News:

About us: a forum for monotheists, and discussion of Islam based on The Quran

Main Menu

Road of the Patriarch

Started by Pazuzu, November 29, 2011, 10:18:04 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Pazuzu

In the Footsteps of Abraham


QuoteIt is not a waste of time to prove that others have wasted theirs?
Ziad Minah (1991)


Preface

He appears suddenly in the center of Arabia, to settle his ?concubine? Hagar and his infant son Ismael in the heart of some desolate valley. Then he leaves them there and travels back, at the ripe old age of 80, to the Levant, over 1200 kilometers away, on foot or on the back of a donkey ?? Then he returns again to Arabia, crossing another 1200+ kilometers, to check up on Hagar and his son. And again, and again, repeating the trip no less than 6 times, as the Islamic books of tradition tell us, and as Ibn Katheer reports:

"...وقد كان إبراهيم عليه الصلاة والسلام يذهب في كل وقت يتفقد ولده وأم ولده ببلاد فاران (من أسماء جبال الحجاز) وينظر في أمرهما..."


Translation: ?? and Abraham would travel repeatedly to visit his son and the mother of his son in the Faran country (another name they gave to the Hijaz mountains) to check up on them.?

This is what they have been teaching us for centuries about Abraham?s multiple and mysterious journeys between Hijaz and Palestine. And if we ever use our reason and contemplate these claims, we will come to the conclusion that Abraham traveled a distance totaling ? in the least ? 15,000 kilometers on foot, or on his donkey; and that?s NOT including his original journey from Mesopotamia and his several alleged forays into Egypt, which we have left out of the equation to make the calculation more simple. This means that Abraham?s trips to and from the Hijaz totaled a distance exceeding the entire circumference of the planet, which measures about 12,800 KM at the equator. And when any person with a single brain cell still functioning in his head asks the question of how an 80 year old goat-herder could travel such distances across desolate wastelands and scorching deserts, and what was the purpose of repeating the trip no less than 6 times, that person would find the age-old answer also in the books of tradition, as Ibn Katheer puts it:

"وقد ذكر انه كان يركب على البراق سريعا إلى هناك والله أعلم"


Translation:  ?And it was reported that he (Abraham) would ride the Pegasus (al-Buraq) to there, and Allah knows best?

Allah knows best, indeed?

The fact is that this strange explanation puts the mind at a fork in the road. The first branch takes the reader towards accepting the story as it is, without questioning, because its source is considered ?divine? and not to be doubted (Allah Said So!).  And this is the road that 99.99% of Muslims, who have completely discarded their brains and logic, have taken.

Or, the reader can take the second road, refuse the story outright, and sound the warning buzzard to the nations, that a great forgery was perpetrated in the account of the Patriarch Abraham. And very few people have chosen to walk this road, despite the dozens of warnings in the Quran that the Jewish priests had tampered with the previous messages and corrupted the biographies of the prophets ? warnings which have gone unheeded for ages. 

___________


So where do we begin? And what is the solution to this puzzle?

I think the best place would be to ask the following question, which I am sure most Muslims have asked at some point in their lives:

Why don?t the Jews and the Christians recognize Abraham?s association with Arabia?

Both creeds agree on the details of the Patriarch?s life, from the time he was born (allegedly in Mesopotamia), to his migration to ancient Palestine (the alleged ?Promised Land?), to his forays into Egypt, to the identity of his two sons (Ismael and Isaac), to the story of the expulsion of his ?servant wench? Hagar and her infant son (Ismael) at the whim of his wife Sarah, etc?

Even the Muslims themselves agree with the Jews and Christians on 90% of these ?facts?, with the exception of small details that are really only minor issues. But there are two important episodes in the life of Abraham which are not commonly agreed upon by the followers of the three creeds ? episodes that ONLY the Muslims recognize:

1- The religious debate that Abraham had with the rejecters from among his native people, and his destruction of their idols. NOWHERE is this mentioned in the Old Testament. The Torah claims that Abraham left his homeland simply because God wanted to direct him to the ?Promised Land flowing with milk and honey?. It doesn?t mention anything about the debate he had with the elders of his people, and the threats they made against him. (This is VERY important, and we will get back to it later on).

2- That the heart of Arabia, and precisely the coastal region of the Tahama of southern Hijaz, was an important station in Abraham?s life.

