• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Early Mosques face Petra, not Mecca

duluxe

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Mar 11, 2013
Messages
13,158
Points
113
https://apologika.blogspot.com/2014/03/why-did-first-muslims-pray-towards-petra.html

By 624 AD, all mosques were supposed to be facing Mecca. And yet, it took 200 years for Islam to finally get their "unity of direction of prayer" right and point all their mosques towards Mecca.

200 years!

Something is obviously wrong here. The historical facts are not tying up with the Islamic sources. That is the reason scholars are now investigating why that is.

The Qibla literally means "direction," and in Islam refers to the direction in which a Muslim must pray.

Classic Islamic history tells us that Muhammad first taught Muslims to pray towards Jerusalem, but then supposedly received a revelation from Allah changing the direction of prayer to Mecca instead. This change was made in 624 AD.

All slides and maps in this article are screenshots which were taken from a video of Jay Smith's presentation at Calvary Church Chino Hills in 2013, a link for which video is provided below.

The blue arrows in this map show where Qiblas were pointing in the earliest days of Islam, or around the 620-630s, just before the death of Muhammad. As you can see, they point, not towards either Jerusalem or Mecca, but to Petra.

Here is a satellite view of the Great Mosque of Guangzhou which was built in 630 AD, and whose Qibla points Muslims to pray towards Petra.

The Qibla of the Humeima Mosque in southwestern Jordan points toward Petra.


The Qibla of the Great Mosque of Ba'albek in Lebanon points to Petra.



The Qibla of the Great Mosque of Sana'a built in Yemen in 705 AD points to Petra.



The Qibla of the Al Aqsa Mosque built in Jerusalem in 709 AD points to Petra.



The Qibla of the Damascus Mosque built in Syria also in 709 AD points to Petra.

The Qibla of the Anjar Mosque built in Beirut in 714 AD points to Petra.
The Qibla of the Mosque of Umar built in Syria in 720 AD points to Petra.

In 727 AD, a mosque was finally built in Banbhore, Pakistan, the Qibla of which points to Mecca. That is 103 years after Muhammad's supposed revelation changing the direction from Jerusalem to Mecca.
But, about a year later, the al-Sharqi Mosque is built in Syria that still points to Petra.

The Mushatte Mosque in Amman was built in 743 AD, and it was still facing Petra.

The Ribat Fortress in Tunisia was built in 770, and it faced neither Petra nor Mecca.

It was the same with the Cordoba Mosque in Spain, built in 784. Its Qibla pointed towards neither Petra or Mecca.
Ditto for the Great Mosque of Kairouan, built in 817 AD.

So here is what we know:

The conflict between history, archaeology and the classical account of Islam's beginnings is etched in stone, no pun intended.

There is no explanation in the Islamic sources for the original Qibla being Petra, nor any explanation as to why there is no valley in Mecca, or a stream, or fields, trees or grass, clay or loam, and no pillar of salt.

The question is also raised about why the Quran would speak of grapes and olives and other fruits in Mecca, where none grow except dates. On the other hand, Jay notes that...




While the Bible continues to amaze many with its historical accuracy, attention from scholars, historians and reliable archaeologists is only now being placed on the claims made in the Quran and Islamic sources. And answers are coming, but they are not confirming what Muslims have been telling the world for centuries. We shall soon see if today's Muslims have the intestinal fortitude to realize and accept that, sadly, they have been sold a bill of goods, and to move on from there.
 
The entire early history of mohamed and Islam have been erased. You cannot find it until about the time hadiths and sunnahs came out. This in a era where greek was the lingua franca of the region. And roman rule was still functioning.
 
@Loofydralb Do your own research, then come back to discuss.
I don't have to. That's not scholarship.
Just a few purported ruins. No historical or documented record.
Assumptions and conjecture. Some guesswork and voila they changed the direction.
 
I don't have to. That's not scholarship.
Just a few purported ruins. No historical or documented record.
Assumptions and conjecture. Some guesswork and voila they changed the direction.
Like tbe hadith?
 
. No historical or documented record.
Assumptions and conjecture. Some guesswork and voila they changed the direction.
Hadiths are records of what the witnesses saw and heard what the prophet said and did.
 
Hadiths are records of what the witnesses saw and heard what the prophet said and did.

Hadiths only compiled about 200 years after the time to caliph uthman, compiler of the first quran. No physical copies of the first quran exists today.
Tales about muhammad can't be verified by moslem sources either but taken as facts and elevated to scripture level by moslems.
 
the modern scholars doing authenticity, they saw and witnessed everything?
Scholars? Haha. From just ruins? No written historical records?
Any real scholar would have thrown it out to conspiracy theories.

why syed is delusional? he dont believe in your fairytales and no virgin to gain or lose from the discussion. It belongs to the alien forum.
Then why is he discussing?

Hadiths only compiled about 200 years after the time to caliph uthman, compiler of the first quran. No physical copies of the first quran exists today.
Tales about muhammad can't be verified by moslem sources either but taken as facts and elevated to scripture level by moslems.
Your concept as Quran is written.

Our concept of Quran is literal. The written Quran validates what is passed down orally through generations as in the past most people are illiterate and recite it from memory, till today.
 
Last edited:
Scholars? Haha. From just ruins? No written historical records?
Any real scholar would have thrown it out to conspiracy theories.

you are very strict w others on context. Like your prophet, you doesn't follow your own rules. My context is hadiths, the sub topic brought in by Syed.

how do scholars classified a hadith as sahid? They witnessed it?
 
Back
Top