Registered: 09/29/03
Posts: 442
Loc: west palm beach
Offline
Today's Muslims need to admit that they are decieved by satan, and they need to repent and ask God to forgive them of thier sins, also they must be born again by the spirit and the blood. see Acts: 2: 38.
When Muhammad and his community came under severe persecution, eighty-three of his followers who had no protection emigrated from Mecca to Ethiopia, taking refuge in the ancient Christian country, Abyssinia.1 Under increasing boycotts and pressure, Muhammad went through a time of weakness and compromised with the Meccan pagans by acknowledging the existence of three pagan goddesses alongside Allah: Lat, Uzza, and Manat.2 The Arabian goddesses are mentioned in Sura an-Najm (Star) 53:19-22.
The statement that Allah was involved with female goddesses while Muhammad and his people were left with men, was cynically discussed by author Salman Rushdie.3 He made the impure account even more obscene. His book was regarded as utterly blasphemous by all Muslims.
When the inhabitants of Mecca heard Muhammad's confess the importance of the ancient goddesses inside the Ka'aba, they immediately revoked their ban on him. Those who had immigrated to Abyssinia (Ethiopia) started to return home after hearing Muhammad's confession and his acceptance in Mecca. But when they arrived, they were shocked to hear that Muhammad had retracted his confession and admitted that he had fallen prey to the whispering of Satan. Thus, today Islam considers Sura an-Najm (Star) 53:19-22 are related to the time when Muhammad spoke the the Satanic Verses. Salman Rushdie did not invent the Satanic verses.4
In Sura Hajj (Pilgrimage) 22:52-53, Muhammad confessed his mistake, alleging that all prophets were tempted by Satan who inspire them with demonic verses, as if they were actually revealed by God. But later on Allah abrogated those Satanic Verses with new revelations and instructs his prophets with new verses. According to Islam, Allah permits such demonic inspiration to test weak believers and to cut off those with hardened hearts.
Never did We send a messenger or a prophet before thee, but, when he framed a desire, Satan threw some (vanity) into his desire: but Allah will cancel anything (vain) that Satan throws in, and Allah will confirm (and establish) His Signs: for Allah is full of Knowledge and Wisdom: That He may make the suggestions thrown in by Satan, but a trial for those in whose hearts is a disease and who are hardened of heart: verily the wrong-doers are in a schism far (from the Truth): Hajj (Pilgrimage) 22:52-53. Yusuf 'Ali's translation
The true, vital issue about the Satanic verses is this. If Muhammad were unable to distinguish Satan's voice from God's voice, then could there be verses in the Qur'an that Muhammad assumed were from God but were really from Satan? Maybe much of the Qur'an is Satanic in origin, in spite of Muhammad's conviction that it was entirely from Allah.
Registered: 01/04/01
Posts: 1257
Loc: London, England
Offline
"If you repeat a lie enough people will begin to believe it," Nazi leader Gobbels. Which part of the Qur'an is satanic? Surely not the parts that preach against satan, or the parts that say "before you begin to recite the Qura'n say 'I seek refuge in ALLAH from the satan'"? So now its only "parts" so who wrote the other parts? Or where did the Revelation come from? Noel you keep changing your story like Paul the Roman, you cant stick to the line.
_________________________
Assalamu alay kum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu (Peace, mercy and blessings be upon you)
Registered: 09/29/03
Posts: 442
Loc: west palm beach
Offline
Originally Posted By: Tman
"If you repeat a lie enough people will begin to believe it," Nazi leader Gobbels. Which part of the Qur'an is satanic? Surely not the parts that preach against satan, or the parts that say "before you begin to recite the Qura'n say 'I seek refuge in ALLAH from the satan'"? So now its only "parts" so who wrote the other parts? Or where did the Revelation come from? Noel you keep changing your story like Paul the Roman, you cant stick to the line.
Are you saying then that the Angel Gabriel contradicted himself?
Registered: 01/04/01
Posts: 1257
Loc: London, England
Offline
What are you on about? Please supply reference,context, example. And we believe in the Islamic view and not what "John" (who?) said in the Bible book called revelations.
_________________________
Assalamu alay kum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu (Peace, mercy and blessings be upon you)
Registered: 09/29/03
Posts: 442
Loc: west palm beach
Offline
[quote=Tman]What are you on about? Please supply reference,context, example.
