Kaba

Oxy2Hydr0 said:

Now I am off to bed

Click to expand...

Goodnight.

Oxy2Hydr0 said:

Ask any muslim who is a Hajji, when passing through Bakkah the pilgrims are weaping while saying Labaik Allahumma Labaik. One cannot help but to weap when ariving at the blessed bakkah.

Click to expand...

I must confessed I did cry when I first step into Masjidil Haram and facing the Ka'aba. How I prayed that God forgave me for the sins I have done in the past.

labbaikallaahumma labbaika labbaika laa shareeka laka labbaika-innal hamda wan na'mata laka wal mulka-la shareeka lak

kjf512 said:

And mecca is hundreds of miles away from Jerusalem too!

I am accepting your word as Weeping. And I am accepted that my original interperetation was totally wrong.

After speaking to the Rebbe and reading commentary, I have come to realize that the people are MOURNING AND ARE WEEPING the destruction of the Temple. and that is why the word baca is being used here. Just because it sounds similar to the arabic word "bakkah" does not mean that it is referring to that.

They were weeping because of the destruction of the temple.

and btw, I also showed you that near the golan heights in Israel there is a place called VALLEY OF TEARS and called like evern backha or something. so even if it wasn't speaking of mourning of the destruction of the temple (which it is) but even if it was not, it would be referring to that.

Click to expand...

kjf512m, this is just an addendum to what you just said; so, it is not entirely addressed to you. I think that you will know which parts pertain to you.

The context of the passage points to a longing for worship, which was performed in the Temple. This chapter is specifically speaking of the Temple in Jerusalem. It is not speaking about some far-away place called Mecca. Anyone who would actually entertain the thought that this was referring to Mecca has some serious issues. This is not meant to be funny, BTW. This is a serious indictment upon you who believe that this is concerning Mohammad and Mecca.

As I keep saying over and over, context is the key to understanding any passage and the meaning of word is determined by its usage in the text. Whatever you may think that Baca may mean, it doesn't have any connection to Arabia. The geography decsribed in the passage absolutely rules this out. Worshisping in a Jewish temple in Zion (Jerusalem) is not the same as worshipping by Muslims in the Kaaba.

Please, Muslims, stop your desparation to legitimize your religion through the Bible. If you can't live by your own text as Christians do, then don't crash our party with your oftentimes outright nonesense! Leave us in peace for once! Go study your Qur'ran and let us be.

peaceful soul said:

The context of the passage points to a longing for worship, which was performed in the Temple. This chapter is specifically speaking of the Temple in Jerusalem.

Click to expand...

How is your speech any different from kjf? Let me repeat again: The Temple has not been built at the time of King David. It would be illogical to even assume crying for a destroyed Temple when the Temple was not there in the first place.

peaceful soul said:

Whatever you may think that Baca may mean, it doesn't have any connection to Arabia. The geography decsribed in the passage absolutely rules this out. Worshisping in a Jewish temple in Zion (Jerusalem) is not the same as worshipping by Muslims in the Kaaba.

Click to expand...

And the geography of that Valley of Baca is at the Golan Heights or the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon is most appropriate passage of a jewish pilgrimage?

While I appreciate kjf's efforts in reconciling the Valley of Baca with his Temple of Jerusalem, and he did make an effort, I have not seen any constructive contributions from you other than the same 'teacher-to-student' type of advice and steering away from discussing the details.

Islam_mulia said:

How is your speech any different from kjf? Let me repeat again: The Temple has not been built at the time of King David. It would be illogical to even assume crying for a destroyed Temple when the Temple was not there in the first place.


And the geography of that Valley of Baca is at the Golan Heights or the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon is most appropriate passage of a jewish pilgrimage?

While I appreciate kjf's efforts in reconciling the Valley of Baca with his Temple of Jerusalem, and he did make an effort, I have not seen any constructive contributions from you other than the same 'teacher-to-student' type of advice and steering away from discussing the details.

Click to expand...

I made a mistake by declaring the sanctuary to be the Temple. I would agree that the temple was not built at the time of David. The revelant point is that this sanctuary of God is in reference to a place in Zion as the final resting place; so, this excludes Mecca.

