The problem with Islam
-
Now this is exactly what I'm talking about. If you are going to throw out such claims then you better have some evidence backing it up. A lack of evidence is not evidence either. Where does it say Muhammad was in Mecca? Besides the Muslim tradition and history, it fits with the Quran. The Quraysh, the shrine, the pilgrims, and probably other elements which I am missing. Quraysh were in Mecca and no one will deny this, Arab pilgrims used to go to the Kaba for ages and this is accounted for by non arab sources predating Islam such as Ptolemy. Besides, Islam spread outwards from Mecca and no where else. Also if you are to believe Muhammad was foretold in previous scriptures, then you must accept he was in Mecca because these prophecies not only describe Muhammad in Arabia, but mention Mecca. It can be found in Hindu prophecies, Biblical prophecies, and others. Here is one such example http//www.mostmerciful.com/twin-events.htm
So if you want to disregard muslims historians, non muslim historians, other scriptures, thats fine but present some evidence or explanation. The Quran is not a history book, it is a confirmation of the old books, a news of the coming judgment, and a guide. It assumes the audience knows what it refers to an many instances. Why would God say, 'and Muhammad was in Mecca'? Once again, just because the Quran doesn't say Muhammad was in Mecca doesn't mean he wasn't there. It proves nothing and it is highly illogical to throw out so much based on the absense of the Mecca in the Quran.
-
Salaamun alaikum,
Riz So if you want to disregard muslims historians, non muslim historians, other scriptures, thats fine but present some evidence or explanation. The Quran is not a history book, it is a confirmation of the old books, a news of the coming judgment, and a guide. It assumes the audience knows what it refers to an many instances. Why would God say, 'and Muhammad was in Mecca'? Once again, just because the Quran doesn't say Muhammad was in Mecca doesn't mean he wasn't there. It proves nothing and it is highly illogical to throw out so much based on the absense of the Mecca in the Quran.
Where Muhammad was doesn't matter. What matters is where WE are. Al-Quraan is all-consuming prophecy of HUMANITY. Our lives, our being and our existence. Look at your own life and look at the book. Does your life concord with that is right according to the book? You're not going to be asked about where Muhammad was, don't worry.
-
You mean to tell me, if he was in Jerusalem, he would have inclined to the kuffar (17/73-75) ? Would he have retreated in Badr ? Or perhaps been harsh to the companions ?
Would anything in the Quran change if Muhammad was somewhere other than Mecca, Riz ?
If so, what?
-
Dear Riz,
Correct me if I?m wrong, but as far as I am aware, there is only one single place in the whole of Qur?an where ?Quraish? is mentioned, in 106.1.
What sources can we find telling more about these people? They must be very important as much of the history depends on their existence in a certain place at a certain time, although the Qur?an doesn?t seem to put much emphasis on it.
Not even the important place, Mecca itself, is mentioned, so again, where does it all come from?Prophesies are all fine and dandy, problem is, there are so many of them that searching long and hard enough, there is no problem finding prophesies to fit almost any situation. It only takes slight adjustments here and there.
Maybe you get the notion that I am a skeptic?
Not thereby saying there is no truth in any prophesies, mind you, but I believe a little skepticism may be good.It is correct as you say, the Qur?an is not a history book, and it confirms what came earlier. I.e. the Qur?an can not confirm what is not in it.
It does mention Moses, and it does mention that the people he was leading went astray and built a shrine to pray towards. And this was not good.
Was the form of the shrine wrong and therefore it is OK to pray to a shrine formed differently? A different form and/or a different place makes it into something else than an idol?Best regds
Ali Omar
-
Ok lets just for some reason pretend that Jerusalem wasn't under Byzantine control during Muhammads life but rather under the control of some pagans who had enough authority to chase out this man and his followers.
Muhammad flees from Jerusalem after being persecuted. According to the 'fake' history, Muhammad was persecuated by idol worshippers in his hometown. Not Christians, not Jews, but those who worship idols. Not just any idolators, but Arab idolators namely the Quraysh. Were their Arab idolators in Jerusalem at this point? Were the Quraysh ever in Jerusalem? Why did they alone harass Muhammad at this point and not the Christians or Jews who later were a problem in Yathrib? What about the shrine? It wasn't the temple mount because that was not there at this point, it was destroyed by the Romans. So where is this "constructed Shrine", the Shrine whose Lord the Quraysh were to serve? (524, 1063)
Did Muhammad not take back his original city from the idolaters? Or will you deny this also simply because it is not mentioned in the Quran? If you want to write your own history, thats fine, but assuming he did take back the city, the city could not have been Jerusalem. Jerusalem was captured after Muhammads death.
