CLASSICAL WRITERS SHOW MECCA COULD NOT HAVE BEEN BUILT BEFORE THE 4th CENTURY AD

[Peter]

http://religionresearchinstitute.org/mecca/index.htm
    *  The Classical Writers and Mecca - By Dr. Rafat Amari
    * Archaeology  and Mecca - By Dr. Rafat Amari
    * The Bible and Mecca- By Dr. Rafat Amari
    * The Kaabah and the Arabian Star Worship - By Dr. Rafat Amari
    * The Role of the Temple at Mecca in the Jinn Religion and in the Arabian Family Star Religion - By Dr. Rafat Amari
    * The True Story of the Construction of the Temple of Mecca - By Dr. Rafat Amari

http://religionresearchinstitute.org/mecca/classical.htm

STUDIES BY CLASSICAL WRITERS SHOW THAT MECCA COULD NOT HAVE BEEN BUILT BEFORE THE 4TH CENTURY A.D.

By Dr. Rafat Amari

We refer the reader to the book of Dr. Amari, Islam in light of History, for more arguments on the true history of Mecca

(you can purchase the book here http://religionresearchinstitute.org/)

Accurate data from Greek geography  excludes the appearance of Mecca before the 4th century A.D.

There is no mention of Mecca in the writings of any classical writer or geographer.  This fact is an important argument against Islam's claim that Mecca has existed since the time of Abraham.  We have complete records of Greek and Roman writers, as well as many geographers who visited Arabia from the end of the 5th century B.C. through the 3rd century A.D.  Some of these people drew maps of Arabia telling us about every city, village, mountain, and temple existing there, yet none mentioned Mecca.  If Mecca did indeed exist at the time of any of these geographers and writers, surely someone would have told us about this city.

    To give you a better understanding, we'll look at the work of some of these classical writers. Greeks were well known for their accuracy in geography. So much so, that they didn't put much stock in reports provided by merchants. We can see this in the writings of Strabo, a famous Greek geographer and historian of the 1st century A.D. He emphasized how important it is to not depend on reports from merchants, but, to depend upon the official findings provided by geographers and historians who visited the regions themselves.[1]  This makes the research on the geography of Arabia provided by ancient Greek geographers and historians a valuable resource, especially when they tell us which  cities existed in West Arabia since the end of the 5th century B.C. through the 4th century AD.  We see, then, that facts gathered by Greek geographers and historians are extremely important in establishing the dates when these cities first appeared.  Since those geographers provided us with accurate reports dated between the end of the 5th century B.C. and the 3rd century A.D., scholars can easily determine within approximately 20 years the date of each city built in West Arabia. With reliable accuracy, we find that Mecca is absent from all the years documented by the Greek and Roman geographers. How ironic it is to claim that a city like Mecca existed as early as the Muslims claim, when it was never mentioned by the historians who documented that time period. So, the case for Mecca existing as a city since Abraham's time is more than a lost cause. It's the most unhistorical assertion that anyone could claim or  insert into history.

 

Herodotus, an Ancient Greek Historian, Visits Arabia

Greeks have been interested in the Red Sea and its Western coast region since the 6th century B.C.[ii][2] One valuable geographical survey, which describes in detail the geography of Arabia, first appeared with another important document provided by Herodotus, the famous Greek historian of the 5th century B.C. Living between 485 B.C. and 425 B.C., Herodotus traveled throughout the ancient World. His main work Histories describes the countries he visited. He visited Arabia around the middle of the 5th century B.C. and wrote about the geography of Arabia. In his writings, he mentioned the names of the cities in the Arabian Peninsula. He did not mention Mecca.

    Any religious city would be worthy of note, because those cities were critical to the culture of the times. Jerusalem, in Israel, and other religious cities were mentioned by Greek historians and geographers in their writings, as were religious cities in other parts of the world, such as Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and parts of Africa. Due to its importance, Mecca would have been the first city to be mentioned in any survey or writing about Arabia. Yet, we find that an attentive historian like Herodotus, mentioned all the cities known at his time in Arabia - but he didn't mention Mecca.

 

THE GEOGRAPHERS OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT AND ARABIA

A survey prepared by two geographers commissioned by Alexander the Great also excludes the presence of Mecca from accounts in the 4th century B.C.

We come to the 4th century B.C. Alexander the Great sent two Greek geographers to make a survey of Arabia in preparation for an invasion Alexander was planning.  Although his death in 323 B.C. stopped the invasion, the classical historians and geographers whom Alexander sent succeeded in providing the Greeks with detailed information about Arabia. Those two men, Batlimos Bin Lagos and Aristopolos, developed an important survey which came to us through the Greek classical writer, Arianos, and the famous historian, Strabo. In their survey, they mention important details about the coast of the Red Sea and the surrounding region. If Mecca existed in the 4th century B.C., they couldn't have missed it. But there's no mention of Mecca in their reports.

    The expedition of the two Greek historians sent by Alexander the Great is of special importance, because Alexander is known to have studied the cultural, historical and religious aspects of each country before battle, in order to determine how to deal with its inhabitants. If Mecca had existed at the time of Alexander's expedition, it would have attracted attention from the Greek geographers and historians whom he sent ahead.

    If the Muslim's claim that Mecca, as the center of a monotheistic religion, had existed since the time of Abraham, it would have attracted worshippers from tribes in Arabia, including Yemen. Therefore, it would have been the subject of Alexander's two scholars. No other city would have been more important to present to their master, Alexander the Great, who doted passionately on religion and the history of religions. But the fact that they mention every detail of Arabia, without mentioning Mecca, is a clear demonstration that Mecca did not exist in the 4th century B.C. This leads us to the conclusion that the Qur'an and the Muslim claims about this city is historically inaccurate.

    When comparing the historical claims of the Qur'an, with those of the Bible, we find that the Biblical claims are true and historically accurate.  I cannot find a single critic in history who argued about the existence of Jerusalem.  Records concerning Jerusalem and its monotheistic faith have come from each generation since the time the Israelites entered into the Promised Land, in the 15th century B.C. Records from Mesopotamia and Egypt all contain important entries about Jerusalem. We find in Hebrew literature complete records about the kings who reigned in the city of Jerusalem. Much literature attested to by internal and external records tells about the monotheistic worship by the Jews in the temple of Jerusalem.

    These facts should convince our Muslim friends to return to the historical legacy of a monotheistic worship as proclaimed in the Bible and known through documented history - and not to give heed to claims which create a worship without any historical foundation housed in a pagan temple built in the 5th century A.D.

 

THEOPHRASTOS' SURVEY

Theophrastos' survey also excludes the existence of Mecca during the end of the 3rd century B.C.

We continue our study by looking at the works of other classical writers who wrote on the geography of Arabia. If we really study these works, we'll learn that they prove that Mecca did not exist until after the 4th century A.D.

     An important Greek historian, Theophrastos, lived in the 4th century B.C. He wrote about the Sabaeans - their trade, their land and their marine routes.  He wrote in detail about the region but he never mentioned Mecca . That is significant, because Muslims claim that, in ancient history, Mecca was a center of commerce with Yemen and the Sabaeans. In spite of this claim, we find that Theophrastos, who specialized in describing details about the region - especially all trade connections and the routes - did not mention Mecca.

    After the death of Alexander the Great,  many classical writers and historians arose who were concerned about the geography and history of Arabia. Most of these historians and geographers lived in the city of Alexandria, which was the capital of the Ptolemies. The first university in the world was established in Alexandria, and it boasted of a famous library, the Library of Alexandria. One of the most important historical figures of Alexandria was the famous geographer, Eratosthenes. He lived between 275-195 B.C., And he contributed greatly to documenting the geography of Arabia. Eratosthenes gathered important information from various resources. He examined the data obtained by the explorers who were sent by Alexander the Great, and data by geographical expeditions initiated by the Alexander Ptolemaic successors.[iii][3] These Greek expeditions continued through the 3rd century B.C.[iv][4]

    Information from the expeditions of Ptolemy II in 278 B.C. encompassed the southern regions of the Red Sea and the African coast. They were used to help in the control of the spice route coming from India and Yemen.  This information was also used to facilitate elephant hunts.  Elephants were used in the Ptolemies wars against  the Seleucids, the royal Greek family which dominated Syria.  These factors opened the door for a systematic collection of geographical data of the African coast of the Red Sea and the Arabian coast. The results of this geographical activity was the book of Eratosthenes, and an important map.[1][a]

     Eratosthenes measured the length of the Red Sea. He also gave a complete survey of the land and marine routes which connect southern Arabia with Aqaba, or Ilat on the north, which is the  Israeli port on the Red Sea.  He described all the people and centers in the region, but he didn't mention Mecca, even though he followed the land route upon which Mecca was eventually built.

 

Classical Geographers Describe the Area Where Mecca was Eventually Built as "Uninhabitable."

Among the things which Eratosthenes described is the Arabian region, which corresponds to Africa's coastal region along the Red Sea called the Troglodytic land.[v][5] The Troglodytic Land is an important region for our study because there is a huge desert area opposite it on the Arabian coast of the Red Sea. This was described by the classical geographers. The southern part of the Troglodytic Land was an arid area without cities or villages. It was a dangerous region where savage nomads roamed from time to time, attacking caravans. This area was described by the classical writers as uninhabitable, dividing the region of Northern Arabia from Southern Arabia. We know of nothing that was built in that area until Mecca was built there around the 4th century  A.D. Yet, it was the most fearful tract in the land route. During the 3rd century B.C., around the time of the Sabaeans of Yemen, they began using the land route in commerce with Israel and Syria. It continued to be the most dangerous tract of land until after the Christian era.

    Eratosthenes mentioned the area of Arabia, opposite to the African Red Sea region called Troglodytic Land. While geographers, who came in the centuries following Eratosthenes, described some areas near this one, Eratosthenes did not. This tells us that in 275-195 B.C., at the time of Eratosthenes, many areas around this one were not inhabited. They were part of a huge desert.  Since the land route beside the Red Sea from Yemen toward Palestine was scarcely used in Eratosthenes' time, we conclude that no villages were yet established along it.

    We know that Eratosthenes' report expresses not only his time - starting from the end of the 3rd century B.C. but also the various geographers who ventured and visited the area before, starting with the two explorers of the Alexander the Great during the last part of the 4th century B.C. If Mecca had existed in Eratosthenes' time, how had he failed to put it on his map of that region?   It would have become a refuge for the travelers and their caravans, and would have become the pride of the Red Sea. No villages or cities were described by him, or by those who explored before him, because no villages or cities existed.  Mecca would have become a center of rest and hope for the geographers and those who crossed that arid and terrible tract of the desert.  Mecca, if it had existed in Eratosthenes' time, would likely have been the main reference point for his map - for it is logical that he would have used Mecca as the point of reference from which distances to other regions were estimated and measured. But, unfortunately, geographers such as Eratosthenes did not have any city or village to use as reference in the area where Mecca was eventually built. Nor was there a temple in that arid and desert region, to be a pride for such desert.  Nor were there religious or non-religious tribes which would require a temple to be built for their worship.

How ironic it is to build a historical, monotheistic faith on this arid uninhabited tract of the desert. And how strange that it shifted people's attention from the Truth to Arabian paganism in the centuries following the Christian era.

If this is the picture of this neglected part of the desert in the 4th and 3rd centuries B.C. , even when the initiated land route had just scarcely started, then how unrealistic it is to conclude that this part of the desert was a center of the Monotheism in the 21st century B.C. at the time of Abraham, where no land routes were known, and Yemen, itself, was unknown to the contemporaries of the Patriarch. To build an eternal hope on this tract of sand, which did not express life through history to help anyone create a religious legacy, is fatal for the soul. However, the tribe of Mohammed came to live on this unimportant region of sand in the 5th  century A.D.  After emigrating from Yemen, and after Mohammed claimed himself as prophet of Allah, he wanted to shift the legacy of the Bible to his tribe's new location, yet it did not affect the historical reports about such tract of the desert. Our Muslim friends need to return to the real legacy of monotheism known in history. They need to acquire a Biblical view, where it is prophesied many times that the true Savior of the world is Jesus Christ. This is the only trustworthy legacy through which all people are called by God to seek Him and His salvation. Many, many people in every generation have received salvation when they have believed in the atoning death of Christ as prophesied in the Old Testament.

    Isaiah, who prophesied in 750 B.C. concerning the suffering of Christ, said in chapter 53 verse 5:

He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed.

This is an invitation for every person who longs to be healed from his or her sin, to look to the righteous lamb who was slain for us on the cross.  Jesus did not refuse to be led to the place where He would be slain, as Isaiah also prophesied in the next verse:

He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as sheep before its shearers is silent, so He opened not His mouth.

He was willing to be slain, though He is the all-powerful One about whom Isaiah said in chapter 9, verse 6:

For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government shall be upon His shoulder.  And His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, and the Prince of Peace.

The powerful God went to the Cross - though He was able to avoid it - because He was willing to pay the penalty for our sins so that we can live forever.

[Peter]

AGATHARCHIDES' SURVEY ON WESTERN ARABIA, AND THE ACCURACY OF HIS SURVEY AS A RELIABLE SOURCE FOR OUR STUDY.

In our study, we now come to the 2nd century B.C. Without doubt, the most important geographer and historian of the time was Agatharchides of Alexandria, who wrote between 145-132 B.C. He was believed to be a major figure in compiling Egypt's political history in the late 2nd century B.C.[vi][6]

    Because he was very close to the royal palace of the Ptolemies, he had first-hand knowledge of the results of the expeditions which took place throughout the 3rd and 2nd centuries, especially in the regions around the Red Sea, the African shore and West and South Arabia.  He had access to sources which documented the achievements of the Ptolemies. These were mainly reports presented by the envoys of the kings during the 3rd and the beginning of the 2nd centuries B.C.[vii][7] Agatharchides coordinated all the information as a keen synthesizer and analyzer. He documented the names of the explorers who visited the region. Among those he mentioned was the name of the geographer, Ariston. That geographer is the one Ptolemy dispatched in the 3rd century B.C. to explore Arabia, especially the regions of West Arabia near the Red Sea where Mecca was later built.[viii][8]

Agatharchides mentioned the name of other explorers, such as Simmias, whom Ptolemy  III sent to explore the region.   Agatharchides told how Simmias described the region, and how this had become an important resource.[9]

    Agatharchides also studied books written by other geographers sent by the Ptolemies.[10]  Scholars think he drew heavily from Anaxicrates' voyage to South and West Arabia.[xi][11] We know of at least seven authors who visited and wrote about the Red Sea region during the 3rd century B.C.  Among them are: Pythagoras,[xii][12]  who was an admiral under Ptolemy II, Basilis, Dalion, Bion of Soli, Simonides the Younger, Aristocreon, and Philon. Scholars assert that Agatharchides consulted all of their writings. Those books were available in the famous Library of Alexandria. In fact, we understand from the narration of Strabo, that Eratosthenes made a collection of these books.[13] Agatharchides synthesized and gathered information from reports and books which explorers and geographers had written before his time. He also depended upon people he encountered whom he called "eyewitness." Among them were envoys of the king, traders and explorers who visited the regions surrounding the Red Sea.[2] Unfortunately, the original documented survey of Agatharchides on the Erythraean Sea disappeared, but almost the entire book has survived in the writings of three classical writers: Strabo, Photius and Diodorus. The most significant summary of Agatharchides' book is found in Photius' book, "Bibliotheca." [3]

    The accuracy of his survey is very much accepted by scholars. The expeditions and discoveries from the 7th and 8th centuries A.D. confirmed the accuracy of the writings of Agatharchides, as they corresponded completely to his writings. Burstein, in his book  Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, describes it this way, "they have vindicated its basic accuracy so that, once again, it is recognized by scholars as one of the most important sources for the study of the history and human geography of ancient northwest Africa and western Arabia to survive from antiquity."[14]

    One example scholars give to defend Agatharchides' accuracy is how he described the shores and adjoining water.  Agatharchides tells us that the color of the water opposite Saba Land, South Arabia, was white, like river water. The phenomenon is still true today.[15]  Another element which proves the accuracy and value of his writings is the similarity between his descriptions of tribes and people living in the area, and the description of the same people in later reports.[16]  Agatharchides gives measurements of various tracts along the shores of the Red Sea in West Arabia.  This tells us that his writing depended on testimony from expert geographers who examined the shore and the regions of Arabia connected to it.