Let's get one thing straight: the focus is on the house of the Lord. If you claim that this is about David, then you would certainly not entertain a possibility that this is A) about Mohammad or Islam and B) not about David and the Jews. Either way you slice the cake, it does not resemble Islam; so, just end it there. Anything else is just your wishful thinking.

I should repeat again: the subjects of the Bible are increasingly focused on Israel as we go from Genesis to Malachi. The main discourse is about Israel and ultimately the Jews. God mentions an overwhelming number of times that it is Judah the he seeks; so, what makes you think that there is any prophecy or reference to Arabia that would contradict what God has declared? If you remove the context of a passage, then you can make it to be anything you desire. That is precisely what you and the rest of your Muslim cohorts are doing.

I will study more on this passage to see if I can explain it more precisely.

BTW: Geography does not indicate a place other than Zion--Jerusalem as its fixture.

Thank you peaceful soul for your great answer!

To islam mulia - Here is my answer summoned up.

The psalm could be talking about one
of two things here.

1. It could be talking about a literal place. If this is the case, then it is probably referring to the "Valley of Tears" (also known as "Vale of Tears" which is near Golan Heights in palestine but occupied by Israel. This place is even known as habakah.

2. It could be symboloic, like many Rabbi's have thought, and it could mean that the people were just weeping because of the destruction of their temple, as habakah means "weeping."


Dimitri is smart. But sorry to say it, but I just don't see how one could think that Psalm 84 is speaking of mecca here. It makes no sense!! Someone has to take things wayy out of context and twist around our Scripture to(attempt) to prove their point.

Eh, I got to stop these long nighters in debates

peaceful soul said:

BTW: Geography does not indicate a place other than Zion--Jerusalem as its fixture.

Click to expand...

The word Jerusalem is no where in that passage. I would agree with you that the word Zion is synanomous with Jerusalem but it does not alway refered to Jerusalem in the Bible:

The first biblical mention of 'Zion' is Deut. 4.48 and is another name for Mount Hermon in Lebanon. This 'Zion' derives from 'Sirion,' a name given to the mountain by the Sidonians. This Zion is referred to again in Psalm 133.3 when the poet compares brotherly love to 'the dew of Hermon coming down on the mountains of Zion.'

http://www.angelfire.com/az3/newzone/zion1.html

Click to expand...

The actual meaning of Zion is parched place or desert. It was a name originally given to a place of dry, desert, or parched place.

What puts this whole thing in question is "The Valley of Baca". There is no such Valley in or around Jerusalem called by this name. There is not one ounce of evidence that there was or is a Valley Called Baca in or around Jerusalem where pilgrims pass through.

Such a place of pilgrimage memorial amongs Jews would have been noted and mapped and have been commemorated to this day.

When this issue is presented to Christians, there are only speculation, assumption, and conjecture of where this place is located at.

The only place on Earth to this day that is geographiocally known and called "The Valley of Baca" is modern day Makkah formerly called Bakkah the same exact word as the Hebrew Baca. Therefore the interpretation of Zion is literally is speaking of a desert.

In order to refute such a claim you must provide proof of where "The Valley of Baca" is located in or near Jerusalem.

Once you have established the proof, we can then go on with identifying this place with rest of the Psalmic passage.

Oxy2Hydr0 said:

Eh, I got to stop these long nighters in debates



The word Jerusalem is no where in that passage. I would agree with you that the word Zion is synanomous with Jerusalem but it does not alway refered to Jerusalem in the Bible:



The actual meaning of Zion is parched place or desert. It was a name originally given to a place of dry, desert, or parched place.

What puts this whole thing in question is "The Valley of Baca". There is no such Valley in or around Jerusalem called by this name. There is not one ounce of evidence that there was or is a Valley Called Baca in or around Jerusalem where pilgrims pass through.

Such a place of pilgrimage memorial amongs Jews would have been noted and mapped and have been commemorated to this day.

When this issue is presented to Christians, there are only speculation, assumption, and conjecture of where this place is located at.

The only place on Earth to this day that is geographiocally known and called "The Valley of Baca" is modern day Makkah formerly called Bakkah the same exact word as the Hebrew Baca. Therefore the interpretation of Zion is literally is speaking of a desert.