Ok so lets just assume that Muhammad was infact born and lived in Jerusalem. Besides the fact that at this point he would not have been an unlettered Prophet anymore, his native langauge would have been Aramaic . So the Quran would have been revealed in Aramaic. Is this Quran in Aramaic? Is there a single verse that is not in Arabic? His original location was clearly in Arabia and therefore the Quran came down in Arabic.
-
Salam everybody,
I think the Quraish who we are told in Qur'an belonged to Petra or Madain Saleh or one of those important centres of the Caravan Route. Actually, Mecca was not one of them. Taif was, but less important. It must be one of the north.
Because Riz, the Bible says that the new prophet would come from the tribes of Kedar, and these tribes settled on what we call now Jordan. Anybody knows something about Qurayza??? Have they anything to do with Quraish?
Anyway, we dont have much info from Saudi Arabia because of obvious reasons (they have so much to hide) and we know just from written words (that they wrote) that Kaaba was a temple dedicated to Allat, al Uzza and Manat. What happens if it's not like that? Petra and MAdain Saleh are clearly signs that they hosted shrines to these goddesses but I beliebe the Kaaba in Mecca is an hindu temple and Shiva the main god. God and not goddesses...
I don't have any doubt about Muhammad having migrated to Medina but I still doubt that he iniciated all the conquests of Arabia. A prophet is not a conqueror. He was not a king neither as Daud and Sulaiman were.
Anyway, we could spend all life discussing this. If it was important, Allah would have tell us. Probably we'll now what is wrong in the Sunni way but it will be difficult to know the truth about the beginning of Islam.
Peace,
nur
-
I think Riz that he was sent to the people who rejected Moses before him. It's just a different generation,but probably the same place. And this place should be
- near Mount Sin were Musa got the Torah
- near the cities of Lut
- near the cities of the people of Nuh, Ad and Zamud
- near (or in) an important road (the Silk Route)
I remind you that Arabic came from the Nabatean language, beside Petra is Jebel Harun as well as Wadi Musa. And it was the main capital of Arabia Petrae (so still is Arabia). The second capital was Madain Saleh, that's why it makes sense the ayat which tells about the "2 important cities".
And when Allah talks about the "umm al-qura" It should be a real amazing city, a capital, a metropolis from an area more os less organized, an state. There should be jews, christians and idolaters. Monks as well, so there should be a Church. There was a Church in Petra, was there in Mecca?? I have no idea.I'm not saying that prophet Muhammad (sas) was from Petra but probably he was preaching there. Musa was born in Egypt, it doesn't matter. But he was preaching in and outside Egypt.
Just keep looking for the truth but don't accept something just because is a Lie so well built, but still is a lie and it cannot last forever.
May Allah guide us to the good path and follow not the liers,
nur
-
Correction, the Jews didn't build a shrine which they worshipped. They built a calf and other graven images which they then worshipped. No Muslim worships the Kabah. Would bowing down infront of it count as idolatry, logically it would. However, I never said Muhammad bowed to the Kabah, what I have argued is that it was significant to him in some way and the pilgrimage is made to it.
You are right, not much of the Quraysh is mentioned. Why would it though? It rarely refers to any living person at the time by name including Muhammad.
Nevertheless, here is something. Surah 541 says "The hour has come and split is the moon." Now, do you believe the moon literally split? Thats what the traditionists believe and say it was a sign of Muhammad. Well, I don't think you believe it split, neither do I. This was a metaphor in the Quran referring to the Quraysh. The moon was their symbol. At this point the Quraysh were literally split. Some with Muhammad, some against him.
There is also some mention of the Quraysh from pre-Islamic sources. Mu'allaqat who was a pre-Islamic poetsays "So I swear, by the holy house about which circumambulate men of Quraysh and Jurhum, whose hands constructed it..."
Unfortunatly archaelogical scholarship about Arabia before Islam is in its infancy right now. A good book to start with is "Arabia and the Arabs From the Bronze Age to the Coming of Islam" by Hoyland. There are pre-Islamic mentions of Quraysh in there, but they are rather trivial and not something significant besides the one I have quoted above.