    Ptolemies wanted an exact study of the region to protect their trade in the Red Sea, and to know how to deal with various groups of population or tribes living in regions connected with the Red sea. They also wanted to know the exact lengths of regions where the trade might find uninhabited areas, or areas with savage tribes or Bedouins. This justified the quantity and the quality of a prolonged, intensive and accurate study through the 3rd and 2nd centuries B.C., where the Ptolemies started to control the movement of trade on the Red Sea, and deal with piracy which threatened such trade coming from the interior Arabian regions.  The book of Agatharchides reflected the success of the Greek geographers in providing to the Ptolemies accurate and detailed geographical and geographical information of the region of West Arabia.

 

Although Agatharchides wrote about locations along the Red Sea, including all the temples and routes which pass through the area where Mecca was eventually built, he never mentioned Mecca, nor its temple.

In his description of West Arabia, Agatharchides mentions each of the populations present in the 3rd century and the first half of the 2nd century B.C. in the regions adjacent to the Red Sea. He began with the Nabataeans, who had their capital in south Jordan and then penetrated into north Arabia, and he went on to describe each population, city, port, temple and mountain, until he reached Yemen. Here's what we learn from Agatharchides' accounts: He passed through the region where Mecca was later built, but he never mentioned Mecca, nor did he mentioned a single temple in that region, although temples were a central subject in his study. We find him stopping to give the origin of the Poseidon Temple, in the northwest coast of Sinai. He tells who built it and for whom it was built. We find him also giving much attention to the temple located in the Negev desert, saying:

There is also an ancient altar that is made of hard stone and bears an inscription in lettering that is archaic and unintelligible. The sanctuary is cared for by a man and a woman who occupy their sacred office for life.[xvii][17]  

Agatharchides accurately reports the Greek trend to know about the temples existing in each region, especially in Sinai and West Arabia, where a temple is a rarity. The Greeks had a passion to know the origin of each temple. In the temple in the Negev, the Greeks made an effort to analyze the archaic inscription carved in the stone altar. They also described the source of the priesthood who served in the temple.

 
Agatharchides Describes a Temple Along the Gulf of Aqaba.

Agatharchides told about another temple close to Ilat in the Aqaba gulf area. It is in a land belonging to a tribe called "Batmizomaneis." Agatharchides emphasizes that the temple, in his own words, "is highly revered by all the Arabs."[xviii][18]

Many Muslims claim that Agatharchides' temple was actually the temple of Mecca. To fix the exact place of that temple, let's follow the narration of Agatharchides, as reported by Photius and Diodorus. Agatharchides began to describe regions north of this temple, including the Nabataeans around the Gulf of Aqaba, which was called the Laeanites Gulf. In Photius and Diodorus, Agatharchides says:

One encounters the Laeanites Gulf around which there are many villages of the so-called Nabataean Arabs. They occupy much of the coast and not a little of the adjacent country which extends into the interior and contains a population that is unspeakably great as well as herds of animals that are unbelievably numerous. In ancient times they led a just life and were satisfied with livelihood provided by their flocks, but later, after the kings in Alexandria had made the gulf navigable for merchants, they attacked those who suffered shipwreck. They also built pirate vessels and plundered sailors, imitating the ferocity and lawlessness of the Tauri in the Pontus. But later they were caught at sea by quadriremes and properly punished. After what is called the Laeanites Gulf, around which Arabs live, is the land of the Bythemaneas.

Notice that the land of Bythemaneas is connected  to the south of the Nabataeans' region, close to Gulf of Aqaba. ( See FIG. 2, at the end of the article). Musil, a famous scholar on Arabia, declared that this land was the  "lower portion of the Wadi al- Abjaz, namely the so-called Wadi al 'efal[4][d], a lowland 50 Km long by 20 km. wide just east of the Gulf of Aqaba."[xix][19] The narration of Agatharchides continues:

Next after this section of the coast is a bay which extends into the interior of the country for a distance of not less than five hundreds stades. Those who inhabit the territory within the gulf are called Batmizomaneis and are hunters of land animals.

 

The stade, or stadia, according to the system of Eratosthenes, equals one tenth of an English mile,[xx][20] thus making the land of Bythemaneas only about 50 miles. He is placing the inhabitants of Batmizomaneis within the gulf region, as we see from his statement, "Those who inhabit the territory within the gulf are called Batmizomaneis." He means that these people lived within the Laeanites Gulf, which was the old name for the Gulf of Aqaba. The narration of Diodorus is parallel to that of Photius because both copied the writings of Agatharchides in his fifth book On the Erythraean Sea. Diodorus says:

The people who inhabit the country beside the gulf ,who are named the Banizomenes , support themselves by hunting and eating the flesh of land animals. A very sacred temple has been established there which is highly revered by all the Arabs.

 

We see that both Photius and Diodorus placed the people of Banizomenes or (Batmizomaneis) beside the gulf of the Laeanites, or the Gulf of Aqaba, many miles from where Mecca was eventually built. Mecca is in central western Arabia, very close to Yemen. Following their comments on Banizomenes, the two authors speak of another area in the south, the Thamud territory. They describe it in these words, "after these it is the territory of the Thamoudeni Arabs." [xxi][21] The Thamud tribe was known in history to inhabit northern Arabia close to the Aqaba gulf, they never reached to the south, toward the area where Mecca was later built. So the temple described by Diodorus was between the Thamud region and the city of Petra, within the Gulf of Aqaba region.

      After Photius mentioned the Thamud region, he mentioned the next segment to the south of Thamud. [xxii][22]  Scholars have identified this segment as the portion of the coast between Ras karama (25 54 N, 36 39 E.) and Ras Abu Madd (24 50 N, 37 08 E). [xxiii][23] Ras Abu Madd is about 450 kilometers (280 miles) north of Mecca. This accurate study shows clearly that the Temple mentioned by Diodorus was in the Aqaba Gulf region, north to the Thamud region, and could not be identified with the temple of Mecca. (See Fig.2, at the end of the article )

     Nonnosus, another classical writer, seems to speak about the same temple at the same place close to Petra. This temple is built to honor the Arabian deities. Nonnosus says:

Most of the Saracens, those Phoinikon and those beyond the Taurenian mountains, consider as sacred a place dedicated to I do not know what god and they assemble there twice a year. [xxiv][24]

 

The Saracens are a people mentioned by Pliny in Natural History, Book V, Chapter 12, as people who live in the Gulf of Aqaba not far from the city of Petra. Crone studied the locations and tribes who venerated this temple. She has located the temple in the northern region of the Gulf of Aqaba. The Saracens are people in northern Arabia. Since the Taurenian Mountains are Jabal Tayyi', the sanctuary is located in the northern area of the Gulf of Aqaba. [xxv][25]  This leads us to assume that Nonnosus was speaking about the same temple mentioned by Diodorus.

    This temple mentioned by Diodorus is built to honor the Arabian deities. The remarks of the Greek historians and geographers about this temple though situated within the secondary tribe's domain, is very significant. They remark that the temple is highly revered by all the Arabs. The Greeks are very careful to distinguish the temple, which has special importance and is revered by many, in a land, regardless of where it is located.

    With such propensity of the Greek historians and geographers, it seems impossible that they could fail to mention a temple with a special claim such as to draw worshippers from all tribes, as Islam claims, for the temple of Mecca. The fact is that neither Mecca, nor its temple, is mentioned by Agatharchides, although he to pursue with such passion all temples existent until his time;This is a clear indication that Mecca, nor its temple, did not exist   during such times.

    Agatharchides covered the narrations of geographers of the 3rd century and his time which was the first part of the 2nd century B.C. Scholars today confirm the fact that the temple near the Aqaba Gulf, close to the border with South Jordan, was revered by Arabian tribes, just as the classical authors had written.

    Scholars today believe that even Quraish, which is the tribe of Mohammed, traveled north every year to a revered temple. There are many proofs that Quraish neglected the temple of Mecca and made their Hajj to the north. Wellhausen quotes the words of al-Kalbi, "people would go on a pilgrimage and then disperse, leaving Mecca empty." [xxvi][26] In their thinking, another temple had pre-eminence over Kaabah, the temple at Mecca.

     Verses in the Qur'an tell us that the citizens of Mecca used to make a trip "far away," but later the Qur'an put a stop to the practice. Mohammed also prohibited people from making this religious trip after he occupied Mecca. Quraish used to go to Taif in the summer. This is attested to by a saying of Ibn Abbas, as reported in the Tabari. [xxvii][27] The other trip may be toward a northern temple.

      Agatharchides' survey, along with what we have discussed, confirms the fact that Mecca and its temple didn't exist during the 3rd and 2nd centuries B.C.  Even when the temple was eventually built in later centuries A.D., it was a local temple of secondary importance, disregarded even by the tribe to which Mohammed belonged.  Mohammed's tribe used to make a pilgrimage with other Arabian tribes to a temple in the far northern part of Arabia.

    It's unhistorical to believe the Islamic claim that the temple in Mecca was built by Abraham and Ishmael as a center of monotheistic worship for Arabia.  Muslims today need to renounce this claim and return to the true monotheism of history, the revelation of God, which the Bible alone represents. Such Biblical revelation has been documented in all epochs since the time Moses received the first five books of the Bible until Revelation, the last book of the New Testament.  

[Peter]

Nonnosus Reports on the Temple in the Gulf of Aqaba Area

This temple mentioned by Agatharchides in northern Arabia in the Aqaba Gulf region is attested to by Nonnosus. Previously, I quoted the words of Nonnosus regarding this temple, as we find them in the book of Photius:

Most of the Saracens , those Phoinikon and those beyond the Taurenian mountains, consider a place dedicated to I do not know what god as sacred, and assemble there twice a year.

The first of these gatherings lasts a whole month and goes on until the middle of Spring. The other lasts two months. While these gathering last, they live in complete peace not only with each other, but also with all the people who live in their country.  They claim that even the wild beasts live in peace with men and, what is more, among themselves.[xxviii][28]

 

This tells us that the northern temple was a place where many tribes would perform a pilgrimage twice a year. During this pilgrimage, the tribes abstained from fighting each other. If one of the religious trips of Quraish was to this temple, It is clear that Mohammed tried to stop this famous and historical Arabian temple pilgrimage. He directed Quraish, the tribe of Mecca, as well as other tribes, to make the pilgrimage to Mecca instead.

    From the quotation of Nonnosus, we see that the northern temple had similarities between their rituals and the rituals we encounter in the temple at Mecca and in other temples of Arabia. These rituals included the Hajj, and abstinence from war during the Hajj. These rituals performed in the temple of Mecca reflect those of pagan Arabian religions. The temple of Mecca was built in the 5th century A.D. by Tubb'a, the Himyarite leader of Yemen. However, the Quraish tribe, like many Arabian tribes, continued to make a pilgrimage twice a year. The word "Hajj" means pilgrimage.  Scholars think the Quraish were regularly traveling on these pilgrimages to the temple at Taif and to a temple located in the far north of Arabia. These travels were performed long before Mohammed imposed worship at the Temple of Mecca on all Muslims and annulled worship at the other temples of Arabia. Therefore, with the accuracy of Agatharchides and the geographers of that time, we see that neither the temple of Mecca nor the city of Mecca existed at that time.  Instead, there was another temple, which attracted the Arabian tribes. That temple was located near the border between northern Arabia and Jordan.

     Quraish, the tribe of Mohammed, occupied Mecca after it was built around the 4th century A.D. by another tribe called Khuzaa'h who had come from Yemen. So the Quraish tribe did not find a revered ancient temple in the city. Even after the temple of Mecca was built in the city later, the Quraish continued the practice of many Arabian tribes and made a pilgrimage twice a year.

     The Qur'an in Sura Quraish 106 verses 1-3 prohibits the tribe to do their "covenant" for two journeys. I think the two pilgrimages to a northern temple and to the temple of Taif are intended in the Qur'anic verse and, instead, compel them to worship Allah in the temple of Mecca. Sura Quraish 106 verses 1-3 says:

for the covenants by the Quraish; their covenants covering journeys by winter and summer. Let them adore the lord of this house.

Islamic tradition confirms that Quraish used to have two religious Hajj to other places in northern Arabia. Scholars think that Quraish were traveling on these pilgrimages to a temple located in the far north of Arabia and to the Taif temple. These travels were regularly performed before Mohammed imposed worship at the temple of Mecca, called Kaabah, on all Muslims. Mohammed annulled worship at the other temples of Arabia, many of which were also called Kaabah.

 

The Kaabah of Mecca was Part of a Religious System Involving Many Kaabahs of Arabia That Belonged to Arabian Star Worship

In the worship before Mohammed's time, "Kaabah" was the name given to all the temples of the so-called "Family Star Religion" of Arabia. The Kaabah of Mecca was no exception.  Each Kaabah had the same basic cubic form, with the same structural details on the inside as are found in the temple at Mecca. For example, each temple had a well where gifts were placed.  Also, each temple had a well which provided holy water for use in the rites of the pilgrimage.  In the case of Mecca, this well is called Zamzam.

   The Main element in the Kaabahs are the black stones, a key element in worship. These stones are meteorites that the Arabians found and revered. Wherever one of these stones was found, a temple was built around it. So each Kaabah has one black stone which is held in esteem as a deity representing the family star.  Pilgrims visiting any of these Kaabahs perform many of the same rites we encounter in the rites at Mecca. For example, men and women wearing special clothing circle around the black stone. The Kaabahs originated in Yemen and were dedicated to "The Star Family." Hilal, the moon, was the father and Ellat, the sun, was his wife.[/b] The Kaabahs spread across Arabia with the emigration of many Yemeni tribes in the north. The tribe of Khuzaa'h emigrated from Yemen in the 2nd century A.D. to the area where Mecca was later built. In the 4th century A.D. they built the city of Mecca. Asa'd Abu Karb, the Yemeni leader who occupied Mecca during his reign in Yemen from 410 to 435 A.D., built the temple of Mecca with the same specifications as Yemeni existing temples. They worshipped the daughters of Allah, and his wife, Ellat, the sun, just as in every Kaabah in Yemen and in regions of northern Arabia.

 

Through the report of Agatharchides , we know that the area where Mecca was eventually built as uninhabited during his time.

We will now return to our discussion of the works of Agatharchides. He is known for describing in detail the regions of Arabia along the Red Sea. He identified all the peoples that lived along the entire Arabian coast of the Red Sea. Agatharchides described the geography from the coast of the Red Sea to 100 miles inland. He mentioned cities like Petra, located about 80 miles from the coast. This was the area that the caravans begin to use in the 3rd century B.C. as their land trading route along the Red Sea.

   The Greek and Roman geographers were very interested with the strip of land which extended in depth from the shore of the Red Sea to about 100 miles inland, and in length from Sinai to Yemen. This strip of land is important to our study, because this is the place where Mecca was later built - about 40 miles from the shore. Although sites in this area were well documented, Mecca is absent in the descriptions of all the Greek and Roman geographers from this time who explored and described this strip of land.

    There is another historical strip of land which starts about 150 to 200 miles from the Red Sea in northwestern Arabia. A few cities were built on some of the oases in this region around the 9th century B.C. Among the first cities built were Dedan and Qedar. Other cities were built later when a trading route developed between the oasis cities and Yemen in the 8th century B.C.  Among these cities were Yathrib and Khaybar, which are mentioned in various records of the kings and the people who occupied northwestern Arabia, an area also called Hijaz.  The location where Mecca was later built is also located in Hijaz.  Mecca is not mentioned in these different records.

    One of the kings who ruled in the area of northwestern Arabia, known as Hijaz, was Nabonidus, the Babylonian king.   Nabonidus transferred his residence to the city of Teima in northern Arabia for 10 years (550-540 B.C.). In what has been called, the "Verse Account of Nabonidus" we read:

Nabonidus killed the prince of Teima and took his residency and built there his palace like his palace in Babylonia.[xxix][29]

 

From an inscription which Nabonidus left at his original city Harran, we know that during his sojourn at Teima he also ruled the cities of Hijaz existing at that time. Among them were Yathrib (Medina) and Khaybar,[xxx][30]  but he did not mention Mecca. (See Fig. 4, at the end of the article) Mecca, if it existed at that time, would have been the only city of Hijaz which he did not conquer. This would have been strange for a strong Babylonian king to conquer so deep and far into the land of Hijaz, reaching as far as Yathrib, and then spare Mecca. The fact is that he did not mention Mecca because it did not exist in his time, which was the middle of the 6 th century B.C. Therefore, Mecca is absent from the historical picture of the events of northern Arabia during the aforementioned times.