According to the rampant Muslim creed, Abraham (whom they too believe was born in Mesopotamia), made no more than a ?passing visit? to the heart of Arabia, where he ?dropped off? his expulsed ?wench? Hagar, and his infant son Ismael, in the middle of a desolate valley, left them there ALONE, and then went back to ancient Palestine, over 1200 KM away. Afterwards, he made repeated visits to them, year after year, to check up on them, until Ismael became of age, at which time he and his father (who was over 90 years old by that time) built a cubic structure in the precise spot where the city of Mecca lies today, and this cube became the House of Allah. Finally, Abraham said goodbye to his son Ismael, who eventually became the ?father of the Arabs?, and went back to Palestine (crossing another 1200 KM), to his ?real? family, Sarah and Isaac (from whose descendants came the Israelites) and died there, and his tomb is still found today in the city of Hebron.

This is the story that we must accept as the unquestionable truth, because ?Allah Said So?. Even a Muslim scientist, who has doctorate degree in nuclear physics, believes in this story, because ?religion? ? as he calls it ? is not a domain for logic (such is their schizophrenia).

Well, with all due respect to your beliefs, dear brothers and sisters, here is what I think: This story is nothing but a pile of bull excrement.  And it reeks of Jewish LIES, and a conspiracy to hide the history of ancient Arabia, to put a big void in its place, and to project the events that took place in it onto the surrounding lands, for reasons that are purely selfish and imperialistic.   


The next question is: Does the Old Testament really not mention Abraham?s association with Arabia?  Or is there something we are missing?

Let?s now analyze some of the passages in the Torah and see what hidden truths can still be found underneath the pile of forgeries.

1) The Migration of Abraham

The Septuagint Torah details the voyage of Abraham (P) from the time he left the land of his fathers, which it claims was in Mesopotamia, during the Chaldean era (in the city of Ur, precisely).

And Terah took his son Abram and his grandson Lot, the son of Haran, and his daughter-in-law Sarai, his son Abram's wife, and they went out with them from Ur of the Chaldeans to go to the land of Canaan; and they came to Haran and dwelt there (Genesis 11:31)

Then He said to him, "I [am] the LORD, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans, to give you this land to inherit it." (Genesis 15:7)

The above passages are among all that the Septuagint priests needed to transfer Abraham?s name to Mesopotamia (the present Iraq), and make him an ?Iraqi? of the Chaldean era.

So let us now ponder over this information and see if it is true, or another of their forgeries which they perpetrated on some moonless night, and passed onto the world.

Scholars place Abraham to have lived anywhere between 2000 BC and 1700BC.  So let?s take the latest limit and say he lived around 1700 BC. This seems more logical because it is in line with the number of generations which passed between Abraham and Moses. And it is here that the first warning buzzard must be sounded.  We said before, that when someone forges a text, he is bound to leave a clue somewhere, or to make a mistake which eventually exposes him.

The question here is: What on Earth does the era of the Chaldeans have to do with the life of Abraham?  It appears that Allah made the corruptors forget that the Chaldean dynasty began somewhere around 630 B.C, after the death of the last Assyrian king, Ashurbanipal, and was ended around 539 B.C, when the Persians conquered Mesopotamia. This information is known to first year university students of ancient history.

What this means is that the Chaldean period started and ended over 1,000 years after Abraham?s time, and some 600 years after Moses? time. 

So just how the Hell did the Torah ? which is supposed to have been ?revealed? to Moses, as they claim ? know about the Chaldean period?

Believing in this glaring anachronism is like believing the claim that Napoleon Bonaparte was a member of King Herod?s court. And they want us to applaud and play the drums to this blatant forgery as unquestionable truth. The evidence is so clear that only an imbecile would fail to see it. The Septuagints lived in the 3rd and 4th century BC. They knew very well of the Chaldean kingdom, which was a world superpower barely 200 years before them. This scandalous claim which we read in the Greek Torah, which was eventually translated into all the languages of the modern West, has always baffled scholars and commentators, who tried to find some kind of excuse ? anything ? to vindicate the mention of ?Chaldeans? associated with the era of Abraham. The only thing they could say was that the Jewish priests had perpetrated this forgery on purpose, in order for the future generations to lay claim to Mesopotamia, since Abraham ? according to them ? was born there.

In his book ?Myths of the Bible: How ancient Scribes Invented Biblical History? (page 115,116), Biblical scholar Gary Greenberg says:

QuoteThe Jews wanted to impose themselves as part of Mesopotamian history as a threshold towards laying claim over its entire land after the fall of the Chaldeans at the hands of the Persians, to whom the Jewish priests were allies.