Nur-
Read the quote above as it talks about the Quraysh circling the Kaba. Also the following
"Different deities seem to have been represented by different sizes and shapes 'Allat... was a cubic stone', 'Sad...was a long stone'. And it is noticeable that where god-stones of al-Ussa and Dshara(Lord of the House) appear together the former is always bigger" (Hoyland 185)You are right, Petra is a possible location of Muhammand besides Mecca if there is one.
You mention Muhammad being close to the land of Lot and others. Well unfortunately the location of Lot and much of Biblical locations haven't been exactly discovered. There are theories of where the places are, but nothing for sure. In Salibis book "The Bible Came from Arabia", he discusses his theory that much of Biblical history happened in Arabia, not the Palestinian area. He basis this mostly on names of towns, cities, and how well their geography fits with the Biblicle discription. It is interesting, but ofcourse there have been no archaelogical digs to confirm his theories or otherwise. If he is at all correct, then it is certainly possible that Abraham, Lot and many others were infact in and around where Muhammad is said to have been.
What you said about the location of Kedar is interesting, I will look into it. Thanks.
-
Dear Riz,
Maybe the Jews did not build a shrine; maybe it was just a physical form of some kind, calf for instance.
Is there a significant difference whether the object one prays toward is a calf (Jews with Moses), stonewall (present Jews), cross (Christians), statue of a woman and /or man (Christians), statue half man/half elephant (Hindu), small stone building (Muslims) etc. etc.?
And numerous rituals like ?Muslims? throwing stones at stone pillars, circumambulating a stone building, believing the water from a certain well is magic etc. etc.
What is the difference between all these ritualistic religions and the pagans of old?rollWhether Mu?allaqat came before the Qur?an and/or Hadiths, or after, is a question open for discussion.
It is not a poet by that name it is a collection of poetry, written by many.
And just to mention it, some of the poems are almost word by word the same as verses of the Qur?an, and they have many similarities with some Hadiths as well.
So, were the poems the source of the Qur?an and/or Hadiths or vice versa? scaredBest regards
Ali Omar
-
Peace all,
Let us see what the facts are. Al-Qur'aan does mention the first house being in Bakkah, and Makkah was never known as Bakkah. So Bakkah has to be some place other than Makkah.
Al-Qur'aan mentions olives and Mount Sinai in relation to The City. Olives are not produced in the desert of Arabia.
Archeological evidence from Negev (southern Israel) and Umm Al-Rasas (Jordan) from the time of Muhammad shows inscriptions in Arabic language, proving that Arabic was spoken in those areas in those times.
There is ZERO archeological evidence of a pre-Qur'aanic city by the name of Makkah or a pre-Qur'aanic shrine by the name of Kaaba. Also there is ZERO archeological evidence of pre-Qur'aanic so called Jahiliya poetry. Please see the following links for further details.
http//free-minds.org/articles/quranic/hajj.htm
http//free-minds.org/articles/science/language.htmAlso the following ayaat
37134 And Lot was one of the messengers.
37135 When We saved him and all his family.
37136 Except an old woman who remained.
37137 Then, We destroyed the rest.
37138 And you pass by their ruins in the morning;
37139 And in the night. Do you not understand?Are there any places in the deserts of the Arabian Peninsula, which have been destroyed by a divine intervention? No!
Finally
3328 And He inherited you their land, their homes, their money, and land you had never stepped on. God is able to do all things.
Which land is this?
3328 follows the verses dealing with the ?battle of the ditch,?. Makkans and their allies could not take Medina, so they lifted the siege and went back to their hometown. If this story is true then the land that the ?Messenger? hasn?t yet stepped on was Makkah. The verses of Qur'aan make that clear. He was from a different land. Make note, Muhammad was in Medina, and it was the fifth year of the Hijra, and the ?Messenger? was yet to step on other lands including the Makkan soil!
3328 makes sense only if Muhammad had begun his life not in Makkah but somewhere else.
-
Well, more land did come under control of Muhammad besides just Mecca. Either way, you are correct in saying there is no evidence that Mecca was an ancient city, infact it was probably built only 2 or 3 centuries before Muhammad. Bekkah was obviously somewhere else. This doesn't mean the Muhammad was not from Mecca. What changes if he was? You mention the cities of Lot and other destroyed people. As I mentioned earlier, we don't know where these places are. Doesn't mean they aren't in that general area.