    This strip of land bordering the Red Sea holds yet another key to the dating of Mecca. The land is historically attested to by expeditions of Greeks and Romans . It is also attested to by kingdoms that tried to control the trade across it from Yemen toward Palestine and Syria. One of these kingdoms is the Nabataean kingdom, situated on the border between Arabia and Jordan.  Another is the Main Kingdom in Yemen. In all their reports, Mecca is absent from the archaeological records.

    Agatharchides' survey covered, in detail, this strip of land along the Red Sea where Mecca was built in later times. He started systematically with the Nabataeans and mentioned a body of water called the Laeanites Gulf. This confirms the influence of the Lihyan kingdom on the region of Aqaba Gulf.  This influence extended from the 4th century B.C. until the 2nd century B.C.

     Agatharchides also tells us about the land inhabited by people called the Batmizomaneis. He says:

Next after this section of the coast is a bay which extends into the interior of the country for a distance of not less than five hundred stades. Those who inhabit the territory within the gulf are called Batmizomaneis and they are hunters of land animals.[xxxi][31]

 

( A "stade" is one eighth of an English mile.)  Fig.2(at the end of the article) shows the Gulf of Aqaba where the land of the Batmizomaneis is located - south of the Nabataeans and north of the Thamud.

   In this land Agatharchides mentioned the temple which all the Arabs used to revere, the temple that I discussed previously. This temple is not the temple of Mecca; geographers had placed the temple in the land of the Batmizomaneis, close to Petra, about 700 miles distant from where Mecca was built. It is interesting to note that Agatharchides describes each group of people living on the strip along the Red Sea, and he explicitly mentions how far each one's territory extended into the interior.  As a careful Greek geographer, he documented, in detail, all the people and the geography of the strip, mentioning places at least 100 miles into the interior of Arabia.

    After describing land along the Red Sea, Agatharchides turns to the Thamud region, which covered a section north of the strip about which we've been talking. He says this area is inhabited by "Arabs called Thamoundeni," or Thamud, a tribe which first appeared in the 8th century B.C. and continued until the 5th century A.D. The existence of the Thamuds is also reflected in Assyrian records, whose inscriptions on rocks proved that the Thamuds were scattered through a wide part of northern Arabia, including the strip along the Red Sea.  Agatharchides describes many details about this part of strip - the length of the Thamudic coast, and other particulars. This helped scholars to identify the coasts which come next after this Thamudic coast, corresponding to today's maps of the Red Sea. In fact, the next coast he described have been identified by geographers as the coast between the following current locations in Arabian peninsula: Ras Karkama located at 25 54' N, 36 39' E, and Ras Abu Madd located at 24 50' N, 37 08 E.[xxxii][32] Ras Abu Madd is about 450 kilometers (280 miles) from Mecca.

    After describing the place identified today as Ras Abu Madd, Agatharchides seemed to pass through uninhabited areas. Previously, he would stop to describe the inhabitants of each area, but after leaving the area which the geographers identified with the region that ends with Ras Abu Madd, there are no description of inhabitants. It is unusual for Agatharchides and the other geographers upon whom he depended to fail to describe an area if it was inhabited. To fail to tell about the inhabitants of an area allows us to conclude that the area was uninhabited. This segment without inhabitants corresponds to the strip where Mecca was built in later times. This fact is reconfirmed by other geographical facts; not only by scholars recognizing the tract that it precedes it, namely, the tract between Ras Karkama and Ras Abu Madd, the two cities which we find today on the map of Arabia. But it is also identifiable by the tract, which follows in the description of Agatharchides, which he describes with the following words:

The next part of the coast is dominated by dunes which are infinite in their length and breadth and black in color.

 

This is identified by scholars with (the black basalt Harat Shama half way between Jeddah and the lagoon of al-Sharifa.)[xxxiii][33] Today Jeddah is considered as the port of Mecca - it is about 40 miles distant from it. Al-Sharifa is described by the geographical books as "a very long inlet, parallel to the coast immediately northwest of al-Lith, shut in by a long narrow island, Jezirat Qishran."[xxxiv][34]  (See Fig. 3, at the end of the article)

      After the area where Jeddah and Mecca were built, Agatharchides described another arid, uninhabited area in his time which extended about 86 miles to the south. From his description, we can see a long tract, starting from Ras Abu Madd until half-way between Jeddah and the Lagoon of al-Sharifa, which was uninhabited in the time of Agatharchides. It is the tract where Mecca was built in later times. This tract we can estimate to be about 460 miles in length.  Mecca was built in the 4th century A.D. in the middle of this tract which divides northwestern Arabia (particularly where some of the Thamuds came to live along the Red Sea) from other tracts which connect central west Arabia with southern Arabia. It was a huge arid geographical barrier between northwestern Arabia and the southwest, where no inhabitants lived at the time of Agatharchides, who wrote about the 3rd century B.C. and his times, the middle of the 2nd century B.C.

    This observation of Agatharchides about this tract located in central western Arabia is understandable historically, because the tribes which inhabited the north of Arabia along the Red Sea were mainly Lihyanites and Thamuds, along with the Nabataeans who extended their dominion sometimes over Northwestern Arabia. None of these tribes were known in history to have lived toward the central western portion of Arabia where this uninhabited tract (that later became the city of Mecca) is situated.  All this tells us is that it would be easier for the people of Alaska to claim that Abraham went to the frozen north and built a temple to establish a monotheistic religion, than for Mohammed to claim that Abraham built a city in an arid tract along the Red Sea in central west Arabia - an area which never attracted people to inhabit it, even the closest tribes of North Arabia. Neither of the tribes and nations closest to such tract from the southern direction had ever inhabited such tract of central western Arabia.

 

ARTEMIDORUS' SURVEY

Artemidorus' survey showed that the tract on central western Arabia, where Mecca was later built, was still uninhabited as late as 103 B.C.

Another Greek geographer and historian, Artemidorus of Ephesus, wrote a total of eleven geography books. He lived around 103 B.C. and was quoted by the historian, Strabo. Although Artemidorus included extensive excerpts from the book of Agatharchides in his eleven-book survey of world geography,[xxxv][35]  he also included additional information gathered by others in his time, and from his own travels, as well.[xxxvi][36] Consequently, Artemidorus, as well as Agatharchides, described the strip of land along the Red Sea. Just like Agatharchides, Artemidorus described the nature of each tract along the coast of the Red Sea and the population who lived there. When he came to the same central western Arabian tract where Mecca was later built, he didn't mention any people living there, making it clear that around 103 B.C. this tract was still uninhabited. He mentioned some islands near that area which were also uninhabited.[xxxvii][37] He has to walk very much more to the south of this region in order to find a small port. To the south of this port was a land inhabited by the so-called "Debae" people. There were Bedouins traveling in the area and a few farmers, but no cities were seen in that area. Artemidorus had to travel much further south to near the border of Yemen to find, as he said, "more civilized" people.[xxxviii][38] In other words, the tract of central western Arabia where Mecca was built later was still uninhabited as of 103 B.C. This tract is divided from Yemen by an area, which is inhabited only by uncivilized Bedouin tribes.

 
THE ROMANS EXPLORE WESTERN AND SOUTHERN ARABIA

The Roman expedition into western and southern Arabia accurately described the villages which were built in the area of central western Arabia , but they never mentioned a city called Mecca.

Our history doesn't end here. In the year 30 B.C. Egypt became a Roman province. The Romans then wanted to control the Arabian regions along the Red Sea, especially south of the city called Leuce Kome on the shore of the Arabian Red Sea. From there, through the central western shore, were places where savage tribes were acting as pirates and threatening sea navigation. The Romans also wanted to control Yemen and, subsequently, the spices trade coming from India through Yemen.

    Rome trusted the military campaign to Gallus, the governor of Egypt. He was unsuccessful, but his campaign provides more historical accuracy for us. Gallus departed from the Egyptian shore of the Red Sea with 10,000 Roman soldiers, 1,000 Nabataean soldiers, and some other Roman allies in the region. The Nabataeans were ruled by the Roman Empire at that time, so they promised to help the Romans in this expedition as soldiers and guides.  The Nabataeans were ideal as guides because part of northern Arabia along the Red Sea was under the Nabataean domain. Strabo, the famous geographer and historian, took part in the expedition and wrote about it in his 16th book. This gives to the expedition a special value in terms of geography; it is a highly-documented expedition, and not a narration of any kind.

   The expedition had special importance for a geographer, because it was not the journey of a traveler who might have missed cities deeper inland. It was a military expedition, intended to control all the villages and cities which might threaten Roman trade within this strip of land.  The Romans were very thorough and would not have missed a city. The Roman Expedition went through the strip of land which geographers used to explore along the Red Sea, which I defined previously as extending from the shore to at least 100 miles inland. The Romans wanted to subdue every village because of the continuing piracy which originated from central western Arabia. Therefore, no city or village was left alone in this military expedition.

    The expedition arrived at Leuce Come, which means the "white village." This village was part of the Nabataean territory at the time of the expedition.  Strabo attested to the flourishing of the land route through this village to Petra, and from there to Egypt and Syria. This village is placed in the today map of Arabia at El Haura, 25 7 N., 37 13 E.[xxxix][39] Leuce Come is about 280 miles from the place where Mecca was later built. To the south of this village lay the central western part of Arabia along the Red Sea, which we previously saw was uninhabited in 103 B.C., But now, because the land route along the Red Sea had started to flourish, there had been a few villages built since 103 B.C. which Gallus occupied. These villages are mentioned in the narration of Strabo who was an eyewitness to this important expedition.

    After Leuce Come, Gallus marched to the south, through Nabataean-controlled lands. Strabo describes the nature of the region with these words:

Gallus moved his army from Leuce Come and marched through regions where water had to be carried by camels.

 

Gallus marched until he reached the desert assigned to Aretas, his kinsman, by King Obodas of Nabataean. We assume that Gallus was marching toward the village of Egra about 1100 Greek stadia from Leuce Come (about 137 miles).  Strabo described this part under Aretas, as follows:

It afforded only zea, a kind of coarse grain, a few palm trees and butter instead of oil.[xl][40]

 

It is a description of a deserted tract of land with few stations on the caravan route coming from the south. These stations are mainly Nabataean stations to protect and control the trade passing through this area.

    Then Strabo described the next segment of the central-western Arabian campaign with these words:

The next country which Gallus traversed belongs to nomads and most of it was truly desert; and it was called Ararene, and he spent fifty days arriving at the city of Negrani.

 

That was a city of Najran on the border of Yemen about 385 miles south of Mecca, and about 125 miles from the shore of the Red Sea. So we understand from the description of Strabo that the central western tract of Arabia along the Red Sea during the time of the expedition had few changes since the 3rd and 2nd centuries B.C. This region was described by previous geographers as uninhabited in its northern part, and inhabited by Bedouins in its southern part, until reaching the more civilized people near Yemen.  At least three of the stations which the Nabataeans had built on the caravan road became small villages, which were mentioned in this expedition. The situation was likely similar to that of the 2nd and 3rd centuries B.C.

    Gallus wanted to subdue the region to protect the trade from the piracy coming from this area. His plan was to occupy all the cities found in this dangerous tract, but he did not find any city until he reached Najran. This demonstrates that Mecca was not yet built in those times - that is, around 23 B.C.  Gallus occupied Najran, then Asca (within Yemeni territory). Going south he occupied a city called Athrula, then advanced toward Marsiaba (probably Ma'rib, the capital of Saba), he assaulted and besieged the city for six days, but desisted for want of water. He lost only seven soldiers in war against the Arabians of Najran and in the battles south of it. Most of the losses in his army came from lack of water and supplies, and disease.

If Mecca existed at the time of the expedition, it would have been impossible to be missed by a weary army which needed a city in which to rest and replenish supplies

The hardships of Gallus' army were because of the huge distances, which existed between the small few villages in this tract of central Arabia where Mecca was built in later times. This caused many soldiers to die from a lack of supplies and water. The Romans accused Syllaeus of not helping them as a guide because he chose paths between the villages and cities that were longer than they should have been. This did not affect the plan of passing through all the villages which existed in the area, since the villages and cities were known by all contemporaries to the expedition, and confirmed by the inhabitants. In other words, each village or city knew the name of the next city or village which Gallus needed to visit on the way to Najran and the other cities of Yemen.

    Since subduing all of central western Arabia was an important goal for the expedition, Gallus would not have missed a city like Mecca, if it had existed then.

    Another thing to consider is that after Gallus failed to occupy the Yemeni city of Marsiaba, he replaced Syllaeus as a guide, and instead depended on native experts to return to Negrana and then to the Nabataean village of Leuce Come. Consequently, he made the return trip more quickly, passing through the few villages which were built on the caravan road where Mecca was eventually built. Strabo mentioned them by name, but never mentioned Mecca.[5][e] Ultimately, Gallus withdrew from the war. The huge distances between the villages, which were built on this central Arabian tract, created a logistical travel problem for an army of more than 11,000.  Gallus lost thousands of his soldiers because of lack of supplies and water.

    The Roman historian, Dio Cassius, described the failure of the expedition in his book, The History of Rome. Here's what he wrote:

At first Aelius Gallus encountered no one, yet he did not proceed without difficulty; for the desert, the sun, and the water (which had some peculiar nature) all caused his men great distress, so that the larger part of the army perished.[xli][41]

This advances our argument. If Mecca had existed as a city, it would have been Gallus' main goal to control it. No cities are described by any of the historians, except for the few villages I mentioned previously which were built on the caravan road. If Mecca had existed, it would have been an important place to rest, to replenish supplies and to prepare a person to traverse the rest of this terrible tract toward Najran and the other Yemeni cities. No one who planned to occupy a desert would abandon its main city. But that desert had no city in existence like Mecca; that is why the expedition had its hardships and problems with supplies.

    What this ultimately shows us is that the claims of Islam which state that Mecca was a city that flourished during the time of Abraham, are unsubstantiated and false. All the records of the historians of the time show that Mecca was not in existence until the 4th century, certainly not in the time of Abraham. If Islam is wrong on this key assertion, how can we trust it in other assertions?  

[Peter]

MECCA WAS ABSENT FROM THE HISTORICAL TRAVELS AND WRITINGS OF STRABO

The historian Strabo shows us clearly that the city of Mecca could not have existed during the time of Christ and, therefore, not when the Muslims claim.

We will continue to refute the Islamic claim that Mecca has existed since the time of Abraham. To this end we will now study the works of Strabo, a Greek geographer who lived between 64 B.C. and 23 A.D. In his geographical study, Strabo summarized the most important works written by geographers before him and reported writings done by his contemporaries.  Among those whose work he referenced were: Artemidorus, Eratosthenes and Agatharcides.[xlii][42] I have mentioned these men in the past.

      Athenodorus was a geographer who accompanied Strabo in some of his travels. In Strabo's own words, he was "a philosopher and companion of mine who had been in the city of the Petraneans."[xliii][43]  By "Petraneans" Strabo means the city of Petra, and he quotes some of Athenodorus' writings about the city and its government. Strabo also passionately and accurately gives us a detailed survey of Arabia during his lifetime.  He visited the region with other Greek historians, philosophers and geographers and described the region, relying on his own first-hand research and the observations of those who accompanied him in the region. I mentioned previously that as a geographer and historian, Strabo accompanied Gallus on the Roman expedition. Strabo's purpose was to personally verify information about the region which he had gathered from various sources. He discussed the goal of the expedition in these words:

Many of the special characteristics of Arabia have been disclosed by the recent expedition of the Romans against the Arabians, which was made in my own time under Aelius Gallus as commander. He was sent by Augustus Caesar to explore the tribes and the places.[xliv][44]

 

So we see that one of the aims of the expedition was to explore the "tribes and the places" of Arabia. Strabo mentioned Augustus Caesar's particular interest in western Arabia when he said:

Caesar saw that the Troglodyte country, which adjoins Egypt, neighbors upon Arabia, and he saw also that the Arabian Gulf, which separates the Arabians from the Troglodytes, is extremely narrow.  Accordingly, he conceived the purpose of winning the Arabians over to himself or of subjugating them.[xlv][45]

    

From this we see that one main goal of the Romans was the pacification of the northern and central regions of Arabia, which lay opposite to Troglodytes on the shore of the Red Sea and the regions around it. This is also where the city of Mecca was later built. Notice, also, that the control of this area was important to the security of the land trade, which was beginning to flourish around the start of the Christian era. Caesar also needed to protect the marine route from piracy which was coming from the Arabian regions adjoining the Red Sea.