In order to refute such a claim you must provide proof of where "The Valley of Baca" is located in or near Jerusalem.

Once you have established the proof, we can then go on with identifying this place with rest of the Psalmic passage.

Click to expand...

Before I even attempt to respond, I must ask you if the sanctuary of the Jews or Israel resided in Mecca? Where do you think the context of that passage comes from? Arabia? David was king of (where) ___________? Jerusalem was also called the city of (whom) ____________? Zion = (what) _____? Mount Zion is located (where) in ___________?

1 Kings 8:27 "But will God really dwell on earth? The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you. How much less this temple I have built!

peaceful soul said:

Before I even attempt to respond, I must ask you if the sanctuary of the Jews or Israel resided in Mecca? Where do you think the context of that passage comes from? Arabia? David was king of (where) ___________? Jerusalem was also called the city of (whom) ____________? Zion = (what) _____? Mount Zion is located (where) in ___________?

Click to expand...

Great response!

anatolian said:

1 Kings 8:27 "But will God really dwell on earth? The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you. How much less this temple I have built!

Click to expand...

What is the significance of this?

Oxy2hydro - I agree that you should stop getting in these long debates.. So should I lol. Deabting does not seem to solve anything, as people disagree with this or that interperetation(as we can see here.) And if they disagree - Well, as much as we could debate, it won't really solve anything. I think instead of debating, we should just bring forth critical questions and see how Christians/muslims/Jews/etc view it.

Anyways, now I already showed you how the meaning could be very metephorical. Hence, the word that means weeping simply means that they are crying for the destruction. I think we all know that the OT is very metephorical.

I also showed you that there is a place near the Golan Heights that is known as "the Valley of Tears."

Baca (bā'kə) , in the Bible, allegorical name of a valley. The English expression “vale (or valley) of tears” may be a translation of this, through the Vulgate.
http://www.answers.com/topic/bakkah

So in Israel there is a place called the "Valley/Vale of Tears." And according to this, Baca means that. So what more is there to explain?

And also, verse 3 says.
3 Even the sparrow has found a home,
and the swallow a nest for herself,
where she may have her young—
a place near your altar,
O LORD Almighty, my King and my God.

Might I ask - Is there an alter at the kabaa?

The word Baca is a very general word. Keep that in mind lol.

And also.. Ok, this says that they PASS THROUGH the VALLEY of Baca. It does not say they make pilgrimage there. It says they pass through.

Also, you know Hebrew, am I correct? So go to Psalm 84:5 and tell me if the word being used for "pilgrimage" really means "pilgrimage" or if it usually means higway or road.

And where is Zion?
Psalms 87:2-3, "The LORD loves the gates of Zion more than all the dwellings of Jacob. Glorious things are said of you, O city of God.

Of the 168 times Zion is used in the Bible, it always speaks of Jerusalem. Not a single time is the word used to mean some type of Desert, or something outside of Jerusalem.

The word for Zion being used here is this -
H6726
ציּון
tsîyôn
tsee-yone'
The same (regular) as H6725; Tsijon (as a permanent capital), a mountain of Jerusalem: - Zion.



H6724
ציון
tsîyôn
tsee-yone'
From the same as H6723; a desert: - dry place.


ציון


ציּה
ציּון

If you honestly think that this is referring to Mecca..

1. The the people onl TRAVEL through Mecca, as the word that is some times used as pilgrims usually means higway or road, as can be seen in most Bible translations.

מסלּה
mesillâh
mes-il-law'
From H5549; a thoroughfare (as turnpiked), literally or figuratively; specifically a viaduct, a staircase: - causeway, roadyway, highway, path, terrace.


2. You would be changing the entire meaning of the Biblical word Zion, all to simply ry and prove your point. Although Zion CAN mean desert and all, the word used here seems to refer to the City of David. If it was simply speaking of a desert, then why didn't
they use ציון instead of ציּון
??

