Sunday, 20 March 2011

Why was Prophet Muhammad’s Father Called “Abdullah”?

It appears there is some confusion on this issue as Prophet Muhammad’s father’s name (Abdullah) meant the “slave of Allah” – questions have been asked as to why the name Allah was known BEFORE Islam was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (p).

Typically, our Christian missionary friends have been spinning this as to mean Allah was a pagan god as the pagan Arabs knew of the word “Allah” before the coming of the Prophet and Islam.

Highlighting ignorance…

This simply highlights the Christian missionary’s/critic’s ignorance as the word Allah was initially used in a monotheistic sense by Ishmael (son of Abraham) and those of his followers. However, with time, these Arabs later slipped into paganism which ultimately led to the Arabs of Mecca leaving the pure belief of Allah being the ONLY God by making Allah a high god of their pantheon of gods.

The Prophet Muhammad (p) brought the Arabs back onto the worship of Allah alone with the introduction of Islam – the same beliefs Ishmael (p) introduced to Arabia.

A brief history of Meccan-Arab religious practice

We know that the word “Allah” was in use before the time of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh). If we read Ar-Raheeq ul-Makhtum we realise that the early Arabs did believe in Allah as the Only God. This is dated all the way back to the time of Prophet Ishmael (p) who resided in Makkah (Mecca) and learned Arabic as well as settling there [1]. He preached the message of pure monotheism; “Most of the Arabs had complied with the call of Ishmael and professed the religion of his father Abraham. They worshipped Allah, professed His Oneness and followed His religion...” [2].

This shows that Allah was known as the Only God, just like the Muslims believe Him to be. Indeed Abraham and Ishmael (pbut) are considered to be Muslims, i.e. those who had submitted to the Will of the Only God, Allah.

How paganism was introduced after Ishmael and Abraham (pbut)

The issue of paganism came into the equation as the Arabs forgot this pure monotheism which was taught by Ishmael and his followers. The idolatry was originated from the actions of a man named Amr bin Luhai, he was known as a devoted and righteous man, well respected by his peers. However, after a trip away from Mecca he saw idol-worship in Syria.

Upon his return to the Meccans he introduced idol worship to the Meccans by bringing an idol named Hubal back from Syria and this resulted in the spread of a great many idols across Mecca.

They now (wrongly) believed Allah to be the high god of many

Despite the Meccan pagans’ acceptance of idols they still proclaimed belief in Allah in the sense that they saw Allah as the High God but used the idols as ‘lesser deities’ whom they believed “could intercede before Allah for the fulfilment of their wishes” [4].

Quite simply they had a pantheon of ‘gods’ but believed that Allah was the High God of their pantheon. [6]

The theory of Allah being considered as a High God is backed by Ar-Raheequl-Maktoum, Karen Armstrong [6] and W. M. Watt [7].

Effectively over the years they changed their belief in Allah, from the belief that Allah was the Only God (the Abrahamic teachings) to the belief that Allah was the High God of their many deities (pagan/polytheistic teachings).

There were 360 different idols, belonging to the pagans of Mecca, around the Ka’bah when Prophet Muhammed took charge of Mecca. These idols were subsequently broken, removed and burned under the authority of Prophet Muhammed [3].

Prophet Muhammad’s father - Abdullah

Another source that attests to the fact that the pre-Islamic Arabs used the name Allah and held a ‘belief’ in Him is the genealogy of Prophet Muhammed, his father’s name was actually Abdullah (meaning servant of Allah) [5]. Interestingly enough, some of these pagan Arabs believed that Allah was the same God that the Jews and Christians worshipped [6]

Prophet Muhammad reintroduces Abrahamic monotheism

In 610 CE, the Prophet Muhammad began to call the pagan Arabs back to the pure monotheism which was taught by Abraham and Ishmael centuries earlier. By 632 CE the Meccan Arabs had given up their idols and returned back to pure monotheism – believing in Allah as the only god.

