Author Topic: Bakka/Mecca  (Read 45383 times)

good logic

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 4968
Re: Bakka/Mecca
« Reply #200 on: July 26, 2015, 09:20:21 PM »
Peace Hawk.

You and I know that ,no  matter what you say, even if it is backed up by Qoran, others are going to claim you are " using hadith"?

Let me explain this " fallacy/applies to you,not to me...etc" argument,logic...:

They come up with history/internet/... which they claim as "fact, because hadith does not contain their history".But they accuse you of using hadith just because your history part happens to be mentioned in hadith?

Should the same rule apply to all? i.e using any "men s word" is hadith and should be checked and backed up by Qoran?

If the history contained in "Hadith" should be checked and validated by GOD s word, then all history written by men should forgo the same test!!!

Of course you and I know that GOD does better than leaving us to go in "every direction" confused. HE sends messengers to "clarify" for us.
That is the real problem, some refuse to listen to or follow "human messengers". These human messengers that GOD sends and backs up with "Bayinat" are liars,use hadith,eat food, make mistakes,go to the market...
Same argument as the past generations, same arrogance as the past generations,same trial by GOD as the past generations, same...

You and I know these things happen. The message gets delivered and people have the choice.

GOD bless you.
Peace.
TOTAL LOYALTY TO GOD ALONE.   IN GOD I TRUST

38:65″ Say:? I warn you; There is no other god beside GOD, the One, the Supreme.?

 http://www.total-loyalty-to-god-alone.co.uk/website-pages/good-logic/

Wakas

  • Administrator
  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 11070
  • Gender: Male
Re: Bakka/Mecca
« Reply #201 on: July 27, 2015, 02:31:50 AM »
peace gl, all,

I think it's actually more simple than that. Quite simply, a number of students of Quran have no robust and falsifiable method/approach when it comes to their understanding of Quran.

For example, if they think a Quranic word (or their understanding of a subject) means X - they do not apply a robust/falsifiable system of checks to test whether it may or may not mean X.

Ironically, it is similar to the Traditional system, where I have never found a consistent/robust/falsifiable approach.

In such a system, pretty much anything goes, hence the variance. For example, seeming contradictions are explained away by simply adopting an inconsistent approach. Some may find this approach acceptable.

Sometimes I say to people who mention to me there is so much variance amongst those following Quran based islam on salat, hajj, etc I ask of the variant views they have read, which of them has put them to the test using a stated robust/falsifiable method? You will soon find the answer is zero, or almost zero. Once this is looked at, the variance is dramatically reduced.

To get an idea, or a good starting point, I recommend:
http://www.quran434.com/study-method.html

#####

And with regard to this subject of "qiblah":
http://mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-masjid-al-haram-Quran.html

 
All information in my posts is correct to the best of my knowledge only and thus should not be taken as a fact. One should seek knowledge and verify: 17:36, 20:114, 35:28, 49:6, 58:11. My articles

www.studyQuran.org

runninglikezebras

  • Advanced Truth Seeker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1501
  • Gender: Male
Re: Bakka/Mecca
« Reply #202 on: July 27, 2015, 09:19:52 AM »
Peace runninglikezebras the above is simply not true: please read below.

God bless you from your schizophrenic forum member.



                           8)

Peace hawk99,

My apologies for missing that post.  So you do admit there was a shared tradition once, confirmed by the mosque of the two qiblas.  You seemed to deny this earlier.

Please answer these questions:

Who built the shrine at mecca?

How old is the masjid al haram in mecca?

What source do you have proving who built the masjid al haram in mecca and when?

Do you claim there was christian influence in the hijaz region?

Where in Quran do you see Mecca named as the qibla?

Do you agree Quran says hindering access to masjid al haram is a great injustice?

If you do, how do you justify that with the practice of only allowing muslims at Mecca?

Thank you.

Peace

runninglikezebras

  • Advanced Truth Seeker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1501
  • Gender: Male
Re: Bakka/Mecca
« Reply #203 on: July 27, 2015, 09:24:01 AM »
peace gl, all,

I think it's actually more simple than that. Quite simply, a number of students of Quran have no robust and falsifiable method/approach when it comes to their understanding of Quran.