It was indeed the Jews who had assisted the Persians in their conquest of Mesopotamia, and in their toppling of the Chaldean reign. Consequently, Cyrus the Great allowed them to return to their ancient homeland in Ur-Salem of YEMEN and rebuild their temple there, in the Heights of Himyar. (All this took place when the Jerusalem of Palestine was no more than an insignificant hamlet). 

Unfortunately, the discovery of this ?Biblical Scandal? only increased the stubbornness and pride of those who wanted to defend the Jewish forgery, until eventually, through their devious means of manipulation, they passed the LIE that Abraham was born in Mesopotamia to all the generations of the world, until it became a matter of unquestionable belief.

To follow the steps of how this forgery was perpetrated, we will take the same approach that we took before, when we showed you how the Septuagint LIARS replaced the word ?Msrim? in the so-called ?Hebrew? Torah with ?Aegyptus? in their Greek translation, thus creating the illusionary association between prophets Moses and Joseph on one hand and Egypt on the other, in order for the later generations of Jews (the self-proclaimed ?descendants? of the Israelites) to lay claim to the land of the Nile, as part of their ?Promised Land? (Remember: From the Euphrates to the Nile is your land, Oh Israel!).

So let us go back to the Septuagint Torah, and compare its text with the so-called ?Hebrew? version, to see what their black hands wrote to the world:

The original Torah, written in Squared Aramaic, mentions a name for Abraham?s original home town which has absolutely no relation whatsoever with ?Chaldea?. Let?s see what the text says, taking Genesis 11:28 as an example:

"וימת הרן על־פני תרח אביו בארץ מולדתו באור כשׂדים׃"

Going back the glossary of ?Hebrew? we can see that the last two words on the left are pronounced as such:   ?Ur ? Kasdim? (or ?Kashdim?, since the ?s? and ?sh? are interchangeable in the Hebrew alphabet, which by the way is the exact same phenomenon as in the ancient Yemeni dialects).

So how did the Septuagints translate this term in the Greek Torah, which became the new source of knowledge for the whole world at the time?

Take a look at the translation:

καὶ ἀπέθανεν Αρραν ἐνώπιον Θαρα τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ ἐν τῇ γῇ، ᾗ ἐγενήθη، ἐν τῇ χώρᾳ τῶν Χαλδαίων.

Again, looking up the last two words on the right, in any Greek vocal glossary, we get: ?Ur ? Kaledon?.
I will leave this translation for you, dear readers, to judge its accuracy for your self.

?Ur ? Kasdim? became ?Ur ? Kaledon?.   

What do you think?  Do you see any relation whatsoever between these two words, which are supposed to be the PROPER NOUN of a location (and hence untranslatable in the first place)?  Furthermore, the word ?Kasdim? is the plural form of ?Kasd?. I showed you before how the ancient Yemeni dialects like Saba?ean and Thamudic used the suffix ?im? to denote the plural. This is the same rule in the so-called ?Hebrew? (eloh ? elohim / cherub ? cherubim / katub ? katubim / Msr ? Msrim /  KASD ? KASDIM / etc?). In fact, the similarities between what they call ?Hebrew? and those ancient Yemeni dialects are so spectacular so as to be mind-boggling. This alone is worth dedicating an entire thread, just to show you these similarities. So they changed a plural noun, which indicates the name of a forgotten or unknown tribe or clan, and replaced it with the well-known and popular name of a city that was the capital of a recently toppled superpower, Chaldea.

And so it was that the news of Abraham being born in Iraq spread throughout the entire world  like wildfire, carried on the wings of the Greek language, and eventually infiltrated the beliefs of the Muslims, who have been propagating this forgery and teaching it to the generations of their children for over 2000 years.

Because the claim of Abraham?s birthplace is so hard to digest, we can see its confusing effects well documented in the books of the Arab historians of old, who found themselves having to go to extreme lengths to vindicate and defend the ancient Jewish scribes against this scandalous forgery, by claiming the following: ?Perhaps they meant Ur of Babylon!?. Now this of course, made sense, since the Babylonians preceded the Chaldeans by many centuries, and coincided with the time of Abraham.  Instead of pointing out the forgery, the Arab historians and commentators ? except for a very small minority - sought to ?patch it up? and defend it!

In order not to prolong this thread, I will not include actual examples of what the Arab historians wrote. But if you can read Arabic, you can go and look up the following books, and see the conjectures and confusion that they were caught in concerning the birthplace of Abraham, all of which are pretty much summed up by the allegation of ?Oh, they must have meant the Ur of Babylon!?.