1. Ar-Raheequl-Makhtum by Safi-ur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri, Darussalam, 2002 pg 26-28
2. Ibid pg 45
3. Ibid pg 45-46
4. Ibid 46
5. Ibid 63
6. Islam a Short History by Karen Armstrong, Phoenix Press, 2001, pg 3
7. What Is Islam by W.Montgomery Watt, Longman Group, Second Edition, 1979, pg 47

Related:
Ancient Arab Pagan Claims

Allah is not a moon god

Feedback: yahyasnow@hotmail.com

77 comments:

Anonymous said...

nakdimon destroyed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l02nnhyMvmc

Anonymous said...

And if he (Muhammad SAW) had forged a false saying concerning Us (Allah Ia IaCaa), We surely should have seized him by his right hand (or with power and might), And then certainly should have cut off his life artery (Aorta), And none of you could withhold Us from (punishing) him. al-Mumtahanah 69:44-47

For they do not speak the truth; their stomachs are like the place of destruction, their throats like an open grave, their tongues like a steep slope leading into it. Psalm 5:9, Rom 3:13

Anonymous said...

KARACHI, PAKISTAN -- A huge controversy has broken out in Pakistan over the case of Magdalene Ashraf, a 23-year-old third-year Christian student nurse at the Jinnah Post Graduate Medical Centre in Karachi, who was allegedly raped by a doctor on July 15, 2010.

Magdalene is the daughter of Ashraf Masih, a poor Christian, who is said to have "dreamed of a good future" for his daughter after her graduation, but then all came crashing down after the alleged rape.

Instead of a rape charge, a case of simple assault was made by the police against Dr. Abdul Jabbar Memon, which falls under section 324 of the country's Penal Code.

ANS has discovered from an informant who asked not to be named for security reasons, that a "renowned Pakistani hospital" run by the state, had allegedly declared, in its medical examination report, that a semen specimen sent to them was "not that" of the alleged rapist of the virgin Christian trainee nurse, thus depriving her of "justice in this case."

The informant then alleged, that staff there conspired together and allegedly declared that the specimen sent to them was not that of the main accused doctor, nor of any of his "accomplices" whom it was claimed had raped the Christian nurse and thus deprived this "hapless and impoverished Christian trainee nurse of justice."

According to our informant, the Christian trainee nurse was allegedly seduced and taken to the doctors' mess led by a Muslim nurse and then subjected to "immense physical, mental and sexual assault" by the doctor and two other Muslim men.

According to reports obtained later that night, she was found lying on ground "nearly dead" and "drenched in blood" and taken to the hospital for treatment for her "critical condition."

Our source said that the police were reluctant to register a case against this influential Muslim physician but, later on, under media pressure, registered a case, but "refrained from inserting the rape section of Pakistani Penal Code." (Read mor

Abdul said...

If that Doctor did indeed commit such an awful crime against that poor girl then may Allah give her justice. What a wicked thing to do.

However, I do wonder what motivates a person like David Wood (who resides in North America) to regularly post about events like this - events that take place in thirdworld countries thousands of miles away from his immediate sphere of concern.

What does he hope to acheive by posting such awful stories?

Aren't these kind of tradgedies, unfortunately, to be found all over the world?

Psssssst.....you don't think that by doing so he's trying to demonize all Muslims do you? - surely not!!!

Anonymous said...

The following is being posted on behalf of Radical Moderate. For some mysterious reason his posts are not going through:

WARNING FAITH SHATTERING POST

Yahya Snow seems to be reposting the Islamic HOAX that Ishmael settled in Mecca, and that He and his descendant's worshiped a god named Allah.


He says...
"We know that the word “Allah” was in use before the time of Prophet
Muhammed (pbuh). If we read Ar-Raheeq ul-Makhtum we realise that the early Arabs did believe in Allah as the Only God. This is dated all the way back to the time of Prophet Ishmael (p) who resided in Makkah (Mecca) and learned Arabic as well as settling there [1]. He preached the message of pure monotheism; “Most of the Arabs had complied with the call of Ishmael and professed the religion of his father Abraham. They worshipped Allah, professed His Oneness and followed His religion...” [2]. "

First this book he is quoting from is a revised version of Rasul Allah. Its a modern revised version, dating back at least to 1979 when it won a competition. The author recently passed away.
Second notice he says "WE KNOW". How does he know, because he goes by a modern revsion of a biography of his false prophet where his false prophet or a later commentator made this statement?

