Author Topic: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.  (Read 23264 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« on: November 05, 2017, 11:58:04 AM »
Peace,

Firstly, I encourage you to consider the presented evidence dispassionately. It is only recently that Islam has undergone serious historical scrutiny, due to obvious reasons. This scrutiny is much like the scrutiny Christianity and the Bible has gone through: it is objective, academic, and honest. And soon enough, you won't be able to dodge/censor it.

Note: I would also like to remind you that the Quran is the truth, from your God and preserved. Therefore, dishonest censorships will be punished accordingly by God, should you choose to partake in these deceptive practices whilst having full control over your mental faculties. You have been warned.

Below I put the key evidences in bold as they generally have least/no alternative interpretations:

- There is no archaeological evidence that Mecca existed until 150 years after Muhammad's death. This is peculiar given Arabia's dry, preserving climate (every archaelogists dream come true), and by comparative/contrasting histories.
- Makkah as "Mother of All Cities" ( i.e. a major trading city), a term used explicitly in the Quran at 42:7, is not sustainable historically, but fits Petra perfectly,
- Makkah was never a major city on a caravan route whereas Petra was both (how can Mecca be a huge trading hub is it's not even on the trading route?)
- Makkah is not found on any map until 900 CE, 300 years after Muḥammad’s birth
- Makkah does not have a distinct valley or substantial mountains (part of the Qur’anic concept of the holy site) yet Petra has both
- Pilgrimages were traditionally made to Petra from across the Arab region from ancient times
- There is substrantial literary evidence for the existence of neighboring kingdoms e.g. Yemen - detailing even the names of kings spanning many generations - going back 1700 years. Yet Mecca's supposed early existence has no literary evidence,
- The Jews have no record of Ibrāhīm in Makkah, or even of journeying anywhere near it
- All the earliest mosques for which we have evidence of orientation in the first 100 years from the Qur’anic revelation point towards Petra (over the next 100 years there is confusion: 12% towards Petra, 50% towards Makkah and 38% follow parallel orientations)
- It is only 200 years after the Qur’anic revelation that all mosques are built facing Makkah
- Stone boards for games of chance such as those mentioned in the Qur’an have been found at Petra, never at Makkah
- Extensive evidence exists over this period for pilgrimages to Petra from Yemen but none for Makkah
- During the civil war with Ibn Zubayr (64AH, 683 CE) the Syrian army attacked the holy city with trebuchet stones; there is no evidence of trebuchet stones at Makkah whereas hundreds exist in Petra, due to Mecca's barren archaeology,
- Physical statues depicting Allat, Uzza and Manat (Nabatean God's mentioned inside the Qiran explicitly) are found in Petra, whereas Mecca has barren archaeology as repeatedly stated.


This is taken from Dan Gibson's book with a few of my own embellishments. I removed some evidences for Petra, as I wanted to focus on Mecca, given how impactful this city is on your world view. You can watch his documentary on Amazon prime, or you pay for it (it will eventually be free though, when the filmmakers make their money back).

The evidence is clear, Mecca is a relatively recent city in historical terms. It did not exist during Muhannad's time and any attempt to prove otherwise will be met with double-think, similar to the Christian's obviously false trinity, a testament to the cacophony that is Christian apologetics today.

I am afraid I cannot link other sites because I am restricted by the moderators highly cultic and humorous forum rules  :-X.

[Screenshots have been taken, and I will defame this site on other sites e.g. key anti-Islam sites, if there is any unrighteous censorship] Someone will inevitably view this thread, and if it gets deleted then you know the true nature of the moderators.

Offline QuranSearchCom

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Islam is the Divine Truth!
    • View Profile
Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #1 on: November 05, 2017, 12:44:03 PM »
I gave detailed rebuttal to the points above and to the youtube video at:

http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,2911.msg13880.html#msg13880



Quote
Makkah is not found on any map until 900 CE, 300 years after Muḥammad’s birth

How silly can one be.  There is detailed history in the Islamic and Arab writings that point to specific locations about events and people that took place and existed in Mecca and near by places, and battles that took place in Arabia, and tribes that were fought, and tribes that embraced Islam, and how the Arabs after that became all Muslims and fought the Romans and the Persians.  All of this doesn't mean anything, and the real Islam happened in Petra, Jordan?

