Archeology & History

what is sure is that the modern rogue state of Israel is most certainly the wrong thing. I believe so. . and perhaps this ayat can bring some clue ? And Pharaoh said, "O eminent ones, I have not known you to have a god other than me. Then ignite for me, O Haman, upon the clay and make for me a tower that I may look at the God of Moses. And indeed, I do think he is among the liars." 28.38 tower made of mud and fire. . . and Then Pharaoh sent among the cities gatherers , "Indeed, those are but a small band, And indeed, they are enraging us, And indeed, we are a cautious society... " So We removed them from gardens and springs And treasures and honorable station Thus. And We caused to inherit it the Children of Israel. 26.53-59

You are completely wrong as to the history of Spain and North Africa. Yes, the official history written by the Roman church and preserved and imposed by the Nationalcatholicism tells that nonsense about so many thousands soldiers coming from north Africa, which by the way was the same state as the one in the Iberian peninsula. There was no invasion but there had been a very long internal stricfe already between the trinitarians and the most followed branch of christianity, unitarian, persecuted by the trinitarians. I know my history, or at least I try, but you blabber the indisputed nonsense that has been fed to the Europeans, pandering to the ideas of the superiority and the indisputability of the Catholic history, now incorporated as part of the "WEST'S" holyness. Don't waste your time trying to teach me lessons. Unfortunately your "knowledge" is uncommonly shallow. You think you know far more than you in fact know. And you seem to think that since you already have everything right, you can go on spitting the same classical garbage over and over and rubber stamping the inventions of panegirists for the greater glory of the some time past All powergful Roman church? You do seem to need very, very much thousands upon thousands of massacred and raped Iberians, whether they were there or not, to sustain your church of the "human are garbage because of religion" church. To start with, how could there be any invasion when on the north and the south of Gibraltar it was the same state and had been the same state for quite some time? Nobody had to invade anything, and the people was the same south and north. And then you put in four lines of clishes the whole of history. Please, please, do not serve the same vomit over and over. It may impress somebody but not those who have bothered in going beyond the eternal Roman historical legends served as history for the greater glory o "European" self-enrightment. I have not read your message to the end because just with the start you spew the usual clishees and I have better things to do that go through the same clishees another more time in my life, particularly when the objection I raised was not about history, because you are not qualified to discuss that, not for my benefit anyway, but my objection was of another kind and that you are too bent on your own petty ideas on religion and history to see through. But I will repeat for the readers' sake, if there is any the use of religion as a weapon by scrupless poweraddicts does not describe religion, it describes the power addicts, just the same as the use of a person by another person does not describe the used but the user. The used may be a willing or unwilling or ignorant of the fact but it is not the doer of the thing, the deliberate user is. The power addicts use everything, religion, ideology, blood relationships, anything to further their addiction. but the identity of the things they use, are not the their use, they are different from their being used. I guess you are such staunch believer in religion as power itself since you use it yourself to eject your own emotional attachments to certain petty ideas, like using the Qur'an to disparage your own "hates" of peoples, or whatever you want to call them, since you do not "hate". Manias, may they be? Do not attempt to make yourself a heroe inventing hates, just because I dare dispute your overbearing sense of moral highhand in questions such as these. If somebody dares dispute you, he or she hates you? Don't be silly and don't delude yourself on your importance. I do not take the trouble of hating anybody I do not know. In fact, I do not take the trouble of hating anybody, least of all somebody I do not know. But what you write I do know and I do not hate it, I plain deny it. Get your facts straight and do not mix self pity and selfrighteousness with polemics. It does not fit and it is not the proper attitude for adults. And update and clean your history, it is pitiful, although I can't deny and I don't deny that it is this kind of clish? history the one that gets popularity and support, not the real, hard facts supported history. So in fact you serve whom you serve, that is, the current power-addicts, furthering their aims with historical fabrications. As it turns out, your moral grandstanding has its uses, which are not innocent. Salaam

Peace Layth. The reason I asked you is because I always assumed " AAman" meant the same amount of days/months? For example 2259 Consider the one who passed by a ghost town and wondered, "How can God revive this after it had died?" God then put him to death for a hundred years, then resurrected him. He said, "How long have you stayed here?" He said, "I have been here a day, or part of the day." He said, "No! You have been here a hundred years. Yet, look at your food and drink; they did not spoil. Look at your donkey - we thus render you a lesson for the people. Now, note how we construct the bones, then cover them with flesh." When he realized what had happened, he said, "Now I know that God is Omnipotent." Thank you for explaining your view anyway.It will be interesting to compare other verses with "Aam" in them to test your theory? GOD bless you. Peace.