Does he have any other sources?
Any archaeological evidence that
1.Ishmael was a arab?
2. Ishmael settled in Mecca?
3. He worshiped a god named Allah, or used Allah in reference to the one true God of Abraham.?

No the only thing he has to go by to "KNOW" as he writes is a 20th century biography based on post 7th century AD sources, that even post date his prophet by a hundred years or so.

Here is what we have on the Name of GOD, the God that Abraham and his descendant's worshiped.

First we have the name itself preserved in the ancient witness of the DSS find. This testifies that the name of the EL, (god) that Abraham and his descendent's worshiped is YHWY. These finds date back to the second century BC.

Next we have the silver scroll, that contains the priestly benediction "May Yahweh bless you and keep you;May Yahweh cause his face to Shine upon you and grant you Peace" ( Numbers 6:24–26) This quote dates back to no earlier then the 7th century BC.

Next we have the name written in STONE, not by the descendent's of Abraham, but by Israel's enemies, the Egyptians, and Moabites.

The Moabites were a historical people, that lived in the mountains of Mu'ab, a mountainous strip in the land in Jordan running along the eastern shore of the Dead Sea.

The king of the Moabites, King Mesha revolted against the King of Israel, as recorded in 2 Kings 3. A Moabite Stele honoring King Mesha and his victory was erected around 840 BC. The inscription on this Stele records the name of God of Israel.

Line 12 " And I carried from there the altar of/for its DVD ("its Davidic altar"?)"

Line's 17-18 " I took [the ves-]-sels of Yahweh.

So here we have the Davidic Alter and the Vessels of YHWY being carried off by King Mesha, king of the Moabites. The Moabites (proto Arabs) Worshiped a god called Kemosh,

Now I will delever the death blow, and shatter your faith.

The Shasu of YHWY: The Shasu is an Egyptian word for pastoral nomads who appeared in the Levant and Arabia from the fifteenth century BCE. The Shasu of YHWY is found in two topographical lists. The lists are found inscribed on the walls of temples, one at Soleb and the second at Amarah-West. So here we have a group of people in the 15th century BC who were nomads in the Levant of Arabia who worshiped a God named YHWY.

So Yahya do you have any evidence like what I have shown to demonstrate that any group in Arabia prior to the seventh century AD worshiped a Unitarian Monotheistic god and called him ALLAH?

Radical Moderate said...

Try this again.

WARNING FAITH SHATTERING POST Part 1

Yahya Snow seems to be reposting the Islamic HOAX that Ishmael settled in Mecca, and that He and his descendent's worshiped a god named Allah.

He says...
"We know that the word “Allah” was in use before the time of Prophet
Muhammed (pbuh). If we read Ar-Raheeq ul-Makhtum we realise that the early Arabs did believe in Allah as the Only God. This is dated all the way back to the time of Prophet Ishmael (p) who resided in Makkah (Mecca) and learned Arabic as well as settling there [1]. He preached the message of pure monotheism; “Most of the Arabs had complied with the call of Ishmael and professed the religion of his father Abraham. They worshipped Allah, professed His Oneness and followed His religion...” [2]. "

First this book he is quoting from is a revised version of Rasul Allah. Its a modern revised version, dating back at least to 1979 when it won a competition. The author recently passed away.
Second notice he says "WE KNOW" how does he know, because he goes by a modern revsion of a biography of his false prophet where his false prophet or a later commentator made this statement?

Does he have any other sources?
Any archeological evidence that 1.Ishmael was a arab?
2. Ishmael settle in Mecca?
3. He worshiped a god named Allah, or used Allah in reference to the one true God of Abraham.?

Radical Moderate said...

Faith Shattering Post Part 2

No the only thing he has to go by to "KNOW" as he writes is a 20th century biography based on post 7th century AD sources, that even post date his prophet by a hundred years or so.