3. If we accept your interperetation, then this is what is basically means -
A. They go PASS THROUGH the "Valley of Baca" to get to the Temple. We know that they are going to somewhere like a Temple, as we can tell from verses 1,3, and 4
>> So how can they be going to the kabaa if they are merely PASSING THROUGH baca?
B. They will be going to "zion" which is the desert, at their place for "pilgrimage."
>> Why Would they simply go to the desert? Why not a Temple?
>> Does it not make more sense that Zion refers to Jerusalem? Hence, they pass through baca to get to Jerusalem?
>> Does it not make sense that it could be metephorical?
>> Do you not realize how general "Baca" is and how many places it could be referring to, to a person or such?

I do not expect you to answer all those questions or anything lol!! But I am just expressing how I see it. If you disagree.. That's fine. I doubt I can change your view, and I know you can't change mine

The Tabernacle is known in Hebrew as the Mishkan ( משכן "Place of [Divine] dwelling").
How lovely is your dwelling place,
O LORD Almighty!



Mishkan is related to the Hebrew word to "dwell", "rest", or "to live in", referring to the "[In-dwelling] Presence of God", the Shekhina (or Shechina) (based on the same Hebrew root word as Mishkan), that dwelled or rested within this divinely ordained mysterious structure.
The Hebrew word for a "neighbor" is shakhen from the same root as mishkan. The commandments for its construction are taken from the words in the Book of Exodus when God says to Moses: "They shall make me a sanctuary, and I will dwell (ve-shakhan-ti) among them. You must make the tabernacle (mishkan) and all its furnishings following the plan that I am showing you." (Exodus 25:8-9). Thus the idea is that God wants this structure built so that it may be a "dwelling", so to speak, for his presence within the Children of Israel following the Exodus.
It is a crucial component for understanding many of the foundations of Judaism, such as the Shabbat (Jewish Sabbath), the Jewish priesthood who were commanded to serve in it, and the meaning and atonement of the sin of the Golden calf.

How lovely is your dwelling place,
O LORD Almighty!



4 Blessed are those who dwell in your house;
they are ever praising you.
Selah

• Chapter 25 [1] : Materials needed, the Ark, the table for 12 showbread, the Menorah.
• Chapter 26 [2] : The Tabernacle, the beams, partitions.
• Chapter 27 [3] : The copper altar, the enclosure, oil.
• Chapter 28 [4] : Vestments for the priests, ephod garment, ring settings, the breastplate, robe, head-plate, tunic, turban, sashes, pants.
• Chapter 29 [5] : Consecration of priests and altar.
• Chapter 30 [6] : Incense altar, washstand, anointing oil, incense.

3 Even the sparrow has found a home,
and the swallow a nest for herself,
where she may have her young—
a place near your altar,
O LORD Almighty, my King and my God.

1 Chronicles 9:19 says
And Shallum the son of Kore, the son of Ebiasaph, the son of Korah, and his brethren, of the house of his father, the Korahites, were over the work of the service, keepers of the gates of the tabernacle; and their fathers, being over the host of the LORD, were keepers of the entrance.

10 Better is one day in your courts
than a thousand elsewhere;
I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God
than dwell in the tents of the wicked.

From this we know:
1. The Korahites were in charge of being Doorkeepers in the Tabernacle
2. Psalm 84 says that the Korahites(as the Psalm was by the Korahites) are a DOORKEPER IN THE HOUSE OF GOD!!

>>> I am sorry, but there is NO WAY that is just coincidential. If the Korahites were in charge of being Doorkeepers, and in their Pslam they mention it, what does that tell you!!

Also, Psalm 42 is a Pslam by the Korah.


1 As the deer pants for streams of water,
so my soul pants for you, O God. 2 My soul thirsts for God, for the living God.
When can I go and meet with God?
3 My tears have been my food
day and night,
while men say to me all day long,
"Where is your God?"
4 These things I remember
as I pour out my soul:
how I used to go with the multitude,
leading the procession to the house of God,
with shouts of joy and thanksgiving
among the festive throng.
5 Why are you downcast, O my soul?
Why so disturbed within me?
Put your hope in God,
for I will yet praise him,
my Savior and 6 my God.
My soul is downcast within me;
therefore I will remember you
from the land of the Jordan,
the heights of Hermon—from Mount Mizar.