Had the spirit been Gabriel, he would not have contradicted his former revelations. Six hundred years before Muhammad, Gabriel said to Mary when he appeared to her: The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called Son of God (Luke 1:35). But the spirit who appeared to Muhammad said to him: ...and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved (literally those who are infidels) of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they (Surat Al-Tawbah 9:30 MPT). Gabriel said to Mary that Jesus would be called the Son of God. The spirit who gave the revelations to Muhammad said that this is the saying of the infidels, and declares that Allah Himself fights against the Christians who confess that Jesus is the Son of God.
Registered: 01/04/01
Posts: 1257
Loc: London, England
Offline
There is no contradiction. You Christians (ifidels) do call him the son of God, although a new version of the Bible now changed this prediction to "son of hope". He was/is "called" that but he was not "named" that, a big difference.
_________________________
Assalamu alay kum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu (Peace, mercy and blessings be upon you)
Registered: 09/29/03
Posts: 442
Loc: west palm beach
Offline
Originally Posted By: Tman
There is no contradiction. You Christians (ifidels) do call him the son of God, although a new version of the Bible now changed this prediction to "son of hope". He was/is "called" that but he was not "named" that, a big difference.
Well, one day we will see who is right and who is wrong. Jesus said: he would be crucified and be resurrected, I don't know for a fact that such an event happen, but I accept it by faith based upon my close relationship and experiences that I have with him. He is real, that I know for a fact. He said he is comming back, I also accept that by faith too.
Registered: 01/04/01
Posts: 1257
Loc: London, England
Offline
"Jesus said: he would be crucified and be resurrected, I don't know for a fact that such an event happen, but I accept it by faith" Well we know it for a fact because the Qur'an says so and the Qur'an is Truth, Science, Maths, Law, Literature, etc, etc and without error.
_________________________
Assalamu alay kum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu (Peace, mercy and blessings be upon you)
Registered: 09/29/03
Posts: 442
Loc: west palm beach
Offline
Originally Posted By: Tman
"Jesus said: he would be crucified and be resurrected, I don't know for a fact that such an event happen, but I accept it by faith" Well we know it for a fact because the Qur'an says so and the Qur'an is Truth, Science, Maths, Law, Literature, etc, etc and without error.
Tman, the quran is full contamination. Here is the Deut. 18 passage again from the NRSV:
"The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you shall heed such a prophet. This is what you requested of the Lord your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said: "If I hear the voice of the Lord my God any more, or ever again see this great fire, I will die." Then the Lord replied to me: "They are right in what they have said. I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their own people; I will put my words in the mouth of the prophet, who shall speak to them everything that I command."
So, the first requirement is this future prophet is to speak the words that God puts in his mouth. Additional implicit requirements to make this prophet "like unto Moses" can be found in the last verses in Deuteronomy 34.10-12:
"And there has not arisen a prophet since in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face, none like him for all the signs and wonders which the Lord sent him to do in the land of Egypt, to Pharaoh and to all his servants and to all his land, and for all the mighty power and all the great and terrible deeds which Moses performed in the sight of all Israel."
The three requirements I find are:
1) this future prophet is to speak the words that God puts in his mouth.
2)this future prophet would speak with God face to face
3)this future prophet would perform miracles, signs, and wonders.
How do Jesus and Muhammad compare to these requirements?
#1 the future prophet is to speak the words that God puts in his mouth.
Jesus said that He spoke God's word; he heard directly from God. John 7:16, 17 - "My teaching is not mine but his who sent me. Anyone who resolves to do the will of God will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own."
John 8:28 - "So Jesus said, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will realize that I am he, and that I do nothing on my own, but I speak these things as the Father instructed me."
Muhammad heard the Quran from a spirit he believed to be Gabriel. Muhammad repeated the words that this spirit spoke.
The Quran, chapter 53:2-5 - "Your comrade does not err, nor is he deceived, nor does he speak of his own desire. It is an inspiration this is inspired, which one (Gabriel) of mighty powers has taught him."
Muhammad fails the requirement because he did not hear from God directly. In fact, the Bible contains warnings about angels teaching false messages:
2 Cor. 11:14 - "And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades an angel of light."
Gal. 1:8 - "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!"
