Mecca or Petra? Interesting thoughts on Islam

  • Thread starter Thread starter AtomicB
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
hasantas said:
If a little flood flow then that is rain water. It is not important how much it is big. There can be such rain water in everywhere.

I think Mecca was fallen from Heavens!!! Is that funny?

We know all parts life of Muhammed as a prophet. His life were written by thousands people in details many times. And we know all places which is mentioned in His life. If Muhammed is an imaginary human then what will we think about Jesus? He was about 500 years earlier!

There are some statements in Hadiths and you try to apply those recitans to all world. I say there used to be some trade routs around our village but these course are not seem in the maps? Then our village must be an maginay place. Our ancestors and their ancestors drop from heavens! The population of Mecca was not so more crowded than our village in that times.
Click to expand...
-Mecca did not fall from heaven, and if it did, it happened after the year 800AD. There is no record of any sizable community present on the location before 900AD other than Islamic sources.

-Ibn Ishaq wrote the first biography of Muhammad at least 125 years after the death of “Muhammad”… we don’t even have that biography.

-the earliest biography of Muhammad that we have dates from around 825AD. That is almost 200 years after Muhammad was supposed to have lived!!

-Mecca was not on any trade route, it is actually out of the way of trade routes that existed at the time of “Muhammad” they did not go by the location of “Mecca”.

-What this means is that the information we have on the history of Muhammad and Mecca is not acurate
 
AtomicB said:
-Mecca did not fall from heaven, and if it did, it happened after the year 800AD. There is no record of any sizable community present on the location before 900AD other than Islamic sources.

-Ibn Ishaq wrote the first biography of Muhammad at least 125 years after the death of “Muhammad”… we don’t even have that biography.

-the earliest biography of Muhammad that we have dates from around 825AD. That is almost 200 years after Muhammad was supposed to have lived!!

-Mecca was not on any trade route, it is actually out of the way of trade routes that existed at the time of “Muhammad” they did not go by the location of “Mecca”.

-What this means is that the information we have on the history of Muhammad and Mecca is not acurate
Click to expand...
The history of Hadiths and Muhammed was written for about 150-200 years later. That is true. Quran was not compilled in a book but that happened later. Like that the history was written or memorized by several people as fragmentary. Some started to fabricate Hadiths for their consept. And at that point it started to compile Hadiths in books. 6 of these Hadiths books are famous and valid. History of Muhammed is in the Hadiths. So it started very initially but it was not compiled in a book.

The Arabs were not affiliated to an authority(Byzantine or the Persian). There were not writting documents between Arabs. Most of them were uneducated. There were poet and people were used to memorise poems. So it is usual that there were not much documents. But with Islam people started to write and read. A history which was conveying in thousand ways cannot be an imaginary knowledge or unaccurate.
 
I don’t profess Islam but in all fairness we should be skeptical of conspiracy theories. Remember the Jesus seminar or those “scholars” who try to say that Jesus never existed/was married, or that Gnosticism was the real original Christianity? It seems to me that just as we might object to such fanciful “scholarship” about Christianity, without hard facts or proof questioning the place of Mecca in the official beginning story of Islam is a double standard. There is plenty to argue about between us without veering off into left field.
 
josephback said:
I don’t profess Islam but in all fairness we should be skeptical of conspiracy theories. Remember the Jesus seminar or those “scholars” who try to say that Jesus never existed/was married, or that Gnosticism was the real original Christianity? It seems to me that just as we might object to such fanciful “scholarship” about Christianity, without hard facts or proof questioning the place of Mecca in the official beginning story of Islam is a double standard. There is plenty to argue about between us without veering off into left field.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that this really qualifies as a conspiracy theory, I understand your trepidation because of problems presented to Christianity by old canards such as “Jesus was married” etc etc prompted by “new” discoveries. Christianity has weathered the storm of western historical criticism; and in fact, eventually found it a great academic ally. But this is a different thing, Islam has never encountered this storm and there is a mounting library of evidence(archaeological, historical,linguistic,numismatic ) that points to a very different historical genesis of Islam than what was, and is, presented by Islamic “scholars”. The location of Mecca is just one tiny corner of a larger emerging complex. Please, read what the guy has to say, Im not saying believe it, just consider his evidence. Read Tom Holland, Patricia crone, scholars of history, not wing nut truthers. There is a historical mystery here.
 