?Al-Muntazhim?, by Abou Faraj (volume 1, page 259)
?Al Bidaya wal Nihaya?, by Ibn Katheer (volume 1, page 140)
?Al Anas al Jaleel?, by al 3ulaymi (volume 1, page 27).


What is even stranger than all this is the alleged road which Abraham and his family initially took to get to Palestine. The Torah states that they had a short ?transit? stop in the city of Haran. To get a clearer picture of the geographical implications of this trip, let?s look at the map below:



Map Explanation: A description of Abraham?s imaginary journey from Ur-Chaledonia (which didn?t even exist in his time), to ancient Palestine, passing through Haran on the way (the red arrow). The map also shows his venture into Egypt, where they claimed he reached the city of Memphis, just south of the Nile Delta - distances that no sane mind could accept. The green arrow shows the ?extra episode? added by the Muslims exclusively, which indicates his repeated voyages deep into Arabia, to the current location of Mecca (which is further south beyond the border of the map).

The city of Ur lies at the southern end of Mesopotamia (what is today called ?Iraq?), near the north eastern border of Arabia; while Palestine, which they call ?the Land of Caanan? (and I will prove to you the fallacy of this name soon), lies to the west, with the only thing separating the two regions being the southern part of the Levant wilderness. As you can see from the map, the path from Ur to Palestine is very simple and straightforward (it?s a straight, and almost horizontal line).  Whereas Haran, their alleged transit stop, lies far far to the north of this straight path, along the ancient Syrian-Armenian border. It is completely out of their way.

In fact, the presence of Haran as a stop along Abraham?s way caused a huge problem to both Biblical scholars as well as the ancient Arab commentators. Aside from the fact that the Torah seems to be confusing the city of ?Haran? in ancient Armenia with ?Haran? the brother of Abraham, there is something blatantly illogical about the geography of the entire voyage. After Tareh, the father of the family, left Ur along with his son Abraham, Sarah (Abraham?s wife), and Lot (Abraham?s nephew), they didn?t travel straight westwards toward Palestine, despite the fact that the road was clear and straightforward. No! Instead, they struck forth far to the north, until they reached the border of Armenia!

Here is what the Torah says, word for word:

Now the LORD had said to Abram: "Get out of your country, from your family and from your father's house, to a land that I will show you. I will make you a great nation; I will bless you and make your name great; and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed."  So Abram departed as the LORD had spoken to him, and Lot went with him. And Abram [was] seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran. Then Abram took Sarai his wife and Lot his brother's son, and all their possessions that they had gathered, and the people whom they had acquired in Haran, and they departed to go to the land of Canaan. So they came to the land of Canaan. (Genesis 12:1-5)

The strange thing is that the Torah does not give any logical reason as to why Tareh would take his family on such a long trek. Some scholars, in their explanations, went as far as claiming that Haran was Tareh?s original hometown, and that he originally migrated south-east to Ur, so that his son, Abraham, could be born there, before striking out again in the opposite direction! In fact the only significant thing that happened in their transit stop at Haran was that Tareh died there (maybe he couldn?t bear the exhaustion from the trip anymore?), and Abraham then took the reins of the family, until he eventually received the ?divine promise? that his progeny would inherit the land ?from the Euphrates to the Nile?.

Is there any logical reason for inserting Haran as a stop along Abraham?s journey in the first place?

Better yet, is there even a single record, in the land of Mesopotamia, from all the thousands of the Babylonian inscriptions that have been unearthed, mentioning a man named ?Tareh?, or his son ?Abraham?, or the name ?Lot?, or anything about the escape of a small clan of goat-herders from Ur to a ?Promised Land? far to the west?

None at all.


2) The Location of the ?Blessed Land? - Muslim Confusion

Let?s see what the Quran says about this issue:

{They said: "Did you do this to our gods O Abraham?" * He said: "It was the biggest one of them here who did it, so ask them, if they do speak!" * So they turned and said to themselves: "It is indeed ourselves who have been wicked!" * Then they returned to their old ideas: "You know that they do not speak!" * He said: "Do you serve besides Allah that which does not benefit you at all nor harm you?" * I am fed-up of you and to what you serve besides Allah! Do you not comprehend?" * They said: "If you are to do anything, then burn him, and give victory to your gods." * We said: "O fire, be cool and safe upon Abraham." * And they wanted to plot against him, but We made them the losers. * And We rescued him and Lot to the land which We have blessed for the worlds}?[21:62-71]

It is clear that Abraham, after a serious of religious debates with the Imams of misguidance from among his people, was forced to migrate from there, at an old age. And the Quran tells us that Lot (a close relative of his) traveled with him initially. They left their original home and moved to a land that Allah described as ?blessed for the worlds?.

