Say goodbye to Mecca (Ka'ba)......ISIS threat

originally posted by: FlyersFan
Absolutely.

That's why I said ... it's okay to have a faith or belief in something that hasn't been proven to be true. That's why it's called faith. Maybe it is true and maybe not, but you choose to think it probably is true. But having faith in something that has been proven false? That makes no sense.

I know, that's why I don't understand how Christians can put their faith into something that has been proven false also. The thing is Christians regardless of whether the New Testament has been proven false or not will still put their faith into it, why is it such a big thing with Muslims when Christians are doing the exact same thing?

It's because it doesn't matter whether it is historical fact or not, the teachings are a very good way for people to apply themselves in this life if they are followed correctly.

a reply to: FlyersFan

You make some good points Flyer - you are quite right about ISIS and their view, but it seems some here aren't quite understanding what you're saying, despite it being quite clear.

I'll try to help and dumb it down for those having difficulty...

ISIS takes a hard line view on everything, hence the destruction of shrines - they view it as worshipping the dead which is "not permitted in Islam" according to them. They also do not like what they perceive to be idolatry - by a logical extension, they view the rituals surrounding the Ka'ba as idolatry ergo, they wish it to be destroyed.

Simples, really.

You are, of course, quite right about the pagan connection and history. All of the Abrahamic religions has done this in the past - taken pagan (or pre-monotheist) beliefs and rituals then reshaped them into the new religion so as to make the new religion more palatable to the masses they are selling it to. The Jews did it while in Egypt (where they likely picked up the belief in One God), the Roman's did it with Christianity and Mohammed did it with Islam.

originally posted by: DarknStormy
It's because it doesn't matter whether it is historical fact or not, the teachings are a very good way for people to apply themselves in this life if they are followed correctly.

For normal folk, perhaps, although I subscribe to the belief that you can be a perfectly good human being with no religion whatsoever, but when you have fundamentalists (of whatever flavour) taking it literally as "the word of God" - despite huge evidence to the contrary - that's when you have problems.

originally posted by: DarknStormy
It's because it doesn't matter whether it is historical fact or not, the teachings are a very good way for people to apply themselves in this life if they are followed correctly.

- It matters if they are true or not, especially when people go out killing others and controlling other peoples lives based on the stories.

- If they are just nice stories with a morale lesson, then they are no different then children's bedtime stories with the morale lessons. So people should say that's what they are instead of screaming 'this is truth from God', when it clearly isn't.

- If you have to lie to people about religious beliefs, then that religion is built on sand instead of rock. It's easily washed away. Truth always is the best foundation.

IMHO. Anyways, this is getting off topic. It's ISIS and their desire to 'fix' Islam.
I think I've said all that I have to say on that topic. Unless I"m dragged back in
to this thread, I have no more to say. /OUT

originally posted by: stumason

For normal folk, perhaps, although I subscribe to the belief that you can be a perfectly good human being with no religion whatsoever, but when you have fundamentalists (of whatever flavour) taking it literally as "the word of God" - despite huge evidence to the contrary - that's when you have problems.

I never read the Bible and Qu'ran up until roughly a decade ago. When I started learning about what is taught in them I understood that most of the things I done in my life was taught in those Books anyway. You can be a good person without religion.

When it comes to fundamentalists etc, I agree with you 100%. They are a dark part of religion and ruin it for everyone else.

originally posted by: McGinty

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: McGinty
But wasn't Jesus himself not that fond of churches?

Just the opposite.

Scripture states that Jesus was 'in the habit' of going to the synagogue .

"And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read." (Luke 4:16)

Mark 1:21 says, "And they went into Capernaum; and straightway on the sabbath day he entered into the synagogue, and taught.

And Jesus established His own church on Earth - Matthew 16:18-19 (Jesus speaking) - And I tell you that you are Peter,[a] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[c] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[d] loosed in heaven.

Well it's been a couple of years since i read the new testament end to end, but i certainly recall Jesus making it clear that the 'church' is an idea, rather than a venue. That he was the church...

That last passage you quoted about Peter being the rock the church is built upon is clearly (at least to my mind) not talking about venues of worship or even an institution. It talking about an idea - that Peter will have followers and those followers will have followers and in this way his teachings will propagate.

Sure, church buildings don't in themselves hinder this, but could aid it and it's hard to imagine such a large flock growing without eventually building places to gather and meet. But it's no secret that these places, as symbols of God, can be utilised and built by people with less pious intentions. Here's something i just found via google which sums this this up pretty well:

...the "Church" and the "church system" are two different things entirely.

The Church: The Ecclesia, the Elect, the Bride of Christ, the true believers, the assembly of those believers, the 80 times in 79 verses that word is used in the King James version of the New Testament.

The church system: The organization of man meeting in defined buildings erroneously called "church". A system based on political motivations to prey on the peoples' wealth and control their minds for the selfish purposes of those who are in control and at the top of the system.

Deeptruths.com

This first line of that piece is what's pertinent to this thread - that there's 2 ways of reading ISIS actions/intentions:

Are they out to destroy the 'Church' (the followers of Christ and Mohammed), or are they out to destroy the 'Church system', in which case they may be defining the church system as defined above,

The organization of man meeting in defined buildings erroneously called "church"

It's not about our personal opinions on the meaning of scriptures, since you know what they say about opinions. It's about analysing ISIS possible opinions about scripture in order to understand them and understand potential malice and threat - only then can we avoid it.

Those here that ring the bell for a new 'anti-christ' on the march, sell themselves short. If i'm correct then ISIS are pro-Christ in eliminating what they may see as a corrupted church system that needs decapitating - first Mecca, next perhaps the Vatican.

Maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong, but all that really matters is preventing innocents getting hurt.

Demus derailed my reply, but has been thoroughly debunked, for which i'm grateful. So may i pose the above statements once again for more thoughtful replies?

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: DarknStormy
The argument can be made for both religions.

Absolutely.

That's why I said ... it's okay to have a faith or belief in something that hasn't been proven to be true. That's why it's called faith. Maybe it is true and maybe not, but you choose to think it probably is true. But having faith in something that has been proven false? That makes no sense.

Kaaba was according to Muslim belief built by first Man, and than by Abraham, original teaching was one God but the people strayed away so the Prophets were sent to correct and remind.

we are always thought to think belief in one God came after the polytheism; what if that is not the case?



ISIS want to destroy Kaaba?, makes sense since they are being founded from sources that having nothing to do with Islam.

originally posted by: demus
we are always thought to think belief in one God came after the polytheism; what if that is not the case?

That isn't the prevailing belief, actually and it rather depends on how you define monotheism as to how you date it's evolution. You had "Supreme" gods popping up in polytheistic societies, who ruled over all, as well as what we would recognise as monotheism evolving as you describe it. It rather depend son the culture you are looking at.

One theory held is that monotheism in the near east (specifically Judaism) arose from influences the ancient Hebrews had while in captivity in Egypt and Babylon, the former actually having "One God" at a time before reverting back to their original pantheon, the latter having a "Supreme" Deity.

-nice post stumason-

anyway, here it is; a place of worship ISIS threatened to destroy.

More about Kaaba and it's significance.
Nobody is worshiping Kaaba but it is of huge religious importance as it is considered by Muslims to be the first house of prayer to One God.

Anyone trying to destroy the Kaaba or holy places of another religions is clearly on the wrong side.

It is the most sacred point within this most sacred mosque, making it the most sacred location in Islam.[

The Hajj pilgrimage is one of the Pillars of Islam, required of all able-bodied Muslims who can afford the trip. In recent times, about 6 million Muslims perform the Hajj every year.

Some of the rituals performed by pilgrims are symbolic of historical incidents. For example, the episode of Hagar's search for water is emulated by Muslims as they run between the two hills of Safa and Marwah whenever they visit Mecca. The Hajj is associated with the life of the Islamic prophet Muhammad from the 7th century, but the ritual of pilgrimage to Mecca is considered by Muslims to stretch back thousands of years to the time of Sayyidna Ibrahim (Abraham).

Every Muslim must go to mecca on pilgrimage Hadj. Saudi will never let them do anything of the sort. That stone will stand. The security around that thing is extreme.

originally posted by: mahatche

People didn't worship the tombs and mosques that have been destroyed either. If we are hearing the truth, I don't think it matters to ISIS. They are the type that kills over cartoons. They have their mind made up that your god wants them to do it.

Sorry, I didn't see this post earlier. What you quoted is more directed at the people here who think Muslims worship the Black Stone, it's simply not true. I know ISIS will do anything, they are not Muslims and even if I was a Muslim, I would disagree that they are worshipping the same God that I was.

Wow, this site has now truly amazed me. Do you all not think we have no Idea what "ISIS" is doing??

Who is "ISIS" being ran by??

Just the fact that were using "ISIS" to name them should be a Red Flag.

I thought Osama Bin Laden was dead. Now Iran is our alley against "ISIS"??

Russia has sent there Fighters before we were able to??

You all can argue Muslim facts all you want, but there is something much Bigger happening here.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

It seems obvious to me that the leadership of ISIL aka ISIS is to do whatever it can to cause an implosion of disorganization amongst the Muslim world. Mecca's destruction would be one of the swiftest methods of doing that. It seems like part of the big picture for these radicals.

originally posted by: hoochymama23
Wow, this site has now truly amazed me. Do you all not think we have no Idea what "ISIS" is doing??

Who is "ISIS" being ran by??

Just the fact that were using "ISIS" to name them should be a Red Flag.

I thought Osama Bin Laden was dead. Now Iran is our alley against "ISIS"??

Russia has sent there Fighters before we were able to??

You all can argue Muslim facts all you want, but there is something much Bigger happening here.

So enlighten us....

My two cents is that ISIS is probs secretly backed up by a western entity.... go figure!

a reply to: MX61000
Is that not the site of an ancient Hindu shrine? and the lingam, or omphalos ? I read that Muhammad's father actually worked in some relation to it's construction or maintenance, but again in the context of the shrine being there as a Hindu symbol of sorts standing there long before Islam makes you wonder what is really sacred and pure as a symbol of a religion if it existed in tribute to a completely different God or Gods?

originally posted by: phinubian
a reply to: MX61000
Is that not the site of an ancient Hindu shrine? and the lingam, or omphalos ? I read that Muhammad's father actually worked in some relation to it's construction or maintenance, but again in the context of the shrine being there as a Hindu symbol of sorts standing there long before Islam makes you wonder what is really sacred and pure as a symbol of a religion if it existed in tribute to a completely different God or Gods?

excellent, you got it.
the shrine has been there long long time - the Muslim believe it was built by first man and rebuilt throughout history by Abraham (Ibrahim) and later other Prophets.

it is not "completely different God" - it is a house of worship of One God.

Allah means God in Arabic, even Christians and other religious who speak Arabic as their mother tongue call their God - Allah.

from time to time it was filled with idols and used as a shrine by polytheists but that doesn't change it's original function - place of worship of One God.

I honestly just can't care anymore. I wish all of the middle east would just burn to the freakin ground. Really. I hope ISIS are successful, and there is a massive calling of Muslims around the world to return and fight on either side and they all end up massacring each other.

I wish the children had a way of being spared and could then grow up deciding for themselves what to believe, or maybe founding a new religion on just being a decent person, doing the right thing and not murdering others over a damn book.

a reply to: 8675309jenny

Often I agree with that sentiment

Then I wonder, "is it all designed to make me feel that way from inception"

a reply to: DarknStormy

The thing is that there is a fine line between reverence and outright worship, and only the individual truly knows where it lies and if they've crossed it.

For many people, they need a physical symbol of what they worship, and often they can cross the line by ascribing all their faith and devotion to that symbol rather than to the concept it represents.

Look at all the people who are atheists who demand over and over again for God to show them that He exists, to provide physical proof. On the side of people of faith, those people look to places, things like the Rock or a tomb to provide that proof, and they can end up assigning their reverence and faith to it instead of God.

Fanatics or zealots like these ISIS twits are attempting to force people who may have strayed into worshipping a physical symbol into what they consider the truer path, but it doesn't work. If you don't actually have faith, then you can't compel it.