Now Verses using root Amaton 7-157 7-158 62-2 3-75 3-20 2-78 22-52 16-103 25-4 25-5 93-7 43-22 12-45 3-104 16-120 16-121 2-124 9-12 17-71 28-5 2-221 we were told by scholars that Amaton is a slave and that Ommi mean an ignorant that don't know how to read and how to write. analphatisme have absolutely no relation with root OM. Amaton is clearly a "women" in a omma. People sharing same Om is a brotherhood like people in the same Omma. So what mean nabi Ommi sent to people of Ommiyouns ? my understanding is that Muhammad was a wise man. As 16-103 shows, he was studying religion with a "teacher" in aajami (not arabic) language. In Quran, both marriage and comarcial contracts have to be written down. According to my understanding, Quran was revealad in one night, that is leylatou el qadr. Exception is, for me, to be done to sourate 9, al tauba, which seems to me have been revealed alone (no bismillah, clear reference to sourate before, begiing with a common declaation of Allah and His rassol). El tauba seems like a political and military sourate after that hypocryts and idolaters were showed to Muhammad at their real face in this verse 3350 O prophet, We have made lawful for you the wives to whom you have already given their dowries, and those who are maintained by your oath, as granted to you by God; and the daughters of the brothers of your father, and the daughters of the sisters of your father, and the daughters of the brothers of your mother, and the daughters of the sisters of your mother - those who 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 maintained by their oaths. This is to spare you any hardship. God is Forgiver, Merciful. whe can see that hijra was before revelation. That simply mean, for me, that the wise, educated, knowing how to write and read, Muhammad, Rassol Allah, begun to constituate his Omma before receiveing Quran. So Ommi and Ommiyouns are people in the path of constituating a new omma. It is clear for me that Muhammad rejectd bullshits of his ancestors before Quran. He was already able to constituate a new Omma based on new aspirations (political, religious..). Quran was the gift of Allah for that Omma (muttaqoun of 22) who was already searching for Allah. i have difficulties to imagine Allah sending Quran to an idolater who was turning around the kaaba stone filled by statues. Impossible for me. Muhammad, like founder of Ismael Brotherhood, Abraham, made his spiritual path towards Allah before any revelation. Muhammad, the wise, the educated,like Abraham, became muslim before receiving Quran leylatou el qadr Peace from Ismael

So where does that leave the Kamal Salibi conjecture, that the Bible came from Arabia? laugh

Why a volcano and not an asteroid? Simply because the descriptions given are not consistent with asteroids (not even remotely close).. And neither is the actual hard evidence outside scripture. All the evidence clearly points to a volcanic eruption. Even Psalms 18 depicts this very context, and even to the point where GOD is not only the spirit of the volcanic mountain, but the volcanic mountain itself.. When you read the bible in this context, it actually makes coherent sense.. Even revelations to which references back to Exodus makes complete sense to what they are actually inferring to.. This is anthropomorphism and animism of the most powerful eruption human kind has ever witnessed as far we are aware of. To them it would have been the most powerful thing in their era.. If you are looking for the time period of Exodus, I would strongly recommend reading the source http//www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodusdate.htm You also need to consider that Exodus is written post event, and that could range 1 to a few hundred years.. But it's clear that the event in question is most assuredly in reference to the Thera eruption and the aftermath...