    Strabo's work is important to my argument that Mecca didn't come into existence until many, many years after Abraham lived. Although this region was documented thoroughly by Strabo's participation in the Roman expedition, Mecca was not mentioned at all. Though his survey quoted heavily the intensive research by other geographers, Mecca was not mentioned in all of this. Neither was any tribe mentioned that, according to Islamic tradition, was supposed to have lived in Mecca since the time of Abraham, nor was any temple found in that area. Strabo's survey is also important because it verified the description given by other geographers who wrote about the tribes and places along the Red Sea, starting from the far north of Arabia and reaching south to Yemen.

    Why doesn't Strabo make any mention of Mecca or its temple?  This cannot be accidental. If a tourist with far less interest in exploring a region had failed to mention the name of a main city, we might be able to consider this an accident. But when a geographer, who is entrusted to make a survey for a great empire like Rome, fails to mention a city like Mecca, there is no possibility that he accidentally missed it.  Add to that all the geographers and experts who described the area, and didn't mention once a city like Mecca, and you can reach only one conclusion: Mecca did not exist in about 23 B.C. when Strabo wrote his reports.

 

"THE PERIPLUS OF THE ERYTHRAEAN SEA"

"The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea" confirms Mecca didn't exist during the end of the 1st century A.D.

I have mentioned Artemidorus, Eratosthenes and Agatharcides, as well as Strabo - none of whom acknowledged the existence of Mecca in their time, which was prior to Christ. Now I'd like to take you to another source. This time, to a book considered to be one of the most reliable historical documents on trade routes and the regions of Arabia. The book, written between 58 and 62 A.D.[xlvi][46]  by an unnamed author, is The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea. It was written by a resident in the city of Berenice, opposite to central Arabia, and about 200-220 miles from the place where Mecca was later built.

   The dating of the book is important to our study, and many external evidences attest to the dating. For example, Pliny copied some of the ideas of Periplus into his book, Natural History.  Natural History was written between 72 and 76 A.D., [6][f]  so we can conclude that Periplus was written before that. Another important element in determining the date of Periplus is that the author in Chapter 57 mentions the monsoon on the Indian Ocean, which Hippalus documented around 47 A.D. Because Hippalus noticed the periodic weather behavior, he was able to sail to India at just the right time, thus shortening the time required for a round-trip voyage to India. His discovery allowed trade with India to flourish.

    The author of Periplus mentions the monsoon discovery, proving that the book was written after 47 A.D. Some other proofs more accurately determine that the book was written a little later than that, even - somewhere between 60-62 A.D.

    It is certain that the author of Periplus was a Greek merchant, and that he traveled the Arabian regions as far as India. We also assume that he lived in the city of Berenice on the Red Sea, opposite the Arabian ports of Leuce Come, and not in the larger city of Alexandria. How do we know this?  Because the author didn't describe the usual voyage as going from Coptos in the interior of Egypt, along the Nile, and through the Egyptian desert. Strabo and Pliny both describe this voyage in such a way, causes scholars to assume that the writer of Periplus lived in Berenice.

    The city of Berenice is on the western coast of the Red Sea, opposite the Arabian ports of Leuce Come and Egra. We know that Egra is about 137 miles away from Leuce Come, and only 62 miles from the village of Malathan, which is the closest village to the place where Mecca was later built. This is important to us because the author lived on the African shore of the Red Sea, not too far from the tract of land on which Mecca was later built. Being very familiar with the central tract of Arabia where Mecca was built in later times, he wrote about the regions close to where he lived, making his book an extremely important document. We also know that the book was not written by a person who only visited the region, or made a survey during his lifetime, but by a person who knew in detail the cities and villages near the area where he actually lived.

    The distance between the city in which he lived and the place where Mecca was built is between 200 and 250 miles. His knowledge of Mecca, if it had existed in his time, is analogous to a contemporary resident of Paris knowing about the city of Rome. Assuredly, the author would have known about the city if it had actually been there. The accuracy of Periplus is corroborated by many geographical and historical evidences.  We find that descriptions in the book agree with descriptions in the later book Pliny wrote describing the Arabian coasts.

    Also, we find historical facts corresponding with those narrated by The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea. For example, the author of the book in chapter 19 mentioned Malichas as king of the Nabataeans. Josephus, the Jewish Roman historian, mentioned this king, under the name of Malchus, in more than one place.[xlvii][47] The author of The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea mentioned Eleazus as a title of the king of Frankincense country, that is, Hadramuot.[xlviii][48]  He also mentions Charibael as title for the king of two Yemeni tribes, the Himyarites and the Sabaeans.[xlix][49]  This information is attested to be true by inscriptions discovered in southern Arabia by archaeologist Glaser.[l][50]

    The author mentioned many other cities which were distant from the shore of the Red Sea. One example is Coloe, which he said is "a three days' journey" from Adulis, a city on the African shore.[51] The author mentioned many other cities which were similarly distant from the Red Sea. Therefore, not mentioning Mecca, which is only 30 or 40 miles from the Red Sea is a significant matter. While the author mentioned many cities in the region which are of little importance, and are two or three times as far from shore as Mecca, the author still does not mention the city of Mecca at all: Think about it .The author of The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea described the regions adjacent to the Red Sea and Indian Ocean, which were the western and southern regions of Arabia. He mentioned the names of kings, tribal chiefs, and cities distant from shore, but he did not mention Mecca. His report has significant importance because he is a resident in the city of Berenice, opposite to central Arabia, and a distance of about 200-220 miles from the place where Mecca was built in later times. As an expert merchant and geographer, which his book clearly shows, it cannot be attributed to him to be ignorant of the cities close to his home when he described the Red Sea coastal regions. In fact, if he did succeed in describing with such accuracy, the cities, tribes and trade as far as India, how then could he be ignorant of a city such as Mecca, which would be only 200-220 miles from his home? The fact is that he does not mention Mecca because, in his time, Mecca did not exist.

 

PLINY'S SURVEY

Pliny's Survey covered all of Arabia, mentioning all the cities, villages and tribes of Arabia, but he never mentioned Mecca, or any tribe which the Islamic tradition claims inhabited Mecca since ancient times.

Previously, we looked at an important military campaign during the time of Caesar. The Roman geographer and historian, Strabo, documented the campaign, but nowhere did he mention the city of Mecca. This causes us to conclude that Mecca had not been built during the time he lived, which was 64 to 23 B.C.

    We move ahead in history to another important Roman author. We know him as Pliny, the Elder. Pliny was born at Como in northern Italy in 23 A.D. He became a commander of a Roman cavalry squadron, studied the law, became the Procurator - the financial manager - in Spain, then returned to Rome and became part of the Emperor's intimate inner circle.[lii][52] This gave him access to the Roman documents, especially about the expedition into Arabia under Gallus, which Pliny mentioned in his work. He then received a naval commission. He died in 79 A.D.

    Pliny completed his book, Natural History, in 77 A.D. It is his most important contribution to the knowledge we have about Roman life and times. It is an encyclopedia covering a wide variety of subjects, including: geography, astronomy, botany, zoology, meteorology and mineralogy. In the preface to this book, Pliny writes that he deals with 20,000 matters selected from 100 different authors. One of the authors Pliny consulted was Juba, a king in Mauritania, who did a survey of Arabia, documenting various locations and tribes in Arabia.

    Pliny in his work Natural History, Book Five, Chapter 12, deals with "the coasts of Arabia, situated on the Egyptian sea." Then, in the book six, in the lengthy chapters 32 and 33, he focuses with detail on Arabia. The work of Pliny is considered a true encyclopedia. He mentioned approximately 92 nations and tribes in Arabia. Though he mentioned the least and most insignificant tribes of Arabia which existed in his lifetime, he does not mention any of the tribes which the Islamic tradition claims lived in Mecca during the first centuries after Christ. Although he mentioned 69 cities and villages in Arabia at this time, including villages of insignificant tribes, he did not mention Mecca. This adds to all other documented proofs that the Islamic claims regarding Mecca are unhistorical and without any foundation.

    Pliny's survey has significant value, because he covered all the regions of Arabia. The survey starts in the far north, proceeds to the eastern gulf region, then proceeds south until it reaches the southeastern corner of Arabia.  He goes west to the Red Sea, then north to the Gulf of Aqaba, and finally returns by proceeding south, all the while describing the interior land of Arabia.  It is easy to see that the survey didn't overlook any area of Arabia which was inhabited at that time.  Pliny was so detailed that he mentioned tribes which inhabited the desert, called the An-Nafud Desert today, such as the tribe of the Agraei, but still he didn't mention Mecca or any tribe living in the area where Mecca eventually was built.

    Considering that Pliny's research covered all regions of Arabia, it is significant that there is a total absence in Pliny's work of any mention of any of the tribes, which were claimed by the Islamic tradition to have existed, and which had an important role in the affairs of Arabia. I firmly believe that the absence of such tribes confirms that Islamic tradition wanted to back the Qur'an in its false claim concerning Mecca. Consequently, the Muslims created false names of tribes, and a false history which doesn't correspond with the true documented history of men like Pliny, Artemidorus, Agatharchides and Strabo. One of the tribes that the Muslims created an imaginary history about is Jurhum. It is claimed that the people of Jurhum existed in Mecca since the time of Abraham and that, for a period of time, those people dominated Arabia. If these claims were true, Jurhum would have been superior to the documented nations of Arabia, such as Saba. Neither Greek nor Roman historical or archaeological records mention or allude to a tribe called Jurhum, even though archaeology over many centuries B.C. had uncovered many nations and tribes who lived north and south to the area where Mecca was later built. Jurhum might have been an insignificant tribe who appeared only after the Christian era.

    Pliny's research also refutes the Islamic tradition concerning Quraish, the tribe from which Mohammed, himself, came. Islam claims that Quraish was an old tribe which lived in or around Mecca.  Islamic tradition also claims that Quraish held a pre-eminent role over the other Arabian tribes in the region.  Pliny, along with his Greek predecessors, demonstrates clearly that the Islamic history of Mecca is completely untrue and unhistorical. It wasn't until the 8th century A.D. that Islamic writers began to claim a special history for Mecca of great prestige in the region. Of course, the work of both Pliny and the Greeks show that these claims can't be substantiated.

    Furthermore, the early surveys disprove the claim that Quraish, the tribe of Mohammed, was an old tribe which had religious prestige among the other Arabian tribes. When compared to the well-documented Greek and Roman histories, the claim is proven to be without historical foundation. In fact, the survey of Pliny, with other Greek and Roman surveys, confirms the fact that Quraish, Khuzaa'h, the tribe which first built Mecca, and other tribes which inhabited Mecca did not yet exist in the 1st century A.D. in the region where Mecca was eventually built. This is a further confirmation that these tribes appeared and emigrated from Yemen in later times, and built Mecca some time after they emigrated from Yemen.

 

Ibn Ishak Invented False History, and Revealed his Ignorance

I mentioned previously that the person who first attempted to assign names to the tribes living in Mecca, and to create a history for Quraish, was Ibn Ishak. He lived in the 8th century A.D.

    I also mentioned the ignorance of Ibn Ishak, his limited knowledge of history, and his confused chronology. In spite of this, the Muslims still follow this man's writings today, although he showed ignorance in his narration about history and lack of any historical basis for his writings. Ibn Ishak wrote about the life of Mohammed, and Ibn Hisham was the one who later edited the writings of Ibn Ishak. Therefore, the biography written by Ibn Ishak was named "Ibin Hisham." This is the oldest and primary narration of the life of Mohammed. The writings of Ibn Ishak, in addition to the sayings of men like Wahab Bin Munabbih, al-Shaabi and Ibn Abbas  who wrote in the 8th and 9th centuries A.D., became the foundation which other Muslim historians depended upon for Islamic history.

    Ibn Ishak's work is filled with examples of historical ignorance in relation to documented and indisputable historical facts. For example, he claims that King Solomon, the son of David, dominated the entire earth before Alexander the Great did.[liii][53]  We know that this was not true of the true historical King Solomon.

    According to Ibn Ishak, Christianity originated in Rome through a Roman emperor who was converted to Christianity by the twelve disciples of Christ. Ibn Ishak thought that the Roman emperor Constantine, who lived in the 4th century, was a contemporary of Jesus.[liv][54]  We know that these claims about Christianity, Constantine and Jesus are not true. Ibn Ishak says that one of the leaders of Yemen, named Tubb'a Asa'd Abu Kareb, who reigned in Yemen between 410-425 A.D., occupied China.[lv][55] History does not mention this occupation of China.  An occupation of China by Yemen in the 5th century would have been recorded as a great event; however, there is no evidence of this event happening. How could all other historians miss such a major event if it had truly happened?

    The writings of Ibn Ishak are full of enormous mistakes which less-informed and ignorant elementary students would not make. How can he be considered a reliable historian for Muslims when he writes a narrative which disagrees with documented history?   And he did all this in order to convince people that Ishmael lived in Mecca and built the temple with Abraham's help! Sadly, this untrustworthy person became the father of a false history which has kept many Muslims from reading true and documented history. He has also kept many Muslims from reading the Bible, a dependable source for understanding ancient history.

    It is time for Muslims to think for themselves, to go beyond false claims, and to challenge what they have believed for years. Once they find the truth about Islam, they will also find the truth about Jesus Christ, the One who died as the sacrifice for sin, and the only way to heaven.

 [/list][/list]

[Peter]

PTOLEMY'S SURVEY AND THE LOCATION OF MACORABA

The Greek geographer, Claudius Ptolemy of Alexandria, Egypt, was born in the year 90 A.D. and died in 168 A.D.  He wrote Almonagest, a chief astronomical work, and another work about astrology called Tetrabilos. Around the year 150 A.D. he dedicated himself to the study of the earth's geography - more specifically, cartographical representation, or mapping of the earth.  He was inspired by the work of several other geographers who lived before him, including Marinus, who lived from 70 A.D. to 130 A.D. These geographers pioneered the concept of latitude and longitude lines for world maps. Ptolemy enhanced the concept of the latitude and longitudes. Ptolemy reduced the latitude and longitude that Marinus has established before.[lvi][56] Ptolemy tried to document in his geographical work, simply called Geography, the latitude and longitude coordinates, also called meridians lines, for the important locations marked on the maps of his time. Most scholars doubt that the maps which included his latitude and longitude coordinates were actually drawn by him.  But they do believe that other geographers used his information when making their maps.[lvii][57]

    Ptolemy's geography provides valuable help in locating places that existed in his time, but we should consider some disclaimers that he mentions in his work. In second book Ptolemy mentions that the locations of some of the places or cities that were documented more recently, with respect to his time, are actually estimated regarding their proximity to more established places or cities.[lviii][58]   When compared to the latitude and longitude system we use today, his system seems crude and inaccurate, yet, it is still helpful to know about the recently-discovered places which didn't appear in previous geographical surveys. We can establish where newer cities are located in relation to older ones. It's helpful to know whether the cities in question are south or north of an old city, or whether they are east or west.

    From a practical standpoint, Ptolomy's criteria proves valuable when looking for other cities in the Middle East mentioned by him, or even those in his own country, Egypt. Based on these facts, his work helps us resolve the location problem for some cities, such as Macoraba, which appeared in his generation.

   In book six, chapter seven, of his work titled Geography, Ptolemy documents the latitude and longitude coordinates of several landmarks in Arabia.[lix][59]  By studying these locations and coordinates, we notice once again that the city of Mecca is never mentioned. In fact, Ptolomy doesn't mention any cities in the strip of land where Mecca was eventually built.

