to make up a story of their people being flogged to death?. You see, Cat thinks that a picture of a rock with clearly made up writing (as no old rock would be dug up with clear, bright, white writing on it) and no proof of who and when this rock was discovered, and whether it is actually authentic and that any other historically backed up evidence. The Cat has fallen for the old adage that If a lie is told over a long period of time it becomes fact. But this cannot change the fact that it is still a lie.

The Cat thinks that because the alleged archaeological find predates Islam by nearly 50 years somehow disproves the fact that Muhammad received revelation around 610 in Mecca. Yet we should note that he himself stated that the rock does not mention Mecca or the Kabba. Then it's absolutely absurd to say that the mentioning of Abraha trying to attack the Kabba is an invention of Muslims. For since it's two different stories, then there's a possibility of two different events being spoken of. See the idiocy in his posts. It's the same kind of foolish logic we find in all the freak minder arguments.

Back to Abraha's conquest; according to his make-believe archaeological find. Abraha was victorious and the carved stone has been confirmed and date confirmed. So where does this leave us? Well, we can rely on an alleged archaeological find supported by no proof of who or when or how it was discovered or whether the inscription is true. It isn't possible that some rock discovery can disprove or overrule the fact that Abraha was alive in 570 to conduct his quest upon Mecca. The inscription on the alleged rock which mentioned some prominent areas and peoples of Arabia but not Mecca, the Kabba and Quraysh proves nothing, because of the simple fact that the possibility that of it not being mentioned can be due to the fact that it relates to a different event. One should also take note that Mecca, the Kabba and Quraysh are all in Arabia and Cat even states that Abraha led a military expedition on Arab tribes. So a claim that Abraha intended to attack the Kabba is not far-fetched, unlike his claim through the freak minders about Mecca.

I'm really glad you are having a go at this conspiracy theory about Islam and Mecca because after what you copied from the freak minders and their likes, I am confident the absurdity in your logic is crystal clear to any reasonable person. You are pretty much admitting how flawed your logic is with such so called Abraha's Inscription which is plagiarism of the freak minders argument. But now, you will not be able to debunk my argument, because by doing so, you will be debunking yours, as my argument regarding the so called Abraha's Inscription is the same as yours. All wishful thinking, what I warned you about earlier regarding the always doubtful so called archaeological evidences.

So let me now make it clear, the Cat, just because you or else claim that an archaeological discovery is found, is not proof that it was found. Just because you refer to the freak minders which states your evidence is not proof that it is true. You have proven nothing as the freak minders and others proved nothing before you. You are simply copying and pasting links and articles claiming that they are true, but you don't have proof. There are websites stating that Big Foot is real, and Tupac and Elvis are still alive, but it doesn't make it true.

The point is that I'm not even stating that the archaeological find was not discovered, but that your logic behind stating that something is true is severely flawed. I've been demonstrating that in my plagiarism of your argument concering Abraha's Inscription, in effect debunking me would be debunking yourself.

Even if the find was actually discovered, it is not proof that the inscription is true. Nor can you prove that the inscription is true. And even if the inscription is true, it still does not prove your point. For as you stated, the rock is dated 552 A.D., while Muhammad was born 570 A.D. Then since there are two different dates and the inscription states an event different from the year of the elephant in Islamic sources, then the logical conclusion is that the discovery refers to a DIFFERENT event. How do we know? Because you just told us that the date of the inscription and events are different. Thus your argument that the year of the elephant is made up in Islamic records is bogus. To even further debunk your absurdity, those who were first to accept Islam were Arabs themselves. The simple fact that they accepted Islam is further evidence which supports the fact that the story is true. For the Arabs of that time would know their history and would have easily criticized and rejected Islam for such a false interpolation of their history of their own people. Yet there is no such case or document in which the Arabs questioned that the year of the elephant is wrong explained in Islamic. So as demonstrated and as usual, your argument fails. I suggest you pick up a book on how to use logical thinking and proof, for your habit of copying and pasting and then stating it is true with no proof is truly an embarrassment.