Here is what we have on the Name of GOD, the God that Abraham and his descendent's worshiped.

First we have the name itself preserved in the ancient witness of the DSS find. This testifies that the name of the EL, (god) that Abraham and his descendent's worshiped is YHWY. These finds date back to the second century BC.

Next we have the silver scroll, that contains the priestly benediction "May Yahweh bless you and keep you;May Yahweh cause his face to Shine upon you and grant you Peace" ( Numbers 6:24–26) This quote dates back to no earlier then the 7th century BC.

Next we have the name written in STONE, not by the descendent's of Abraham, but by Israel's enemies, the Egyptians, and Moabites.

The Moabites were a historical people, that lived in the mountains of Mu'ab, a mountainous strip in the land in Jordan running along the eastern shore of the Dead Sea.

The king of the Moabites, King Mesha revolted against the King of Israel, as recorded in 2 Kings 3. A Moabite Stele honoring King Mesha and his victory was erected around 840 BC. The inscription on this Stele records the name of God of Israel.
Line 12 " And I carried from there the altar of/for its DVD ("its Davidic altar"?)"
Line's 17-18 " I took [the ves-]-sels of Yahweh.

So here we have the Davidic Alter and the Vessels of YHWY being carried off by King Mesha, king of the Moabites. The Moabites (proto Arabs) Worshiped a god called Kemosh,

Now I will delever the death blow, and shatter your faith.

The Shasu of YHWY: The Shasu is an Egyptian word for pastoral nomads who appeared in the Levant and Arabia from the fifteenth century BCE. The Shasu of YHWY is found in two topographical lists. The lists are found inscribed on the walls of temples, one at Soleb and the second at Amarah-West. So here we have a group of people in the 15th century BC who were nomads in the Levant of Arabia who worshiped a God named YHWY.

So Yahya do you have any evidence like what I have shown to demonstrate that any group in Arabia prior to the seventh century AD worshiped a Unitarian Monotheistic god and called him ALLAH?

Anonymous said...

Never in my wildest dreams would I have thought that there might be problems with Western governments attempting to apply Sharia in the West.


UNITED KINGDOM--Sharia law is being used by house buyers posing as Muslims to dodge stamp duty, it was revealed yesterday.

A scheme, brought in by Labour in 2005, allows followers of Islam to buy property without paying the tax.

Paying interest is banned under Sharia law, so Muslims are allowed to buy a house and then sell it on to an offshore financial company.

They then lease the house from the company instead of taking out a mortgage, which would include interest payments. Stamp duty, which is applicable to all properties worth £125,000 and over, does not have to be paid on properties which are immediately sold on.

But the loophole, which costs the Treasury £40million a year, is now being used by some who pretend to be Muslim.

Sultan Choudhury, from the UK Islamic Finance Secretariat, said: “It was certainly not envisaged that some tax advisers would manipulate the legislation on behalf of their clients to avoid paying stamp duty at all.” (Source)

"Paying interest is banned under Sharia law." Anyone ever consider telling U.K. Muslims that that Great Britain is not under Sharia law? Would that be too bigoted?

Anonymous said...

Brother Snow,

I wanted to drew your attention to brother Bassam Zawadi has written a great refutation to an article of Anthony Rogers. I knew you have refuted this Christian in the past and thought you will like to know about this since brother Bassam destroys his argument, especially since he keeps challenging you to debate. Now I knew why you won't debate him. He doesn't knew what he is talking about. But it is good if you could link to this article by Zawadi for the brothers and expose him.

Rebuttal to Anthony Rogers's Article

Anonymous said...

IBN here.

RadicalIdiot: Any archeological evidence that 1.Ishmael was a arab?