It should also be noted that the Petra area was not captured by Muslims until after Muhammads death.
Why/how/when did everyone betray Muhammad? Any theories what happened at th early stages of Islam which led to the break down of Muhammads Islam?
Here is somewhat of an explanation I have come up with
-Muhammad came from some city to Yathrib after being persecuted. Could have come from Mecca or somewhere else.
-Preached Monothiesm. Meccans might have felt threatened so they attacked but failed. Muhammad retaliated and took the town. However, unlike the traditional claim, there weren't any idols there besides the Kabah. Because if Muhammad is supposed to have smashed all the idols, he would have destroyed the Kabah and the stone. Obviously he didn't. Rather he left the people and allowed them to keep their religion. The chiefs/generals of the town were forced to either convert or be killed. One such person being Abu Sufyan, father of the first Ummayad Caliph. The rest of the people were left alone as was their shrine. Nevertheless, Islam was preached there. "Serve the Lord of this Shrine." The Lord being Allah. The town adopted Islam for the most part by not associating with Allah or giving Him daughters such as Al-Uzza and Al-Lat.
-Muhammad dies eventually.
-Leaves behind wives, daughters, possibly sons(?), disciples and believers who God was earlier happy with and whose hearts were united as the Quran mentions.
-Assumingly Muhammads own family held onto his teachings as did most or all of his close friends/disciples.
-Disciples are said to have taken over, but this might not have been the case. The people who historically took over Islam helped spread Islam but were extremly divided and killed each other.
-What happened to these so called disciples? Why did they kill each other? Or were these people who took power after Muhammads death not reallly the close disciples tradition records? If so then what happened to the disciples who were warriors themselves just like Muhammad? Were they all killed along with Muhammads sons who might have been the heirs to power. This is an unlikely scenerio however. If these people had the power to kill the closest followers of Muhammad, they would have done so earlier and killed Muhammad as well.
-Discovered archaeological evidence is silent for about 28 years about Islam in general.
-28 years after Muhammad supposedly died, there is a well established Islamic cult that reverences the stone at kabah, performs pilgrimage there, so on. This is what the religion will look like for the next 1400 years.
-So what happened to the believers who God was happy with? Such a large scale betrayal from among the family, disciples, and believers is not likely. Something else seemed to have happened.
-Through all of this chaos who/how was the Quran preserved? God says he will preserve it, but ofcourse He didn't personally come down here and protect it from individual people.
-
Dear Riz,
No, on the contrary, I do not think they brought pagan beliefs into Islam, I think they put their own teachings into a big pot, added some Islam, and cooked up a lot of stories and religions and sects that were presented as truths.
Islam is still here, but only remnants are found in the various religions and sects, like Ahlus Sunnah, Shiah and so on, Islam is not there, they are more or less pure pagan religions, as are other religions like the various Hindu, Christian and Jewish sects and so on.
Don?t the various symbolic objects, and also rituals; strike you as odd if God, and God?s system, should be the centre of our attention? ?
Best regards
Ali Omar
-
And just to mention it, some of the poems are almost word by word the same as verses of the Quran, and they have many similarities with some Hadiths as well.
So, were the poems the source of the Quran and/or Hadiths or vice versa?There is more evidence to suggest that Muhammad got his inspiration from many sources. Early pre-Islamic poets is one source, the bibble and christians sources, Jews and Sabeans etc.