Conclusion: In verses 3 and 4 they are CRYING, AKA THEY ARE WEEPING(baca)

In Verse 5 we read where they remember the Lord from.. The LAND OF JORDAN, THE HEIGHTS OF HERMON-FROM MOUNT MIZAR!!

PERHAPS THE KORAHITES WERE WEEPING IN THE LAND OF JORDAN, THE HEIGHTS OF HERMON, FROM MOUNT MIZAR, SO THEY CALLED IT "THE VALLEY OF BACA" AKA THE VALLEY OF WEEPING!!

Put the puzzle pieces together, and there you go!!!

peaceful soul said:

Before I even attempt to respond, I must ask you if the sanctuary of the Jews or Israel resided in Mecca? Where do you think the context of that passage comes from? Arabia? David was king of (where) ___________? Jerusalem was also called the city of (whom) ____________? Zion = (what) _____? Mount Zion is located (where) in ___________?

Click to expand...

It is possible that David could have been in Mecca (Baca) in Paran and could have seen the pilgrimage. The significance of Paran can be deduced from:

1. The bible mentions Abraham bringing Hagar and their son, Ishmael, to the desert and when Hagar could not find any water for the baby, God saved her and Ishmael by giving them a well of water. This water zam-zam is still existent in Mecca, in the desert of Paran:

16 Then she went, and sat down over against him a good way off, about the distance of a bowshot; for she said, "Let me not look upon the death of the child." And as she sat over against him, the child lifted up his voice and wept. 17 And God heard the voice of the lad; and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven, and said to her, "What troubles you, Hagar? Fear not; for God has heard the voice of the lad where he is. 18 Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him fast with your hand; for I will make him a great nation." 19 Then God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the skin with water, and gave the lad a drink. 20 And God was with the lad, and he grew up; he lived in the wilderness, and became an expert with the bow. 21 He lived in the wilderness of Paran; and his mother took a wife for him from the land of Egypt. (Genesis 21)

2. We also know that David was always on the run from King Saul and on the death of Samuel, escaped to the wilderness of Paran.

1 Now Samuel died; and all Israel assembled and mourned for him, and they buried him in his house at Ramah. Then David rose and went down to the wilderness of Paran. (1 Samuel 25).

The whole passge of Psalms 84 was talking about the House of God (Baitullah), how David wished he could be a doorkeeper to the House of God rather than stay at the tent in the wilderness.

During the time of David, there were many Mizpahs and Bethel (see http://www.christianforums.com/t5591579-must-read-the-muslim-haj-and-jewish-hag.html) - the House of God. One of them is at Mecca built by Abraham and Ishmael, in the desert of Paran, which David could have visited and saw the pilgrimage.

The pilgrimage reached its highest point when the pilgrims would assemble at Arafat, a parched land, (the Zion). Zion was only officially mentioned as Jerusalem by Solomon, David's son. Zion, as Brother Oxy has mentioned, meant other things before David became King of Judah. In the time when David was in the wilderness of Paran, Zion may well mean a place, a parched place, where the pilgrims reached in the rituals of the pilgrimage.

islam mulia - the Psalm is from the Korahites, and they are speaking in it and not David. There are Psalms by many people.. Abraham, Adam, David, etc. Although David does most, He doesn't do all!

I just showed that in Psalm 42 they are crying, and they say where they will remember it at.

Baca does mean weeping, yes. And as we can tell from Psalm 42, they were weeping. And we know where the "valley of weeping" is now!

Psalm 42:5
...therefore I will remember you
from the land of the Jordan,
the heights of Hermon—from Mount Mizar.

originally posted by Islam_mulia

It is possible that David could have been in Mecca (Baca) in Paran and could have seen the pilgrimage. The significance of Paran can be deduced from:

1. The bible mentions Abraham bringing Hagar and their son, Ishmael, to the desert and when Hagar could not find any water for the baby, God saved her and Ishmael by giving them a well of water. This water zam-zam is still existent in Mecca, in the desert of Paran:

16 Then she went, and sat down over against him a good way off, about the distance of a bowshot; for she said, "Let me not look upon the death of the child." And as she sat over against him, the child lifted up his voice and wept. 17 And God heard the voice of the lad; and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven, and said to her, "What troubles you, Hagar? Fear not; for God has heard the voice of the lad where he is. 18 Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him fast with your hand; for I will make him a great nation." 19 Then God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the skin with water, and gave the lad a drink. 20 And God was with the lad, and he grew up; he lived in the wilderness, and became an expert with the bow. 21 He lived in the wilderness of Paran; and his mother took a wife for him from the land of Egypt. (Genesis 21)

Click to expand...