Any archeological evidence that Ishmael, or for that matter, Abraham existed? No. So let's go with what we can glean from history instead. Historically, both Jews and Christians, before and after Islam, have identified Arabs as the descendants of Ishmael. For instance, the 7th century Armenian Bishop Sebeos wrote, "Twelve peoples representing all the tribes of the Jews assembled at the city of Edessa. When they saw that the Persian troops had departed leaving the city in peace, they closed the gates and fortified themselves. They refused entry to troops of the Roman lordship. Thus Heraclius, emperor of the Byzantines, gave the order to besiege it. When the Jews realized that they could not militarily resist him, they promised to make peace. Opening the city gates, they went before him, and Heraclius ordered that they should go and stay in their own place. So they departed, taking the road through the desert to Tachkastan Arabia to the sons of Ishmael. The Jews called the Arabs to their aid and familiarized them with the relationship they had through the books of the Old Testament. Although the Arabs were convinced of their close relationship, they were unable to get a consensus from their multitude, for they were divided from each other by religion. In that period a certain one of them, a man of the sons of Ishmael named Muhammad, became prominent."

Similarly, the medieval Jewish scholar Maimonides said about the Arabs, "The Ishmaelites are not at all idolaters; [idolatry] has long been severed from their mouths and hearts; and they attribute to God a proper unity, a unity concerning which there is no doubt. And because they lie about us, and falsely attribute to us the statement that God has a son, is no reason for us to lie about them and say that they are idolaters . . . And should anyone say that the house that they honor [the Kaaba] is a house of idolatry and an idol is hidden within it, which their ancestors used to worship, then what of it? The hearts of those who bow down toward it today are [directed] only toward Heaven . . . [Regarding] the Ishmaelites today – idolatry has been severed from the mouths of all of them [including] women and children. Their error and foolishness is in other things which cannot be put into writing because of the renegades and wicked among Israel [i.e., apostates]. But as regards the unity of God they have no error at all."

Abdul said...

RadicalModerate -

1 - Ishmael is considered the 'father' of the Arab people and not as an Arab himself as such.

2 - Archaeological evidence for Ishmael in Mecca - seriously?

I hate to break it to you Rad, but there is no archaeological evidence that Abraham existed let alone Ishmael or Issac.

You really don't think these things through do you?

Anonymous said...

IBN here. I posted a response to RadicalFool regarding Ishmael. Why isn't it appearing?

Radical Moderate said...

@Ibn and Abdul

So you have nothing then. So please to Yahya to change his article from "WE KNOW" to "WE DON"T KNOW" or "WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE FOR THIS" or "IT IS JUST SPECULATION"

Thank you

Abdul said...

RadicalModerate -

*Palm of hand impacts upon forehead with devastating force*

We KNOW that Ishmael settled in Mecca, and built the Ka'ba with Abraham, because the Qur'an tells us Rad, not because of archaeological evidence.

And this is precisely the same reason why you believe what you believe - because you read it in the Hebrew Bible - not because of archaeological evidence (because there is none) - geddit?

So are you going to be consistent on this one, and follow the advice that you just gave Yahya when talking about the Patriarchs to people? - Because it is no different for you either.

You need to engage that brain of yours before typing in future, my forehead won't take another palm impact like that.

Radical Moderate said...

I just thought of this, we christians have more evidence for the Crucification of Christ that you DENY. Then you do for Ishmael settling in Mecca, and the Arabs worshiping a unitarian monotheistic god called Allah prior to Mohamed which you believe.

Talk about blind faith.

Abdul said...

I was too late

Radical Moderate said...

@Abdul

you said...
"*Palm of hand impacts upon forehead with devastating force*

That's it keep hitting yourself in the head, maybe it will rattle something loose.

You also said...

"We KNOW that Ishmael settled in Mecca, and built the Ka'ba with Abraham, because the Qur'an tells us Rad, not because of archaeological evidence."

Yeah classic, what ever the Quran says is true, and anything that says other wise is false. Classic blind faith.

You also said...
"And this is precisely the same reason why you believe what you believe - because you read it in the Hebrew Bible - not because of archaeological evidence (because there is none) - geddit?"

No sir your completely wrong. I believe the bible, because it can and is proven by historical evidence and archeological FACTS. In other words I just don't believe the bible because the bible says so, I believe the bible because it is TRUE, proven by the fact of History and Archeological evidence. Something your Quran does not have.