Muhammad got his inspiration from
Zayd Amr
the most influential person who motivated Muhammad in the invention of Islam and the opus of the Quran was, perhaps, Zayd b. Amr, who preached Hanifism. Muhammad later metamorphosed Zayds Hanifism into Islam
The Sabeans
among the ancient religions that the writers of the Quran incorporated in it, perhaps the practices of the Sabeans is crucial. In fact, the rituals of 5 prayers and the 30 days fasting were actually adapted from the Sabeans
Here is a list of sources of Muhammads Inspiration
http//www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/kasem/quran_origin.htmImrul Qaysan ancient poet of Arabia who died a few decades before Muhammads birth
Zayd b. Amr b. Naufalan apostate of his time who preached and propagated Hanifism
Labidanother poet
Hasan b. Thabitthe official poet of Muhammad
Salman, the PersianMuhammads confidante and an advisor
Jabra Christian neighbour of Muhammad
Ibn Qumtaa Christian slave
KhadijahMuhammads first wife
WaraqaKhadijahs cousin brother
Ubay b. KabMuhammads secretary and a Quran scribe
Muhammad himself
I could not believe that a book which is supposed to be the handiwork of the most compassionate, the most merciful and the most forgiving Allah could contain such a terrible amount of hate, terror, call for murder, war, vengeance and most of all a blanket plea for the destruction of all those who do not subscribe to the Quranic view of the world
http//www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/kasem/quran_origin.htm
Of course, there were a few verses which were very poetical, beautifully crafted, rhythmic and sometimes rich in spirituality. Apart from those handful good stuff I found the vast part of the Quran simply nonsensical, and not-to-talk about the those incriminating verses exhorting the believers to murder and wage an unrelenting war (Jihad) against the unbelievers
-
Peace Riz,
Assumptions, assumptions and more assumptions, conjectures galore !! and not a shred of hard evidence.
Well, more land did come under control of Muhammad besides just Mecca.
So? what difference does that make? Makkah was still part of the lands that Muhammad never stepped on before he came to Medina.
infact it was probably built only 2 or 3 centuries before Muhammad.
Wow, an assumption became a fact ? wow Bring archeological evidence showing existence of Makkah in the immediate pre-Qur'aanic time (before revelation of Qur'aan), let alone 2 or 3 centuries before Muhammad. There is ZERO evidence of that.
Bekkah was obviously somewhere else. This doesn't mean the Muhammad was not from Mecca.
I challenge you to bring evidence that Muhammad was from Makkah originally. Qur'aan makes it clear that he had never stepped on the lands including Makkah until after the battle.
You mention the cities of Lot and other destroyed people. As I mentioned earlier, we don't know where these places are. Doesn't mean they aren't in that general area.
More assumptions and ignorance. Bring evidence that destroyed cities of Lot were in area of Makkah. There is archeological evidence that the cities of Lot were located in the plain of Jordan River, in the Jordan Rift Valley, and to the south east of Dead Sea. Please see the following link
http//www.abu.nb.ca/ecm/topics/arch5.htm
It should also be noted that the Petra area was not captured by Muslims until after Muhammads death.
And that proves what ? Does not rule it out as area of origin of Muhammad.
-Muhammad came from some city to Yathrib after being persecuted. Could have come from Mecca or somewhere else.
All Qur'aanic and archeological evidence points to Muhammad NOT coming from Makkah.
Because if Muhammad is supposed to have smashed all the idols, he would have destroyed the Kabah and the stone. Obviously he didn't.
How is that assumption of yours "obvious"?, what evidence do you have which proves your conjecture ?. He could have destroyed it and it could have been rebuilt soon after his death.
The chiefs/generals of the town were forced to either convert or be killed.
More assumption and conjecture in this circus of assumptions !!
2256 There is no compulsion in the system; the proper way has been made clear from the wrong way.
Muhammad said and did only what he was commanded to by The God
5120 "I only said to them what You commanded me to say
1073 "But if you turn away, then I have not asked you for any reward, for my reward is with God. And I have been commanded to be of those who have surrendered."
1595 So proclaim what you have been commanded and turn away from those who set up partners.
3913 Say "I have been commanded to serve God, devoting the system to Him. And I was commanded to be the first of those who surrender."
4067 Say "I have been forbidden from serving those whom you are calling upon besides God, since the proofs have come to me from my Lord. And I have been commanded to surrender to the Lord of the worlds."If Muhammad had not followed the above ayat he would have been immediately killed by The God.
6944 A revelation from the Lord of the worlds.
6945 And had he attributed anything falsely to Us.
6946 We would have seized him by the right.
6947 Then, We would have severed his life-line.
6948 None of you would be able to prevent it.-What happened to these so called disciples ? Why did they kill each other ? Or were these people who took power after Muhammads death not reallly the close disciples tradition records ? If so then what happened to the disciples who were warriors themselves just like Muhammad ? Were they all killed along with Muhammads sons who might have been the heirs to power. This is an unlikely scenerio however.