#2 the future prophet would speak with God face to face
Jesus was with God prior to being revealed on earth. While he was on earth, he spoke with God face to face.
John 1:18 - "No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son who is close to the Father's heart, who has made him known."
John 17:5 - "So now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had in your presence before the world existed."
Matthew 17:5 - "While he was still speaking, suddenly a bright cloud overshadowed them, and from the cloud a voice said, "This is my Son, the Beloved; with him I am well pleased; listen to him!"
As stated before, Muhammad never spoke with God directly. The entire Quran was given to him through a medium - a spirit. Was the spirit from God? If not, then we can conclude that it was an evil spirit that was deceiving Muhammad.
Registered: 01/04/01
Posts: 1257
Loc: London, England
Offline
Where did the angel Gabriel get the words? From God. So Muhammad (PBUH) spoke the words he got from God. Thre are many more requirements to this prophecy which we went through a long time ago and showed Muhammad (PBUH) is more like Moses (PBUH)than Jesus (PBUH) so go back and review. Many facts are contained in the Qura'n which could only have come from a Divine source.
_________________________
Assalamu alay kum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu (Peace, mercy and blessings be upon you)
Registered: 01/04/01
Posts: 1257
Loc: London, England
Offline
Head tuff boy! Your teachers must have had a hard time with you in school. Half of the Qur'an is praising God, the other half is cussing the devil. Tell me how satan will benefit from this. One error , just one error in the Qur'an and I will convert to your religion.
_________________________
Assalamu alay kum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu (Peace, mercy and blessings be upon you)
Registered: 09/29/03
Posts: 442
Loc: west palm beach
Offline
Originally Posted By: Tman
Head tuff boy! Your teachers must have had a hard time with you in school. Half of the Qur'an is praising God, the other half is cussing the devil. Tell me how satan will benefit from this. One error , just one error in the Qur'an and I will convert to your religion.
(1) Muhammad = false prophet
(2) The spirit was not the Angel Gabriel = demon. (3) That makes the quran a demonic book and it's evident in Islam: We see force conversions, killing of non believers (infidels)of Islam the demonic religion, blow up buildings and kill in the name of Allah. Tman, this is the garbage that you are on this site defending and promoting, professing to be wise. And when these monsters of Islam commits thier wicked acts they cite the quran to give authencity to thier evil deeds. Tman are they reading a different quran than what you're reading? the answer is no, as you said in your own words "there is only one quran and it never changes because Allah protected it from corruption" Obviously you're all reading the same demonic book that advocates atrocities against mankind who does not believe thier lies. Tman you need to wake up from your sleep and slumber. Sometimes you appear to be a decent person, but sometimes I can hear satan speaking through you, especially when you're trying to be an apologetic for the quran which you know is a cesspool of contamination. You should be ashamed of yourself. I agree not all muslims resort to violence, but they are all decieved just like thier false prophet was. On June 1, 2009, the world population according to the US Census Bureau was 6,783,557,879. Are all these people Doctors? no they're not, same way not all muslims are violent, they're good people who just made a bad decission, but there is nothing too hard for God, he still: forgives, he still heals, and he still Delivers. Jesus Christ is still the same, yesterday today and forever. You have tried everything, why don't you try Jesus today?
For he is our God. We are the people he watches over, the flock under his care. If only you would listen to his voice today!
Christ calls upon his people to hear his voice. You call him Master, or Lord; then be his willing, obedient people. Hear the voice of his doctrine, of his law, and in both, of his Spirit: hear and heed; hear and yield. Christ's voice must be heard to-day. This day of opportunity will not last always; improve it while it is called to-day. Hearing the voice of Christ is the same with believing. Hardness of heart is at the bottom of all distrust of the Lord. The sins of others ought to be warnings to us not to tread in their steps. The murmurings of Israel were written for our admonition. God is not subject to such passions as we are; but he is very angry at sin and sinners. That certainly is evil, which deserves such a recompence; and his threatenings are as sure as his promises. Let us be aware of the evils of our hearts, which lead us to wander from the Lord. There is a rest ordained for believers, the rest of everlasting refreshment, begun in this life, and perfected in the life to come. This is the rest which God calls his rest.