Salaam, You need to consider this was relatively long ago and I think the population that left was not that enormous maybe only a few hundreds up to a thousand or two. Just a guess but I still think it was not a huge population. The numbers you see in the Bible are likely very exaggerated numbers but yet you see the Earth was pretty scarcely populated compared with today's numbers. Anyway, the probable reason no one found any trace is because they looked in the wrong location. They likely raced on far east (or turned south as according to Pazuzu), anxious to get as far away from their "prison" as possible. I cannot think they went to today's Israel because it is too close to Egypt, they would risk revenge attacks even if the Egyptians were crippled by a dead Pharaoh, and the Palestinians (Phillistines) would not made it easy or likely for them to settle down. They either went on east or south from there, but no matter what they wandered the deserts of Arabia for some years due to disobedience. They met people (Palestinians I suppose) who worshiped statues/idols, so I think they ignored that place and kept wandering. There were events with eruptions mentioned in the Bible and some of them were probably triggered by God directly to punish them and you also see real life traces of those eruption events. The Earth opened up and swallowed quite some of Moses' people. This does not answer the topic of the thread though but might be worth mentioning. It would seem a bit weird if Moses people went to Mount Sinai in Ethiopia when they first crossed the waters and then went up in the mountains of Sinai. God bless you Volcanoes are not triggered by Gods. We know what causes them here in the 21st Century as where they did not.. And if you read the Psalms, the deity is described as both the spirit of the volcano and the volcano itself. Exodus isn't much different. They literally believed the eruption and the volcano was God, and I can't really blame them for it as they are among the rare few who have ever, if ever entirely, witnessed a super volcanic eruption. And if I had saw that myself in that Era, I probably would have believed it to have been god to. Thera exploded with so much force due to sea water getting into the magma chamber, and not because a god made it happen. And it won't be the last super volcanic eruption we will see either. Yellow Stone being probably at the top of the list.. However, it is most likely the Hyksos who lost power in Egypt and who portrayed themselves as slaves rather than the rulers who's reign of power came to an end around 1560 BC. They are the ones that should be looked at in regards to the people who left Egypt.

Just to comment on the first part of the video regarding the flood myth, it's well understood that the region of Levant has been hit by Tsunami's in the Mediterranean. We have to remember that the region is very geologically active, and the Nile Delta flooded often and so did the Red Sea. I think it's not unexpected to find stories constructed around these events just as Exodus is likely constructed around the Thera Eruption in which led to the downfall of the Bronze age and the Eviction of the Hyksos from Egypt. People of this time period however didn't understand these events and thus they became animistic and anthropomorphic. Hence the God's were angry ect. Though we know now what actually causes these events.. Cheers! )

I think most Illuminati conspiracies are as fake as the claim that all Muslims are somehow all terrorists. I can find no evidence to support either or to which isn't shrouded in appeals to ignorance. /

Gog and Magog are people of northern area, which by the time of the Quran writing was largely uncharted and unknown. The nomadic people inhabiting the "Northern Part" who has consistently strike fear due to their sudden attack and raid since ancient times. They're recognized by many names throughout the century, starting from "The Hun", "The Turks", "The Mongols" etc.. Scientifically they're being named as "Altaic People" due to the similarity of their language. http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altaic_languages. The Romans, The Persians and The Chinese share the similarities of this 'constant fear' about them. And ALL of them built some kind of wall to contain them. The most dazzling is not the wall made by Persians (Cyrus) or Romans but the wall made by the Chinese! http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Wall_of_China Which has proven to be not enough to hold the invasion of the "Barbaric People from The North". http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_conquests So as we speak now in current modern time.. The Altaic / Gog Magog people has indeed migrate, invade and spread nearly all across the globe. The history has recorded the devastating effect of the Hun Invasion, the Mongol invasion, the Turkic invasion and the German + Japanese invasion in WWII etc.. Now they have mixed with the rest of humanity and now they have become "us". The "Prophecy" has been fulfilled many centuries ago.. Salam / Peace

would definitely be interesting to visit these places and examine these sites. I'm a nature and wildlife buff too, and that part is said to be rich with wildlife and things like that