It could be unlikely but not impossible. That scenario COULD have happened. Bring your proof that it did not happen, rather than just conjecturing and assuming.
Muhammad however had no sons
3341 Mohammed was not the father of any man among you, but he is the messenger of God and the seal of the prophets. And God is fully aware of all things.
If these people had the power to kill the closest followers of Muhammad, they would have done so earlier and killed Muhammad as well.
What an absurd argument !! actually they tried to kill Muhammad but failed.
941 If you do not help him, then God has helped him. When those who rejected expelled him, he was one of only two, and when they were in the cave, he said to his friend "Do not grieve, for God is with us." So God sent down calmness over him and He supported him with soldiers that you did not see, and He made the word of those who rejected be the lowest, and God's word be the highest. God is Noble, Wise.
-Discovered archaeological evidence is silent for about 28 years about Islam in general.
And that proves what ? Events could have happened so rapidly after death of Muhammad that almost no archeological evidence existed, or the evidence was so little that it could have easily been destroyed by the winners.
-So what happened to the believers who God was happy with? Such a large scale betrayal from among the family, disciples, and believers is not likely. Something else seemed to have happened.
Again, not likely does not mean it could not have happened. Bring solid evidence to support your conjectures. If you compare the teachings of Qur'aan to the modern traditional islam, that is evidence of a MAJOR corruption that most likely happened soon after death of Muhammad.
-Through all of this chaos who/how was the Quran preserved? God says he will preserve it, but ofcourse He didn't personally come down here and protect it from individual people.
The fact is that The God preserved The Qur'aan. He uses humans to do that. All the ayaat of Al-Qur'aan were written down by Muhammad himself and the scribes, as soon as they were revealed, then compiled and arranged in a certain order under direct instructions from The God. Subsequently many written copies were made and disseminated all over the lands that were under the muslim rule. In addition to that thousands memorized The Qur'aan by heart.
Looks like you still have not read the link that I posted in one of my earlier posts regarding this. I will repost it, hoping you might read it this time
http//free-minds.org/books/wadud_05.htm
Also I will repost the ayaat that seem to have been ignored
7515 Indeed, man will testify against himself.
7516 Even though he puts forth his excuses.
7517 Do not move your tongue with it to make haste. It is for Us to gather it and relate it.
7518 So when We relate it, you shall follow its revelation.
7519 Then it is for Us to clarify it.The God knew that some will put forth excuses, as is evident !!
1510 Indeed it is We who have sent down the Reminder, and indeed it is We who will preserve it.
1039 Or do they say he invented it? Say "Then bring a chapter like it, and call upon whoever you can besides God if you are truthful!"
-
The God knew that some will put forth excuses, as is evident !!
You mean Muhammad knew... He knew because the people of his time begain to question him, so he adds self serving verses to cover himself
-
Here is a list of sources of Muhammads Inspiration
Imrul Qays?an ancient poet of Arabia who died a few decades before Muhammad?s birth
Zayd b. Amr b. Naufal?an ?apostate? of his time who preached and propagated Hanifism
Labid?another poet
Hasan b. Thabit?the official poet of Muhammad
Salman, the Persian?Muhammad?s confidante? and an advisor
Jabr?a Christian neighbour of Muhammad
Ibn Qumta?a Christian slave
Khadijah?Muhammad?s first wife
Waraqa?Khadijah?s cousin brother
Ubay b. Ka?b?Muhammad?s secretary and a Qur?an scribe
Muhammad himself
You mean Muhammad knew... He knew because the people of his time begain to question him, so he adds self serving verses to cover himself
People who say these kinds of things, The God Himself calls them wicked.
Tell me, which one of the above narrated all the hundreds of scientific facts present in Qur'aan, which were discovered or confirmed within the last century, without a SINGLE contradiction ?
See the following link
http//members.aol.com/silence004/
Which one of the above narrated the prophesies in Qur'aan that came true later on ?
Which one of the above originated the magnificient literary masterpieces ?
Here is what The God says about people like Albion
395 Whoever invents lies about God after this, these are the wicked.
450 See how they invent upon God the lies; is that not enough as a clear sin?
623 And who is more wicked than one who invents lies about God, or denies His revelations! The wicked will never succeed.