An archaeological discovery mentioning a different year and instances is proof of a different event, not that another story is made up. Such a conclusion is absurd. By that logic, that means that all history which is not mentioned in the archaeological fins is false. That is simply ridiculous. Secondly, the fact that the Arabs accepted and embraced Islam is very strong evidence to support the fact that the incident concerning the year of the elephant mentioned in Islamic records is true. Otherwise, the Arabs would have rejected Islam, not embrace it. Your logic is utterly flawed Cat. Get over it.

Thanks to my friend, and thank you Cat

Cheers
- Sun 21 Nov, 2010 4:00 pm
Post subject:
AhmedBahgat wrote:
Hello the Cat

I will look at this one for now, then I will look at the other one later inshaallah:

The Cat of FFI said to Ahmed:
All this fabulation (Ishmael/al-Muttalib/Muhammad/Mecca) has been debunked by the inscription of king Abraha
Thumbnail, click to enlarge.


The inscription dated 552CE reads:
"With the power of the Almighty and His Messiah, King Abraha Zeebman, the King of Saba'a, Zuridan, and Hadrmaut and Yemen
and the tribes (on) the mountains and the coast wrote these lines on his battle against the tribe of Ma'ad (in) the battle of al-Rabiya
in the month of "Dhu al Thabithan" and fought all of Bani A'amir and appointed the King Abi Jabar with Kinda and Al, Bishar bin Hasan
with Sa'ad, Murad, and Hadarmaut in front of the army against Bani Amir of Kinda. and Al in Zu Markh valley and Murad and Sa'ad in
Manha valley on the way to Turban and killed and captured and took the booty in large quantities and the King and fought at Halban
and reached Ma'ad and took booty and prisoners, and after that, conquered Omro bin al-Munzir. (Abraha) appointed the son (of Omro)
as the ruler and returned from Hal Ban (halban) with the power of the Almighty in the month of Zu A'allan
in the year sixty-two and six hundred.
"

-- Abraha won.
-- No mention of Mecca whatsoever, while the province of Kinda is...
-- No mention of elephants (they would have needed a ton of water supply).
-- No mention of al-Muttalib nor of the Quraysh tribe.
--The inscription is ascertained 552AD, destroying the whole hadiths fabrications.

Thanks again for the time and trouble you took in your researched presentation.
-------------------

Ahmed says
Apparently you do not see the flaw in your logic above concerning your so called archaeological evidence of the inscription of King Abraha.

King Abraha was living in Sanaa Tamen, therefore he was an Arabic speaker. Your Barbie scripture is written in a language that you did not even tell us about, but certainly not Arabic, it is not like someone will come with some chicken shit or rubbish and claim this is the inscription of Abraha and so it is a fact.

The above so called inscription looks to me a forgery, a photo shop job, you can see how the letters are so bright which makes no sense especially with the two different directions of the rows which are overlapping each other in the middle, as seen with the three arrows I added to this forged photo shop image.

Now, Abraha lived for some time and conquered many villages as told in this funny inscription, therefore it is not like these only 10 lines or so are telling us all his history and what he did or heard about, just thinking this way is totally insane and ridiculous. It is not like we should have read in this unknown language of a few words that Abraha heard of Kabba and he is going to destroy it.

The un-mentioning of Kabba in this funny so called archaeological evidence does not really mean that Abraha did not know about it. And certainly he could have never added it after after he was killed in the battle of Mecca as the Quran told us. One guy whom I know responded to one of the deluded idiots like Cat concerning the same archaeological Abraha crap. So I would like to copy it but direct it at the Cat instead:

Here is the Cat believing in wild stories about Abraha?????????????????????¢??s army advancing on Arab tribes that was written on some alleged rock that was discovered some years before Muhammad's time. And the fact that he leaves out who and when this archaeological discovery was found, or proof that such a discovery was made probably has the audience on the edge of their seats in suspense of his magical rock. I mean what Arabs would agree to make up a story of their people being flogged to death?. You see, Cat thinks that a picture of a rock with clearly made up writing (as no old rock would be dug up with clear, bright, white writing on it) and no proof of who and when this rock was discovered, and whether it is actually authentic and that any other historically backed up evidence. The Cat has fallen for the old adage that If a lie is told over a long period of time it becomes fact. But this cannot change the fact that it is still a lie.