For example, if they think a Quranic word (or their understanding of a subject) means X - they do not apply a robust/falsifiable system of checks to test whether it may or may not mean X.

Ironically, it is similar to the Traditional system, where I have never found a consistent/robust/falsifiable approach.

In such a system, pretty much anything goes, hence the variance. For example, seeming contradictions are explained away by simply adopting an inconsistent approach. Some may find this approach acceptable.

Sometimes I say to people who mention to me there is so much variance amongst those following Quran based islam on salat, hajj, etc I ask of the variant views they have read, which of them has put them to the test using a stated robust/falsifiable method? You will soon find the answer is zero, or almost zero. Once this is looked at, the variance is dramatically reduced.

To get an idea, or a good starting point, I recommend:
http://www.quran434.com/study-method.html

#####

And with regard to this subject of "qiblah":
http://mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-masjid-al-haram-Quran.html

Well we have all seen what your methodology has rendered Quran into Wakas.  Gibberish.  Your article about masjid al haram completely conceals the pre-Quranic occurence of the word qibla in older scriptures.  Totally concealing the aramaic root of the word.  Ultimately rendering it into some version of English that is not even valid to English standards.

Not only your article about masjid al haram suffers from the above.  434 is rendered to citing!  Lmao, cite your wife boys!  Whatever that means.  I wonder if Wakas ever gets confronted with a situation applicable to 434 how he would react.  Imagine his partner living with him from his income, murders her own child.  Will Wakas ultimately just cite her and not part ways with her?  I wonder...

Peace

runninglikezebras

  • Advanced Truth Seeker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1501
  • Gender: Male
Re: Bakka/Mecca
« Reply #204 on: July 27, 2015, 09:44:38 AM »
Peace Hawk.

You and I know that ,no  matter what you say, even if it is backed up by Qoran, others are going to claim you are " using hadith"?

Let me explain this " fallacy/applies to you,not to me...etc" argument,logic...:

They come up with history/internet/... which they claim as "fact, because hadith does not contain their history".But they accuse you of using hadith just because your history part happens to be mentioned in hadith?

Should the same rule apply to all? i.e using any "men s word" is hadith and should be checked and backed up by Qoran?

If the history contained in "Hadith" should be checked and validated by GOD s word, then all history written by men should forgo the same test!!!

Of course you and I know that GOD does better than leaving us to go in "every direction" confused. HE sends messengers to "clarify" for us.
That is the real problem, some refuse to listen to or follow "human messengers". These human messengers that GOD sends and backs up with "Bayinat" are liars,use hadith,eat food, make mistakes,go to the market...
Same argument as the past generations, same arrogance as the past generations,same trial by GOD as the past generations, same...

You and I know these things happen. The message gets delivered and people have the choice.

GOD bless you.
Peace.

I'd still like to see that quranic proof for Mecca locating masjid al haram.  So far I have those in support of mecca only seen avoiding precise questions.

Peace

Wakas

  • Administrator
  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 11070
  • Gender: Male
Re: Bakka/Mecca
« Reply #205 on: July 27, 2015, 11:18:35 AM »
Well we have all seen what your methodology has rendered Quran into Wakas.  Gibberish.  Your article about masjid al haram completely conceals the pre-Quranic occurence of the word qibla in older scriptures.  Totally concealing the aramaic root of the word.  Ultimately rendering it into some version of English that is not even valid to English standards.

As I have said to you before, do not mistake your reasoning for sound reasoning. Readers can see from this post when we previously discussed this subject:
http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604467.msg367433#msg367433

And will note how you re-interpreted multiple issues regarding the verses, in order to make your view fit. Not that I think your view actually fits.

How about you start your own thread with a detailed review of the verses in question presenting your view, then we can all see if it works or not. Or will you run like a zebra from such a simple request?

Quote
Not only your article about masjid al haram suffers from the above.  434 is rendered to citing!  Lmao, cite your wife boys!  Whatever that means.  I wonder if Wakas ever gets confronted with a situation applicable to 434 how he would react.  Imagine his partner living with him from his income, murders her own child.  Will Wakas ultimately just cite her and not part ways with her?  I wonder...