They settled in Paran much later. Take notice of the preceeding verses:

KJV:

Gen 21:14 And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba.
Gen 21:15 And the water was spent in the bottle, and she cast the child under one of the shrubs.
Gen 21:16 And she went, and sat her down over against him a good way off, as it were a bowshot: for she said, Let me not see the death of the child. And she sat over against him, and lift up her voice, and wept.
Gen 21:17 And God heard the voice of the lad; and the angel of God called to Hagar out of heaven, and said unto her, What aileth thee, Hagar? fear not; for God hath heard the voice of the lad where he is.

Evident from the text is the fact that they were not far from Beersheba, or perhaps they were still in Beersheba, whch is is a part of present day Palestine. It would make more sense that their water and rations would only last for a day or two before they would need more water and food. That would support the position that they had to have been close to where Abraham left them, which is nowhere near Mecca. Do you have any idea how long it would take them to walk to Mecca? Even more crucial the length of time that the water that Abraham gave to them would last. According to the description of the sac that was put on Hagar's back, it could not have been too much. Think! Selah!

2. We also know that David was always on the run from King Saul and on the death of Samuel, escaped to the wilderness of Paran.

1 Now Samuel died; and all Israel assembled and mourned for him, and they buried him in his house at Ramah. Then David rose and went down to the wilderness of Paran. (1 Samuel 25).

Click to expand...

But, David was not running from anyone at this time--at least we can't conclude this from context. There is no context that mentions that he was evading anyone. You are highly speculating. Moreover, there is no record anywhere that supports that David or any other Jew went to Mecca at that time in history. There is no Biblical text that will support your claim either. The only times that I know that Israel did not stay at or near their home, Israel, is when God punished them for their disobedience. At no time that is mention that they were captured and sent as far as Mecca.

The whole passge of Psalms 84 was talking about the House of God (Baitullah), how David wished he could be a doorkeeper to the House of God rather than stay at the tent in the wilderness.

Click to expand...

The built-in assumption is that David was on the run and was in the desert? So, am I to conclude that David, a Jew, was longing go go the the Kaaba? in Mecca? Which, at this time, you will support that pagans were worshipping in it? Remember that according to you, the pagans had corrupted Allah's word long before Moahmmad came along. Is is reasonable to believe that if the Qu'ran existed at this time, that it may have been occupied with pagans? Just a thought.

The territory given to Israel is how far away from there? And how probable is it that David would not long to worship in his natural habitat--a Jewish sanctuary in Jeruslem?

During the time of David, there were many Mizpahs and Bethel (see http://www.christianforums.com/t5591579-must-read-the-muslim-haj-and-jewish-hag.html) - the House of God. One of them is at Mecca built by Abraham and Ishmael, in the desert of Paran, which David could have visited and saw the pilgrimage.

Click to expand...

The only source of your claim of the Kaaba is the Qu'ran or a hadith. There is no Christian or Jewish text that will support your claim. There is no reason to believe that Jews took an active interest to worship in the Kaaba in Mecca. History does not support this.

The pilgrimage reached its highest point when the pilgrims would assemble at Arafat, a parched land, (the Zion). Zion was only officially mentioned as Jerusalem by Solomon, David's son. Zion, as Brother Oxy has mentioned, meant other things before David became King of Judah. In the time when David was in the wilderness of Paran, Zion may well mean a place, a parched place, where the pilgrims reached in the rituals of the pilgrimage.

Click to expand...

