Focal Point
-
Peace Ignoramus,
But the negative proof shifts the burden of proof. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs. So the burden of proof is on those who make the extraordinary claim that Mecca was a famous town established by Abraham and a shrine in it known to the people of the book (as they know their own children) despite the complete absence of any mention of Mecca prior to the 8th century CE and the fact that none of the people of the book ever visited or ever even heard of this so-called Mecca.
If people are going to claim that there were unicorns, fire-breathing dragons, winged horses or 80 meter tall humans then they had better bring the skeletons to support such claims. They should not say "prove that such things didn't exist".
Peace,
Ayman
salam brother Ayman
i agree that it is propesterous for someone ask for the non-existence of mecca in times of revelation. however, just because it has not been proved that it did exist does not mean it did not, in reality, exist.
salam
-
salam brother Leoxyz
perhaps your understanding of english is a little lacking, but i read so many of your posts which are quite ridiculous. i think you totally misunderstand much of what other posters are saying. i think it would be good for you to take a bit more time trying to understand the other posters.
salam
-
First, belief in a "fake god" in support of Quran and its unrealistic and barbaric injunctions. Second, supporting the first in extreme affirmation as the Only Truth. As for the contradictions, there are plenty mentioned in the Quranic Divinity section. You can also do a google search by typing "contradictions in the Quran". For some magical reasons, all of them will be vehemently denied because of the second and putting a heavy weight on all others to become subjective.
What ex-Muslims have to say
http//www.apostatesofislam.com/http//www.formermuslims.com/forum/index.php
http//www.islam-watch.org/
salam brother or sister Genteel
i had a look at those site and i do not find a single thing in them which i would say could be reasonable called a contradiction. the sites are far from objective and all seem to exist out of some hatred for what they think is the religion of islam.
salam
-
i had a look at those site and i do not find a single thing in them which i would say could be reasonable called a contradiction. the sites are far from objective and all seem to exist out of some hatred for what they think is the religion of islam.
You were not supposed to find contradictions on those sites but what ex-Muslims have to say about Islam. The hatred part is atypical from religionists. People should relax, open up their minds, discuss and THINK. Belief in GOD is NOT A LAW and Muslims cannot seem to understand this. It is an ideology. Muhammad made this belief a LAW and enforced it upon people of his time and subjugated them rather harshly and severely for disbelief, hence the retributions and consequences upon them; the reminiscience are apparent. The Quran expands on this very ideology in a controlled environment. -
You were not supposed to find contradictions on those sites but what ex-Muslims have to say about Islam. The hatred part is atypical from religionists. People should relax, open up their minds, discuss and THINK. Belief in GOD is NOT A LAW and Muslims cannot seem to understand this. It is an ideology. Muhammad made this belief a LAW and enforced it upon people of his time and subjugated them rather harshly and severely for disbelief, hence the retributions and consequences upon them; the reminiscience are apparent. The Quran expands on this very ideology in a controlled environment.
salam
sorry i misunderstood what you were saying.
as for what Mohammed did, this is conjecture, but i do understand what you are getting at. the Quran does not depend on the things you assert; it says there is not compulsion in religion.
i also do not think that one has to even know of the Quran's existence, never mind follow it, in order to be a believer or even to be saved from any penaly from God, in life or after.
salam
-
salam brother Ayman
i agree that it is propesterous for someone ask for the non-existence of mecca in times of revelation. however, just because it has not been proved that it did exist does not mean it did not, in reality, exist.
salam
Peace Ignoramus
Brother Aymans got a point. If the traditions are true and Mecca was the place of the first house built by Adam and then visited and rebuilt by Abraham it would have been the most important place for Jews for over 3 millenniums before Jesus and would have been important for Christians too. All this would have made it the holiest place in the world for Jews and Christians centuries before Muhammad. In these circumstances it would have taken a miracle to keep such an important holy place out of some mention in some book or document prior to 8th century.
-
Peace Ignoramus
Brother Aymans got a point. If the traditions are true and Mecca was the place of the first house built by Adam and then visited and rebuilt by Abraham it would have been the most important place for Jews for over 3 millenniums before Jesus and would have been important for Christians too. All this would have made it the holiest place in the world for Jews and Christians centuries before Muhammad. In these circumstances it would have taken a miracle to keep such an important holy place out of some mention in some book or document prior to 8th century.
salam
we are told the scriptures have not remained unscathed and that some of the people of the book deliberately conceal parts of the Truth. The jews and christians still dispute the loctions of some of the most important temples. the Quran says ask those of knowledge and it is not obvious who are people of knowledge.
the fact that most jews and christians of today do not recognise the famous mosque in mecca is a good argument that it is not al masjid al haram, but it is not proof of any kind.
one might ask how it can be that billions of people do not identify with one the holiest of places, but by that token, how is it that over a billion people, claiming to follow the teachings of the Quran, so obviously do the opposite.
although the exact location of al masjid al haram, if it is physical, is obviously important, it has yet to be shown with any robust argument whether al masjid al haram is physical, mental or even something else.
salam
-
the Quran does not depend on the things you assert; it says there is not compulsion in religion.