I think this comment demonstrates well your reasoning. Not only do you seemingly lack the logic to connect "cite them" with authority involvement in the very next verse, you bring up a wrong/crime such as murder when the verses do not even discuss this.

In my years of experience in having discussions on this forum, I have often noted that when people have little or no substance to their arguments, they often resort to comments like yours.

When you have something of substance to say, I may respond. Peace out.

All information in my posts is correct to the best of my knowledge only and thus should not be taken as a fact. One should seek knowledge and verify: 17:36, 20:114, 35:28, 49:6, 58:11. My articles

www.studyQuran.org

OnlyOneGod

  • Apprentice
  • **
  • Posts: 215
Re: Bakka/Mecca
« Reply #206 on: July 27, 2015, 11:20:27 AM »
You can lead a zebra to water but you can't make him drink it.


runninglikezebras you say that:

"The reader can establish I raised this question 3 times AND that you still avoid answering who those christians in Mecca were of which historians say there weren't any?  The historical record of Baca is the Old Testament itself.

Quran http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=2&verse=140"

In order to prove your point you link a verse of the Quran. Do you even understand what it means?

I would love to have your opinion on the verse that you just quoted to prove that there were never any Christians in the Hijaz.

Btw you still failed to prove that bekka in the old testament was ever a historical city in Jerusalem.

Good luck with that.

Peace


runninglikezebras

  • Advanced Truth Seeker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1501
  • Gender: Male
Re: Bakka/Mecca
« Reply #207 on: July 27, 2015, 11:56:01 AM »
Quote
In order to prove your point you link a verse of the Quran. Do you even understand what it means?

It is a direct reference to http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=2&verse=136

Say, [O believers], "We have believed in Allah and what has been revealed to us and what has been revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants and what was given to Moses and Jesus and what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims [in submission] to Him."

This confirms what was given to Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants.  If you distinct a jewish qibla from an islamic qibla and a christian qibla, then you are no longer believing in what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants.

This verse does not prove there were no christians in the Hijaz region - that is your misunderstanding.  It proves the qibla spoken of in Quran is known to the christians and Jews - christians of which there is no trace of in the Hijaz region by all archaelogical and historical evidence.  Jewish of which there is no record of them acknowledging any shrine in the Hijaz region ever.

@hawk99 how do you interprete  http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=2&verse=136 - Dont you think it's directly contradicting what you say here:

Quote
Peace runninglikezebras, yes Ibrahim is Abraham, Ishmail is Ishmael,
Ishaq is Isaac, Yaqub is Jacob.  Like I said in my earlier post, fasting
Hajj, prayer and other rites and rituals exist around the world and
predate Islam, we do not "share" a qibla, or sacred masjid we have our way
and they have theirs.




Peace



runninglikezebras

  • Advanced Truth Seeker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1501
  • Gender: Male
Re: Bakka/Mecca
« Reply #208 on: July 27, 2015, 12:06:17 PM »
Quote
Who built the shrine at mecca?

How old is the masjid al haram in mecca?

What source do you have proving who built the masjid al haram in mecca and when?

Do you claim there was christian influence in the hijaz region?

Where in Quran do you see Mecca named as the qibla?

Do you agree Quran says hindering access to masjid al haram is a great injustice?

If you do, how do you justify that with the practice of only allowing muslims at Mecca?

These questions are still to be answered by the stone worshippers.

runninglikezebras

  • Advanced Truth Seeker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1501
  • Gender: Male
Re: Bakka/Mecca
« Reply #209 on: July 27, 2015, 12:14:04 PM »
Btw you still failed to prove that bekka in the old testament was ever a historical city in Jerusalem.

Good luck with that.

Peace

I never claimed baca was a historical city.  I never claimed any such thing.  Baca is an area inside Jerusalem.  Referred to in old scriptures: jewish and christian manuscripts.  You show me one scripture mentioning mecca predating Quran.  If this was such an important place, historical records of it predating Quran shouldn't be hard to find.

Peace