Bakka/Mecca
-
Now please answer the question you have been trying to avoid. When mentioning the qibla, Quran mentions jews, christians and polytheists. Are you claiming there were christians in the hijaz region? If you do, I'm afraid you are not mentally sane.
Peace
-
The Hijaz had not been touched by Christian preaching. Hence organisation of the Christian church was neither to be expected nor found.
This is also mentioned in the books dealing with Christianity among Arabs in pre-Islamic times from the point of view of poets.
The testimony of poets to the influence of Christianity in a spiritual and a sociological sense is negative.
Dr. Nab?h Aqel, a Professor of Arabic and Islamic History in the University of Damascus, states in his book Tar?kh al-Arab al-Qad?m
The big difference between Christianity and Judaism is that Christianity unlike Judaism didn?t have any bases in Hijaz , Christianity was an external source of enlightenment echoed in Hijaz either by missionary activities form Ethiopia, Syria and Iraq or from Alheerah?s Christian centres; dair Hind al-Kubra ? Um Amro al-Mundhir ? Dair Hind al-Sugra or from some of the scattered churches in Bahrain, al-Yamamah and Yemen.
An observation from the point of view of Islamic traditions had been made by Richard Bell quite a long time ago. He says that
?in spite of traditions to the effect that the picture of Jesus was found on one of the pillars of Ka?aba, there is no good evidence of any seats of Christianity in the Hijaz or in the near neighbourhood of Makkah or even of Madina.
Sir William Muir, despite being known as a harsh critic of Islam, admits that
The legend, that the image of Jesus and the Virgin was sculptured on a pillar of the Kaa`ba, and adored by the Arabs, is not an early or a well supported one, and in itself is improbable. Christianity never found much favour at Mecca?
-
Edit Double post
-
To turn to your faith I would have to overcome the following obstacles
- No historical record for mecca during Muhammads lifetime. Literally none.
- Masjid al haram is built by later caliphs. No evidence of a masjid al haram at Mecca during Muhammads lifetime. Literally none.
There is an abundance of historical record, you simply do not want to accept it.
- I don't like to face a meaningless rock while praying. I'd like to face the place my faith was given to me. The first House of God. Known to Abraham and every prophet in his lineage.
Is the temple mount also not a rock and hence as meaningless (or meaningful) as the Kaaba?
- I would have to accept the Quran contains mistakes in spelling and thus meaning. I would have to doubt every word in quran if one can just mistake an M for a B any mistake is possible. I strongly believe Quran is protected.
You seem to want it to contain mistakes although it does not. It mentions the same name in the most used dialects of the time when the Quran was revealed.
- I can't logically accept one God to install multiple qiblas.
Whats wrong with whatever Qibla your God tells you to pray towards. Why do you think that the baca of the bible cannot be the bakka or mecca of the Quran, located in the Hijaz? What do you actually have against this location which turns you off.
- How can I acknowledge a qibla that was never acknowledged by any prophet except the hadith version of muhammad?
That is your own strawman. How about proving it?
-
See above all historians agree there was no christian influence in the hijaz region. Who were those christians in mecca during Muhammads lifetime? Did you just invent those?
Peace
-
So far we can see for you an M can mean a B in Quran and vice versa. Not only this, you claim there was a christian influence in the Hijaz region in contradiction with pretty much every historian.
Peace
-
How many jewish people do they receive at mecca on a yearly basis? Zero. Maybe you are worshipping a different God
Peace
-
Now please answer the question you have been trying to avoid. When mentioning the qibla, Quran mentions jews, christians and polytheists. Are you claiming there were christians in the hijaz region? If you do, I'm afraid you are not mentally sane.
Peace
As this is the first time you're bringing this up, I don't see how i'm avoiding this.
And what is so illogical about christians being in the Hijaz (even though I didn't even bring up this issue)? Do you have proof to claim otherwise?
OK ... now answer my question which you have been avoiding
Why is there no actual historical record of a Baca ever existing in Jerusalem. And I don't consider the books of the bible to be historical proofs.
-
As this is the first time you're bringing this up, I don't see how i'm avoiding this.
And what is so illogical about christians being in the Hijaz (even though I didn't even bring up this issue)? Do you have proof to claim otherwise?
OK ... now answer my question which you have been avoiding
Why is there no actual historical record of a Baca ever existing in Jerusalem. And I don't consider the books of the bible to be historical proofs.
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
Peace -
Or do you say that Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants were Jews or Christians? Say, "Are you more knowing or is Allah ?" And who is more unjust than one who conceals a testimony he has from Allah ? And Allah is not unaware of what you do.
You bro are one saying Abraham and Ishmael were Jews or Christians. You have your own qibla now, not one which was acknowledged by Abraham, nor Ishmael, nor Isaac nor Jacob or their descendants. We know the qibla of the descendants Jerusalem.
Peace
-
The christians many times referred to in Quran can NOT be identified as an influence in the Hijaz region. However we do know the Byzantine empire was christian and controlled Jerusalem during Muhammads lifetime after losing and gaining it back. Ultimately losing it to Muslims.
Peace
-
For an imported word denoting a placename the double K is possible. Baca imported from hebrew into arabic can undergo that kind of change.
You think it is coincidence both verses in Old Testament and Quran using that placename attach the same symbolic value Gods first House?
Peace
Anything can undego any change, but you have to prove it it has undergone that change. You cannot make at will a thing bein derived from another just like that, You may think it could have been sobut you have to show how, why, and when. It is by no means anything straightfoward or at leas produce several other instances of what you say.
Bakka is a perfectly Arabic word, just la Makka. To make it anything else and derived fromanother language you have to bring some substance and not mere personal conjecture, otherwise it is useless.