Which land was that, and how did the commentators explain it?

If you go an open the books of history and ?tafseer?, you will not believe your eyes at the heap of conjecture concerning this issue. The best summary of this can be seen in the writings of Al-Tabari, notably his famous ?Tafseer ul-Kabeer?.
Here is what he tells us (volume 17, page 47):

حدثني يونس، قال: أخبرنا بن وهب قال: قال بن زيد: في قوله "ونجيناه ولوطا إلى الأرض التي باركنا" فيها للعالمين، قال: إلى الشام. وقال آخرون: بل يعني مكة، وهي الأرض التي قال الله تعالى: "التي باركنا فيها للعالمين". ذكر من قال ذلك حدثني محمد بن سعد قال: ثني أبي، قال: ثني عمي، قال: ثني أبي عن أبيه، عن بن عباس قوله: "ونجيناه ولوطا إلى الأرض التي باركنا فيها للعالمين" يعني مكة. ونزول إسماعيل البيت ألا ترى أنه يقول: "إن أول بيت وضع للناس للذي ببكة مباركا وهدى للعالمين". قال أبو جعفر: وإنما اخترنا ما اخترنا من القول في ذلك لأنه لا خلاف بين جميع أهل العلم أن هجرة إبراهيم من العراق كانت إلى الشام وبها كان مقامه أيام حياته و إن كان قد كان قدم مكة وبنى بها البيت وأسكنها إسماعيل ابنه مع أمه هاجر، غير أنه لم يقم بها ولم يتخذها وطنًا لنفسه ولا لوط. والله إنما أخبر عن إبراهيم ولوط أنهما انجاهما إلى الأرض التي بارك فيها للعالمين.

To summarize what is said by Al-Tabari in the above passage, It seems that there were two feuding opinions as to where this blessed land was. One party said it was to ?Mecca? that Abraham and Lot were rescued by Allah, while the second claimed that Abraham and Lot migrated to Al-Sham (the Levant), and that ?Mecca? was not their permanent residence, but was only a passing stop where Abraham settled his son Ismael and Ismael?s mother Hagar.

What do we conclude from the above?

1- That the ancient memory of the Arabs did in fact record that Abraham migrated to the heart of Arabia; however, this memory was contaminated with certain alien traditions that did not come from Arabia, which claimed that the Patriarch migrated from Mesopotamia to the Levant (Palestine). And that these traditions are what caused the confusion concerning this matter.

2- That Al-Tabari, who is considered to be the ?Superman of the Imams of History? could not even make up his mind, or substantiate one opinion over the other. He left the issue open to debate.   

3- We read again the tyrannical expression ?There is no debate among the people of knowledge that Abraham and Lot migrated to the Levant?. This is the same poisonous expression (?There is no debate among the people of knowledge that so and so and bla..bla..bla..?), which appears hundreds of times in many of the books of tradition, claiming the so-called ?Ijma?a? (consensus) of the so-called ?people of knowledge?. And its aim is to simply shut the mouths of all those who seek to doubt, enquire and ask. It is used to denote the opinion not of those who bring the PROOFS, but of those whose opinion was supported by the tyrants of the age.  As for those ?misguided ignorants? who don't agree, their opinions are usually restricted to old books that sit gathering dust on the shelves of old libraries, and very few bother to read them. And it is not until hundreds or thousands of years later, when the rampant belief is proven to be false, that these old books are brought out into the light again.

4- Personally, we are not supporting either of the two parties, because we can say, with 100% confidence and certainty, that Abraham was NOT born in Mesopotamia, and he migrated neither to Palestine nor to Mecca. We can also say that the ?Bakka? mentioned in the Quran is neither Jerusalem NOR Mecca, as we will later see. In fact, the so-called city of Mecca did not even exist at the time of Abraham. (We must be completely objective here, when searching for the truth. Just as we accept that the Chaldean state didn?t exist during Abraham?s time, neither in fact did Mecca). So in effect, they are both WRONG. However, we do respect the opinion of those ?misguided ignorants? who have defied the tyrannical ?Ijma?a? by claiming that Abraham migrated to the heart of Arabia, NOT to the Levant. In reality, they are closer to the truth than they know. The question is where exactly was Abraham in the first place, and where exactly did he migrate to? This is what we will eventually answer.