Now getting back to the topic.
My question was not whether Ishmael or Abraham ever existed. My question is whether you can prove this.

Another Question was whether you can prove that the Arabs worshiped a unitarian monotheistic God called ALLAH, as I have proven going back to 1500 BC that a group of nomadic people in the Levant and Arabia worshiped a God named YWHY.

I also proved that as early as 840 BC a battle that was described in the Bible took place, as depicted in the Stele of the enemy. This Stele also proves that there was a DAVIDIC alter, a house of David, as well as the God's name is YWHY.

I have also proven that as early as the 7th century BC, text from the Numbers 6 that calls on the name of YWHY for a blessing were written on silver, a precious metal.

So I ask you again can you prove any of this for the arabs in MECCA.

BTW, if there was a permanent sustained human presence at Mecca dating back to the 3rd or 2nd Milenium BC, then there would be evidence of that.

So I am asking you for that evidence.

Anonymous said...

So? According to Abdul, the Quran verifies the Kabaa, and the Kabaa verifies the Qur'an. Oh bother, where have I heard that before. Scientific "miracles" anyone?

Anonymous said...

Seriously, where did my response go?

Radical Moderate said...

@Abdul

One more thing, I can prove the descendents of Abraham existed and settled in the land of Cannan, in at least 1200 BC.

Jacob the son of Issac, who was the son of Abraham was named ISRAEL.

The victory Stele of Merneptah tells of the victory's of Pharoh Merneptah who reined in 1200 BC. The Stele commemorates a victory in a campaign against people in Cannan. One of the peoples was the tribe of ISRAEL.

"Israel is laid waste; its seed is no more."

What makes this really interesting is that Israel is marked as a tribe and not as a kingdom.

So do you have anything like this for Ishmael or his descendent's in MECCA?

Radical Moderate said...

@IBN

Don't know what your talking about but I see can can read your comment. Maybe you need to take off those ROSE Colored glasses you wear when you read the Quran.

You said...
"both Jews and Christians, before and after Islam, have identified Arabs as the descendants of Ishmael."

You then go on to quote a 7th century text and then appeal to Maimonides a medieval Jew, who lived under Islamic occupation and oppression. But either way both sources are after Islam. Can you please show a source prior to Islam.

BTW Ibn I think your post made more sense when when no one could see it.

Anonymous said...

BlitheringIdiot: Can you please show a source prior to Islam.

Sure. As Carol Bakhos, Associate Professor of Late Antique Judaism and Jewish Studies at UCLA, writes in her book, "Ishmael on the Border", "...............the identification of Arabs as descendants of Ishmael was well established by the time of the redaction of the Talmud". (p.73)

"We also find in Josephus several examples where Ishmaelites are identified as Arabs................Jospehus writes, 'The Arabs defer the ceremony to the 13th year, because, Ishmael, the founder of their race, born of Abraham's concubine, was circumcised at that age.'" (p.74)

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://tribewithted.mlblogs.com/nelson-haha.gif&imgrefurl=http://tribewithted.mlblogs.com/archives/2009/09/sometimes---life-sucks.html&usg=__3BeIsATimeJ9RLVWZNc29WZktoI=&h=300&w=400&sz=13&hl=en&start=2&sig2=L1UDnZAAyoqPQvyPXFtYrg&zoom=1&tbnid=DKhTW5TGVeWf0M:&tbnh=93&tbnw=124&ei=eyuJTbfQBc25hAeRo9y5DQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3DNelson%2Bhaha%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D574%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:1&itbs=1

Radical Moderate said...

@Anon

Ok Josephus I accept. So the Arabs are descendent's of Ishmael.

So can you prove that Ishmael settled in MECCA? Can you prove that the ARABS worshiped a unitarian monotheistic deity called ALLAH?

Can you even prove that Mecca existed prior 100 BC?

Anonymous said...

FatIdiot: So can you prove that Ishmael settled in MECCA?

