RE: How it was forged.
October 6, 2015 at 7:41 am
(This post was last modified: October 6, 2015 at 8:11 am by WinterHold.)
MNMP
Surfing through the site; I found this :
http://www.searchformecca.com/timeline.html
Move the cursor to the square holding "satanic verses"..what the hell?
With a Quran open in front of me now, the verse mentioned is actually a direct attack on the heathens of Mecca; and matter in fact discusses a totally different topic : read the complete verses yourself :
(Sura 53 Verse 19 ) Did you see al-Lat and al-'Uzza?
(Sura 53 Verse 20 ) And Manat, the third - the other one?
(Sura 53 Verse 21 ) Is the male for you and for Him the female?
(Sura 53 Verse 22 ) That, then, is an unjust division.
(Sura 53 Verse 23 ) They are not but [mere] names you have named them - you and your forefathers - for which Allah has sent down no authority. They follow not except assumption and what [their] souls desire, and there has already come to them from their Lord guidance.
The verse literally says that the Gods of Mecca are nothing more than "names, the heathens and their forefathers made up"; referring again to the type of pagans who worship their own desire..it's so romantic to have a fertility Goddess after all..Though it remains a desire.
If such an info exists on the site; then the author cannot even read the Quran probably and truly makes me throw their crediibility down the stream, this begins to smell like that movie "the innocent of Islam". The previous verse was an open war against the idols of Mecca; yet the author found a way to twist it upside down.
If such stuff is embedded in their content, then their content has no credibility to me at least. This was a direct hiding of the rest of the verses, and taking a verse out of context.
About the mosques..how do I believe now that their research is true ?? Some pictures here and there proves nothing too..
But about the Qibla, yes it was changed in Mohammed peace be upon him's time, from Jerusalem to the holy mosque in Mecca. The Quran described that in details.
About my religious stand, not what I like is what I take; I validate anything against the Quran; in other words it's my own constitution. Take Aisha & Ali as an example. I side with Aisha; but that doesn't make me a Sunni. I stand against Ali, but that doesn't make me an Ummayad Sunni. I stand against the Ummayads and their heathen master, but that doesn't make me a Shia or "Ali worshiper".
Bring me a Hadith. If it doesn't contradict the Quran, then I put it on my radar as possibility. But never believe in it.
A methodology that brought me a peace of mind. Quranists though are not my type; I remember reading about them in the past; I think many of them stand "lost" because they don't know how to pray; or do other things that the Quran spoke about in the first place.
Surfing through the site; I found this :
http://www.searchformecca.com/timeline.html
Move the cursor to the square holding "satanic verses"..what the hell?
With a Quran open in front of me now, the verse mentioned is actually a direct attack on the heathens of Mecca; and matter in fact discusses a totally different topic : read the complete verses yourself :
(Sura 53 Verse 19 ) Did you see al-Lat and al-'Uzza?
(Sura 53 Verse 20 ) And Manat, the third - the other one?
(Sura 53 Verse 21 ) Is the male for you and for Him the female?
(Sura 53 Verse 22 ) That, then, is an unjust division.
(Sura 53 Verse 23 ) They are not but [mere] names you have named them - you and your forefathers - for which Allah has sent down no authority. They follow not except assumption and what [their] souls desire, and there has already come to them from their Lord guidance.
The verse literally says that the Gods of Mecca are nothing more than "names, the heathens and their forefathers made up"; referring again to the type of pagans who worship their own desire..it's so romantic to have a fertility Goddess after all..Though it remains a desire.
If such an info exists on the site; then the author cannot even read the Quran probably and truly makes me throw their crediibility down the stream, this begins to smell like that movie "the innocent of Islam". The previous verse was an open war against the idols of Mecca; yet the author found a way to twist it upside down.
If such stuff is embedded in their content, then their content has no credibility to me at least. This was a direct hiding of the rest of the verses, and taking a verse out of context.
About the mosques..how do I believe now that their research is true ?? Some pictures here and there proves nothing too..
But about the Qibla, yes it was changed in Mohammed peace be upon him's time, from Jerusalem to the holy mosque in Mecca. The Quran described that in details.
About my religious stand, not what I like is what I take; I validate anything against the Quran; in other words it's my own constitution. Take Aisha & Ali as an example. I side with Aisha; but that doesn't make me a Sunni. I stand against Ali, but that doesn't make me an Ummayad Sunni. I stand against the Ummayads and their heathen master, but that doesn't make me a Shia or "Ali worshiper".
Bring me a Hadith. If it doesn't contradict the Quran, then I put it on my radar as possibility. But never believe in it.
A methodology that brought me a peace of mind. Quranists though are not my type; I remember reading about them in the past; I think many of them stand "lost" because they don't know how to pray; or do other things that the Quran spoke about in the first place.