The Cat thinks that because the alleged archaeological find predates Islam by nearly 50 years somehow disproves the fact that Muhammad received revelation around 610 in Mecca. Yet we should note that he himself stated that the rock does not mention Mecca or the Kabba. Then it's absolutely absurd to say that the mentioning of Abraha trying to attack the Kabba is an invention of Muslims. For since it's two different stories, then there's a possibility of two different events being spoken of. See the idiocy in his posts. It's the same kind of foolish logic we find in all the freak minder arguments.

Back to Abraha?????????????????????¢??s conquest; according to his make-believe archaeological find. Abraha was victorious and the carved stone has been confirmed and date confirmed. So where does this leave us? Well, we can rely on an alleged archaeological find supported by no proof of who or when or how it was discovered or whether the inscription is true. It isn?????????????????????¢??t possible that some rock discovery can disprove or overrule the fact that Abraha was alive in 570 to conduct his quest upon Mecca. The inscription on the alleged rock which mentioned some prominent areas and peoples of Arabia but not Mecca, the Kabba and Quraysh proves nothing, because of the simple fact that the possibility that of it not being mentioned can be due to the fact that it relates to a different event. One should also take note that Mecca, the Kabba and Quraysh are all in Arabia and Cat even states that Abraha led a military expedition on Arab tribes. So a claim that Abraha intended to attack the Kabba is not far-fetched, unlike his claim through the freak minders about Mecca.

I?????????????????????¢??m really glad you are having a go at this conspiracy theory about Islam and Mecca because after what you copied from the freak minders and their likes, I am confident the absurdity in your logic is crystal clear to any reasonable person. You are pretty much admitting how flawed your logic is with such so called Abraha?????????????????????¢??s Inscription which is plagiarism of the freak minders argument. But now, you will not be able to debunk my argument, because by doing so, you will be debunking yours, as my argument regarding the so called Abraha?????????????????????¢??s Inscription is the same as yours. All wishful thinking, what I warned you about earlier regarding the always doubtful so called archaeological evidences.

So let me now make it clear, the Cat, just because you or else claim that an archaeological discovery is found, is not proof that it was found. Just because you refer to the freak minders which states your evidence is not proof that it is true. You have proven nothing as the freak minders and others proved nothing before you. You are simply copying and pasting links and articles claiming that they are true, but you don't have proof. There are websites stating that Big Foot is real, and Tupac and Elvis are still alive, but it doesn't make it true.

The point is that I'm not even stating that the archaeological find was not discovered, but that your logic behind stating that something is true is severely flawed. I've been demonstrating that in my plagiarism of your argument concering Abraha?????????????????????¢??s Inscription, in effect debunking me would be debunking yourself.

Even if the find was actually discovered, it is not proof that the inscription is true. Nor can you prove that the inscription is true. And even if the inscription is true, it still does not prove your point. For as you stated, the rock is dated 552 A.D., while Muhammad was born 570 A.D. Then since there are two different dates and the inscription states an event different from the year of the elephant in Islamic sources, then the logical conclusion is that the discovery refers to a DIFFERENT event. How do we know? Because you just told us that the date of the inscription and events are different. Thus your argument that the year of the elephant is made up in Islamic records is bogus. To even further debunk your absurdity, those who were first to accept Islam were Arabs themselves. The simple fact that they accepted Islam is further evidence which supports the fact that the story is true. For the Arabs of that time would know their history and would have easily criticized and rejected Islam for such a false interpolation of their history of their own people. Yet there is no such case or document in which the Arabs questioned that the year of the elephant is wrong explained in Islamic. So as demonstrated and as usual, your argument fails. I suggest you pick up a book on how to use logical thinking and proof, for your habit of copying and pasting and then stating it is true with no proof is truly an embarrassment.

An archaeological discovery mentioning a different year and instances is proof of a different event, not that another story is made up. Such a conclusion is absurd. By that logic, that means that all history which is not mentioned in the archaeological fins is false. That is simply ridiculous. Secondly, the fact that the Arabs accepted and embraced Islam is very strong evidence to support the fact that the incident concerning the year of the elephant mentioned in Islamic records is true. Otherwise, the Arabs would have rejected Islam, not embrace it. Your logic is utterly flawed Cat. Get over it.

