I addressed that exactly. I even added a paragraph on my website that mentions this ancient history, to help keep others from making the same error you did. What you in fact are ignoring is that Arabia began to desertify 4,000 years before Abraham, and as your article put it, "sealing" the Arabian peninsula.
That still does not invalidate the possibility that Abraham could have traveled to Mecca at any point in time.
We fully understand the reason for your desperation my friend, but nothing you choose to dither on with will move the Wilderness of Beersheba (where Sarah's bondwoman Hagar and her son Ishmael wandered) or the wilderness of Paran (where they eventually settled) any closer than 1,000 kilometers away from the area where Mecca was eventually settled in the 4th century AD.
But the better question remains, why would anybody actually want to admit to being of the seed of Ishmael - the "children of the flesh" - whether literally, or through inheritance by way of the rituals of the flesh and praying in the "vain repetitions of the heathen" of Muhammadanism?
Let alone that Ishmael and his seed were specifically cut out of God's covenant with Abraham through his son Isaac.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/seed_ishmael_ishmaelites.htmWhy don't you explain to us why it is that you pray 5 times a day. Why 5 times? Which do you suppose is more likely? Because Muhammad rode around on a flying donkey-mule on night and picked up the ritual in his stop-off in "paradise", or is it more likely that Muhammad lifted the ritual from the Sabian moon worshipers, along with most of the rest of the pagan rituals that Muhammad adopted, adapted and thinly veneered that his followers amazingly continue on in today.
http://www.petewaldo.com/sabians_islam.htmhttp://www.petewaldo.com/hajj_umrah.htm#indexWhy? Because the desertification didn't affect the western parts of Arabia, such as those in the Hejaz where Mecca is. If you read again what the author wrote, he didn't say nor imply that the desertification sealed the entire Arabian peninsula. It affected only the interior regions of Arabia - from north to south - "from c.6000 BC around Jubba to c.2000 BC on the edge of the great waste of Ar-Rub al-Khali, the ‘Empty Quarter’, in the south" (Rice, 87).
In a later paragraph, the author even further clarifies that there are places which remained "rich and fertile," places where the neolithic hunters could have moved to for settlement:
"Some probably moved eastwards, to the southern islands and coastlands of the Gulf, some to settle in what today is the Oman peninsula. Others would have moved west, along the desert rim towards the highlands of western Arabia which remained rich and fertile; some of these migrants, who already may have had something of the sort of social organisation which is customarily found amongst neolithic hunting communities, could well have moved up the shores of the Red Sea." (Rice, 87-88)
Deserts remain "rich and fertile" specifically because of the dearth of rainfall. He paints a picture of a veritable fairyland, while the classical geographers that you have been otherwise fond of quoting 17th and 18th century false presumptions about, described the area where Mecca was eventually built as being "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."
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1138.0The Hejaz, which includes Mecca and Medina, is in western Arabia and thus remained rich and fertile as the author would agree. So, pilgrims could have stopped in one of those fertile areas to nourish themselves as they continue their journey towards Mecca. Farms and watering places were very likely dispersed throughout the Hejaz, ranging from north to south. This is further substantiated by the recorded geophysical conditions of the region (the Hejaz), in which there are abundant springs and wadis (or valleys) with fertile middle courses: "There is a chain of small oases with farms downs its course, fed by the abundant springs of its tributaries, the Wadis Leimun and Seil, north and north-east of Mecca. [...] Mecca itself lies in the arid hills south of this wadi; but is is clear, from reports, that south of the Mecca-Jiddah Road, there are similar wadis with fertile middle courses." (Handbook of Hejaz. Cairo: Arab Bureau, 2nd edn, 1917. p. 25)
Speaking of climate change in Arabia, I should mention the fact that the desertification which occurred around 6000 to 2000 BC was not unique in Arabia. Recent fieldwork indicates that the subcontinent is characterized by extreme environmental fluctuations between many wet and dry phases during the Quarternary, and this can be studied at two levels: "Environmental oscillation between wet and dry periods can be studied at two levels, first at a broad ‘glacial' (generally dry) and 'interglacial' (with wet phases) level and second in terms of more short-term change."
It is also worth noting here that sea levels go down during periods of increased aridity. This is most prominently known to occur during the glacial periods, which are characterized by cooler and drier climates over most of the earth as well as a significant sea level reduction. Paradoxically, however, as predicted by a little-known hydrogeological model (see link below), one of the effects of sea-level reduction is that the coastal regions would get an increase of groundwater flow, "causing springs, oases, and wetlands to appear." This is based on three well-established facts as mentioned in the abstract of the paper:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818102000607
During the arid phases, the reduced sea levels caused a significant amount of water to infiltrate the emerged continental shelves (as groundwater) which ultimately led to the formation of springs and fertile areas, which in turn acted as a drawing force for human populations and animals. People and animals would have displaced themselves from the inhospitable interior and move into the coastlands because "sea-level fall during hyperarid glacial phases would produce abundant fresh water flow onto emerged continental shelves as the continental interior desiccated."