Thbere is the very well researched article by T Shanavas. After that, whoever wants to insist that Aixa was a child then it must be somebody pursuing some islamophobic agenda or, the counterpart of that, some boysclubislam mysigynist and backwards islam agenda. salaam Indeed. Like with the age of Aisha, and many other topics, it is interesting to see the connection between stand point and agenda. E.g. those who have islamophobic agendas, will always insist on the truth of the negative and disgusting story or version. Islamophobes would always insist Aisha married at the age of 6 or 9 or whatever. They'd also insist Muhammad did all sorts of bad things and even was a thief. Oftentimes the back it up with the Quran and hadith. BUT when you present a positive and reasonable version, then they won't agree, because it doesn't serve their purpose of bad-mouthing Islam. I always find it hilarious that they use the Quran and hadith to insist on the truth of the bad versions, as if they believe in the Quran and hadith as truthful documents. For bad things, Quran and hadith are to them clear and solid evidence and proof... but for other things the books are not truthful at all.... brickwall

Thanks Mo! Interesting youtube video. Laughable intro in terrible Arabic in order to confirm bias and subtly confirm and steer the discussion into a certain direction, but ok what can u do. Listening now ) Right. Notice how she said when Al Shafi used the obey God and obey the messenger, the Ahlul kalam (as Shafi referred to them) answered that we obey the messenger by obeying the Quran. Only a Quranist will give such an answer. Also Shafi repeatedly says we can not only follow the Quran because of s and so and so etc. Only a Quranist will make such claim, that we are to only follow the Quran. What Aisha Musa did was she looked at Shafi's arguments and counter argumnets against his opponents and noticed they are identical to the Sunni-Quranist debate she came across in the internet. But one topic she did not address that was a major (and perhaps the most important) was abrogation and contradiction. Shafi was asked point blank by the Quranist of his time what happens if a hadith contradicts the Quran. This issue is the issue that Sunnis and Shias avoid to talk about in public. Its is in the end the most important issue. Abrogation is applicable to both sources of Islamic law the Qur'n and the Prophetic Sunna. A Qur'nic verse may abrogate another Qur'nic verse, and a Prophetic Sunna may likewise abrogate another Prophetic Sunna. The possibility of abrogation between these two sources, though, was a more contentious issue precipitated by the absence within a source of the appropriate abrogating (nsikh) or abrogated (manskh) material necessary to bring concordance between it and the Fiqh. In Shfi''s source theory the possibility of abrogation between the Sunna and the Qur'n was vehemently denied Arguing determinedly that any verbal discrepancies between the Qur'n and the reported sayings or reports of the practices of Muhammed- the Sunna of the Prophet- were merely illusory and could always be removed on the basis of a satisfactory understanding of the mechanism of revelation and the function of the prophet-figure, Shfi' set his face decidedly against any acceptance of the idea then current that in all such cases the Qur'n had abrogated the Sunna, or the Sunna the Qur'n. This stance was a reaction to larger developments within Islamic jurisprudence, particularly the reformulation of the Fiqh away from early foreign or regional influences and toward more eminently Islamic bases such as the Qur'n. This assertion of Qur'nic primacy was accompanied by calls for an abandonment of the Sunna. Shfi''s insistence upon the impossibility of contradiction between Sunna and Qur'n can thus be seen as one component in this larger effort of rescuing the Sunna He campaigned tirelessly to justify use of the Sunna as the second primary source alongside the Kur'n against those who would accord the hadth no role in the derivation of the shar'a on the argument that the degree of conflict in the hadth, the inadequacies of the guarantee against corruption, fraud or error afforded by the isnds rendered the hadth unfit for the sacred role of declaring the divine intent underlying the Kur'n's declarations. Asked point-blank whether the Sunna could ever be abrogated by the Qur'n, Shfi' had bluntly replied that that could never happen. Were the Sunna to be abrogated by the Qur'n, the Prophet would immediately introduce a second sunna to indicate that his first sunna had been abrogated by his second sunna- in order to demonstrate that a thing can be abrogated only by its like (mithlihi) . Later scholars, writing when the juridicial legitimacy of the Sunna could be taken for granted (thanks largely to Shfi''s efforts!), were less inclined to adopt his inflexible stance. To their minds the reality of this sort of inter-source abrogation was proven by several "indisputable" instances the changing of the qibla towards Mecca and away from Jerusalem, and the introduction of the penalty of stoning for adultery. The following passage from Qurtub (al-Jmi' li ahkm al-Qur'n) is representative in this regard ...the Qur'n may be naskhed by the Qur'n and the Sunna by the Sunna. The Qur'n may, in addition, be naskhed by the Sunna, as has occurred in the case of Q.2180, which was replaced by the Sunna ruling no wasiya in favor of an heir. Mlik admitted this principle, but Shfi' denied it, although the fuqah all admit, in the instance of the penalty for adultery, that the flogging element of Q.242 has been allowed to lapse in the case of those offenders who are condemned to death by stoning. There is no explanation for the abandonment of the flogging element other than that the penalty all now acknowledge is based on the Sunna, i.e. the practice of the Prophet. In the instance of the change of qibla, a Sunna ruling was set aside in favor of a Qur'n ruling- there is no reference in the Qur'n to the Jerusalem direction of prayer. Al-Ghazl employs the same three examples in his Mustasf. One outcome of these disputations was the proposal of a mode of naskh known as naskh al-tilwa dna al-hukm ("abrogation of the wording but not ruling&quot in order to provide a Qur'nic nsikh, or abrogator, for Q.242 (see below). http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naskh_(tafsir) They are talking about the challenge Shafi faced from the Mutaziltes and Ahlul Kalam. Both were Quranist and refused abrogation of any kind of the Quran and both did not accept hadith as a religious binding source. Their arguments are the same arguments you find in this forum.