Thanks to my friend, and thank you Cat

Cheers


FFIers have a habit of diverting the topic.

You have already addressed the two core issues, Ahmed.

1. You have already shown and proved that the words are
بِبَطْنِ مَكَّةَ and those mean "in the valley of Mecca".

2. You have demolished the argument about the History of Mecca by quoting the polemic Christian William Muir, a hate-bag himself.

The rest, I believe, is nothing but diversion. In my view, that debate is over.

Salaams
BMZ
- Sun 21 Nov, 2010 4:04 pm
Post subject:
Salam bro BMZ

I know man, the Game was Over using Muir and Arabic grammar, and I know their tactics of diversions, however I am not going to leave the playground empty for them, my previous comment was a reply to their diversion, the important point is this, I do not divert the debate as they always do

Cheers
- Sun 21 Nov, 2010 5:08 pm
Post subject:
AhmedBahgat wrote:
Salam bro BMZ

I know man, the Game was Over using Muir and Arabic grammar, and I know their tactics of diversions, however I am not going to leave the playground empty for them, my previous comment was a reply to their diversion, the important point is this, I do not divert the debate as they always do

Cheers


Yes, mate.

The entire team of FFI goons uses diversionary tactics, once they are dismissed.

If you want to have more fun, show them the verse " هُوَ اللَّهُ الَّذِي لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا هُوَ عَالِمُ الْغَيْبِ وَالشَّهَادَةِ هُوَ الرَّحْمَنُ الرَّحِيمُ " and ask them what happened to Shahaadah here? Rofl

They do not even know how to recite that verse in Arabic.

Anyway, it was a great slam dunk and I am glad you did not stamp it.

Salaams, mate
BMZ
- Mon 22 Nov, 2010 4:19 am
Post subject:
AhmedBahgat wrote:
Well, I can also copy and paste a lot of things which will expose you and your master who molested you from the Frak Minders, however I am tired now, but will do later


The Cat wrote:
Do so! See how you lose either may...


It is not my problem that you are a confused and abused manipulated kafirs who in a few months the freak minders molested you until you submitted to their non sense.

The Cat wrote:
1) You lose the argument concerning 48.24, but save the Koran in regards of history.


Well I showed you, you confused manipulated manipulator, the dictionaries you used yourself defining Mecca to us as a city and even telling us why it is called so

I also shoved into your blind eyes a irrefutable Arabic grammar lesson confirming that Mecca is a proper name of a city

For both you preferred to be silent, however you had no option, ignorant, my refute was designed to silence you and your con-teachers Layth ad Ayman. Tell us what did they said concring the above if you have nothing to say on your own.?

The Cat wrote:
2) You 'win' but then the Koran is proven faulty for there was no Mecca in existence.


Lol, Mecca is mentioned in the Quran more than two times punk, this is what your dictionaries told us and what the Arabic grammar p[quote="The Cat"]om weight of doubt.

The Cat wrote:
You MUST prove this important city was even existing, that is apart from the fabulations of Ibn Ishaq and the unreliable hadiths...


Muir you stupid punk of a molested freak traced Mecca to 570, and youw Wiki traced it to the second century

I also showed you tard, the Great Mosque in Sanaa Yamen which was built during the prophet time, pointing to Mecca using Google earth

Why you have not replied to that you confused ignorant of a molested kafir?

I know, you had nothing to say but spin on the magical rock of Abraha, well, you may shove Abraha rock up your arse, or up Layhis, or up Ayman's or up Yekee, well the rock is huge, how about all of your break it up, and have a shoving party between yourself?

The Cat wrote:
And no... evading through the 'ummi'. We've already discussed the topic, you and I, in the old forum!
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=54337
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1089048#1089048


No punk, that is the next slam dunk for the record, but I will slam it when I choose, I want to watch you spinning around like a donkey for a few days first, it is entertaining

Cheers
- Mon 22 Nov, 2010 5:32 am
Post subject:
pussy Cat

This is not the place to play with your girlfriend yekee

Let me slam dunk both of your, freaks:

Do you know Edward Gibbon?