    Macoraba was a city in the Arabian interior which was mentioned by Ptolemy. Some people wanted to assume that Macoraba was actually Mecca. Macoraba had appeared recently, with respect to Ptolemy's time. This assumption would result in the conclusion that Mecca was built around the middle of the 2nd century A.D. However, even if this were true, it wouldn't support the claim that Mecca was an old city existing from the time of Abraham. Upon further study of the facts concerning Macoraba, we can conclude with certainty that Macoraba can't be Mecca, and we can refute the idea that Mecca was built in the 2nd century A.D. All the facts point to the historical argument that Mecca was constructed in the 4th century A.D. Since Macoraba is not pronounced similar to Mecca, the scholar Crone suggested that the location of Maqarib, near Yathrib, was actually Macoraba. Maqarib is mentioned by Yaqut al-Hamawi, an Arab geographer who lived from 1179 to1229 A.D., in his geographical dictionary Mujam al-Buldan.[lx][60] This location is more acceptable than Mecca for the modern-day location of Macoraba, because Maqarib is closer in pronunciation to Macoraba than Mecca.  Another reason is that Maqarib, though it does not exactly fit the documented location of Macoraba, is closer to the location, according to the latitude and longitude of Ptolemy, than Mecca is to the documented location of Macoraba.

    In order to determine the exact location of Macoraba, scholars have looked to the city of Lathrippa, mentioned by Ptolemy at longitude of 71, as a reference.  Lathrippa is accepted by most scholars as the city of Yathrib, a city documented in the historical record. Ptolemy placed the city of Macoraba at 73 20 longitude which means about three and a third degrees east of Yathrib, while Mecca is west of Yathrib. So Macoraba can't be the city of Mecca, nor a city in the direction where Mecca was later built.  Macoraba should be located deeper into the interior of Arabia, or toward the eastern coast of Arabia.

    We have just analyzed the longitude; now let's turn to the latitude. When we study latitude we find more data concerning the historical location of Macoraba. Ptolemy described Macoraba, not as the next city south of Lathrippa, or Yathrib, but the sixth city to the south. While the city of Carna is the first city to the south of Lathrippa, Macoraba is the sixth city to the south. Carna was a well-known Yemeni city, belonging to the Minaean kingdom mentioned by Strabo.  That is significant, because Strabo described the main tribes of southern Arabia in these words:

The extreme part of the country is occupied by the four largest tribes; by the Minaeans - whose largest city is Carna; next to these, by the Sabaeans, whose metropolis is Mariaba; third by the Cattabanians, whose royal seat is called Tamna; and the farthest toward the east, the Chatramotitae, meaning Hadramout, whose city is Sabata.[lxi][61]

 

Carna, in the past, was known as the most important and the largest city of the Yemen Kingdom of Ma'in. Carna was a significant city of Arabia which Ptolemy couldn't miss. Because Macoraba was listed as the fifth city south of Carna, we understand Ptolemy used Carna as a reference point for the five cities he listed south of Carna, included Macoraba. We can't make Lathrippa a reference point for locating Macoraba since Lathrippa is farther north of Macoraba,  but Macoraba's location is south of the famous old Minaean city of Carna. We can only conclude that by latitude, Macoraba is in south Arabia, south of the Yemeni city of Carna. However, by longitude, Ptolemy placed it closer to Carna.  By any measure, Macoraba must be near Carna, in Yemen.

    I think we should go more east of Yathrib to identify Mokoraba mentioned by Ptolemy. In fact, Pliny mentions a city with the name Mochorba, and he said it was a port of Oman on the Hadramout shore in South Arabia. It's also possible that Macoraba is derived from Mochorba.[lxii][62]

     Since Macoraba never appears in any literature other than the narration of Ptolemy, it must have been a small settlement or tiny village which disappeared in Ptolomy's time during the 2nd century A.D. Probably a small Omani tribe emigrated from the port of Mochorba toward the north of Yemen, near Carna the old Minaean city of Yemen, and established a small settlement which they named after their original city. The tribe would then have moved to another area in search of better living conditions, a usual migratory occurrence in Arabia. The fact that Macoraba never appears again in any other classical survey confirms the fact that it was a small provisional settlement of a small tribe, and not a significant town.

    If a case for the name of Machorba should be opened, it should be seen in relation with the southern Arabian city of Mochorba, and not with Mecca. In the same manner, we see the city of New London in the United States as being named after the original city of London.  We can't open a case for the origin of the name of the American city apart from the English city after which it was named.

THE ABSENCE OF MECCA IN THE ETHIOPIAN, SYRIAN, ARAMAIC AND COPTIC LITERATURE

The absence of Mecca in the Ethiopian, Syrian, Aramaic and Coptic literature points to the fact that it couldn't have been founded during the 3rd century A.D.

Let's look at Ethiopian literature. The Ethiopians were also concerned with documenting Arabian cities on the opposite coast of the Red Sea, especially in the area where Mecca was eventually built. Again, we see that there is no mention of Mecca in their surveys. Neither do we find any mention of Mecca during the 2nd, 3rd or 4th century A.D. This also demonstrates that Mecca did not exist at the time of Ptolemy; we have to place its origin at a later date.

    That Mecca was not built before the 2nd century is an indisputable fact. The question now is whether we can determine if Mecca was built in the 3rd century or the 4th century A.D. The absence of records in Syrian, Aramaic and Coptic literature makes the dates for the existence of Mecca later than the 3rd century A.D. Crone, whom I mentioned earlier, did a survey of the Coptic and Syrian literature which was concerned with Arabia, but none of these works mentioned Mecca.[lxiii][63]

   We also have other reasons to assume that the date for Mecca's founding was after the beginning of the 4th century. We find some help in Christian evangelistic and missionary activities in Arabia and Christian literature. They do not mention Mecca either.

We also know that the Christians under the Byzantine Empire tried to evangelize Arabia. The Byzantine emperor targeted the main cities of Arabia and sent missionaries to evangelize and establish churches. This evangelism was so successful that, at the Nicea Convention around 320 A.D., an Arabic bishop participated.[lxiv][64] The church in Najran, a city on the border of Yemen toward Mecca, was established before the Nicea Convention. In 354 A.D., Constantine the Second sent Theophilus Indus to Arabia to evangelize the region. He established churches in Eden, Thafar and Hermez. The Ethiopians sent missionaries to Arabia to evangelize the cities around the Red Sea. The Nestorians sent missionaries to Hijaz, in northern and central western Arabia where Mecca was eventually built. Arabia was also the main target of missionary activity for the church of Hira in southern Iraq.

    It is significant that we don't find any mention of Mecca in all the Christian records of this time. This suggests that Mecca did not exist in the 3rd century, or at the beginning of the 4th century. Because it was inhabited by many tribes and built by a big tribe, like Khuzaa'h, Mecca could not be a small village which would not have attracted the attention of the missionaries and the Christian churches of Mesopotamia, Ethiopia and Byzantium.

    Once again, we see the writers of history confirming our research which shows that Mecca was built long after Muslims claim it was. This simple truth should challenge Muslims to take a fresh look at the teachings of the Bible and seek after the truth, which Jesus said, "-will make you free."

 

( For more studies on the true history of Mecca - see the book of Dr. Rafat Amari, Islam in light of History)

     Religion Research Institute -Home

(Pete note - Some maps here but didn't transfer to this page.)

[1][a] Many of the reports which Eratosthenes based his map upon was lost, but  much of the contents survive in the fragments of Agatharchides' work "on the Erythraean Sea," Burstein, page 12

[2] Many passages in "On the Erythraean Sea" clearly point to the fact that Agatharchides consulted eyewitness merchants and others who visited the region. See especially fragment 41.

[3][c]  Although the book of Agatharchides is no longer in existence, it has been preserved through the synopsis of the classical authors Photius, Diodorus and Strabo. We find a good summary of the 5th book of Agatharchides in the work of Diodorus "Library of History, - chapters 12-48.  The summary of Photius in his work "Bibliotheca," especially Codex 250, is very important.

[4][d] The geographical book "Western Arabia and the Red Sea," specifies the area of Wadi al- 'efal in the following area adjacent to the Gulf of Aqaba: "East of the Gulf of Aqaba two important watersheds lie, roughly parallel to one another and to the gulf; immediately behind the coastal lowlands the Ridge of al-Farwa separates the Wadis, which cut westward through the coastal ridge to the gulf, from those which drain southward to the Red Sea east of Ras Fartak. The chief of the latter wadis is Wadi al-Abyadh which, in its lower reaches, broadens and is called Wadi Efal- behind to be the plain inhabited by the Bythemani - Bythemaneas -"."; "Western Arabia and the Red Sea," Naval Intelligence Division, Geographical Handbook Series, 1946, page 40; see also footnote 3

[5][e] Regarding the expedition of Gallus; He returned to Negrana  in nine days after he failed to occupy Marsiaba in Saba. Negrana is Najran, about 650 kilometers south of Mecca. On the 11th day he reached a village called Hepta phreata, then he went to another village named Chaalla, then on to another village named Malotha which, most probiblay, was Malothan located close to the actual city of Jadda, which is about 30 miles from Mecca. But between Malotha or Malothan and Egra (north of where Mecca was later built) there were no villages mentioned by Strabo who accompagned the expedition. Gallus badly needed urgent supplies of water and food, but he could not find villages which could give him rest, and re-supply his troops in the area where Mecca was eventually built.
See The Geography of Strabo,  Book XVI. 4 .  24

[6][f]  Scholars agree that Pliny wrote his Natural History after the compilation of The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, because Pliny seems to include many elements in the description of The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea of Arabia Felix. It is known that Pliny accomplished his work Natural History between 72-76 A.D.


[1] Strabo, Geography, xv.1:4

[ii][2] Stanley Burstein, Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, The Hakluyt Society London, 1989 , page 1

[iii][3] Stanley Burstein , Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, The Hakluyt Society London, 1989, page 30

[iv][4] Stanley Burstein , Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, The Hakluyt Society London, 1989 , page 3

[v][5] The Geography of Strabo,  Book XVI .4:4
The Geography of Strabo, Volume VII, Harvard University Press, 1966, page 313

[vi][6] See C.Muller, Geographi Graeci Minores, Paris, 1855-1861, I,LIV-L,VIII; quoted by  Burstein, page 13

[vii][7] Fraser, P.M., Ptolemaic Alexandria, Oxford, 1972, I, 549; cf. Peremans, W., "Diodore de Sicile et Agatharchide de Cnide'", Historia xvi, 1967, pp.443-4; cited by Burstein, page 30

[viii][8] From book 5 of Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, excerption  from  Photius, bibliotheca, cited by Burstein, page 147-fragment 87

 

[ix][9] From book 5 of Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, excerption from Diodorus, library of history, cited by Burstein, page 79-fragment 40b

• [10] Peremans, W., " Diodore de Sicile et Agatharchide de Cnide', pp.447-55, cited by Burstein, page 32

[xi][11] Burstein, Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, The Hakluyt Society London, 1989, page 160

[xii][12] There are fragments of the book of Pythagoras, kept by Aelian, NA 17.8-9 and Athenaeus, Deipnosophists 4 .183-4; citation of  Burstein

[xiii][13] Strabo wrote: 'Eratosthenes takes all these as matters actually established by the testimony of the men who had been in the regions, for he has read many historical treatises - with which he was supplied if he had a library as large as Hipparchus says it was - he means the library of Alexandria - Strabo, Geography, book 2. 1:5

[xiv][14] Burstein , Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, The Hakluyt Society London, 1989 , page 36

[xv][15] From book 5 of Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, excerption  from  Photius, bibliotheca, cited by Burstein, page 169-fragment  105a

 

[xvi][16] See Burstein's study, footnotes, page 33

[xvi][17] From book 5 of Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, excerption  from  Photius, bibliotheca, cited by Burstein, page 148-fragment 87a

 

[xviii][18] From book 5 of Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, excerption from Diodorus, library of history, cited by Burstein, page 153-fragment 92b

[xix][19] Musil, page 303

[xx][20] Wilfred Schoff , The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, Munshiram Manoharial Publishers Pvt Ltd., 1995, page 54

[xxi][21] From book 5 of Agatharchides of Cnidus,on the Erythraean Sea, excerption  from  Photius, bibliotheca, cited by Burstein, page  150-155-fragment  90 a- 95a ;   from book 5 of Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, excerption from Diodorus, library of history, cited by Burstein, page  150-155 "fragment 91b-93b

[xxii][22] From book 5 of Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, excerption from Photius, bibliotheca, cited by Burstein, page 155-fragment   95a

[xxiii][23] cf.Woelk, p.223; cited by Burstein, page 155

[xxiv][24] Nonnosus cited by Photius, bibliotheca, 1,5

[xxv][25] Crone page 197

[xxvi][26] Noted by Wellhausen, Reste,  p.92,  cited by Crone, page 197

[xxvii][27] Ibn Abbas  in Tabari, Jami',  xxx,171, cited by Crone, page 205

[xxviii][28] Nonnosus cited by Photius, Bibliotheque, 1,5

[xxix][29] Sidney Smith, Babylonian Historical Texts, London 1924, Chapter III, page 27-97; Dougherty, Nab. And Bel., page 105-11; cited by F.V.Winnett and W.L.Reed, Ancient Records from North Arabia, University of Toronto Press, 1970, page   89

[xxx][30] C.J.Gadd, "The Harran Inscriptions of Nabonidus," ( Anatolian Studies, 8 ( 1958), page 59 ; cited by F.V.Winnett and W.L.Reed, Ancient Records from North Arabia, University of Toronto Press, 1970, page 91

[xxxi][31] From book 5 of Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea,  excerption  from  Photius, bibliotheca, cited by Burstein, page 152-fragment 92a

[xxxii][32] cf Woelk, p.223; quoted by Stanley Burstein, "Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea,"  The Hakluyt Society London, 1989, page 155

[xxxiii][33] H.Von Wissmann, Zaabram', Pauly's Realencyclopadie der Klassischen Altertumswissenschaft ( Stuttgart, 1894-1980)  supp., XI {1968}col.1310 ; cited by Stanley Burstein, Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea, The Hakluyt Society London, 1989 , page 155

[xxxiv][34] Western Arabia and the Red Sea, 1946, naval intelligence division, page 585

[xxxv][35] See Stanley Burstein on his introduction to "Agatharchides of Cnidus, on the Erythraean Sea," The Hakluyt Society, London, 1989,  page 13

[xxxvi][36] Leopoldi, Helmuthus, De Agatharchide Cnidio (Diss.Rostow, 1892) pp.13-17 ; cited by Burstein, page 39
Strabo made abridgement of Agatharchides's book, adding material from the lost book of Artemidorus. The work which Artemidorus developed, especially about Arabia, is contained in Stabo's chapters especially 16.4.5-20. See Bunbury, E.H. a history of ancient Geography, 2nd ed. (London 1883), page 61-69; Burstein, page 38

[xxxvii][37] The Geography of Strabo,  Book XVI .4.18
The Geography of Strabo, Volume VII, Harvard University Press, ( London, 1966), page  343

[xxxviii][38] The Geography of Strabo,  Book XVI .4.18

The Geography of Strabo, Volume VII, Harvard University Press, ( London, 1966), page 345

[xxxix][39] Wilfred Schoff on his comment on The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea,  Munshiram Manoharial Publishers Pvt Ltd. ( New Delhi, 1995), page 101

[xl][40] The Geography of Strabo,  Book XVI. 4 .  24

[xli][41] Dio Cassius: History of Rome,  Book LIII. xxix.3-8

[xlii][42] The Geography of Strabo,  Book XVI .4.20
The Geography of Strabo, Volume VII, Harvard University Press (London, 1966), page 349

[xliii][43] The Geography of Strabo, Book XVI .4.2

[xliv][44] The Geography of Strabo, Book XVI .4.22

[xlv][45] The Geography of Strabo,  Book XVI .4.22

[xlvi][46] Wilfred Schoff  on his introduction to The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea,  Munshiram Manoharial Publishers Pvt Ltd.( New Delhi, 1995), page 14, 15

[xlvii][47] Among the places where Josephus mentions Malchus are in "The wars of the Jews," book 1, chapter 14 and  "The Antiquities of the Jews," Book 14, chapter 14

[xlviii][48] The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, section 27

[xlix][49] The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, section 23

[l][50] Inscription No. 1619 by Glaser, cited by Wilfred Schoff, page 11

• [51] The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, section 4
  
  [lii][52] )  H.Rackham,  Introduction to Pliny, Natural History, Cambrigde, Massachusetts,  Harvard University Press, William Heinemann Ltd. (London, 1979), page vii
  
  [liii][53]Tarikh al-Tabari, first volume, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyeh (Beirut, Lebanon 1991), page 142
  
  [liv][54]Tarikh al-Tabari, first volume,  page 355
  
  [lv][55]Tarikh al-Tabari, I, 421
  
  [lvi][56] Josephi Fischer S.J., Commentatio de CL. Ptolemaci vita, operibus, influxu sacculari, pages 65-79 (in his introduction to Vatican publication of Ptolemy: Claudii Ptolemaci Geographiac Urbinas Codex graccus 82 phototypice depictus); the same mentioned by Josephi Fischer in his introduction to Claudius Ptolemy The Geography, translated by Edward Luther Stevenson, Dover Publications, INC, (New York, 1991, page 7
  
  [lvii][[lvii]57] Josephi Fischer in his  introduction to Claudius Ptolemy,  The Geography , translated by Edward Luther Stevenson, Dover Publications , INC, (New York, 1991), page 5
  
  [lviii][58] Claudius Ptolemy, The Geography, book II, Claudius Ptolemy, The Geography,  translated by Edward Luther Stevenson, Dover Publications , New York, 1991, page 47
  
  [lix][59] Claudius Ptolemy, The Geography,  book VI chapter VI, Claudius Ptolemy, The Geography,  translated by Edward Luther Stevenson, Dover Publications , New York, 1991, page 137-138
   
  
  [lx][60] Yaqut al-Hamawi, Mujam al-Buldan, iv, 587); quoted by Patricia  Crone, Meccan Trade, Princeton University Press, 1987, page, 136
  
  [lxi][61] ) The Geogrophy of Strabo, book 16, chapter iv, 2 (The Geogrophy of Strabo, volume vii, translated by Horace L. Jones , 1966, page 311 )
  
  [lxii][62] Natural history of Pliny; Book VI, chapter 32
  
  [lxiii][63] Patricia  Crone, Meccan Trade, Princeton University Press, 1987,  page 134,135
  
  [lxiv][64]  Nallino Carlo Alfonso , Raccolta di Scritti editti E ineditti, Roma, Istituto per l'Oriente, 1939-48 , Vol.III, page 122 ; Caetani, Annali Dell' Islam, I, (1907), page 125
  
     Religion Research Institute -Home

[Peter]

Are they hiding Mecca from those not indoctrinated? Why wouldn't they show off their rich history - that is if Mecca HAD one!



http://www.middle-east-info.org/league/saudi/saudi.htm

Compare that with the evidence of the history of Israel, where Muslims today enjoy more freedom than they do in any Muslim controlled country in the world.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/History/Early+History+-+Archaeology/

[Peter]

http://www.petewaldo.com/oldest_mosque_qibla.htm

There are references to lots of other temples, and even to a great temple "highly revered by all the Arabs', that was of the Bythemaneas, located near Ilat in the Aqaba gulf area.