'Islamic' historiography is not the monopoly of sunni or shia, its very heterogenic. Nevertheless, very biased and should be (and is) subjected to thorough academic scrutiny and research.

Salaam All i thank posters for their reactions I hardly believe that History of islam from Adam until Muhammad as described in Quran is a "one story". History of prophets would just be different episodes in a same serie. That story talks about human attitude towards the teaching of their creator who they reject as unique Rabb/teacher. it is just a strong feeling for now. For me, Quran would be a greater teachning if it relates a story with quite same people and different generations of quite same people. We don't know what happened to other prophets and where they were (quran speaks about prophets he didn't mentionned), but those mentionned in quran are probably part of a same and coherent story. if we see ocurrences of medina and median as city names, we see that all quranic prophets are regionally linked together. the "Ommou al qura" should a be medina if medina mean a big town. It seems that there is many ommu el qura ((28-59). But it seems for me that quran is speaking about what happened around only one of them. that's story would be then the one he selected/choosed as main teachning for the human kind. 933 He is the One who has sent His messenger with the guidance and the Deen of truth, so that it will expose all other Deens , even if the polytheists hate it. 4828 He is the One who sent His messenger with the guidance and the Deen of truth, so that it would expose all other Deens . And God is enough as a witness. 619 He is the One who sent His messenger with the guidance and the Deen of truth, so that it will expose all other Deens , even if the polytheists hate it. Quite three times the same verse. God is insisting on that. Destiny of quran is probably much bigger than it is now. Peace

an article with WEAK LOGIC... the DOUBTERS must check abt 19 code of QURAN... and recent scientific discoveries... anyways, disbelievers will doubt till the DAY OF JUDGEMENT... so itz pointless to try and convince them...

(Don't get me wrong. I love a good archaeological rant as much as the next person but it should serve to enlighten, not to perpetuate some kind of ancient internal feud. The very earliest of Muslim scholars have taken such precious care in explaining to people that the true nature of Al Lah is so unfathomable, so beyond gender and other human measures of substance that I simply do not see how people can continually become so entangled in the sort of mundane talk which only ever ends in confrontation.) sun

The book "Jerusalem in the Quran" by Imran Hosein http//www.imranhosein.org/books/37-jerusalem-in-the-quran.html You can download it and read it here http//www.imranhosein.org/media/books/j_in_q.pdf An interesting read. i am surprised that people of this thread do not know about this book...

Salaam I belive that many more copies like that will be discover soon among arqueological artifacts and the truth will shine step by step, i just wish to be alive to see this truths come out and people get awere of this.. only Allah knows how long truths will be covered bettween Thamud and Asir. Salaam may Allah guide us to truth pr

Absence of evidence doesn't mean evidence of absence.