I've heard similar nonsense from shias on YouTube.  Heretic cults don't have a leg to stand on.  They just spew lies.  It's funny how your theory suggests that the people of Northern Arabia (Jordan and all surrounding lands) and central and southern Arabia are just all plain stupid for messing up Islam by inventing Mecca in Saudi Arabia when it actually was in Petra?  They forgot their history and eliminated it entirely from Petra and put it in the invented city of Mecca?  And then attributed all of the history from

1-  Geographical locations.
2-  Battles.
3-  Tribes.
4-  How Islam started and systematically expanded from Mecca to all of Arabia and the rest of the world.

They messed up all of that, because it was all in Petra and all of its surrounding lands and people, but somehow it all got falsely transferred to Mecca nearly 1000 miles south of Petra?

Do you see how stupid you sound?



The reason for the Hate:

To the reader, the reason for this stupidity is very simple.  Islam came to then nomadic desert "nobodies" (very despised people by the then nearby empires).  Islam crushed under its feet the following empires.  It brought to extinction:

1-  Persia.
2-  Byzantine.
3-  Coptics.

Islam also took the majority of the lands of the Roman empire.  We also had Spain for 800 years.


This is where all of the hate comes from.  The infidels from these NOW-MUSLIM-MAJORITY LANDS (with the exception of Spain) are having heart attacks because their pagan civilizations were replaced with Islam, and their people are mostly all Muslims now.


You find this hatred also with the Hindus because we converted almost half of their people to Islam.  And some of their lands seceded from India and became independent Muslim States; one is even a powerful nuclear one.  Pakistan.




Mecca is Baca:

The following links give proofs that ancient writings did recognize Mecca as Baca (Becca, Bacca):

http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,2254.msg10005.html#msg10005
http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,2254.msg10009.html#msg10009



And again, the detailed rebuttal to the points above and to the youtube video is located at:

http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,2911.msg13880.html#msg13880

Take care,
Osama Abdallah

Online AMuslimDude213

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • View Profile
Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #2 on: November 05, 2017, 01:32:16 PM »
The same old stupid claim remade,first of all there is textual and archaeological proofs of Mecca from Infact even before 4th century
https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/09/03/did-kabah-in-makkah-exist-before-4th-century/

As for your second one there is proof it was a trade route,in those times
Claudius Ptolemy was a Greco-Roman writer of Alexandria, known as a mathematician, astronomer, geographer; is another person, centuries before Islam who makes mention of Makkah. He uses the name ‘Makoraba’ for Makkah.

In the Book: ‘The New Encyclopedia of Islam’, written by Cyril Glassé says that Ptolmey, in the second century mentioned Makkah. Here is what he wrote,

“Mecca (Makkah al-Mukarramah, lit ‘Mecca the blessed’). For thousands of years Mecca has been a spiritual center. Ptolemy, the second century Greek geographer, mentioned Mecca, calling it ‘Makoraba’. Some have interpreted this to mean temple (from Maqribah in south Arabian) but it may also mean ‘Mecca of the Arabs’.” [5]

Ilya Pavlovich Petrushevsky (1898–1977) was an Professor of History of the Near East at the University of Leningrad for twenty years, he also makes mention that Ptolemy in the second Century mentioned Makkah:

“On the caravan route from Syria to the Yemen, in the Hijaz neighbourhood, lay Mecca. Ptolemy, the Greek geographer, mentions it as early as the second century calling it Makoraba, which is derived from the south Arab word Maqrab meaning ‘sanctuary’. [6]


It was a trade route between Syria and Yemen and this is a historian speaking,not some average Muslim.
Infact let me quote a Christian  saying it existed in the time of Patriarchs which was very ancient,btw

Reverend Charles Augustus Goodrich a Christian, was an American author and Congregational minister comments on Kaaba and Mecca, although, he is not fond of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh), but he is sincere in admitting that Ka’bah existed at the time of Patriarchs. He writes:

“Among the variety of fabulous traditions which have been propagated by the followers of Mahomet, concerning the origin of this building, we find it asserted, that its existence is coeval with our parents, and that it was built by Adam, after his expulsion from paradise, from a representation of the celestial temple, which the almighty let down from heaven in curtains of light and placed in Mecca, perpendicular under the original. To this the patriarch was commanded to turn his face when he prayed, and to compass it by way of devotion, as the angels did the heavenly one. After the destruction of this temple by the deluge, it was rebuilt by Abraham and his son Ishmael on the same spot, and after the same model, according to directions, which they received by revelation; and since that time, it has continued to be the object of veneration to Ishmael’s descendants. Whatever discredit we may give to these, and other ravings of the Moslem imposter concerning the Caaba its high antiquity cannot be disputed; and the most probable account is, that it was built and used for religious purposes by some of the early patriarchs; and after the introduction of idols, it came to be appropriated to the reception of the pagan divinities. Diodorus Siculus, in his description of the cost of the Red Sea, mentions this temple as being, in his time, held in great veneration by all Arabians; and Pocoke informs us, that the linen or silken veil, with which it is covered, was first offered by a pious King of the Hamyarites, seven hundred years before the time of Mahomet.” [1]

Also,as for Al-Lāt,Al Uzza and Manat,Read Ibn Kalbi book of Idols, it proves in Mecca there were these idols,Infact it proved your whole argument wrong,Mecca did exist,it was a trade route,and it was a place of worship for the pagans before Muslims, and in conclusion your argument has been destroyed.

Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #3 on: November 05, 2017, 01:46:05 PM »
You are assuming your historical foundations from an external literature. The hadith was invented by an oligarchy consisting of very few (ingeneous might I add) men well-versed in the art of realpolitik; God did not create the Quran for an invented library of hearsay with its own complex, insane science of authentication to replace it.

May I please request that you do not comment until you have watched the documentary, or read the book, please.

The word Mecca appears once inside the Quran and when it does, does not reference today's Mecca, and ironically the word Salaah does not appear anywhere near the one instance of this root.

Your religion is patchy, incorrect and highly unaesthetic. I cannot cite websites because you'll just ban me, so I'll provide a Youtube video which will provide a window into the main body of work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inJ1mCIsz5A&t=53s.

I do not heil from any sect, I simply seek to spread the Quranic teachings, see my previous thread.

Online AMuslimDude213

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • View Profile
Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #4 on: November 05, 2017, 01:54:29 PM »
Oh and just to add up,theres more proof than just this Muhammad SAW was in Mecca,there were narrators and letter-writers of that time who spoke of Muhammad SAW in Mecca. And even people like Ibn Abbas and A'isha R.A after Muhammad SAW who seen him.

And this too destroys your whole points.

Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #5 on: November 05, 2017, 02:06:58 PM »
Peace.

Mecca is not the same place as Macoraba.

No, there are no statues at Mecca depicting the Nabatean Gods. There just isn't. Because it's not there. It's just not. Just like the sky isn't green.

I haven't got the time for this; watch the documentary, or see the link I posted above to Youtube. Or read the book if you have the attention span.

Online AMuslimDude213

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • View Profile
Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #6 on: November 05, 2017, 02:16:26 PM »
Again you'd have to explain the Letters,etc and not be ignorant of History,and also explain Ibn Kalbis book of Idols which is a Pre-Islamic book referencing nabatean Gods and I provided my proof and you only provided a video only cherrypicking from the Quran.

Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #7 on: November 05, 2017, 02:26:58 PM »
Again you'd have to explain the Letters,etc and not be ignorant of History,and also explain Ibn Kalbis book of Idols which is a Pre-Islamic book referencing nabatean Gods and I provided my proof and you only provided a video only cherrypicking from the Quran.

Again you'd have to explain the Letters,etc and not be ignorant of History,and also explain John the Baptist's book at 1:1 which is a reliable Biblical account refercning Jesus as God and I provided my proof and you only provided a video only cherrypicking from the Bible.

 ;D

Online AMuslimDude213

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • View Profile
Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #8 on: November 05, 2017, 02:32:33 PM »
Again,the bible is something different,Ibn Kalbis book is something different,you're changing topics which proves you cannot defend your case.

And you're definetly an atheist,not a muslim.

Offline QuranSearchCom

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Islam is the Divine Truth!
    • View Profile
Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #9 on: November 05, 2017, 06:42:26 PM »
Quote
You are assuming your historical foundations from an external literature.