5-  What is the purpose of this strange story that the Muslims believe in, which separates between Abraham and his family in this way? It's as if Islamic creed requires us to believe that Abraham placed his original wife Sarah and his son Isaac in the ?Blessed Land? of Palestine, then migrated, on foot, a distance of over 1200 KM, across scorching deserts, to place his ?concubine? Hagar and his other son Ismael in some desolate valley in the ?non-blessed? land in the south of Hijaz?

Is this another case of ?Allah Said So?? Or is it due to the ancient memory and culture of Arabia being contaminated by false Jewish beliefs that have gone unchecked for ages?

It seems that the classical commentators failed to pay attention to the very important clue given in the Torah itself, which completely denies such a separation between Abraham?s progeny, when it clearly tells us that BOTH his sons buried Abraham when he died:

And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Macphelah, which [is] before Mamre, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite (Genesis 25:9)

So did Ismael also travel on the back of the Pegasus (the winged horse) from ?Mecca? to Palestine, upon hearing of his father?s death?

Why all this confusion?

If you contemplate the story of Abraham?s migration from Mesopotamia to the Levant, you will find holes in it that are so large, you wonder how it even got by the classical commentators themselves. To sum up the reasons they gave as to why the Levant is ?blessed?, we can state the following example from Al-Tussi?s book entitled ?Al-Tibyan? (volume 7, page 263):

وقال الجبائي: أراد أرض الشام. وإنما قال "للعالمين" لما فيها من كثرة الأشجار والخيرات التي ينتفع جميع الخلق بها إذا حلوا بها وإنما جعلها مباركة، لأن أكثر الأنبياء بعثوا منها، فلذلك كانت مباركة. وقيل: لما فيها من كثرة الأشجار والثمار...

It seems that the opinion in support for the Levant as the candidate for ?blessedness? relied on two arguments to validate itself:

1- Because the Levant had an abundance of trees and resources.
2- Because it was the land where Allah had sent all the prophets to.

And here I feel I must comment briefly on this conjecture:

The first reason, which states that the Levant was the land of many trees and riches (resourses) was not only proven false by modern archeology (the same archeology that failed miserably to find a single trace of Solomon's temple in Palestine) but would also have us believe the ridiculous claim that Mesopotamia, which was the cradle of one of Asia?s earliest civilizations dating back 5000 years, from the Sumerians, to the Babylonians, to the Assyrians, to the Acadians, to the Chaldeans (in that exact order), and whose land rivaled the Nile Valley in terms of its fertility, suddenly had no trees, and no resources to speak of! Do you believe this crap, dear readers?

As for the second reason given, which claims that the Levant was the land of the prophets, this is nowhere mentioned in the Quran. It is mentioned only in the orientalist and colonial modern translations of the corrupted Jewish and Christian scriptures, which the Muslims have followed blindly. And by continuing to uphold this false belief, that the Levant was the Blessed Land, and the cradle of the prophets, the Muslims have been marketing this Jewish merchandise for ages, without being aware of it, and without even being aware that it constitutes a screaming contradiction to their own beliefs. How the Hell can the Levant be the land of prophets, when the Quran says half a  dozen times that Muhamad (P) emerged from the Mother of Towns ( which they believe to be Mecca), and says that all the prophets sent before Muhamad lived and preached in the towns surrounding it?

There is something so WRONG in this story that it simply boggles the mind just how far the Muslims have gone astray on this issue.

Here is the resounding truth which we repeat. And this is for the MUSLIMS to hear, before anyone else:

There is not one spot of land that Allah, in His Quran, described as ?blessed to the worlds?, in the ancient times, except the region of Asir in Arabia.  And ALL the prophets mentioned in the Quran, from Noah (P) to Muhamad (P) lived and died in Arabia and nowhere else. PERIOD.

But the Muslims have failed to grasp this truth, as they continue their hypocritical claim that they follow the Quran, when the fact is that they read it like zombies, and are more content with ?chanting it? eloquently, while swearing an oath to the shaytan not to ever contemplate its meaning. Instead, 99% of what they believe in comes from man-made sources which blatantly contradict Allah?s Book.

As a result, they have allowed OTHERS to write their history for them, and dictate to them who they are and where they came from. And as the famous saying goes:  He who does not know his past has no future to speak of.

____

To Be Continued?

IMHO

Quote from: Pazuzu on November 29, 2011, 10:18:04 AM
In the Footsteps of Abraham

Here is the resounding truth which we repeat. And this is for the MUSLIMS to hear, before anyone else:

There is not one spot of land that Allah, in His Quran, described as ?blessed to the worlds?, in the ancient times, except the region of Asir in Arabia.  And ALL the prophets mentioned in the Quran, from Noah (P) to Muhamad (P) lived and died in Arabia and nowhere else. PERIOD.