Can you even prove that Ishmael existed? No. So again we have to look at the historical sources for relevant information. As it turns out, pre-Islamic Arabs believed that Ishmael had settled in Mecca, so it was not something which Muhammad(saw) cooked up. Uri Rubin,a Professor in the Department of Arabic and Islamic Studies at the Tel-Aviv University in Israel, writes in his article, "Hanifiya and Kaaba: an inquiry into the Arabian Pre Islamic Background of Din Ibrahim", "Even the view that the haram ....was founded by Abraham may be regarded as pre-Islamic in origin"

He goes on to write, "Generally speaking, the pre-Islamic Arabs seem to have been well aware of their genealogical descent from Abraham and Ishmael....(T)here does not seem to be any serious reason for doubting the authenticity of the reports about the pre-Islamic Abrahamic sacredness of the Kaba and the Quraysh.....The view that the Kaba was the sacred House of Abraham is indeed very early. Its origins may be traced back to the Book of Jubilees...."

Anonymous said...

I just posted a response to Fatman. Why can't i see it?

Radical Moderate said...

@IBN

You ask "Can you even prove that Ishmael existed? No."

That is not the issue, the issue is can you prove that he settled in MECCA, and even can you prove that MECCA existed prior to 100 BC. So quit running from the issue and provide this proof. Remember it is Yahay who said "WE KNOW" so I am simply asking how do you know this, with out any evidence to back it up.

You then quote a modern Professor who just repeats the claim. Show me the proof, not just a repeat of the claim.

Radical Moderate said...

@Ibn

You said...
"I just posted a response to Fatman. Why can't i see it?"

And you call me a fatidiot lol

Anonymous said...

so much for fatman's faith shattering response. The fool can't even deal with the scholarly sources that confirm the Muslim position.

Fat:That is not the issue, the issue is can you prove that he settled in MECCA, and even can you prove that MECCA existed prior to 100 BC. So quit running from the issue and provide this proof. Remember it is Yahay who said "WE KNOW" so I am simply asking how do you know this, with out any evidence to back it up.You then quote a modern Professor who just repeats the claim. Show me the proof, not just a repeat of the claim.

Look at it this way. Jews have confirmed that the Arabs are descendants of Ishmael. The Arabs themselves know that they have descended from Abraham's first born. Given that descendants are more likely to know about their own ancestors than those who have not descended from them and,therefore, likely to preserve information about their predecessors which are not available to outsiders, it is plausible to believe that the Arabs have information about Ishmael that the Jews don't, namely that Abraham and his son migrated to Mecca. Moreover, given that the pre-Islamic sources regarding the Abrahamic sacredness of Mecca are largely authentic, the plausibility of Ishmael migrating to Mecca is strengthened.

Radical Moderate said...

@IBN

WOW this really was FAITH SHATTERING FOR YOU.

You said...
"Look at it this way. Jews have confirmed that the Arabs are descendants of Ishmael"

You know a Muslim is in trouble when he has to appeal to JEWS. LOL

So a JEW, who under any other circumstance you would call a liar, son of a pig, evil Zionist etc..., repeats your claim that mecca was founded by Ishmael may be regarded as pre islamic... and "The view that the Kaba was the sacred House of Abraham is indeed very early. Its origins may be traced back to the Book of Jubilees"

So if it can be traced back to the book of Jubilees then I'm sure he provided a quote from that book. Which is a second century BC work. So again I repeat one of my questions. Can you prove that Mecca existed in 1000 BC?

Anonymous said...

Fat:You know a Muslim is in trouble when he has to appeal to JEWS. LOL So a JEW, who under any other circumstance you would call a liar, son of a pig, evil Zionist etc..., repeats your claim that mecca was founded by Ishmael may be regarded as pre islamic..blah,blah

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

Radical Moderate said...

@Ibn

DING DING DING and he throws in the towel.

I'm sorry I just shattered your faith. But don't be a hater :)

Abdul said...

RadicalModerate -

No, you believe that the archaeological evidence tallies when it quite clearly does not. That is your belief - which flies in the face of the real arcaeological facts.