So, even though most of the continental interior desiccated during the hyperarid glacial phases, the coastal regions, on the other hand, remained fertile enough for providing food and freshwater. This accords with Michael Rice's statement where he acknolwedged the idea that Arabia didn't become entirely barren, that people could have migrated to places like the "coastlands of the Gulf" or "along the desert rim towards the highlands of western Arabia which remained rich and fertile," as quoted earlier. These remarks parallel yet another study (Jeffrey Rose, 2010) which supports the possibility that populations in Arabia were able to surive periodic climatic downturns "by contracting into environmental refugia around the coastal margins of the peninsula," localized pockets which had food and water.
"The Arabian subcontinent houses a mosaic of microenvironments, some of which provided stable, predictable sources of food and freshwater even during the most hyperarid phases of prehistory. At times when glacial conditions led to increased aridity and widespread environmental degradation, reduced sea levels exposed large portions of the continental shelf and caused the formation of 'coastal oases' fed by upwelling subterranean springs." (Rose, J.I. 2010. "New Light on Human Prehistory in the Arabo-Persian Gulf Oasis." Current Anthropology 51, 6, 849–883)
Such findings, although they've clearly prompted a growing level of interest amongst academics, are not all that surprising either. For instance, it is already well-known that groundwater was abundant in Arabia, so much so that it permitted human settlements over there since the remotest antiquity: "Even in Desert Arabia, the grim stony steppes hold perennial sources of water, supplying cities of immemorial antiquity or comparatively recent settlements" (Western Arabia and The Red Sea, p. 3). This has only been further corroborated by the coastal oases model as well as recent archaeological investigations, as I've just alluded to.
In conclusion, then, especially in view of the large and increasing overlap in the points above, there is quite enough reason to maintain that the Muslim assertion that Abraham did go to Mecca - ........
Yet there is no scriptural evidence, that suggests that Abraham did other than kick his
wife Sarah's
slave Hagar and her son Ishmael out of his house, at Sarah's behest and with Yahweh's approval. Further confirming
God's covenant with the seed of Isaac - his
wife Sarah's son - not with the seed of Ishmael or the "children of the flesh".
Genesis 21:8
And the child grew, and was weaned: and Abraham made a great feast the [same] day that Isaac was weaned. 9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking. 10 Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, [even] with Isaac. 11 And the thing was very grievous in Abraham's sight because of his son. 12 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/seed_ishmael_ishmaelites.htm14
And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave [it] unto Hagar, putting [it] on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba.You can see from the historical record of scripture and physical location of the wilderness of Beersheba, that the scriptural account makes perfect geographical sense:
As directly opposed to created Islamic fiction:
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/seed_ishmael_ishmaelites.htm#islamic_tradition........ contrary to your ignorant and wishful protestation, however - is not something outside the realm of possibility. Food and freshwater were likely to exist in the coastlands of Arabia even during the most hyperarid phases of the subcontinent. Abraham had camels, too, which enabled him to travel long distances as you must concede. And so, on his way to Mecca, he could have stopped in some of the fertile areas (in the highlands of western Arabia) to rest and to get some food and water for himself and his camel. His son, Ishmael, could have done the same.
From north to south. Since THE Holy Land of the prophets and patriarchs is Israel that land would have been cut off first. However it really doesn't matter since desertification began over 4,000 years before Ishmael roamed the earth, and was completed hundreds of years before he was born. Do you understand that desertification began - a period of time twice the length of the entire Christian era - before Ishmael?!!!
How long ago the desertification occured doesn't tell us the extent of the desertification (i.e. how much of Arabia was affected and to what degree), so you''ll have to incorporate additional pieces of information to your argument, instead of stressing only the time period of its occurrence as you did here. But no need for that now, since I've already provided for you plenty of additional information in my comments above - quotes, academic sources, and recent archaeological studies - altogether which, unsurprisingly, demonstrates that your oft-repeated "geographical impossibility" and such are fundamentally mere rhetoric.
Also, "from north to south" is not precise enough to tell us how much of Arabia was affected nor to what degree. The author (Michael Rice) wrote that it was only between Jubba and the edge of Rub al Khali in which the desertification took place, not the entire peninsula. The large body of water that he wrote about existed in the town of Jubbah, which is in the Hail Province. He also mentioned "extensive, brackish lakes" which the herds of cattle used to drink water from, in the Ar-Rub al Khali desert, south of Jubbah. But again, the dessication of these lakes did not affect the coastal regions of Arabia, including where Mecca is.
"The Jubbah palaeolake is located in the Nefud Desert of northern Arabia. The desert floor of the Nefud is characterized by a network of relict lake and river systems, some of which have yielded Pleistocene fauna." (Source)
And, if you click over here, you can see once again that the Nefud Desert (which contained the Jubba paleolake) is in northern Arabia.
Once again, as I've quoted above, the coastal regions of Arabia remained fertile enough, so Israel did not get "cut off" from the western coast of Arabia (where Mecca is).
"Some probably moved eastwards, to the southern islands and coastlands of the Gulf, some to settle in what today is the Oman peninsula. Others would have moved west, along the desert rim towards the highlands of western Arabia which remained rich and fertile; some of these migrants, who already may have had something of the sort of social organisation which is customarily found amongst neolithic hunting communities, could well have moved up the shores of the Red Sea." (Rice, 87-88)
Let alone that
the one true God of Jews and Christians had His people build His temple in Jerusalem, in THE Holy Land of the prophets and patriarchs, and not in the eventual Christian era center of pagan Arabian moon, sun, star and jinn-devil worship of Mecca.
http://www.historyofmecca.com/#temple_mount