From a website
"The Qiblah of the oldest mosques in Mecca, Iraq and Egypt do not align with Mecca. Instead they align with a point in northern Arabia. This has caused some Orientalists to speculate that they may be aligned with Jerusalem, but the calculations don't work out. The Qiblah of the earliest mosques face a point south of Jerusalem but north of Mecca."

Is this yet another smoking gun? Might the oldest mosques be pointing to that temple of the Bythemaneas in Ilat in the northern Gulf of Aqaba?

Even Mohammed's own tribe, the Quraish went on Hajj, or pilgrimage, to places to the north twice a year, long after the Kaaba in Mecca was built, indicating that the Kaaba in Mecca was a lesser temple. One of the journeys during the summer was to the city of Taif where there was also a temple called Kaabah of Ellat, or Kaabah of the Sun. "This Kaabah was more significant and much older than the Kaabah of Mecca. All Arabs, including the tribe of Quraish from which Mohammed came, venerated this Kaabah."

http://www.petewaldo.com/oldest_mosque_qibla.htm

[Peter]

http://www.petewaldo.com/mecca.htm#temple_ilat

There are references to lots of other temples, and even to a great temple "highly revered by all the Arabs', that was of the Bythemaneas, located near Ilat in the Aqaba gulf area.

From a website
"The Qiblah of the oldest mosques in Mecca, Iraq and Egypt do not align with Mecca. Instead they align with a point in northern Arabia. This has caused some Orientalists to speculate that they may be aligned with Jerusalem, but the calculations don't work out. The Qiblah of the earliest mosques face a point south of Jerusalem but north of Mecca."

Is this yet another smoking gun? Might the oldest mosques be pointing to that temple of the Bythemaneas in Ilat in the northern Gulf of Aqaba?

Even Mohammed's own tribe, the Quraish went on Hajj, or pilgrimage, to places to the north twice a year, long after the Kaaba in Mecca was built, indicating that the Kaaba in Mecca was a lesser temple. One of the journeys during the summer was to the city of Taif where there was also a temple called Kaabah of Ellat, or Kaabah of the Sun. "This Kaabah was more significant and much older than the Kaabah of Mecca. All Arabs, including the tribe of Quraish from which Mohammed came, venerated this Kaabah."

[AnnaMuslim]

Speculation, Conjecture, text that cannot be verified seem to be your sources, that are for all accounts and purposes written with a strong bias. The reason for Islam, from the time of Adam to Muhammad there is only ISlam, everything else is a deviation from the truth. The idols and idol worshipping, the worshipping of temples and Institutions, the worship of vanity of knowledge are all deviations from the truth. It matters not what some historian says or does not say or even your commentary out of vain desires is of no consequence and absolutely no value to anyone living or dead. But l;et me assure you of the Facts

There is Zam Zam in Makkah and this well predates all the historians you have mentioned the well of the wife of Abraham.

Abraham rebuilt the Kaabah on older Ruins, not built it from Scratch, These are in the records in ARABIA not the Western libraries.

The Knowledge of Islam is the foundation of your knowledge, please check the history books carefully and see who was dark ages when the the ranaissance started and who gathered all the knowledge available at the time. The reason you have greek and Roman history and Pholosophy is the Muslims. Bagdad, ring any bells ??

I would have to start this history lesson from the start to dispel all your deviations and misinterpretations,So let me start at the beginning for you

There is no God but ALLAH and Muhammad is the messenger of ALLAH.
ALLAH created Adam, (the God is a generic term that is very crude in its presentation and translation of the name of the Almighty)
ALLAH created Eve and ALLAH told him the names of all living things (ALLAH teaches man that which he knows not).
ALLAH asked all of creation to bow down to man
SATAn (Iblees) a Jinn refused and realising his mistake asks ALLAH for time to prove that man is not worthy to be bowed down to.
Satan is banished to earth and vows to lead all of mankind astray.

What I am trying to say is that your history lesson is of the utmost unimportance.

[Peter]

Speculation, Conjecture, text that cannot be verified seem to be your sources, that are for all accounts and purposes written with a strong bias. The reason for Islam, from the time of Adam to Muhammad there is only ISlam, everything else is a deviation from the truth.

Hi AnnaMuslim and welcome to the forum!

By the 7TH CENTURY, after the Bible had been copied tens of thousands of times in every popular language that was known to man and was being read all over the known world, Mohammed's "Allah" inspired this surah...

sura 5:47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.

Was his Allah just confused? Didn't Allah know the Gospel was "a deviation from the truth" as you suggest?

[Peter]

The idols and idol worshipping, the worshipping of temples and Institutions, the worship of vanity of knowledge are all deviations from the truth. It matters not what some historian says or does not say or even your commentary out of vain desires is of no consequence and absolutely no value to anyone living or dead. But l;et me assure you of the Facts

There is Zam Zam in Makkah and this well predates all the historians ........

This is NOT A FACT but preposterous nonsense you have been indoctrinated to believe.
According to even Islamic historians, Mohammed's grandfather Abdel Mutaleb dug the well of Zamzam.
(Ibn Hisham, I, pages 117 and 118)

http://religionresearchinstitute.org/Mohammad/occultism.htm
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1173.0
http://petewaldo.com/hajj_umrah.htm#zamzam

......... you have mentioned the well of the wife of Abraham.

If you are referring to Hagar, she was not Abraham's wife, but was Abraham's wife Sarah's, bondwoman - Sarah's servant.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1277.0

Abraham rebuilt the Kaabah on older Ruins, not built it from Scratch, .......

According to Aisha even your own prophet credited his tribe the Quraish with building the Kaaba - from the ground up. Presumably not even on the former foundation, since he claimed they built it smaller.

Sahih Muslim Book 007, Number 3078:
    'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Messenger may peace be upon him) said to me: Had your people not been unbelievers in the recent past (had they not quite recently accepted Islam), I would have demolished the Ka'ba and would have rebuilt it on the foundation (laid) by Ibrahim; for when the Quraish had built the Ka'ba, they reduced its (area), and I would also have built (a door) in the rear.

In other words, the Kaaba, as it stands today, was built entirely by immigrants from Yemen, which is perfectly consistent with Dr. Amari's findings.

[Peter]

The Knowledge of Islam is the foundation of your knowledge, ........

I'm sorry, but Mohammedan Islam is the 7th century invention of a single false prophet.

...... please check the history books carefully and see who was dark ages when the the ranaissance started and who gathered all the knowledge available at the time. The reason you have greek and Roman history and Pholosophy is the Muslims. Bagdad, ring any bells ??

You seem to have missed the fact that the article recognizes that there is abundant historical and archaeological record of many other ancient Arabian towns.
There just isn't a record of Mecca, before the 4th century AD, because it didn't exist.

I would have to start this history lesson from the start to dispel all your deviations and misinterpretations,So let me start at the beginning for you

There is no God but ALLAH and Muhammad is the messenger of ALLAH.
ALLAH created Adam, (the God is a generic term that is very crude in its presentation and translation of the name of the Almighty)
ALLAH created Eve and ALLAH told him the names of all living things (ALLAH teaches man that which he knows not).
ALLAH asked all of creation to bow down to man
SATAn (Iblees) a Jinn refused and realising his mistake asks ALLAH for time to prove that man is not worthy to be bowed down to.
Satan is banished to earth and vows to lead all of mankind astray.

I'm sorry, but that has nothing to do with history. You are simply regurgitating what you have been indoctrinated to believe through Mohammed's 7th century religion.
The original five posts of this thread regard HISTORICAL RECORD, recorded by those that lived in or near the times, AS ALL HISTORY is recorded.
Not by some 7th and 8th century history CREATORS, like Islam's Ibn Ishak and Tabari.

 

What I am trying to say is that your history lesson is of the utmost unimportance.

But your "lesson" had nothing whatsoever to do with historical record, so it is not a history lesson at all.
Your claim is easy to resolve. In order to demonstrate that your claim is not false, simply show us the historical, and/or archaeological EVIDENCE that suggests that Mecca predated the Christian era - or even the 4th century AD - or that it's Kaaba existed prior to the early 5th century when pagan immigrants from Yemen built it for moon, sun and star worship.

While you're at it please explain how Abraham, Hagar and Ishmael, wandered across 1200 kilometers of unknown desert wasteland, from Hebron to Mecca, 900 years before the first caravan route was established along the Red Sea. Please answer on that related thread.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1277.0

[Peter]

....... These are in the records in ARABIA not the Western libraries.

Dr. Amari is from the Middle East and is Arabic speaking. He researched this subject full time for 20 years - including the records in Arabia.

I am sure you would agree that simply saying something doesn't make it true. Please produce evidence to support your claim that Arabian records show that the Kaaba existed before the 4th or 5th century AD.
Of course I am not talking about the Ibn Ishak styled CREATED Islamic history of the 7th and 8th centuries, that was written without a single reference to the actual historical record. That cannot be characterized as historical record, but rather fiction.

Since quipped "But l;et me assure you of the Facts", you are of course, under obligation to bring evidence to bear that suggests that Mecca existed prior to the Christian era.
Here are some ancient towns that the Saudi's recognize.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Towns_in_Saudi_Arabia

Do you understand that the reason that Mecca cannot be included in this Wikipedia article, like the other ancient towns of Saudi Arabia, is because there has to be some evidence that IT IS an ancient town, before someone can include it in the article?

[AnnaMuslim]

Here is something to think about, I went to the Bible and searched for a possible answer, Also after reading most of your references

TUESDAY, JUNE 12, 2007

Conquest of Makkah in the Bible
Conquest of Makkah by Muslims in the Bible

"And Enoch also, the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord came with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard [speeches] which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. (Jude 1:14-15)"


"And he said, The LORD came from Si'-nai, and rose up from Se'-ir unto them; he shined forth from mount Pa'-ran [Mecca in Arabic], and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them.
(Deuteronomy 33:2)"


"Lord came from Teman, and the Holy One from mount Paran. Selah. His glory covered the heavens, and the earth was full of his praise." (Habakkuk 3:3)



Hastings dictionary of the Bible describes Teman as an oasis just north of Madina. Paran is the city of Makkah. E-sword dictionary also agrees with this.

Plus

Other evidence is also available for this claim.

The evidence is by non-Muslims.

All these links include historical and biblical facts.

Prophet Muhammad (s) is the only man in history to migrate from Makkah to Madina and then return to Makkah with 10,000 men.

The army of the Muslims that conquered Mecca without any blood shed (peacefully) were exactly 10,000 men (From the book of "Muhammad the Prophet" by Maulana Muhammad Ali, pages 128-129). The Bible calls them "ten thousands of saints"





A Christian once claimed:

The saints were angelic beings and it was God who descended and not Prophet Muhammad (s).



My response:

The dictionary does not agree that a saint is an angel. A saint is a human being.

If we look at the words carefully, we see that the verses are clearly stating that it is a prophecy and therefore the question of past tenses does not arise.


It is not God personally who is being talked about but the knowledge of God because God is not limited to a single place.
POSTED BY INVITATION TO TRUTH AT 10:43 AM  

   
WAS PARAN MAKKAH OR NEAR MAKKAH???

Prominent Saudi Prince follows Moses Exodus Saga.

Our thesis that Moses’ journey started in Yemen and followed the tectonic line of volcanoes to the Holiest City of Islam, MAKKAH seems to have caused somewhat of a stir in the Kingdom and left the Israelis cold.  

In a private note, a prominent member of the Saudi Royal family has asked to be kept in touch with further developments not only regarding the Exodus but also our thesis that the Temples of Jerusalem were never built on the Temple Mount but rather in their more logical position some 600 ft. further south over the City’s only natural supply of water, The Gihon Spring in the City of Jerusalem.

I will keep you posted on the developments in the Muslim and Arab world. The material has already been translated and posted on the internet in Urdu and Arabic.  

Islam has claimed that the coming of Mohammed was foretold in the Bible in the following verse:

"And this is the blessing wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death and he said, 'The Lord came from Sinai and dawned from Mount Seir upon them; he shone forth from Mount Paran he came from ten thousands of holy ones: with flaming fire at his right hand. Yea, he loved His people; all those consecrated to him were in his hand: so they followed in thy feet, receiving direction from thee, when Moses commanded us a law, as a possession for the congregation of Jacob. Thus the Lord became King in Jeshurun when the heads of the people were gathered, all the tribes of Israel together." (Deuteronomy 33:1-5).

The controversy naturally revolves around any independent evidence that Paran was in the vicinity of Makkah.

We have already cited a medieval geographer on that score but one cannot be sure whether the identification was real or an attempt to strengthen the thesis that Mohammed was mentioned in the Bible. We would expect therefore that Muslims would favor that identification. In fact it is now taken for granted by the Muslim world. Perhaps that is the reason why the Saudis have expressed more interest in the thesis than the Israelis.  However it does cause Islam a problem which they have preferred not to address over the centuries. For, if  they accept Paran as Makkah, then they MUST at the same time accept that the Exodus took place in Saudi Arabia .

What is puzzling is that we cannot find any Islamic commentator who has taken the next and only logical next step. IF Mekkah is Paran then the Exodus MUST have taken place in Arabia . We have seen no Islamic commentator make that obvious conclusion.

What is much more startling is that Yemeni Jewish sages also identified Paran with Mekkah, surely against their interests and biases. The argument has been posited that Yemeni Jews for their own protection would not want rock the boat and that as the rise of Islam was undoubtedly a major world event in history and they believe that all such events are predicted in the Torah, they would have no problem is accepting the Muslim interpretation.

I will leave the reader to decide whether that is sufficient justification for Jewish sages to have accepted the identification that Paran is Makkah.