I am not a fan of speculation. With enough creativity, one can make others believe that the there is really cheese on the moon. What you have failed to do is to deal with what the context allows us to understand. This is the essence of how we arrive at a sound, reasonable conclusion about scripture. The context of the scripture determines the word meanings. The context of the scripture determines the scriptural meaning. Take away the context and you have an endless number of ways to make a text say what you want. Hint: Stick to context.

Given what we know about the Jews from earlier scripture, we have no reason to believe that David or whomever is writing this psalm, is referencing anything other than their home, Jerusalem/Israel. Placing Mecca into the picture totally distorts not only the immediate context, but the context of other psalms. That shoud tip you off that fitting Mecca into the picture presents many problems with the consistency of othe scripture.

kjf512 said:

islam mulia - the Psalm is from the Korahites, and they are speaking in it and not David. There are Psalms by many people.. Abraham, Adam, David, etc. Although David does most, He doesn't do all!

I just showed that in Psalm 42 they are crying, and they say where they will remember it at.

Baca does mean weeping, yes. And as we can tell from Psalm 42, they were weeping. And we know where the "valley of weeping" is now!

Psalm 42:5
...therefore I will remember you
from the land of the Jordan,
the heights of Hermon—from Mount Mizar.

Click to expand...

A few things:

1. It does not add up! If the issue is on the Tabernacle and the Feast of Tabernacle is at Jerusalem, why would the Korahites, the gatekeeper of the House of God, go as far as Mount Mizar in Jordan in their pilgrimage before ending their pilgrimage at Jerusalem?

2. If the settings were made after the destruction of the Temple and the Jewish exile (otherwise why would the Psalmist longed for the House of God) then what relevance would that had to do with David and the Psalm?

3. In some bible commentaries, the Korahites were closely related to Psalms 42 and other Pslams, but not so the link of the Korahites to Psalms 84. You may wish to check and enlighten us on how you can attach Pslam 84 to 42.

4. This is the first time I was awakened by Christians who said that the Psalms were written not just by David but by others, notably scribes/priests. It makes me wonder if other books of the OT could also be the author of unknown scribes and hence the point of the inspired book of God is being critically questioned.

1. It does not add up! If the issue is on the Tabernacle and the Feast of Tabernacle is at Jerusalem, why would the Korahites, the gatekeeper of the House of God, go as far as Mount Mizar in Jordan in their pilgrimage before ending their pilgrimage at Jerusalem?

Click to expand...

Hm, why is 94% of our government Anglo's? Does that mean all white people are in the government though? no.

2. If the settings were made after the destruction of the Temple and the Jewish exile (otherwise why would the Psalmist longed for the House of God) then what relevance would that had to do with David and the Psalm?

Click to expand...

It wasn't made after the destruction of the Temple.

3. In some bible commentaries, the Korahites were closely related to Psalms 42 and other Pslams, but not so the link of the Korahites to Psalms 84. You may wish to check and enlighten us on how you can attach Pslam 84 to 42.

Click to expand...

Are you serious?

(Psa 84:1) For the choir director; on the gittith; a psalm by Korah's descendants. Your dwelling place is lovely, O LORD of Armies!

4. This is the first time I was awakened by Christians who said that the Psalms were written not just by David but by others, notably scribes/priests. It makes me wonder if other books of the OT could also be the author of unknown scribes and hence the point of the inspired book of God is being critically questioned.

Click to expand...

Are you kidding me?

Wow, I don't guess you have read the Bible huh? Even a few years ago when I was agnostic and had not read the Bible I knew that Psalms was not just written by David!

Psalms is not made to just be written by David.

kjf512 said:

I also showed you that there is a place near the Golan Heights that is known as "the Valley of Tears."

Baca (bā'kə) , in the Bible, allegorical name of a valley. The English expression “vale (or valley) of tears” may be a translation of this, through the Vulgate.
http://www.answers.com/topic/bakkah

So in Israel there is a place called the "Valley/Vale of Tears." And according to this, Baca means that. So what more is there to explain?

Click to expand...

Man you dont listen. The valley of tears (bekaa) is not in Israel, it is in Lebanon as you showed it on the map:



Also the word Bekaa here is actually Beqa'a which is a complete different word from the Baca in the Bible and Bakkah in the Quran.