695 And who is more wicked than one who invents lies about God, or says "It has been inspired to me," when We did not inspire anything to him; or who says "I will bring down the same as what God has sent down." And if you could only see the wicked at the moments of death when the Angels have their arms opened "Bring yourselves out, today you will be given the severest punishment for what you used to say about God without truth, and you used to be arrogant towards His revelations."
736 Who is more wicked than one who invents lies about God, or denies His revelations? These will receive their recompense from the record; so that when Our messengers come to take them, they will Say "Where are those whom you used to call on besides God?" they said "They have abandoned us!" and they bore witness upon themselves that they were rejecters.
1018 Who is more wicked than one who invents lies about God or denies His revelations? The criminals will never succeed.
1119 And who is more wicked than one who invents lies about God? They will be displayed before their Lord, and the witnesses will Say "These are the ones who lied about their Lord." Alas, God's curse will be upon the wicked.
1816 "Here are our people, they have taken gods besides Him, while they do not come with any clear authority. Who then is more wicked than one who invents lies about God?"The God knew what people like Albion would say
255 And those who rejected said "This is but a falsehood that he invented and other people have helped him with it; for they have come with what is wrong and fabricated."
256 And they said "Tales of the people of old, he wrote them down while they were being dictated to him morning and evening."This is what will happen to people like Albion on the Last Day
2876 And We will extract from every nation a witness, then We will Say "Bring forth your proof." They will then realise that all truth belongs with God, and what they had invented will abandon them.
349 "Has he invented a lie against God, or is there a madness in him?" Indeed, those who do not believe in the Hereafter will be in a retribution and far straying.Here is the challenge for the wicked !
1039 Or do they say he invented it? Say "Then bring a chapter like it, and call upon whoever you can besides God if you are truthful!"
-
Tanveer, I have read that article long before you pointed it out as well as most articles on free-mind. I have read the Quran multiple times and have seen those verses many times before. I'm not blind so you can save yourself the time and quit posting the same thing over and over again.
You say I am making too many assumptions, I can say the same about you. You assume the opposite of everything I assume.
You ask for solid evidence of these events. I never claimed I have solid evidence. If I did I wouldn't be asking questions. What I am trying to do is construct a possible scenerio of what happened following the death of Muhammad. Why do you find this so objectional? Do you have to go home and face a barrage of questions from your family concerning your beliefs? Do you have to answer them when they bring up written accounts of the early Sunni practices of Islam? Do you have to answer them when they ask you to bring proof of the corruption? Has your Sunni family ever asked you to give them a logical explanation of what happened after Muhammad? Well they sure have asked me, and its not easy. Its not easy discarding 1400 years of history, tradition, and 'logic' while not having a decent explanation.
I mentioned Mecca was probably built a century or 2 before Muhammad and I was making reference to your own comment that there is no historical evidence of such a town before Islam. Ofcourse you would rather discard the history of the whole world and just pretend nothing matters. That thinking is no better than that of right-wing Christians who think the world is 6000 years old. So if you are done trying to dodge the issue, why don't you come up with some sort of an explanation of what happened. If you are unable to find some logical explanation, then all you are going by is a big fat assumption being that Muhammad had no care of the Kabah and his entire family and everyone who had supported him turned their were lying for the 23 years he was alive. Thats a much greater assumption than all of mine combined.
Uncovering Meccan history
http//religionresearchinstitute.org/mecca/classical.htm
http//religionresearchinstitute.org/mecca/construction.htm -
Peace Riz,
You say I am making too many assumptions, I can say the same about you. You assume the opposite of everything I assume.
Qur'aanic facts and archeological evidences are assumptions ??? hmm
I'm not blind so you can save yourself the time and quit posting the same thing over and over again.
You sure about that ? are you ?
Juss kiddin !!
Do you have to answer them when they ask you to bring proof of the corruption?
Al-Qur'aan is the biggest proof brother. Whoever does not accept that is rejecting The God's revelations and The God will deal with them on the Last Day. Just worry about yourself first. You are answerable to The God only, not your friends or forefathers.
Ofcourse you would rather discard the history of the whole world and just pretend nothing matters.
When there is no solid proof, then yes you can discard all the history (fiction agreed upon) especially when there is solid proof otherwise (Al-Qur'aan).
I never claimed I have solid evidence.
Then please do not build scenarios on assumptions and conjecture, and do not state things as FACT when you have no knowledge.
1737 And do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and mind, all these you are responsible for.