Salaam
-
@huruf you expose yourself as one that has never challenged the traditionalist views and is totally unaware of the western scholarly work done studying the etymology of Quran. Even some sunni scholars had the courage to admit many of these words are indeed foreign. I could quote some scholars who all studied the etymology of many quranic words.
Eg
https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christoph_Luxenberg
https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Jeffery
https//de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siegmund_Fraenkel_(Semitist)But quoting those scholars would give you the impression I also agree with their conclusions. I don't. But I do agree on the massive amount of evidence of foreign imports inside the Quranic vocabularium.
You are still living in some wonderland in which every word of Quran is originally arabic and arab scholars can explain all the grammar and every spelling of every word in Quran. You need a reality check. They can't using arab only. Imports between languages are frequent and very common.
Peace
-
There are many examples of similar imports. Check any name of any messenger also known to the Jews and you will see a similar phenomenon. Including how it affects the inflection of the word.
Changes in spelling
Words taken into different recipient languages are sometimes spelled as in the donor language (such as many of the terms above). Sometimes borrowed words retain original (or near-original) pronunciation, but undergo a spelling change to represent the orthography of the recipient language. Welsh is a language where this is done with some consistency, with words like g?m (game), cwl (cool), and ded-gifawe (dead giveaway). The French expression "cul de sac" (meaning "dead end" or "no through road" is used in English as is, with the same meaning but a spelling pronunciation the 'l' is mute in French but enunciated in English.This import only suffered a change in spelling to fit the arab orthography. Not a change in meaning nor in pronunciation. Baca imported to bacca is way more plausible than mecca to bacca wouldn't you agree?
Even the name Allah itself in Quran has foreign roots.
from the Aramaic/Syriac alaha, meaning 'God' or 'the God'.
The final 'a' in the name alaha was originally the definite article
'the' and is regularly dropped when Syriac words and names are
borrowed into Arabic. Middle-eastern Christianity used 'alah' and
'alaha' frequently, and it would have often been heard.But in the Aramaic/Syriac language there are two different 'a' vowels,
one rather like the 'a' in English 'hat' and the other more like the
vowel in 'ought'. In the case of 'alah', the first vowel was like
'hat' and the second like 'ought'. Arabic does not have a vowel like
the one in 'ought', but it seems to have BORROWED this vowel along
with the word 'alah'. If you know Arabic, then you know that the
second vowel in 'allah' is unique; it occurs only in that one word
in Arabic.Another import from Aramaic another doubling of a consonant triggered by the ambiguity of the 'a' vowel. Same phenomenon with "baca". alaha (aram) -> allah (arab) | baca (aramaic) -> bacca (arab)
Peace
-
Salaam Runninglike...
I am not interested in your conjetures about me at all, so if you can spare them so much the better because once I see where you are going I do not read further.
I requested you some things very specific, if you are not able to bring that, so that is it. Generalisations that you make over your own OPINIONS are not facts that I can use for gaining any further knowledge and I am not a child to engage in battles about who is right on this or who dares that or what this people have done or not done in this or that field. I am quite aged and independent to judge that for myself and if I think somebody's insight into something is worthwhile I will take the trouble to examine it as thouroughly as I can of my own accord, not because anybody "leads me to the straight path". But you do not bring up any such insight that I can see but rather the usual crap of your woulbe allknowers about this and that which I have outgrown long ago. And bludgeonning me with the horrible threat of been considered a bad girl in whatever snese, leaves me cold.
In general, if you do want people to take your words into account, do not be so patronising. I do not need you to protect me from bad ones who have no knowledge and take me to the straight path and save me from ignorance. If I need a mentor I will choose it myself.
So if you have those things I mentionned to you good, if not, no use preaching to me the things that will make me acceptable to the political correctors because I am under no need to please anybody with my own view of things.
Salaam
-
Hi,
I agree with huruf. Quran contains Semitic origin words only, and is based on the usual trilateral roots. Arabic is a descriptive language and the ancient speakers referred to things in descriptive ways.
In the very past all people in this region used forms of Aramaic sharing the same roots. They were universal.
Be well
-
-
Peace runninglikezebras your qiblah being Jerusalem is just so odd.
Free-minds never ceases to amaze me!God bless
peace
Peace hawk99,
Well to me a qibla that is not Jerusalem is totally weird. If you acknowledge Abraham how can you acknowledge a qibla that was never part of Abrahams life?
How can one identify masjid al haram in Mecca when there was no such thing as a masjid in mecca at that time.
How can one identify the christians in the hijaz region when there is a total absence of christian influence in the hijaz region during that time?
How can one ignore the events happening in Jerusalem during that time period which fit the Quranic narrative like a glove? (3 main actors all present as mentioned in the surah dealing with the qibla persians (polytheists), byzantines (christians) and muslims.
How can one ignore the old testament contains verses with the same aramaic root word qbl all speaking of a prayer direction being Jerusalem.
How can one accept a qibla to be in mecca that does not allow jewish people only muslims in contradiction with what Quran instructs (safe access to Jews).
If you believe all those things regardless of the lack of any evidence for them, you might as well believe the Grimm fairytales are the word of God.
I'm still waiting for an answer of those who identify the qibla to be Mecca, to identify who these mysterious christians were in the hijaz region of which history has no record.
Peace
-
Hi,
I agree with huruf. Quran contains Semitic origin words only, and is based on the usual trilateral roots. Arabic is a descriptive language and the ancient speakers referred to things in descriptive ways.
In the very past all people in this region used forms of Aramaic sharing the same roots. They were universal.
Be well
You agree with huruf while she denies arab contains any foreign words? Is there any logic on this forum at all? I'm not surprised the majority of members of a forum on the internet dealing with religion consists largely of the delusional and irrational. But one would expect to find a few who demonstrate some capability of rational thought.
Peace