Show Posts
1
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Muhammad was not from Mecca, but Petra.
« on: November 05, 2017, 12:58:04 PM »
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
.
[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.
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
.[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.