Above, I updated my post and gave links that contain ancient writings that prove Mecca was Baca.  The links again are:

http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,2254.msg10005.html#msg10005
http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,2254.msg10009.html#msg10009



As to proofs for the "external literature", we have the graves of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, and many of his companions in locations in Saudi Arabia and in northern Arabia where they died after opening the lands from the Persians and the Romans.  The literature that proves the location where Islam started, and what was its Prophet's name, and how Islam systematically spread throughout Arabia and beyond is quite solid.  You have a disease called "everything outside the Quran is false".

We have hard evidence from graves, to physical locations of homes, battles, tribes, etc... and ample literature that thoroughly prove Islam began in Mecca and took off from Mecca.

Take care,
Osama Abdallah

Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #10 on: November 05, 2017, 07:50:53 PM »
Quote
You are assuming your historical foundations from an external literature.

Above, I updated my post and gave links that contain ancient writings that prove Mecca was Baca.  The links again are:

http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,2254.msg10005.html#msg10005
http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,2254.msg10009.html#msg10009



As to proofs for the "external literature", we have the graves of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, and many of his companions in locations in Saudi Arabia and in northern Arabia where they died after opening the lands from the Persians and the Romans.  The literature that proves the location where Islam started, and what was its Prophet's name, and how Islam systematically spread throughout Arabia and beyond is quite solid.  You have a disease called "everything outside the Quran is false".

We have evidence from graves, to physical locations of homes, battles, tribes, etc... and ample literature that thoroughly prove Islam began in Mecca and took off from Mecca.

Take care,
Osama Abdallah

It's weak evidence and ignores the big picture: spurious, extremely vague literatures. I might as well he a trinitarian based off of John 1:1, it's really unimpressive. Read this excerpt from Gibson's book:

"Muslims  commonly  believe  that  ancient  Mecca  was  a  major  city  on  the caravan  routes  between  the  kingdoms  of  Arabia.  However,  history  does  not prove  this  to  be  so.  One  would  think  that  kingdoms  like  Yemen,  which  is immediately  south  of  present  day  Mecca,  and  those  north  of  Mecca  would substantiate  Mecca’s  existence,  but  this  is  not  the  case.  The  ancient  kingdoms of  Yemen  utilized  the  skill  of  writing  since  the  10th  century  BC  (Kitchen, 1994,  page  135)  and  yet,  with  the  thousands  of  inscriptions,  graffiti  and  other writings  that  have  survived  to  this  day,  there  is  not  a  single  mention  of  the city  of  Mecca. Looking  north  from  Mecca  to  the  cities  of  Dedan,  Teyma  and Khaybar,  thousands  of  inscriptions,  graffiti  and  other  writings  have  survived to  this  day,  and  once  again  we  have  not  a  single  mention  of  the  city  of  Mecca in any literature prior to 900 AD."

Literary evidence works against you when you deal with the case at hand appropriately, not plucking rare, vague texts.

And you completely blanked the maps, did the cartograpgers brain-fart seven times in a row when drawing their maps? Mysteriously skipping Mecca, the supposed Mother of all cities?

And you blanked the archaeological evidence, another huge piece of the puzzle since it's hard for politicians/later imams to fake. When I go to Petra and I stick a spade in the ground, I'm gonna dig something up, because it was the Umm-Al-Qura described at 42:7 inside the Quran: it was the New York of Arabia, the Dubai of Arabia, the London of Arabia  There are thousands of artifacts from Petra on auction. This is the sort of evidence one needs.

Can I say the same thing with Mecca? No, I cannot. Mecca's not historical.

You also have the footprints of Ibrahim near the Ka'ba, this is embarrasing. They are insulting your intelligence. Your religion is a psyop and is not in the Quran.

It's such a shame that you've got such a pure revelation, but you choose to sell your mental faculties to an unknown, highly questionable priesthood.

Offline Albarra

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • View Profile
Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #11 on: November 05, 2017, 11:35:45 PM »
Peace.

Mecca is not the same place as Macoraba.

No, there are no statues at Mecca depicting the Nabatean Gods. There just isn't. Because it's not there. It's just not. Just like the sky isn't green.





That's completely dumb. How did you know it's not there. You were just guessing.

Statues? You mean 300 idols around Ka'aba?