AtomicB said:
I don’t think that this really qualifies as a conspiracy theory, I understand your trepidation because of problems presented to Christianity by old canards such as “Jesus was married” etc etc prompted by “new” discoveries. Christianity has weathered the storm of western historical criticism; and in fact, eventually found it a great academic ally. But this is a different thing, Islam has never encountered this storm and there is a mounting library of evidence(archaeological, historical,linguistic,numismatic ) that points to a very different historical genesis of Islam than what was, and is, presented by Islamic “scholars”. The location of Mecca is just one tiny corner of a larger emerging complex. Please, read what the guy has to say, Im not saying believe it, just consider his evidence. Read Tom Holland, Patricia crone, scholars of history, not wing nut truthers. There is a historical mystery here.
Click to expand...
There are answers of all questions which are fabricated by opponents of Islam. We know all them and indeed non of them make sense. Qur’an is here. If some body can bring a thing like Qur’an(Qur’an challenge for about 1400 years) then he can claim an object. Will anyone bring a thing like Qur’an?
 
AtomicB said:
This hadith claims there was a stream or water passage btwn to mountains in Mecca(or at least the location of the Ka’ba) running from one mountain to the other. There is no such thing in Mecca, never was…but there is in Petra.

“When the Prophet performed the ṭawāf of the Ka’ba, he did Ramal during the first three rounds and in the last four rounds he used to walk and while doing ṭawāf between Ṣafa and Marwa, he used to run in the midst of the rain water passage. (Ṣaḥīḥ Al Bukhārī Ḥadīth 2:685)”

You could look this up your self(try Patricia Crone,Tom Holland), but there is no map or guide showing Mecca at all, until After 850AD. The Romans/Byzantines mapped the area pretty extensively and would have noted such a large trading hub. They didn’t…no one did. No mention of Mecca- Pliny the Elder- 1cen BC, Ptolemy 1st cen AD. I could go on and on. but here is a link to a docu- skip the first min or so

.https ://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dlXCrpKTt0

also- youtube.com/watch?v=34Zq3WJowrU
Click to expand...
I read Hadiths and history of Islam many times but I never think that Mecca was on the so a major trade rout. People prepared Karavans and make trades. And people had used come for Hadj and during that times fairs were fixed. That is all mentioned in Hadiths. And also there were a trade rout which pass through region of Hejazz. Hejazz is a large region and Mecca is in that. But there is no so much Hadiths about that trade routs. Some commodities of Yemen and Indian were transported through Hejazz. That is all. The Petra is in Hejazz also and there were Nebatian Arabs there. But during prophet Muhammed that Petra was an archaic city and there were no people in that city. So Muhammed did not come to world in an archaic and empity city!!! Realy that is a very comic assert.

Mecca was not so big and important city and Mecca was not city of a state. There was no a goverment in Arabistan. Mecca was not city of Byzantine or persian. So it is natural if there is no map about Mecca(I have not accurate knowledge about that. )

There is no a statement about rivers in Mecca but about floods that is all.

The direction(Qibla) of Mosques never head towards Petra. Even there can be for about 45 degree(angle) faullt in Qiblas of Mosques now. But Qibla is Mecca.

I repeated and summarized that there is no mean in such assert!
 
hasantas said:
I read Hadiths and history of Islam many times but I never think that Mecca was on the so a major trade rout. People prepared Karavans and make trades. And people had used come for Hadj and during that times fairs were fixed. That is all mentioned in Hadiths. And also there were a trade rout which pass through region of Hejazz. Hejazz is a large region and Mecca is in that. But there is no so much Hadiths about that trade routs. Some commodities of Yemen and Indian were transported through Hejazz. That is all. The Petra is in Hejazz also and there were Nebatian Arabs there. But during prophet Muhammed that Petra was an archaic city and there were no people in that city. So Muhammed did not come to world in an archaic and empity city!!! Realy that is a very comic assert.

Mecca was not so big and important city and Mecca was not city of a state. There was no a goverment in Arabistan. Mecca was not city of Byzantine or persian. So it is natural if there is no map about Mecca(I have not accurate knowledge about that. )

There is no a statement about rivers in Mecca but about floods that is all.