If there is no compulsion in religion, as Quran so eloquently puts it, then why the severe and harsh punishments? The Quran repeatedly threatens and severly subjugates one from disbelieving in God and his commands towards uncompromising and horrific punishmentments, yet makes it sound very simple and easy to state that there is no compulsion, when in fact the very belief in God and religion as per the Quran mandates a LAW. Have you noticed in any other religion which confesses that if you don't believe in my god and my holy book, then you'll be massacred, cut into pieces and burnt alive. I'm afraid to mention that is this some kind of a joke. Why do Muslims always pick and choose a specific verse without studying, understanding and analyzing the entire Quran? Why are they too quick to make judgment calls by picking on one verse to disgrace and demean others and even among themselves who also believe in the same Quran, without knowing the specifics and settings in which the verse was originally intended during Muhammad's time. -
If there is no compulsion in religion, as Quran so eloquently puts it, then why the severe and harsh punishments? The Quran repeatedly threatens and severly subjugates one from disbelieving in God and his commands towards uncompromising and horrific punishmentments, yet makes it sound very simple and easy to state that there is no compulsion, when in fact the very belief in God and religion as per the Quran mandates a LAW. Have you noticed in any other religion which confesses that if you don't believe in my god and my holy book, then you'll be massacred, cut into pieces and burnt alive. I'm afraid to mention that is this some kind of a joke. Why do Muslims always pick and choose a specific verse without studying, understanding and analyzing the entire Quran? Why are they too quick to make judgment calls by picking on one verse to disgrace and demean others and even among themselves who also believe in the same Quran, without knowing the specifics and settings in which the verse was originally intended during Muhammad's time.
salam
it may just be that my understanding of the Quran is completely different than yours, but i do not find in the Quran anything that you say. i am not sure where you are finding this "law", but i do not see it. i cannot find anywhere in the Quran that says God will inflict any penalty on someone for not following the Quran.
to a great extent i agree with your point about individuals and societies being "quick to make judgment calls by picking on one verse to disgrace and demean others and even among themselves", but this does not mean they are following the Quran, or God by doing this.
in my opinion, the Quran was not just intended for Mohammed, so the intricate details of his life and the environment of revelation are not important.
we obviously differ in opinion on many aspects of God and the Quran, but i think we are slightly off topic and i had intended to cease debating God and the Quran and wean myself off these fora, which i have found myself drawn into, even though i had planned not to, so i will agree to disagree and accept that i might be totally wrong and you might be totally right.
salam
-
You are correct, I am Dajjal, I have one eye, and I have a pink complexion, and I am here to steal your women
Please answer the very simple question instead of resorting to idle talk. Also, please stop trash-talking using the Quran, it does not look good.
Who is closer to shirk, the one upholding God alone or the one upholding God alone + spinning round the Arab cube + invoking Amun-Ra 5 times a day?
Whether you like it or no Islam will dominate inshallah
933
(933) He is Allah Who has sent His Messenger with Guidance and the Right way so that He may make it prevail over all other ways, *32 even though the mushriks be much averse to it. -
Whether you like it or no Islam will dominate inshallah
933
(933) He is Allah Who has sent His Messenger with Guidance and the Right way so that He may make it prevail over all other ways, *32 even though the mushriks be much averse to it.You are correct, the cube is eroding as we speak and sectarianism is dying a slow and painful death. So, those who associate their pagan cube with God as a symbolic partner will get their come-uppance.
In any case, dear Imam, can you answer the very simple question? Or are you going to continue dancing around it like your cube?
-
Whether you like it or no Islam will dominate inshallah
933
(933) He is Allah Who has sent His Messenger with Guidance and the Right way so that He may make it prevail over all other ways, *32 even though the mushriks be much averse to it.salam
you seem so quick to condemn, label and blame others. i think it might be better for you to concentrate own deeds and beliefs. if someone else is a "mushrik" or anything else, you will not suffer for it.
salam
-
i am not sure where you are finding this "law", but i do not see it. i cannot find anywhere in the Quran that says God will inflict any penalty on someone for not following the Quran.
That tells me that you've not read the Quran in its entirety or forgotten certain verses or simply put, not understood well enough.I myself beg to let this topic sink on this thread and as you said, agree to disagree.