Also, "the sky isn't green" is completely different than Mecca.

Offline QuranSearchCom

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Islam is the Divine Truth!
    • View Profile
Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #12 on: November 06, 2017, 03:57:48 AM »
Quote
It's weak evidence and ignores the big picture: spurious, extremely vague literatures.

Vague literatures?  I don't see millions flocking to pilgrimage to Petra every year.  I see them flocking to Mecca.  Your theory would be valid if literally all of the Arabs in the entire Middle East were permanently drunk or stoned.  To have millions of Muslims flock to Mecca every single year testifies to the Truthfulness of Islam's literature about Islam indeed began from Mecca, and Its Prophet was Muhammad, peace be upon him. 



How was the fabrication possible?

How could Hajj (pilgrimage) be fabricated when the Holy City of Mecca is the VERY CORE of it?  If Hajj began at Petra, as you claim, then please tell us what year did the fabrication happen, and how did the thousands and thousands of Muslims back then just suddenly and/or abruptly change from Petra to Mecca? Like I said, they must all be permanently intoxicated in order for your theory to work.  Otherwise, people wouldn't just change from Petra to Mecca because some doofus ordered them to change.

If you do not directly answer this, I will ban you!  I am getting tired of your BS.

Osama

Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #13 on: November 06, 2017, 04:29:20 AM »
Quote
It's weak evidence and ignores the big picture: spurious, extremely vague literatures.

Vague literatures?  I don't see millions flocking to pilgrimage to Petra every year.  I see them flocking to Mecca.  Your theory would be valid if literally all of the Arabs in the entire Middle East were permanently drunk or stoned.  To have millions of Muslims flock to Mecca every single year testifies to the Truthfulness of Islam's literature about Islam indeed began from Mecca, and Its Prophet was Muhammad, peace be upon him. 



How is the fabrication possible?

How could Hajj (pilgrimage) be fabricated when the Holy City of Mecca is the VERY CORE of it?

Do you have anything else to add?  I am getting tired of your BS.

Osama

I'm not here to convince everyone, it's my Quranic duty to preach against real and potential idols, like your religion. I want to please my maker.

I'm going to say it another time: your city is not historical, you've activated full-on Trinitarian Christian mode: fingers in both ears.

How could they pull it off? Let me ask you, how did they pull off 9/11? You underestimate how much power royalty has.

For your exact answer, it's in the documentary and involves the classic historical formula of: victors win war, victors rewrite history. Hence the burning down of libraries and mass censorship that ensued. But I guess you're not gonna watch it, that's ok, I don't think anyone takes you seriously anyway.

You have this flowery version of your religion's history which is false - the true history is ugly.

Offline Albarra

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • View Profile
Re: Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« Reply #14 on: November 06, 2017, 08:06:28 AM »
Give me a verse that Muhammad (phub) was born in Petra.


Again, your stupid evidence did not prove me that Makkah was not historical. Petra sounds like a unpopular area in southern Jordan. No top Islamic scholars or Salafi said about Muhammad (phub) and Petra.


Also, we have old hadith like Muwatta Malik mentioned about Mecca many times. That was around 700 CE, but oral hadith were memorized since Islam was born.

You just looked the hadiths that were written in 900 CE, but what about oral hadiths? 



UPDATE FROM OSAMA ABDALLAH:

"You just looked the hadiths that were written in 900 CE, but what about oral hadiths?"


Dear brother Albarra, I am afraid that your last statement makes it sound like he has HADITHS (sayings of the Prophet) that were written around year 900 AD/CE that actually say Petra was indeed Mecca.  I just want to make it clear to the reader that such Hadiths do not exist.  Your statement was referring to the alleged maps that he was talking about.  And of course his statement is very stupid, because Mecca did ACTUALLY EXIST in 900 and 800 and 700 and 600 and thousands of years before!  But at the very least, we know that it existed before 900 AD, whether there was a map drawn for it or not.  People lived there and it was always called MECCA, and Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was born there, and his entire sub-tribe Hashim and entire tribe Quraysh were the inhabitants of Mecca.  And the House of GOD Almighty that was built by Abraham and Ishmael, peace be upon them, was already there.

Just wanted to clarify that.  Jazaka Allah Khayr.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2017, 01:57:38 PM by QuranSearchCom »