To Be Continued?
Salaam alaykum Pazuzu,
Thank you again for your much awaited post. Before we go any further I would appreciate if you could address what almarh0m mentioned in his post about the 'search for Mohamud' thread:
A very interesting piece indeed. My only reservation about the whole article is that the inclusion of Muhammad as one of the said messengers from that area contradicts 34:44 as well as the lumping of Abraham and his progenies as the patriarchs of the jews seemed to be wandering away from the Qur'an 2:140. That aside, the article was an excellent read.Peace
almarh0m


harris

Salaam Pazazu,
Lovely post as usual.. Your research is incredible! Its amazing how such gaping holes exist in religious history and nobody minds them...

Big fan! Keep up the good work.

Just wonder why you got tat scary face as ur profile pic.... :&
it doesnt match with the great content you keep posting :yay:

PEACE.
Bad boys, whatcha gonna do,
When THEY come for you?

theNabster

Salam,

would it be possible that Isaac and Ismail are true brothers with the mother the same?

or better, and that will be truly mind exploding, Isaac and Ismail being the same person? after all, we hear Israel and Jacob being the same person too...

and the Israelites want Isaac to have been the object of a potential sacrifice... whereas the Quran tafseer tells us it is Ismail, even though the Quran does not mention him by name...

or more mind boggling, in a deep trance, Ismail is the father of Isaac?...

again I might be hallucinating...  :hypno:
41:53 We will show them Our Signs in the universe, and in their own selves, until it becomes manifest to them that this (Qur'an) is the truth.

kamking

Dear Pazuzu, Well Done ....  :bravo: :bravo: :bravo:

Cheerleader .... not a bad compliment  hehehehehe

Ashraf

Quote from: IMHO on November 29, 2011, 12:54:59 PM
My only reservation about the whole article is that the inclusion of Muhammad as one of the said messengers from that area contradicts 34:44 as well as the lumping of Abraham and his progenies as the patriarchs of the jews seemed to be wandering away from the Qur'an 2:140. That aside, the article was an excellent read.[/i][/b]Peace
almarh0m

May i add my understanding here on 34:44, like Abraham and Lot, although they are from same region and time which seem not far by distance from each other, they have different target audiences (qaum) and both are addressing the specific location of audience where no nazir seem to came before. The Asir/Yemen is vast area and there are many potential target audiences.

On 2:140, the articles by Pazuzu doesnt lump Abraham and progenies as Jews, as far as i could comprehend his writing so far..

Peace

GODsubmitter

Thank you Pazuzu for this mostly awaited new thread!

How remarkably clear and logical things now do fit.

I might consider myself lucky for not being much polluted in the past by false notions, as I am learning all this afresh from your threads.

Thank you 
God has no Religion!

God is running everything.

Peace begins with me.

Pazuzu

QuoteMay i add my understanding here on 34:44, like Abraham and Lot, although they are from same region and time which seem not far by distance from each other, they have different target audiences (qaum) and both are addressing the specific location of audience where no nazir seem to came before. The Asir/Yemen is vast area and there are many potential target audiences.

That's part of the answer, actually. The word "qaum" in the Quran does not  mean a "nation" in the modern sense of the word. It can be a single tribe, clan, group of people with homogenous beliefs , or the inhabitants of a single city.  But besides this fact that  SW Arabia is a vast area, there is also another reason that many have not been aware of, and it has to do with the relation between what is called the "eloquent tongue" (which is translated as "Arabic") and the "a3jami" tongue(s) described in the Quran, which existed during the time of Muhamad. Once this relation is understood, we can then fully grasp the implications of 34:44. 

Also, I might add that if we were to understand 34:44 as purely designating a geographical region, then the official FM belief would also not fit. Since the people behind this website are advocating that Muhamad lived in the Palestine- Jordan area, and that Bakkah is in Jerusalem, where all the prophets were previoulsy, then you will have the SAME problem with 34:44.

So it is not simply a case of the geographical area. It is something that has to do with the LANGUAGE of the previous scriptures as well.

Anyway, I will fully address IMHO's question further down this thread.

As for 2:140, I never claimed, in any of these threads, that Abraham  or the original Israelites had anything whatsoever to do with Judaism.  The children of Israel were the descendants of a man whom the Quran calls "Israel" by name. This is why I am doubting that Israel and Jacob are the same person. Anyway, they existed many centuries before Judaism appeared. The ISraelites were a TRIBE, where as Judaism is a RELIGIOUS CREED. This is the same as the diference between Islam and Quraish (the tribe which existed long before Muhamad came with the Message).