I guess both of you dumb ignorant bums never heard of him

Here he is from you favorite Wiki:

Edward Gibbon (April 27, 1737[notes 1] ' January 16, 1794) was an English historian and Member of Parliament. His most important work, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, was published in six volumes between 1776 and 1788. The Decline and Fall is known for the quality and irony of its prose, its use of primary sources, and its open denigration of organised religion.[1]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Gibbon

In his book: Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire, Volume V, he writes the following:

.....of the blind mythology of the Barbarians; of the local deities, of the stars, the air, and the earth, of their sex or titles, their attributes or subordination. Each tribe, each family, each independent warrior, created and changed the rites and the object of his fantastic worship; but the nation, in every age, has bowed to the religion, as well as to the language, of Mecca. The genuine antiquity of the Caaba ascends beyond the Christian aera;


See, freaks, The genuine antiquity of the Caaba ascends beyond the Christian aera

You can download the book from here:

Http://free-islam.com/Downloads/Mecca/Gibbon/gibbone.pdf

I highlighted it for you, blinds, in yellow, page 55

You have been slam dunked again, pussy Cat

Cheers
- Mon 22 Nov, 2010 6:16 am
Post subject:
Hey pussy Cat

Do you know Diodorus Siculus?

I am sure an ignorant bum know nothing about him, here he is from your favorite Wiki:

Diodorus Siculus (Greek: Διόδωρος Σικελιώτης), was a Greek historian who lived in the 1st century BC. According to Diodorus' own work, he was born at Agyrium in Sicily (now called Agira). With one exception, antiquity affords no further information about Diodorus' life and doings beyond what is to be found in his own work, Bibliotheca historica. Only Jerome, in his Chronicon (49 BC), writes, "Diodorus of Sicily, a writer of Greek history, became illustrious". His English translator, Charles Henry Oldfather, remarks on the "striking coincidence" that one of only two known Greek inscriptions from Agyrium (I.G. XIV, 588) is the tombstone of one "Diodorus, the son of Apollonius".

Work:
Diodorus' universal history, which he named Bibliotheca historica ("Historical Library"), consisted of 40 books, of which 1'5 and 11'20 survive, and were divided into three sections. The first six books treat the mythic history of the non-Hellenic and Hellenic tribes to the destruction of Troy and are geographical in theme, and describe the history and culture of Ancient Egypt (book I), of Mesopotamia, India, Scythia, and Arabia (II), of North Africa (III), and of Greece and Europe (IV'VI). His account of gold mining in Egypt is one of the earliest extant texts on the topic, and describes in vivid detail the use of slave labour in terrible conditions.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diodorus_Siculus

In his book, he wrote:

BOOK III. 44. 1-4

shut in as it is by crags which are of wondrous size, its mouth is winding and hard to get out of; for a rock which extends into the sea obstructs its entrance and so it is impossible for a ship either to sail into or out of the gulf. Furthermore, at times when the current rushes in and there are frequent shiftings of the winds, the surf, beating upon the rocky beach, roars and rages all about the projecting rock. The inhabitants of the land about the gulf, who are known as Banizo-menes, find their food by hunting the land animals and eating their meat. And a temple has been set up there, which is very holy and exceedingly revered by all Arabians.


See, freak, And a temple has been set up there, which is very holy and exceedingly revered
by all Arabians


You can read the the book online:

http://www.archive.org/stream/diodorusofsicily02dioduoft/diodorusofsicily02dioduoft_djvu.txt

Or download from:

http://free-islam.com/downloads/mecca/diodorusofsicily/DiodorusOfSicily.htm

You have been slam dunked again, pussy Cat. Imay have time to slam dunk you one more before I head 800 km away from Sydney for the next 5 days

Cheers
- Wed 24 Nov, 2010 3:06 am
Post subject:
AhmedBahgat wrote:
Hey pussy Cat

Do you know Diodorus Siculus?