Registered: 01/04/01
Posts: 1257
Loc: London, England
Offline
So all the killings and forced conversions attributed to Christians from the Inquisition, to the Crusades to Columbus to African "missionaries" makes Christianity a demonic religion too. Hitler was a Christian and how many millions did he kill? Any two people can read the same book and interepet it differently. You well know only a small minority of Muslims act in this way and you tar the entire Muslim population with this brush. The challenge still stands "Find one error in the Qur'an and I will adopt your religion." ”…do they not consider the Qur’an (with care), had it been from any other than ALLAH they would have found therein many a discrepancy.” Qura’n 4:82 My doctrine was not voted on by a committee presided over by a Roman emperor.
_________________________
Assalamu alay kum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu (Peace, mercy and blessings be upon you)
Registered: 09/29/03
Posts: 442
Loc: west palm beach
Offline
Originally Posted By: Tman
So all the killings and forced conversions attributed to Christians from the Inquisition, to the Crusades to Columbus to African "missionaries" makes Christianity a demonic religion too. Hitler was a Christian and how many millions did he kill? Any two people can read the same book and interepet it differently. You well know only a small minority of Muslims act in this way and you tar the entire Muslim population with this brush. The challenge still stands "Find one error in the Qur'an and I will adopt your religion." ”…do they not consider the Qur’an (with care), had it been from any other than ALLAH they would have found therein many a discrepancy.” Qura’n 4:82 My doctrine was not voted on by a committee presided over by a Roman emperor.
No Sir, that's not what I am saying. There will always be conflict in religion and politics that's why I stay away from both. I am not here endorsing any religious establishment or belief systems, as I said before I am not religious, I do not Identify with none of the major religions. God gave me an independent mine (free will)and no where in scripture he told me to seek religion are follow religion, he told me to seek him, follow him.
Only satan would call God a liar, and I can prove that to you:
Genesis 2 : 15 The Lord God placed the man in the Garden of Eden to tend and care for it. 16 But the Lord God gave him this warning: “You may freely eat any fruit in the garden 17 except fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If you eat of its fruit, you will surely die.”
Now watch satan comes and try to contradict what God said:
Genesis 3: 1 Now the serpent was the shrewdest of all the creatures the Lord God had made. “Really?” he asked the woman. “Did God really say you must not eat any of the fruit in the garden?” 2 “Of course we may eat it,” the woman told him. 3 “It’s only the fruit from the tree at the center of the garden that we are not allowed to eat. God says we must not eat it or even touch it, or we will die.” 4 “You won’t die!” the serpent hissed.
Did you get that Tman? now we see the same finger print in the quran.
Gabriel's words to Daniel foretell that the Messiah would be killed. According to Christians, Jesus' crucifixion fulfilled this event. Although open to debate as to the year of Jesus' crucifixion, evidence supports that Jesus was crucified in either the year 30, 32 or 33 CE. This event is recorded twice in verses Daniel 9:24 and Daniel 9:26.
Only the Islamic faith challenges that Jesus was not crucified or that Jesus never died. The problem for Islam is that Muhammad lived 600 years after the event of Jesus’ crucifixion. The Muslim view requires blind faith to accept since Jesus is said to have been removed from the cross by Allah. The Muslim view based on faith alone cannot be confirmed. It takes substantial faith to believe that Jesus did not die as compared to the fact that everyone dies.
Tman, Is the Islamic view of Jesus' crucifixion credible when compared to the discovery of ancient artifacts from the 1st century?
In the evidence and analysis presented below, you are presented with five (5) distinct physical items that confront the Islamic view of Jesus' crucifixion. To begin, we have archaeological evidence of four (4) people who looked into Jesus' eyes on the day of the crucifixion. Finally, we have a new discovery in 1995 made by a scholar with a PhD in Physics that links Josephus' writings to the gospel of Luke at the 99% confidence level. The physical evidence and mathematical correlation are presented below.
Archaeological evidence mathematically supports that Muhammad has less than 2 chances in a billion of being correct about Jesus not dying on the cross.