So I don't see how 2:140 contradicts what I have been saying.

Quotewould it be possible that Isaac and Ismail are true brothers with the mother the same?

or better, and that will be truly mind exploding, Isaac and Ismail being the same person? after all, we hear Israel and Jacob being the same person too...

Yes, it is possible they were from the same mother, and no they are NOT the same person.

The Quran relates to us Abraham giving thanks to Allah by saying:

{Praise be to Allah who has granted me in my old age Ishmael and Isaac; my Lord is Hearer of the prayer}...[14:39]

As you can see, they were brothers, in fact, and they were born when Abraham was an old man (probably in his 60's). However, the Quran doesn't tell us if they whether they were from the same mother or not. Also, the order of the names shows that Ismael came before Isaac.

As in:

{And his wife was standing, so she laughed when We gave her the good news of Isaac, and after Isaac, Jacob}...[11:71]

The order shows Isaac came before Jacob. Also, who is the "wife" mentioned in this verse who laughed when she was given the tidings? Was it Sarah or Hagar?  And what about Ismael? Was he already born when these tidings were given? The Quran doesn't say for certain, so better to leave it at that, rather than to conjecture.

My hunch is that Ismael was the elder, based purely on:

1- The order of the names
2- Ismael was the one who helped his father clear the Bayt of idols and establish the first monotheistic system in Arabia.

@Harris:

The avatar is a relic from my years of watching Zombie flicks  :)

_____

Peace...

NOMAD

....and the Cheerleaders atack again :ignore: :bravo: :bravo:..hehehe :)

Thank you again brother Pazuzu, ;) i still not had time to read today s post but surly ill read it later today:sun:

Shukran
(2:26) Allah is not shy to strike a parable whatsoever a gnat or larger. Those who believe know that it is the truth from their Lord. As for those who disbelieve they ask: 'What could Allah mean by this parable? By it, Allah misleads many and guides many. ' But He misleads none except the evildoers

IMHO

Quote from: Pazuzu on November 30, 2011, 02:10:00 AM
.... The children of Israel were the descendants of a man whom the Quran calls "Israel" by name. This is why I am doubting that Israel and Jacob are the same person. Anyway, they existed many centuries before Judaism appeared. The ISraelites were a TRIBE, where as Judaism is a RELIGIOUS CREED. This is the same as the diference between Islam and Quraish (the tribe which existed long before Muhamad came with the Message).
......
{Praise be to Allah who has granted me in my old age Ishmael and Isaac; my Lord is Hearer of the prayer}...[14:39]
The order shows Isaac came before Jacob. ....  And what about Ismael? Was he already born when these tidings were given?
Peace...
Salaam brother Pazuzu

Thank you for addressing our concern. There are two more issues I would like to discuss;
1) 3;33 Allah did choose Adam and Noah the family of Abraham, and 
the family of Imran above all people.

19;58 Those were some of the prophets on whom Allah did bestow His Grace― of the posterity of Adam, and of those whom We carried (in the Ark) with Noah, and of the posterity of Abraham and Israel― of those whom We guided and chose; whenever the Signs of (Allah) Most Gracious were rehearsed to them, they would fall down in prostrate adoration and in tearsThe posterity of Abraham is mentioned along with Israel, so the question is who is this person Israel; was he alive at the same time as Ibrahim(as)? And what about Lot; he migrated to another place so could Israel be from Lot's side?
However in 3:33 The family of Imran is mentioned, in the context of prophets, as the one chosen above all so was Israel perhaps from the family of Imran?  :hmm

{And his wife was standing, so she laughed when We gave her the good news of Isaac, and after Isaac, Jacob}...[11:71]

2) We learn from the Torah that Jacob is the son of Isaq, and was later named Israel, thus only the children of Jacob are considered 'chosen', but the Quran does not confirm that. It seems to me that the verse above could be interpreted to mean that the good news of two sons was given to Ibrahim(AS) and his wife (Sarah). In contrast to the Bible version, where Sarah is shown to be a jealous wife she could have been a kind and paticent wife who accepted Ismael, thus Allah(swt) who rewards patience may have rewarded her with two sons despite her old age.
As they were both old it seems unlikely, if this news indeed referred to a son and a grandson, that they would have lived to see the son of Isaac. Allah knows best.   
Jazakallah Khair
:peace: