Don't keep trying to run away and claim victory, and stop wriggling about with the 'rules'. It doesn't help your argument in any way. I have said that historians claim the kaaba was not around in Abrahams time, so any traditions associated with it cannot stem from him. The fact that no other abahimic faiths share similar traditions supports this, plus he's unlikely to have ever been anywhere near the area..They can stem from similar pagan traditions that existed in that area. Occam's razor suggests it's pagan. You need to prove it's older, and Abraham knew of it I don't accept your claim that the quoted words mean something different than what they say, but given the previous paragraph, it's academic anyway, plus there are other references to the pagan nature of the ceremonies, even from your book, such as mohamed removing the other 360 idols it contained. You need to prove the abrahimic roots of the tradition, or disprove the pagan claim. Don't just try to grasp at one part, I'm taking the time to offer a package of evidence. You need to argue each piece, and back each part up with something more than your opinion, and not just quibble over your interpretation of the words in two quotes.
That reads more like a cry for help. It'll just end up a confused tag match, but if you need a hand, go for it. You're the one determined to 'win', I'll have a chat with anyone.
Sorry but you are starting to rant and throw accusations I am not going anywhere just yet albeit I will go to sleep at some point. That isn't running away is it? I am trying to argue each piece. I said as much FYI hajj is in Jewish and Christian scripture but that can wait until we have moved on
It's not in any way a rant. My points and claims are crystal clear, I've even given you some pointers to help you reply, because I'm kind like that. So, your response?
I'm not trying to change anything. You agreed to a conversation on the topic. Feel free to join in when your ready.
I've seen it. I take it your actual response to the points raised and supporting evidence will follow?
A conversation with boundaries to prevent what you are intent on doing, with refs. I sent you the memo Now can we get back to the discussion and the hadith you quoted
I am waiting patiently to finish the conversation we started. To refresh your memory the hajj in Islam is not pagan and those hadith do not support your claim
I have responded, along with several other supported points. I'm waiting patiently for you to engage with the conversation, and support any claims with evidence, not just opinion.
I have said that historians claim the kaaba was not around in Abrahams time, so any traditions associated with it cannot stem from him. The fact that no other abahimic faiths share similar traditions supports this, plus he's unlikely to have ever been anywhere near the area..They can stem from similar pagan traditions that existed in that area. Occam's razor suggests it's pagan. You need to prove it's older, and Abraham knew of it I don't accept your claim that the quoted words mean something different than what they say, but given the previous paragraph, it's academic anyway, plus there are other references to the pagan nature of the ceremonies, even from your book, such as mohamed removing the other 360 idols it contained. You need to prove the abrahimic roots of the tradition, or disprove the pagan claim. Don't just try to grasp at one part, I'm taking the time to offer a package of evidence. You need to argue each piece, and back each part up with something more than your opinion, and not just quibble over your interpretation of the words in two quotes.
You have shifted your position away from the initial claim, from islam , hajj and paganism to Abraham, Greek, Gilgamesh, with no evidence as it happens
It's still part of the same claim. If the kaaba didn't exist in Abraham's time, or if he never went near it, your argument falls apart anyway. The epic of gilgamesh is proof, all you need do is google it, likewise the other elements that are egyptian. As I said, its a whole argument I've put forward, quibbling over the interpretation of one part doesn't change it. I've already said I don't accept your version of what the words mean, and you've offered no evidence to support your version, BUT, it doesn't matter, because if you can't disprove the historians claims, it cannot be abrahimic.
I only "need" to do what we agreed. Point by point no jumping around. Your quotes prove the safa and marwah circumbalation to God, its in the rest of the quote itself. Muhammad removing the idols and the pagans only restored it not bring anything new There are historians who support Kaaba to Abraham but lrtd not digress, as I am at pains yo point out one step at a time
Its never been my argument, its your claim we were discussing and you are reluctant to continue. Its also your "evidence" and "proof" as you posted the hadith not me. Safa and marwah links to God in YOUR evidence Furthermore my discussion is with you not Google. If your answer or position is that I have yo Google your claims rather than you present them then you may as well google the responses to your claims instead of wasting my time So back to the discussion or shall I just go to sleep?
It's not jumping around at all, it's directly related to my initial claim. You have offered nothing to support the one part you've clung to, and offered nothing to disprove what I claim as a whole position. It's only wiki, but... "Prior to the spread of Islam throughout the Arabian Peninsula, the Kaaba was a holy site for the various Bedouin tribes of the area. Once every lunar year, the Bedouin tribes would make a pilgrimage to Mecca. Setting aside any tribal feuds, they would worship their pagan gods in the Kaaba and trade with each other in the city. Islam would later adopt the established traditions of the Bedouin tribes, such as encouragement of trade during the Hajj, but replacing the worship of their pagan gods with Allah.[49]" God can't have thought much of the kaaba, as it's had its share of floods and rebuilds.
You'd probably be better going to sleep, as that's just a ramble, and still has no supporting evidence. You seem to have given up the conversation, in favour of a very poor impression of David Dimbleby.