The ka'aba in vedic traditions that go back thousands of years:
http://volker-doormann.org/kaaba23.htm
Edward Gibbon writes about the Kaaba and its existence before the Christian era in his book: "The genuine antiquity of Caaba ascends beyond the Christian era: in describing the coast of the Red sea the Greek historian Diodorus has remarked, between the Thamudites and the Sabeans, a famous temple, whose superior sanctity was revered by all the Arabians; the linen of silken veil, which is annually renewed by the Turkish emperor, was first offered by the Homerites, who reigned seven hundred years before the time of Mohammad." Diodorus Siculus was a Greek historian of 1st century BC who wrote Bibliotheca Historica, a book describing various parts of the discovered world. The following lines are the English translation of Greek quoted by Gibbon from the book of Diodorus Siculus (Diodorus of Sicily)  describing the 'temple' considered to be the the holiest in the whole of Arabia. 'And a temple has been set-up there, which is very holy and exceedingly revered by all Arabians.'
G E von Grunebaum says: "Mecca is mentioned by Ptolemy, and the name he gives it allows us to identify it as a South Arabian foundation created around a sanctuary."


There are true scholars out there that are not indoctrinated, not biased or have agendas of their own, but seekers of the the truth, according to the scriptures of the past, You say you believe the bible well the bible says that there is a place baca old name for the city of makkah

In Psalm 84
1     How amiable are thy tabernacles, O LORD of hosts!
2     My soul longeth, yea, even fainteth for the courts of the LORD:
           
my heart and my flesh crieth out for the living God.
3     Yea, the sparrow hath found a house,
           
and the swallow a nest for herself,
where she may lay her young,
even thine altars, O LORD of hosts,
my King, and my God.
4     Blessed are they that dwell in thy house:  Beitullaah (house of ALLAH) or house of the Lord)
           
they will be still praising thee. (walking around the ka'aba chanting praises) innal ghamda (Only ALLAH is  praise worthy
Selah.
5     Blessed is the man whose strength is in thee;
           
in whose heart are the ways of them.
6    Who passing through the valley of Baca make it a well; MAKKAH and the Zam Zam
           
the rain also filleth the pools.
7     They go from strength to strength,
           
every one of them in Zion appeareth before God.
8     O LORD God of hosts, hear my prayer:
           
give ear, O God of Jacob.
Selah.
9     Behold, O God our shield,
           
and look upon the face of thine anointed.
10     For a day in thy courts is better than a thousand.
           
I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God,
than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.
11     For the LORD God is a sun and shield:
           
the LORD will give grace and glory:
no good thing will he withhold from them that walk uprightly.
12     O LORD of hosts, blessed is the man that trusteth in thee. (Muhammad in the first ten years underwent extreme trials and tribulations and trusted in ALLAH alone.)

Do you need more evidence or are you going to try and argue against scripture!!!

[AnnaMuslim]

sura 5:47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel. Was his Allah just confused? Didn't Allah know the Gospel was "a deviation from the truth" as you suggest?

Please alow me to explain as you are very confused due to the constant practice of twisting GOD's words!!

The translation is: Judge by what ALLAH has revealed in the Scripture, not what corrupted men are saying, if you arefuse to judge by what is revealed then you are kaafir (disbelievers). In other words you want to believe what you want to believe despite having the clear revelation in your hands.

Like Hear o' israel your lord God is on, begets not nor is he begotten, we are all (including Nabi EESA) the creation of ALLAH and subject to the laws as revealed throughout the ages from Adam to Muhammad

Now since there has been too many human interventions, lost documents, no original language copies, Greek anbd Roman are not a Scriptural languages in fact they are both enemies of the Bani Israeel (Jahud) and the Nasaara (people of Nazerath) and the People of the BOOK.

[Peter]

Here is something to think about, I went to the Bible and searched for a possible answer, Also after reading most of your references

TUESDAY, JUNE 12, 2007

Conquest of Makkah in the Bible
Conquest of Makkah by Muslims in the Bible

"And Enoch also, the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord came with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard [speeches] which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. (Jude 1:14-15)"


"And he said, The LORD came from Si'-nai, and rose up from Se'-ir unto them; he shined forth from mount Pa'-ran [Mecca in Arabic], and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them.
(Deuteronomy 33:2)"


"Lord came from Teman, and the Holy One from mount Paran. Selah. His glory covered the heavens, and the earth was full of his praise." (Habakkuk 3:3)



Hastings dictionary of the Bible describes Teman as an oasis just north of Madina. Paran is the city of Makkah. E-sword dictionary also agrees with this.

You are misunderstanding or misquoting e-sword (please provide reference with link) since the Wilderness of Paran was not within a thousand kilometers to the north of where Mecca was eventually built in the 4th century AD. The Wilderness of Paran was in the northern Sinai over to what is today the trans-Jordan border. It would be ridiculous to believe that Ishmael traveled 1200 miles from Mecca to Hebron, about 900 years before the first caravan did, in time to make it to his father Abraham's funeral.







http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paran

[Peter]

Now answer this post please while I continue with yours.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1079.msg6355#msg6355

[Peter]

(disappeared and restored from database)

Plus
Other evidence is also available for this claim.
The evidence is by non-Muslims.
All these links include historical and biblical facts.
Prophet Muhammad (s) is the only man in history to migrate from Makkah to Madina and then return to Makkah with 10,000 men.
The army of the Muslims that conquered Mecca without any blood shed (peacefully) were exactly 10,000 men (From the book of "Muhammad the Prophet" by Maulana Muhammad Ali, pages 128-129). The Bible calls them "ten thousands of saints"
A Christian once claimed:
The saints were angelic beings and it was God who descended and not Prophet Muhammad (s).

My response:
The dictionary does not agree that a saint is an angel. A saint is a human being.
If we look at the words carefully, we see that the verses are clearly stating that it is a prophecy and therefore the question of past tenses does not arise.

It is not God personally who is being talked about but the knowledge of God because God is not limited to a single place.
POSTED BY INVITATION TO TRUTH AT 10:43 AM

WAS PARAN MAKKAH OR NEAR MAKKAH???
Prominent Saudi Prince follows Moses Exodus Saga. <br />

The problem is that the Saudi Prince gets all his Islamic "history" from the fiction created in the 7th and 8th century by the likes of Ishak and Tabari. Thus his preposterous conclusions. He is trying to create history just the way that the liars before him did.
On the other hand archaeology continuously confirms the scriptures as a reliable source of historical record. Even your brother punisher admits to that.
"First of all, no archaeological find has ever contradicted the Bible. &nbsp;Archaeology has only confirmed what the Bible says."
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1483.msg6063#msg6063

Our thesis that Moses’ journey started in Yemen and followed the tectonic line of volcanoes to the Holiest City of Islam, MAKKAH seems to have caused somewhat of a stir in the Kingdom and left the Israelis cold.
In a private note, a prominent member of the Saudi Royal family has asked to be kept in touch with further developments not only regarding the Exodus but also our thesis that the Temples of Jerusalem were never built on the Temple Mount but rather in their more logical position some 600 ft. further south over the City’s only natural supply of water, The Gihon Spring in the City of Jerusalem.

And doesn't that say it all. You demonstrate you are willing to believe anything, as long as it's a lie. Gee, of course the temple was never built on the temple mount!!! Makes perfect sense doesn't it? So then the Temple of Solomon must have been built in ..... Mecca! Of course!

I will keep you posted on the developments in the Muslim and Arab world. The material has already been translated and posted on the internet in Urdu and Arabic.

Islam has claimed that the coming of Mohammed was foretold in the Bible in the following verse:
"And this is the blessing wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death and he said, 'The Lord came from Sinai ......

Don't you even read what you copy and paste? Sinai, Sinai, Sinai!!!
That's over 1,000 kilometers from where Mecca was eventually built in the 4th century AD.

...... and dawned from Mount Seir upon them; he shone forth from Mount Paran he came from ten thousands of holy ones: with flaming fire at his right hand. Yea, he loved His people; all those consecrated to him were in his hand: so they followed in thy feet, receiving direction from thee, when Moses commanded us a law, as a possession for the congregation of Jacob. Thus the Lord became King in Jeshurun when the heads of the people were gathered, all the tribes of Israel together." (Deuteronomy 33:1-5).

The controversy naturally revolves around any independent evidence that Paran was in the vicinity of Makkah.

There is no controversy since Paran was a thousand kilometers north of where Mecca was eventually built, and the times we are talking about are a thousand years before the first caravan made the journey along the Red Sea.

We have already cited a medieval geographer ........

What medieval geographer?

........ on that score but one cannot be sure whether the identification was real or an attempt to strengthen the thesis that Mohammed was mentioned in the Bible.

Mohammed is indeed mentioned in the Bible.
Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Mat 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
And Mohammed and his kingdom "beast" fate?
Rev 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast &nbsp;and the false prophet &nbsp;[are], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

We would expect therefore that Muslims would favor that identification. In fact it is now taken for granted by the Muslim world.

But then Muslims also take for granted that the pagan moon, sun, star and jinn worship rituals they engage in were invented by your &quot;Allah&quot;, rather than the pagans that Mohammed stole them from.

Perhaps that is the reason why the Saudis have expressed more interest in the thesis than the Israelis.

Perhaps the reason the Israelis don't have an interest is because THEY KNOW WHERE THE HOLY LAND IS, and have for 3500 years.
And it's not in some 7th and 8th century created historical fiction Mohammedan fraud.

[Peter]

However it does cause Islam a problem which they have preferred not to address over the centuries. For, if  they accept Paran as Makkah, then they MUST at the same time accept that the Exodus took place in Saudi Arabia .

Even if it did, the part of Saudi Arabia in which it allegedly took place IS NOT WITHIN A THOUSAND KILOMETERS of where Mecca was eventually built - by EVERYONE'S estimate.

What is puzzling is that we cannot find any Islamic commentator who has taken the next and only logical next step. IF Mekkah is Paran .......

Nothing could be more ILLOGICAL than this nonsense.

....... then the Exodus MUST have taken place in Arabia . We have seen no Islamic commentator make that obvious conclusion.

What is much more startling is that Yemeni Jewish sages ......

I prefer scripture, history, archaeology, geography and truth, to the nonsense of so-called "sages".

........ also identified Paran with Mekkah, surely against their interests and biases. The argument has been posited that Yemeni Jews for their own protection would not want rock the boat and that as the rise of Islam was undoubtedly a major world event in history and they believe that all such events are predicted in the Torah, they would have no problem is accepting the Muslim interpretation.

I will leave the reader to decide whether that is sufficient justification for Jewish sages to have accepted the identification that Paran is Makkah.

Only sheer ignorance to scripture, history, archaeology and geography could allow one to "accept" that.

The ka'aba in vedic traditions that go back thousands of years:
http://volker-doormann.org/kaaba23.htm
Edward Gibbon writes about the Kaaba and its existence before the Christian era in his book: "The genuine antiquity of Caaba ascends beyond the Christian era: in describing the coast of the Red sea the Greek historian Diodorus has remarked, between the Thamudites and the Sabeans, a famous temple, whose superior sanctity was revered by all the Arabians; the linen of silken veil, which is annually renewed by the Turkish emperor, was first offered by the Homerites, who reigned seven hundred years before the time of Mohammad." Diodorus Siculus was a Greek historian of 1st century BC who wrote Bibliotheca Historica, a book describing various parts of the discovered world. The following lines are the English translation of Greek quoted by Gibbon from the book of Diodorus Siculus (Diodorus of Sicily)  describing the 'temple' considered to be the the holiest in the whole of Arabia. 'And a temple has been set-up there, which is very holy and exceedingly revered by all Arabians.'
G E von Grunebaum says: "Mecca is mentioned by Ptolemy, and the name he gives it allows us to identify it as a South Arabian foundation created around a sanctuary."

And how did Gibbon characterize his own interest?

"I am ignorant, and I am careless, of the blind mythology of the Barbarians: of the local deities, of the stars, the air, and the earth, of their sex or titles, their attributes or subordination.

That, and the actual historical writings of those Gibbon mentioned, are how we know his 18th century presumptions were false. If you had read the original post you would have seen an exegesis of very same authors that Gibbon mentioned.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1138.msg4430#msg4430
The subject of Gibbon's book was the Roman Empire not Arabia.

Covered in this thread.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1121.0

There are true scholars out there that are not indoctrinated, not biased or have agendas of their own, but seekers of the the truth, according to the scriptures of the past, You say you believe the bible well the bible says that there is a place baca old name for the city of makkah

In Psalm 84
1     How amiable are thy tabernacles, O LORD of hosts!
2     My soul longeth, yea, even fainteth for the courts of the LORD:
           
my heart and my flesh crieth out for the living God.
3     Yea, the sparrow hath found a house,
           
and the swallow a nest for herself,
where she may lay her young,
even thine altars, O LORD of hosts,
my King, and my God.
4     Blessed are they that dwell in thy house:  Beitullaah (house of ALLAH) or house of the Lord)
           
they will be still praising thee. (walking around the ka'aba chanting praises) innal ghamda (Only ALLAH is  praise worthy
Selah.
5     Blessed is the man whose strength is in thee;
           
in whose heart are the ways of them.
6    Who passing through the valley of Baca make it a well; MAKKAH and the Zam Zam
           
the rain also filleth the pools.
7     They go from strength to strength,
           
every one of them in Zion appeareth before God.

Didn't you even read this? ".....in Zion...." ".....in Zion...." ".....in Zion...."

Zion is mentioned 153 times in scripture because it is the name of the easternmost hill of the city of Jerusalem.
Thus we see this passage describing a journey to ZION - to Jerusalem - to the Holy Land. Baca simply being a stop along the way.

Since the well of Zamzam (that Mohammed's grandfather dug in the 5th century AD) lies 1200 kilometers away from Jerusalem, across harsh Arabian desert, the whole notion that this passage has anything to do with Mecca is utterly preposterous.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1313.0

8     O LORD God of hosts, hear my prayer:
           
give ear, O God of Jacob.
Selah.
9     Behold, O God our shield,
           
and look upon the face of thine anointed.
10     For a day in thy courts is better than a thousand.
           
I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God,
than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.
11     For the LORD God is a sun and shield:
           
the LORD will give grace and glory:
no good thing will he withhold from them that walk uprightly.
12     O LORD of hosts, blessed is the man that trusteth in thee. (Muhammad in the first ten years underwent extreme trials and tribulations and trusted in ALLAH alone.)

Do you need more evidence or are you going to try and argue against scripture!!!

As you can see, it is you that is sorely deceived by the 7th century false prophet Mohammed and his thinly repackaged moon, sun, star and demon worship.
I will stick with the scriptures.

[Peter]

Now answer this post please.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1079.msg6355#msg6355

[AnnaMuslim]

Part one of many proofs:

We are all aware that HINDU scripture go back several thousands of years and here are some brief outlines of some of them

 PROPHET MUHAMMAD IN HINDU SCRIPTURES
DR. Z. HAQ
(Copyright 1990, 1997, All Rights Reserved)

A Brief Introduction To Hindu Scriptures

The Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, and Brahmanas Granth are the four sacred books in Hindu religion. The last one is a commentary on the Vedas, but it is considered as a revealed book. These books are in Sanskrit, the sacred language of the Hindus. The Vedas are divided into four books: Rig Veda, Yajur Veda, Sam Veda and Atharva Veda. Of these, the first three books are considered the more ancient books, and the Rig Veda is the oldest of them. The Rig Veda was compiled in three long and different periods. Opinions greatly differ as to the date of compilation or revelation of the four Vedas. Swami Daya Nand, founder of the Arya Samaj, holds the opinion that the Vedas were revealed 1.3 billion years ago, while others (Hindu scholars and orientalists) hold the opinion that they are not more than four thousand years old. Analysis of the Vedas reveal differences in the accounts of the places where these books were revealed and the Rishis (Prophets) to whom these scriptures were given. Nevertheless, the Vedas are the most authentic scriptures of the Hindus.

The Upanishads are considered next to the Vedas in order of superiority and authenticity. However, some Pandits consider the Upanishads to be superior to the Vedas primarily from the internal evidence found in the Upanishads. Next in authenticity to the Upanishads are the Puranas. The Puranas are the most widely read of all Hindu Scriptures, as these are easily available (the Vedas are difficult to find). The compiler of the Puranas is Maha Rishi Vyasa, and he arranged the Puranas in eighteen volumes. These books contain the history of the creation of the universe, the history of the early Aryan people, and life stories of the divines and deities of the Hindus. The Puranas were either revealed simultaneously with the Vedas or some time before. The sanctity and reverence of the Puranas is admitted and recognized in all the authentic books of the Hindus.