Bekaa or Biqa come from the root bq'a spelled ba,qaaf, aiyn http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beqaa_Valley

Baca and Bakkah come from the same root bka spelled ba, kaf(caf), alif (aleph)

It is a completely different word.

kjf512 said:

And also, verse 3 says.
3 Even the sparrow has found a home,
and the swallow a nest for herself,
where she may have her young—
a place near your altar,
O LORD Almighty, my King and my God.

Might I ask - Is there an alter at the kabaa?

Click to expand...

The verse you quoted makes not mention of the altar being at the house of worship. It is only identified with the pilgrimage, and yes muslim do make qurbani ie sacrifice of an animal in the pilgrimage:

Towards the end of the Hajj the sacrifice of an animal such a sheep, goat or camel takes place. This festival of sacrifice (Eid ul-Adha) commerates Prophet Ibrahim's (PBUH) willingness to sacrifice his son for God. Here camels are herded for the modern day sacrifice

http://www.ummah.net/hajj/pics/

Click to expand...

any further thaugts just let me know........

kjf512 said:

And also.. Ok, this says that they PASS THROUGH the VALLEY of Baca. It does not say they make pilgrimage there. It says they pass through.

Click to expand...

The further you take this the bigger you keep diging your hole. You obviously dont know anything about the muslim Hajj of how it is performed:



They passs through the Valley of Bakkah. The start is not in Bakkah and it does not end in Bakkah.

kjf512 said:

If you honestly think that this is referring to Mecca..

1. The the people onl TRAVEL through Mecca, as the word that is some times used as pilgrims usually means higway or road, as can be seen in most Bible translations.

מסלּה
mesillâh
mes-il-law'
From H5549; a thoroughfare (as turnpiked), literally or figuratively; specifically a viaduct, a staircase: - causeway, roadyway, highway, path, terrace.

Click to expand...

See the above muslim pilgrimage route

kjf512 said:

2. You would be changing the entire meaning of the Biblical word Zion, all to simply ry and prove your point. Although Zion CAN mean desert and all, the word used here seems to refer to the City of David. If it was simply speaking of a desert, then why didn't
they useציון instead of ציּון
??

Click to expand...

In order to link this Zion to Jerusalem your going to have to show where the Valley of Baca is at in Jerusalem or near it.

If you say the Valley of Baca is the Valley of Biqaa (Tears) in Lebanon then you will have to identifiy the House of worship in Lebanan and what people make pilgrimage through the Valley of tears in Lebanon with connection to Zion by name or by meaning.

A) There was a location originally called Zion in Lebenon

The first biblical mention of 'Zion' is Deut. 4.48 and is another name for Mount Hermon in Lebanon. This 'Zion' derives from 'Sirion,' a name given to the mountain by the Sidonians. This Zion is referred to again in Psalm 133.3 when the poet compares brotherly love to 'the dew of Hermon coming down on the mountains of Zion.'

http://www.angelfire.com/az3/newzone/zion1.html

B) There is no Zion by meaning of desert in the Valley of Biqaa in Lebanon:

Now where is this house of worship in Lebanon that pilgrims pass through the Valley of Biqaa(tears) ?

Your interpretation will still point away from Jerusalem and away from the Jewish or Christian religion.

kjf512 said:

A. They go PASS THROUGH the "Valley of Baca" to get to the Temple. We know that they are going to somewhere like a Temple, as we can tell from verses 1,3, and 4
>> So how can they be going to the kabaa if they are merely PASSING THROUGH baca?

Click to expand...

See above starting and ending route of teh muslim pilgrimage

kjf512 said:

B. They will be going to "zion" which is the desert, at their place for "pilgrimage."
>> Why Would they simply go to the desert? Why not a Temple?
>> Does it not make more sense that Zion refers to Jerusalem? Hence, they pass through baca to get to Jerusalem?
>> Does it not make sense that it could be metephorical?
>> Do you not realize how general "Baca" is and how many places it could be referring to, to a person or such?

Click to expand...

>> In the Muslim pilgrimage they go to desert to pray and to suplicate, when passing through the Valley of Bakkah they visit the House to make Tawwaf and then continue on ward leaving the Valley of Bakkah.