The direction(Qibla) of Mosques never head towards Petra. Even there can be for about 45 degree(angle) faullt in Qiblas of Mosques now. But Qibla is Mecca.

I repeated and summarized that there is no mean in such assert!
Click to expand...
-Mecca was not a “city” at all(even by your own words), if it was a stop on caravans at all it was really out of the way and because of that, very tiny. Only a small well and a shrine…maybe.

-there is no record of Mecca before 800, on any map or guide.
-there are Mosques, where the Quibla faces very far away from the direction of Mecca, Jerusalem or Petra (as a possible location)
-you can do this yourself!
-the Hadiths are unreliable history, some of the chains of transmission themselves are even said to be unreliable by Muslims.
 
hasantas said:
There are answers of all questions which are fabricated by opponents of Islam. We know all them and indeed non of them make sense. Qur’an is here. If some body can bring a thing like Qur’an(Qur’an challenge for about 1400 years) then he can claim an object. Will anyone bring a thing like Qur’an?
Click to expand...
Granted there are fabrications and OTT statements and assertions that oppose many of the Islamic claims and stances, BUT, there also appear to be many ‘Islamic’ claims that stretch the credulity, reality and historicity of emergent Islam {‘Allah’, Muhammad, Arab conquests etc.].
 
hasantas said:
The history of Hadiths and Muhammed was written for about 150-200 years later. That is true. Quran was not compilled in a book but that happened later. Like that the history was written or memorized by several people as fragmentary. Some started to fabricate Hadiths for their consept. And at that point it started to compile Hadiths in books. 6 of these Hadiths books are famous and valid. History of Muhammed is in the Hadiths. So it started very initially but it was not compiled in a book.

The Arabs were not affiliated to an authority(Byzantine or the Persian). There were not writting documents between Arabs. Most of them were uneducated. There were poet and people were used to memorise poems. So it is usual that there were not much documents. But with Islam people started to write and read. A history which was conveying in thousand ways cannot be an imaginary knowledge or unaccurate.
Click to expand...
I agree with you here about Arabs being poetic people and could memorize poems. This is common among Semitic people in the Middle East. The Torah of the Jews was pretty much an oral tradition until it was written and compiled. There are many tribes in Asia that record their history through oral tradition.

What make your suggestion to be credible were the many people who contributed to the Hadith. It would not be so if there was no such person (Muhammad) existed.

From a non-Muslim perspective, and it is still a very big gap in the Quran credibility, was the burning of the other versions of Quran by Caliph Uthman. Ordinarily he did a very sensible thing to standardize the Quran but on retrospective his high handed action was also his flaw, because of the claim that the present Quran is the original unchangeable word of Allah.

If he had said that the present Quran is the standard copy of the Islamic Empire and to be used by all Muslims, then there would be no problem as people can judge for themselves by comparing the other purported Quran versions available.

What Uthman did was akin to Emperor Shi Huangdi of China who burned much of the scholarly work of other people in order to unify the country but at the expense where many of the information then were lost forever.
 
“What make your suggestion to be credible were the many people who contributed to the Hadith. It would not be so if there was no such person (Muhammad) existed.”

Sorry hate to disagree, but I traveled the Camino in Spain, and there were all kinds of fantastic local legends about the great deeds of Roland, a figure of whom there is little historical info. Competing towns had competing legends. Add the fact that the ahadith were not complied until the 9th century makes them almost historically usless for knowing anything about mohmmad.
 
AtomicB said:
“What make your suggestion to be credible were the many people who contributed to the Hadith. It would not be so if there was no such person (Muhammad) existed.”

Sorry hate to disagree, but I traveled the Camino in Spain, and there were all kinds of fantastic local legends about the great deeds of Roland, a figure of whom there is little historical info. Competing towns had competing legends. Add the fact that the ahadith were not complied until the 9th century makes them almost historically usless for knowing anything about mohmmad.
Click to expand...
It is okay. You are right too. Stories attributed to a popular legend could multiply and more so when it was encouraged by the rulers. I would not discount that possibility. The fact that the Arabs were good stories tellers, the Arabian Nights genre for example, would undoubtedly helped in all those tales, if that was the case.

I guess I was making a point on oral tradition to support the poster’s contention.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top