Supporting Evidence:
Can Jesus' crucifixion be documented? Archaeological evidence continues to be found that supports the crucifixion story foretold by Gabriel through Daniel and the New Testament documents that included eyewitness accounts. Consider the following evidence:
Archaeological Evidence: (People who Knew Jesus and the Crucifixion Event)
Item No. 1: In 1990, a Jewish burial box called an ossuary was found in Jerusalem. Construction workers using a bull dozer found the ancient burial cave from the 1st century. Inside the cave were 12 ossuaries. Two of the ossuaries had the name "Caiaphas" which supports that the Caiaphas family buried family members at this site. The most ornate ossuary had the words, "Joseph son of Caiaphas" carved on it two times, implicating the importance of the person buried in the ossuary.
In the New Testament, Jesus stood before Caiaphas to be condemned to death. However, the New Testament does not give Caiaphas’ first name.
However, a very important reference to Caiaphas is found in the writings of Josephus. Josephus reveals that Caiaphas used the name Joseph as found on the burial box. "Joseph, who was also called Caiaphas, of the high priesthood" [Antiquities book 18, chapter 4, paragraph 3: The ossuary of "Joseph son of Caiaphas" is even more credible due to the writings of Josephus. Both the physical evidence and the written evidence support that Jesus died on the cross as presented in the gospel accounts.
In the New Testament, Caiaphas is spoken of in the books of Matthew, Luke, John, and Acts. Joseph Caiaphas served as the high priest in the years 18 to 36 CE, which matches New Testament dating for the crucifixion.
Item No. 2: Just as important, the New Testament refers to Pontius Pilate, Roman governor of Judea, who ordered Jesus to be crucified. In 1961, archaeologists found a dedication plaque at the Roman amphitheater in Caesarea, which uses the name of Pontius Pilate, the governor of Judea, in honor of the emperor Tiberius Caesar. Up to 1961, no physical evidence supported the existence of Pontius Pilate, the New Testament character that gave orders for Jesus to be the crucified.
Item No. 3: Another archaeological find is the discovery of an ossuary referring to "Alexander, son of Simon of Cyrene. In the Gospel of Mark, we read that the Roman soldiers compelled a passer-by, Simon of Cyrene, the father of Alexander, to carry Jesus’ cross (Mark 15:21).
Supporting Evidence from "The London Sunday Times, BBC"
Probability calculations support that this could in fact be the ossuary of Alexander, whose father carried Jesus' cross. "There are 250 Simons. So if it just said Simon of Cyrene, I would probably say there was a surge of immigrants called Simon from Cyrene, in North Africa, to Jerusalem. But because we have the name Alexander and that is not such a popular name with Jews only 20 in the directory and the biblical Simon of Cyrene is said to have sons Alexander and Rufus, then the chance that this is the ossuary of the son of Simon of Cyrene who carried Jesus' cross is very likely." [The London Sunday Times, BBC, March 31, 1996]
Archaeological Evidence: (Crucifixion Verified to be Accurate)
Item No. 4: You can visit the Israeli Museum in Jerusalem and see three items related directly to Jesus' crucifixion. The Caiaphas ossuary, the plaque with the name Pontius Pilate, and an ankle bone with a nail driven through as an example of crucifixion. The ankle bone dated to the 1st century was discovered in 1968 in Jerusalem.
Registered: 01/04/01
Posts: 1257
Loc: London, England
Offline
None of the above "evidence" proves that Jesus (PBUH) was crucified on the cross. Just that some names from the NT were discovered and some 1st century artefacts. Big deal. None of the so-called New Testament writers witnessed the event, not even the disciples, who all ran away, so you are accepting it on blind faith. The earliest account was written 60 years after the event by people we don't even know as they are listed as "according to Matthew etc". Islam accepts the account in the Qur'an because everything else in it is the Truth and it contains no errors. And I still challenge you to find one error in it and I will accept your "religion".
_________________________
Assalamu alay kum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu (Peace, mercy and blessings be upon you)
Registered: 09/29/03
Posts: 442
Loc: west palm beach
Offline
Originally Posted By: Tman
None of the above "evidence" proves that Jesus (PBUH) was crucified on the cross. Just that some names from the NT were discovered and some 1st century artefacts. Big deal. None of the so-called New Testament writers witnessed the event, not even the disciples, who all ran away, so you are accepting it on blind faith. The earliest account was written 60 years after the event by people we don't even know as they are listed as "according to Matthew etc". Islam accepts the account in the Qur'an because everything else in it is the Truth and it contains no errors. And I still challenge you to find one error in it and I will accept your "religion".