For a long time, the Hindu Scriptures were primarily in the hands of Pandits and a small group of men who had learned Sanskrit (The majority of the Hindu population knew Hindi and could comprehend only a smattering of Sanskrit words). Sir William Jones, who was a Judge and founded the Asiatic Society of Bengal, learned Sanskrit in the last decade of the Eighteenth century. He was instrumental in generating interest in Sanskrit and Hindu Scriptures in Europe, and it was due to his efforts that the Hindu scriptures were translated into English.

In 1935, Dr. Pran Nath published an article in the Times of India that showed that the Rig Veda contains events of the Babylonian and Egyptian kings and their wars. Further, he showed that one-fifth of the Rig Veda is derived from the Babylonian Scriptures. From a Muslim perspective, it is likely that the Hindus were given a revealed book or books that contained description and struggles of Allah's Prophets sent previously to other peoples. It is also possible that commentaries written about them were incorporated later and became a part of the revealed books.

There are a number of examples of these in Hindu scriptures. The Atharva Veda is also known as "Brahma Veda" or in its meaning as the Devine Knowledge. An Analysis of the Vedas reveal that "Brahma" is actually Abraham, where the initial letter A in Abraham is moved to the end making it Brahma. This analysis is accurate when one writes the two words in Arabic script, a language close to that spoken by Prophet Abraham. Similarly, Abraham�s first wife Sarah is mentioned in the Vedas as Saraswati, and Prophet Nuh (Noah of The Flood) is mentioned as Manuh or Manu. Some Pundits consider Atharva Veda as the Book of Abraham. Prophets Ismail (Ishmael) and Ishaq (Isaac) are named Atharva and Angira, respectively, in the Vedas.
Table 1
Brahma           Abraham
Saraswati           Sarah
Manu, Manuh   Nuh


All major books of the Hindus prophesy about Prophet Mohammad. In addition to many of his qualities, his life events, Abraham, Ka'bah, Bakkah (Makkah) and Arabia, the prophecies mention his name as Mahamad, Mamah, and Ahmad. The name Mahamad appears in the Puranas, Mamah in Kuntap Sukt (in Atharva Veda) and Ahmad in Sama Veda. Many different classifications as to the degree of importance of the Vedas have been made. For example, in Shatpath it is stated that Sama Veda is the essence of all the Vedas. At another place in Taitttriya Brahmana, it is stated that "This world was created from Brahma, the Vaishas were created from the mantras of the Rig Veda, the Kashtriyas were created from Yajur Veda and Brahmans were created from Sama Veda."


The translation of Verses 5-27 (Sanskrit text of the Puranas, Prati Sarg Parv III: 3, 3) is presented below from the work of Dr. Vidyarthi.

"A malechha (belonging to a foreign country and speaking foreign language) spiritual teacher will appear with his companions. His name will be Mahamad. Raja (Bhoj) after giving this Mahadev Arab (of angelic disposition) a bath in the 'Panchgavya' and the Ganges water, (i.e. purging him of all sins) offered him the presents of his sincere devotion and showing him all reverence said, 'I make obeisance to thee.' 'O Ye! the pride of mankind, the dweller in Arabia, Ye have collected a great force to kill the Devil and you yourself have been protected from the malechha opponents (idol worshipers, pagans).' "O Ye! the image of the Most Pious God the biggest Lord, I am a slave to thee, take me as one lying on thy feet.'
"The Malechhas have spoiled the well-known land of the Arabs. Arya Dharma is not to be found in that country. Before also there appeared a misguided fiend whom I had killed [note: e.g., Abraha Al-Ashram, the Abyssinian viceroy of Yemen, who attacked Mecca]; he has now again appeared being sent by a powerful enemy. To show these enemies the right path and to give them guidance the well-known Mahamad (Mohammad), who has been given by me the epithet of Brahma is busy in bringing the Pishachas to the right path. O Raja! You need not go to the land of the foolish Pishachas, you will be purified through my kindness even where you are. At night, he of the angelic disposition, the shrewd man, in the guise of a Pishacha said to Raja Bhoj, "O Raja! Your Arya Dharma has been made to prevail over all religions, but according to the commandments of "Ashwar Parmatma (God, Supreme Spirit), I shall enforce the strong creed of the meat-eaters. My follower will be a man circumcised, without a tail (on his head), keeping beard, creating a revolution, announcing call for prayer and will be eating all lawful things. He will eat all sorts of animals except swine. They will not seek purification from the holy shrubs, but will be purified through warfare. Because of their fighting the irreligious nations, they will be known as Musalmans (Muslims). I shall be the originator of this religion of the meat-eating nation."


More Prophecies In Hindu Scriptures

The Vedas contain many prophecies about Prophet Muhammad. Some European and Hindu translators of the Vedas have removed the name referring to the Prophet, while others have tried to explain away the mantras (verses) on his life events, Ka'bah, Makkah, Medinah, Arabia, and other events using the terminology of the Hindus, such as purification rituals, and lands and rivers in India. Some mantras containing prophecies are inter-mixed with explanatory phrases, and it may be that these were commentaries and explanatory notes on the prophecies, which later became a part of the prophecy.

Several prophecies are found in Atharva Veda: (1) XX: 21, Mantras 6, 7, and 9, (2) XX: 137, Mantras 7 through 9, and (3) X: 2, Mantras 26, 27, 29, 30, and 32. Similarly, in Rig Veda, additional prophecies are found in: (1) VII: 96, Mantras 13 through 16, and (2) I: 53, Mantras 6 and 9. Finally, a prophecy is found in Sama Veda III: 10, Mantra 1. These are a sample of many prophecies. The serious reader may want to refer to scholarly work of Dr. A.H. Vidyarthi, entitled "Mohammad in World Scriptures," 1990. This book explains the Hindu terminology used in the Mantras and the meaning and usage of certain words and phrases from within the Vedas and other Hindu Scriptures.

[Peter]

Well I'm glad I don't have to turn to Hinduism to confirm Christianity!
But the above is all simply foolish and false presumption that has nothing to do with EVIDENCE, just as your epic failure to write Islam into scripture in your previous posts in this thread.

Now you try to prove heathen scripture with heathen scripture.
But all I see is a bunch of Deedat style deception and false presumption by DR. Z. HAQ, citing Swami Daya Nand (and his preposterous and unsupportable claim that Hindu records are 1.3 billion years old!), and 1935 Dr. Pran Nath, that HAQ spliced into the article in a feeble attempt to legitimize his false presumptions, but it didn't accomplish that any more than it provided any kind of evidence.
No surprise to find that Dr. Haq is Muslim who does the same thing with scripture that you failed to do previously.

Where are the Hindu scholar's confirmation regarding Mohammed in their books?
You suppose that's why Muslims attack hindus? No. The spirit of antichrist in them is why Muslims attack Hindus.

Where is the historical evidence?
Where is the archaeological evidence?
Where is the geographical evidence?
You have to start at the beginning - with the foundation.
How can you place Abraham, Hagar and Ishmael in Mecca?
Failure to be able to do this relegates Mohammed's whole STAND-ALONE 7th century invention to the trash heap.
It won't do you any good to turn to scripture, Hunduism or the Wiccans to save Islam, if you can't provide an answer to that question.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1483.0

[Peter]

If your above post was intended to assuage your false accusation you failed miserably. In your accusation you made a suggestion of evidence which you have not as yet presented.

You made several accusations. Now it's time to back them up beginning with this one.

Dear Peter

Everything I type is relevant and not spam, you have so little understanding that I have to begin at the basics in order for you to grasp simple Religious concepts, before you are able to understand your role as a human being.You are not a person that listens to logic, you only listen to European and Americanized logic and that makes you a racist, you refute evidence from Hindus and Arabs and Persians that the Ka'aba existed long before Christianity, you present opinions as evidence. Most disturbing is that you quote from the Quran and Hadith out context and verses you have no knowledge of, you act out of ignorance, and your disrespect is not dialogue.  

http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1079.msg6416#msg6416

Where did I "refute" the "evidence" that you claim I refuted?
How can one refute something that one hasn't seen?

Where is the evidence from the Hindus, Arabs and Persians to which you refer?
Please bring the EVIDENCE, and post it at the following thread link so we can compare the EVIDENCE.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1138.0

I of course mean historical evidence. Not that 7th and 8th century created Islamic historical fiction penned by those like Ishak and Tabari, but the actual historical record, recorded by those living in or near the times during which it is recorded.

[Peter]

Why not bring the "Arabs" "evidence" that you referenced, since you failed regarding Hindu evidence so far?

[AnnaMuslim]

This is my Introduction, i will do what I should have done in the first place, expose DR, Rafats Fruadulent statements based on his conclusions as a disbeliever (yeas he is Mushrihk, a person that ascribes partners to ALLAH and a KAAFIR a rejector of faith)

I will answer all your questions listed below but first I will show you why I disagree as you are averse to hindu writings but not Pagan Greek and Roman writing (Is it becuase you only believe fair skin people?)

Now you try to prove heathen scripture with heathen scripture. But all I see is a bunch of Deedat style deception and false presumption by DR. Z. HAQ, with a single reference to another source, a 1935 Dr. Pran Nath, that HAQ feebly attempted to splice into the article, that didn't support his article any more than it provided any kind of evidence. Gee, I wonder if DR. Z. HAQ is a Hindu? Whoops, what do you know. He's a Muslim who does the same thing with scripture that you failed to do. Isn't that a surprise? Where are the Hindu scholar's confirmation regarding Mohammed in their books? Where is the historical evidence? Where is the archaeological evidence? Where is the geographical evidence? You have to start at the beginning - with the foundation. How can you place Abraham, Hagar and Ishmael in Mecca? Failure to be able to do this relegates Mohammed's whole STAND-ALONE 7th century invention to the trash heap. It won't do you any good to turn to scripture, Hunduism or the Wiccans to save Islam, if you can't provide an answer to that question. http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1483.0

The ka'aba is the evidence, why would so many rebuild something that according to you is not a genuine house of worship?
Why would it be mentioned in the Bible?, Why would it have so many names? The only problem here is that you dont accept it as the truth and fabricate arguments with everything at your disposal, none of your arguments are valid and they are misguided

I have done exactly what you have done and now it is unacceptable? You quote Dr Rafat that has done nothing but quote pagan Greek and Roman historians, he jumped to conclusions based on these writings, he has not presented any evidence that says the Prophet's words is not true, he speculates, if historians did not document it, if Pagans says that they built it, I have already shown you several accounts of the rebuilding of the Ka'aba, but you continue with your own opinion, you have not preentes any evidence you take an argument and say it is evidence it is not it is merely contradictory statements, and yes your only Historical proof that there was a person cruxified is Pagan Accounts (altered pagan Acounts held by christians, there is no evidence or documents)

Sarcasm (re DR Z Haq) does not suit you and reveals your hypocrisy just as, MR Rafat's (is he Jewish or Christian) fraud has been exposed and if you need evidence  for any scripture there is none, Speculation and interpretation of archeological finds leads one to KUFR (Disbelief) not belief. It is subject to could have beens and in mostlikely hood opinions.

Archeology in Egypt, Persia and India says that a person similar to your account in the Pauline documents of Jesus existed
   

    Hosea 13:4:
   King James Version. "...I am the LORD thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me: for there is no saviour beside me."

Horus is one of the oldest and most significant deities in the Ancient Egyptian religion, who was worshipped from at least the late Predynastic period through to Greco-Roman times. Different forms of Horus are recorded in history and these are treated as distinct gods by Egyptologists.[1]  from wikipedia.
In another version of the story, Isis was impregnated by divine fire.[8] Once Isis knew she was pregnant with Horus, she fled to the Nile Delta marshlands to hide from her brother Set who jealously killed Osiris and who she knew would want to kill their son.[8] There Isis bore a divine son, Horus.

In Greek mythology, Dionysus is made out to be a son of Zeus (Greek GOD) and the mortal Semele (His MOTHER). He is described as being womanly or "man-womanish"(GENTLE?).[6] The retinue of Dionysus was called the thiasus and was comprised chiefly of maenads and satyrs. Dionysus is a god of mystery religious rites. One of the most famous mystery religions was the Eleusinian Mysteries, in which Dionysus may have had a minor role.

A retinue is a body of persons "retained" in the service of a noble or royal personage, a suite (literal French meanings: what follows) of "retainers." Followers or disciples perhaps

Attis was a Phrygian or a Lydian dear to Cybele. He is remembered for having cut off his genitals in a fit of folly. Some say that at his death he was turned into a pine tree, but even more extraordinary is his birth.
Belief today and yesterday

Not few believe that people of ancient times were like children, and not at all so clever as modern man. And since technological advance is their clue and indicator, they are persuaded that humanity easily discards the beliefs and fantasies of the past, as its mental sanity is increased by a larger amount of verifiable facts. So for example, says the distinguished anthropologist James G. Frazer, 1854-1941:

"The belief in the possible impregnation of women without sexual intercourse appears to have been common, if not universal, among men at a certain stage of social evolution, and it is still held by many savages." (James G. Frazer. Note to Apollodorus 1.3.5.).

However, there are those in contemporary society who could not be called savages and yet assert that Mary, the mother of Jesus, conceived her child without regular sexual intercourse.

   Most conservative Christians believe that God inspired the authors of the Bible to write material that is inerrant -- without error. Thus the Gospels and other books in the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) are completely accurate in their description of Jesus as Lord and Savior, 100% God and 100% human.
 
   Most progressive Christians believe that much material in the Christian Scriptures is actually folklore -- myths that grew up around the memory of Jesus during the 40 to 70 years between his execution and the writing of the Gospels. During that interval, stories about Jesus' magical powers, his supernatural origins, etc. accumulated to produce a mixture of Yeshua, the itinerate teacher / native healer and Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior.

NOW WHY DO YOU FAVOUR THE WRITINGS OF THE EUROPEANS OVER THE ARABS<INDIANS AND PERSIANS
THEIR MYTHS AND SPECULATION AND PRETENTIONS THAT THEY HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE WHILE IT IS MERE SPECULATION AND INFERENCES TAKEN FROM PAGAN WRITERS THAT WERE HIGHLY FLAWED AND HAS A RESEMBLANCE TO THE REALITY!!!
WHY WOULD YOU THINK YOUR KNOWLEDGE SUPERIOR WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE
HISTORICAL OR ARCHEOLOGICAL!!

LET ME TAKE RAFATS WRITING APART FOR YOU LINE BY LINE

There is no mention of Mecca in the writings of any classical writer or geographer.  This fact is an important argument against Islam's claim that Mecca has existed since the time of Abraham.  We have complete records of Greek and Roman writers, as well as many geographers who visited Arabia from the end of the 5th century B.C. through the 3rd century A.D.  Some of these people drew maps of Arabia telling us about every city, village, mountain, and temple existing there, yet none mentioned Mecca.  If Mecca did indeed exist at the time of any of these geographers and writers, surely someone would have told us about this city.

First and fore mostly, Makkah is known by many names and if you are looking for the word Makkah in Greek chances are that it would not appear (how would a greek know) Your complete records are flawed as many scholars have revealed, mention is not made here of the names of the Greek and Roman Writers, CITE your sources as any good academic would! Well I am sure Cities (FUNNY thing, the Arabians were mostly Nomads, very few except the custodians of temples lived in cities (About 300 people)

Greeks and Romans hardly Ruled ARABIA (They have no footprint there) they gave it to lesser kingdoms as they said it was ungovernable the phrase was that "they are the slaves of our slaves. ROMAN EMPIRE I'll give you my source later in keeping with Rafat

The first one mentioned is Strabo here is the Wikipedia write-up It is not known precisely when Strabo's Geography was written, though comments within the work itself place the finished version within the reign of Emperor Tiberius. Some place its first drafts around 7 AD, others around 18 AD. Last dateable mention is given to the death in 23 AD of Juba II, king of Maurousia (Mauretania), who is said to have died "just recently".[5] On the presumption that "recently" means within a year, Strabo stopped writing that year or the next (24 AD), when he died.The first of Strabo's major works, Historical Sketches (Historica hypomnemata), written while he was in Rome (ca. 20 BC), is nearly completely lost. Meant to cover the history of the known world from the conquest of Greece by the Romans, Strabo quotes it himself and other classical authors mention that it existed, although the only surviving document is a fragment of papyrus now in possession of the University of Milan (renumbered [Papyrus] 46).

As you can see very accurate indeed, his own life was a question mark how to verify what he wrote? Oh we only have a single piece of papyrus where does Rafat get this accurate wrirings from???