I am sure an ignorant bum know nothing about him, here he is from your favorite Wiki:

Diodorus Siculus (Greek: Διόδωρος Σικελιώτης), was a Greek historian who lived in the 1st century BC. According to Diodorus' own work, he was born at Agyrium in Sicily (now called Agira). With one exception, antiquity affords no further information about Diodorus' life and doings beyond what is to be found in his own work, Bibliotheca historica. Only Jerome, in his Chronicon (49 BC), writes, "Diodorus of Sicily, a writer of Greek history, became illustrious". His English translator, Charles Henry Oldfather, remarks on the "striking coincidence" that one of only two known Greek inscriptions from Agyrium (I.G. XIV, 588) is the tombstone of one "Diodorus, the son of Apollonius".

Work:
Diodorus' universal history, which he named Bibliotheca historica ("Historical Library"), consisted of 40 books, of which 1?????????????????????¢??5 and 11?????????????????????¢??20 survive, and were divided into three sections. The first six books treat the mythic history of the non-Hellenic and Hellenic tribes to the destruction of Troy and are geographical in theme, and describe the history and culture of Ancient Egypt (book I), of Mesopotamia, India, Scythia, and Arabia (II), of North Africa (III), and of Greece and Europe (IV?????????????????????¢??VI). His account of gold mining in Egypt is one of the earliest extant texts on the topic, and describes in vivid detail the use of slave labour in terrible conditions.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diodorus_Siculus

In his book, he wrote:

BOOK III. 44. 1-4

shut in as it is by crags which are of wondrous size, its mouth is winding and hard to get out of; for a rock which extends into the sea obstructs its entrance and so it is impossible for a ship either to sail into or out of the gulf. Furthermore, at times when the current rushes in and there are frequent shiftings of the winds, the surf, beating upon the rocky beach, roars and rages all about the projecting rock. The inhabitants of the land about the gulf, who are known as Banizo-menes, find their food by hunting the land animals and eating their meat. And a temple has been set up there, which is very holy and exceedingly revered by all Arabians.


See, freak, And a temple has been set up there, which is very holy and exceedingly revered
by all Arabians


You can read the the book online:

http://www.archive.org/stream/diodorusofsicily02dioduoft/diodorusofsicily02dioduoft_djvu.txt

Or download from:

http://free-islam.com/downloads/mecca/diodorusofsicily/DiodorusOfSicily.htm

You have been slam dunked again, pussy Cat. Imay have time to slam dunk you one more before I head 800 km away from Sydney for the next 5 days

Cheers


Hello, Ahmed,

The Cat is really getting hilarious. I can't take this anymore. Please stamp official dismissal. Rofl

Here is the reason:

http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=8371&start=60#p133800

Salaaams
BMZ
- Mon 30 Jan, 2012 8:32 am
Post subject:
Amazing rebuttle as usual Ahmed, I love especially how you used archaelogy to prove the Aad and Ubar connection.

I might just add one thing. The Dome of the Rock is NOT the Masjid al Aqsa!

Here is a picture of the Aqsa mosque


Thumbnail, click to enlarge.



This one shows the Dome of the Rock (golden dome) with the Aqsa Mosque in the background (grey dome)



Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the Dome of the Rock:

The Dome of the Rock (Arabic: مسجد قبة الصخرة‎, translit.: Masjid Qubbat As-Sakhrah, Hebrew: כיפת הסלע‎, translit.: Kipat Hasela) is a shrine located on the Temple Mount in the Old City of Jerusalem. The structure has been refurbished many times since its initial completion in 691 CE at the order of Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik. The site's significance stems from religious traditions regarding the rock, known as the Foundation Stone, at its heart.


Isra'a was done to al Aqsa Mosque, the Dome of the Rock was not even built during the life of our prophet.
- Mon 30 Jan, 2012 8:46 pm
Post subject:
Thank you dear brother, and many thank for the extra information you added

Please be aware that I have migrated the site from one server to another a few moths back, this has resulted in some character set incompatibility in mYSQL, that is why you will see so many weired characters replacing the comma '

I am fixing them as I go inshaallah, sorry about that


Cheers
- Mon 30 Jan, 2012 10:26 pm
Post subject:
I was wondering about that...
All times are GMT + 10 Hours
Powered by phpBB 2.0 .0.17 © 2001 phpBB Group