First of all, I don't have a religion, second, you need to accept Jesus Christ as Lord and savior, not religion.
And whether you believe it or not, the only way to heaven is the way of the cross, so you can keep an fooling yourself, but you aint fooling nobody on this site.
At Mohammed's birth, Mohammed's grandfather, who was the KEEPER OF THE KAABA, did this in front of HUBAL: "After his [Mohammed's] birth his mother sent to tell his grandfather Abd al-Muttalib that she gave birth to a boy...It is alleged that Abd al-Muttalib took him before (the idol) HUBAL IN THE MIDDLE OF THE KAABA,where he stood and PRAYED TO ALLAH, thanking him for his gift" (Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad, pp.66-68; see also F.E. Peters, A Reader of Classical Islam, p.45, emphasis mine). This confirms Watt's statement that: " "There are stories in the sira of pagan Meccans praying to Allah while standing besides the IMAGE OF HUBAL" (Watt, Mohammed's Mecca, p.39, emphasis mine)
It is interesting to note that Mohammed's father was called "Abdullah," meaning "the servant of Allah." Now if Mohammed's grandfather was worshipper of Hubal, and named his son and Hubal, Allah, then Hubal is Allah!
In this story about Mohammed's birth GJO Moshay writes: "In this revealing incident in the life of Mohammed's grandfather. Who was 'the Lord'? Was it Allah? What about Hubal?...From Ibn Ishaq's account here, praying to Allah was the SAME THING AS PRAYING TO HUBAL. They could practically mean the SAME THING. As HA-BAAL or HU-BAAL means 'the Lord' so Al-ilah' or 'Allah' means 'the god'''(Who is this Allah, p.136, emphasis mine). Hubal is ALLAH!
Here is another example: "For two years Muhammad remained in his [grandfather's] house overlooking the KAABA, while the old man TAUGHT HIM THE CEREMONIES ATTACHED TO THE WORSHIP OF THE MOON GOD, [Hubal] AND TOLD HIM THE LEGENDS OF THE PLACE: (Robert Payne, The History of Islam, p.11, emphasis mine).
"Muhammad was raised in the religion of the moon god, Allah" (Morey, The Moon god Allah, p.11, emphasis mine). THIS IS MUHAMMAD'S BACKGROUND
Here is an example of one of the legends that was taught to Muhammad by his grandfather.In the Koran we read about the Christian King of Abyssina who wanted to take over the Kaaba, and make it Christian. Look at what Muhammad says in the Koran: "Have you not considered how God [Allah] dealt with the army of the elephant? Did he not confound their stratagem and send against them flocks of birds which pelted them with clay stones..." (Surah 105). This happened in the year of his birth, and it was still fresh in the minds of the Meccans. Also his grandfather at the time witnessed it first hand, and taught Muhammad this story as a boy.
Look at what Robert Payne says in his book about this incident, for proof of who Allah really is, and what Muhammad learned from his grandfather: "Abd al-Muttalib offered a last prayer to the MOON GOD [Hubal] to preserve the Kaaba...The Meccans expected the Abyssinians to Advance but HUBAL HEARD THEIR PRAYERS, overnight, and epidemic perhaps an aggravated form of small pox swept through the army...No one could doubt the power of the MOON GOD [Hubal] who kept the army of the elephants at bay" (The history of Islam, p.7, emphasis mine). Now he told Muhammad that Allah, i.e Hubal was the one that saved them. This incident was still fresh in the minds of the Meccans at the time of Muhammad. Why is it in the Koran, you don't hear the Meccans rebuking Muhammad saying that Hubal saved them and not Allah if these two deities were different. Instead there is silence from the Meccans about Hubal because they already knew who ALLAH WAS, HUBAL, THE ALLAH OF THE MECCANS, AND Muhammad UNDERSTOOD IT THE SAME WAY, THAT'S WHY THERE IS NO DISPUTE.
Registered: 01/04/01
Posts: 1257
Loc: London, England
Offline
In all your research you cant find one place where it says Muhammad (PBUH) worshiped at the Khabbah before he cleansed it of all the idols. Even your Orientalis friends and Westerners cant claim this. My faith was not decided by the vote of a committee supervised by a Roman emperor like yours.
_________________________
Assalamu alay kum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu (Peace, mercy and blessings be upon you)