Peace!
-
That tells me that you've not read the Quran in its entirety or forgotten certain verses or simply put, not understood well enough.
I myself beg to let this topic sink on this thread and as you said, agree to disagree.
Peace!
Why let the topic sink? Please substantiate your claims. See the other thread by Samia titled with verse numbers in this forum.
-
Peace Ignoramus,
I will let you digest all the information and ponder on the passages. Meanwhile, I have a couple of comments.
1 billion people believing al masjid al haram is the famous mosque in mecca, together with whatever is in the books of hadith etc is evidence. i agree it is far far from proof, but it exists nevertheless
This is the opposite of proof. This is the logical fallacy of "appeal to popularity".
not everything can be proved empirically and, in my opinion, empiricism by itself will not lead us to the Truth.
This is what people who don't appreciate the book want you to believe. They want you to think that this is a theoretical book that cannot be empirically applied or verified. The book itself tells us otherwise. One of the ways that we reach certainty is through the empirical verification of the ATTITUDE of unappreciative rejecters that is very accurately described in the book. As I said, try the experiments that I described in my previous response to you and verify the truth for yourself.
Peace,
Ayman
-
salam brother Ayman
i really am not saying anything i say is the Truth, or that i know the Quran well. i try to be objective and it is far from clear to me what al masjid al haram is.
Peace Ignoramus,
I will let you digest all the information and ponder on the passages. Meanwhile, I have a couple of comments.
This is the opposite of proof. This is the logical fallacy of "appeal to popularity".
i am not saying it is proof, in fact if you read my posts, i say it is miniscule evidence. i have never claimed there is any proof.
This is what people who don't appreciate the book want you to believe. They want you to think that this is a theoretical book that cannot be empirically applied or verified. The book itself tells us otherwise. One of the ways that we reach certainty is through the empirical verification of the ATTITUDE of unappreciative rejecters that is very accurately described in the book. As I said, try the experiments that I described in my previous response to you and verify the truth for yourself.
i totally disagree. very little of the Quran can be verified empirically. a great deal more can be proved rationally. even rationalism cannot prove everything in the Quran.
lack of empirical proof of something is not the proof of its fallacy. empirical proofs are not the elixir of all ills. for example, you can never empirically prove God exists.
salam
-
salam
we are told the scriptures have not remained unscathed and that some of the people of the book deliberately conceal parts of the Truth. The jews and christians still dispute the loctions of some of the most important temples. the Quran says ask those of knowledge and it is not obvious who are people of knowledge.
the fact that most jews and christians of today do not recognise the famous mosque in mecca is a good argument that it is not al masjid al haram, but it is not proof of any kind.
one might ask how it can be that billions of people do not identify with one the holiest of places, but by that token, how is it that over a billion people, claiming to follow the teachings of the Quran, so obviously do the opposite.
although the exact location of al masjid al haram, if it is physical, is obviously important, it has yet to be shown with any robust argument whether al masjid al haram is physical, mental or even something else.
salam
Salaam
I am not talking just about scripture. There should be so much historical and archeological information which should have been normally available about a place of this nature apart from the religious books.
-
Salaam
I am not talking just about scripture. There should be so much historical and archeological information which should have been normally available about a place of this nature apart from the religious books.
salam
i agree the lack of evidence is quite remarkable, but this is still not proof that the mosque in mecca did not exist, or was not significant during times of revelation.
based on all the evidence of which i am aware, at the present time the existance of a mosque in mecca at the time of revelation can neither be proved nor disproved. i do not understand why so many will just not accept this and continue to challendge eachother to prove what cannot be proved based on currently available (or at least accessible) evidence.
salam
-
salam
i agree the lack of evidence is quite remarkable, but this is still not proof that the mosque in mecca did not exist, or was not significant during times of revelation.
based on all the evidence of which i am aware, at the present time the existance of a mosque in mecca at the time of revelation can neither be proved nor disproved. i do not understand why so many will just not accept this and continue to challendge eachother to prove what cannot be proved based on currently available (or at least accessible) evidence.
salam
We are commanded to think and not base our deen/focal point on something with shaky foundations (9100-9120). So this debate will always rage on. Even in 9109, firm spiritual foundations are compared to shaky physical foundations.
-
We are commanded to think and not base our deen/focal point on something with shaky foundations (9100-9120). So this debate will always rage on. Even in 9109, firm spiritual foundations are compared to shaky physical foundations.
Mental cases have debated the existance of God.
If someone debates presence of Mecca or MasjidulHaram ,there is No deficiency of "Tabarrukaat" and "Kazzaabs"(Liars) in this world