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.
Show Posts
