I do believe Quran is enough, but you are confusing me!

zizo

Salamo Alaykom,
I'm new to this site and have read a few of your articles.
Well I believe since about five or six years that sunnah is no part of religion, but still, you confused me with your talk about mekka and jerusalem as well as months. It does make somehow sense and somehow it doesn't.
First of all, we are getting into guessing again, and this would also divide the moslems. Besides, you are just erasing all what is agreed upon in the islamic world. I do not agree on Hadith, but nobody doubted that mekka was the place of pilgrimage.
Anyway it does make more sense that it is jerusalem, but what about

The Israa from the restricted mosque to the aqsaa mosque. What is the aqsaa mosque and what is the restricted mosque? It must have been from the place where the prophet lived. Besides where is the historical proof of any of what you claim?
How about the pilgrimage of the prophet? Where was it supposed to have been?
When did the prophet ever suppossed to have reached jerusalem? What language was spoken in that area so that it would make sense for the quran to be revealed in Arabic?
How about all the historic figures? All invented?
And why should the religion have been totally altered like that and when? And where is the evidance of any remains of the original faith?

About ritual prayer, what is wrong about it? And why do we have to reinvent everything just because we do not believe that Sunnah is part of the religion? I just ignore the things that are based on the Sunnah, but the prayer and pilgrimage and the months are suppossed to be ok. And if they are not, how could u ever get to the truth? I don't want to just guess.

The interpretations are fine, but they get too much into guessing, even if they are based on nice theories. I can always come to a very wrong conclusion using a totally logical path and very sound theories. We can never really know!

So are we getting united like this? or will all that just end up in increasing the arguments?