The Hebrew Bible is awash with some of the most glaring anachronisms possible.

I'll give you a quick example of such an anachronism which the Qur'an actually clears up - and there is no way that anyone but Allah (swt) could have been so precise and subtle.

Here goes...

In the OT account of prophet Joseph (as), the ruler of egypt is called Pharaoh (Gen 20:13,14,17) and king (Gen 39:20,40:1,5) whereas in the Qur'an it only ever refers to him as king and never Pharaoh.

The OT does exactly the same with the monarch in the time of Moses (as) calling him Pharaoh (Exodus 1:11,19,22) and king (Exodus 1:8,15,17) whereas the Qur'an only ever refers to him as Pharaoh.

So while the OT uses the terms Pharaoh and king interchangably the Qur'an only ever refers to the monarch in the time of Joseph (as) as king whilst the ruler in the time of Moses (as) is only ever called Pharaoh.

'Pharaoh' means 'great house' and was used during the time of the Old Kingdom to denote the palace of the sovereign. It was not used as an epithet for the monarch himself until the reign of Tuthmosis III (1504-1450 BCE).

Basically what this means is that the title 'Pharaoh' was not utilized as a title for the Kings of Egypt until the fifteenth century BCE - well after the time of Joseph (as).

So the Qur'an's use of the title 'Pharaoh' for the monarch under whom Moses (as) lived but not to the sovereign under whose rule Joseph (as) lived corrects the anachronism found in the OT.

What were you saying about blind faith Rad? Seems you need blind faith to believe the OT account and its historical discrepancies if you ask me.

There are many different and equally subtle corrections of the Hebrew scriptures to be found in the Qur'an - you just have to study it.

See - L. Fatoohi - The Mystery of Israel in Ancient Egypt, Luna Plena Publishing, 2008, page 41

Radical Moderate said...

@Ibn

Sorry to ground and pound you, but I just read over the book of Jubiliees and ohh it get's so much worse for you.

"she departed and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba, and the water in the bottle was spent, and the child thirsted, and was not able to go on, and fell down. 10. And his mother took him and cast him under an olive tree, 1 and went and sat her down over against him, at the distance of a bow-shot; for she said, "Let me not see the death of my child," and as she sat she wept. 11. And an angel of God, one of the holy ones, said unto her, "Why weepest thou, Hagar? Arise, take the child, and hold him in thine hand; for God hath heard thy voice, and hath seen the child." 12. And she 2 opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water, and she went and filled her bottle with water, and she gave her child to drink"

Since Islam teaches that Hagar took Ishmael Mecca, and the well is he well of Zam Zam, then what is she doing in Beersheba?

Just to let you know Beersheba is in the NEGEV no were near MECCA.

Next it says
"And Ishmael and his sons, and the sons of Keturah and their sons, went together and dwelt from Paran to the entering in of Babylon in all the land which is towards the East facing the desert. 13. And these mingled with each other, and their name was called Arabs, and Ishmaelites."

Paran is the vast wilderness, also notice they went as far as Babylon. NO MENTION OF MECCA.

So there you have it, Ishamel is the ancestor of Arabs, (ok I give you that point for you.) But says nothing about him settling in MECCA. Also since Islam teaches that the well of Zam Zam in Mecca is the same well that appeared to Hagar, and the Book of Jubilees says that well was in Beersheba in the Negev obviously this can not be MECCA.

So again I ask you Muslims to provide proof that Ishmael settled in Mecca, and that Mecca existed in 1000 BC?

Radical Moderate said...

Abdul
Looks like I'm going to have to smack you around a bit more.

You said...
"In the OT account of prophet Joseph (as), the ruler of egypt is called Pharaoh (Gen 20:13,14,17) and king (Gen 39:20,40:1,5) whereas in the Qur'an it only ever refers to him as king and never Pharaoh."

This might come as a shock to you but the Pharaoh of Egypt is also the KING OF EGYPT. So you are bringing up a non issue.

But again, this has nothing to do with the fact that there is no evidence for the claim that Ishmael settled in Mecca, or that Mecca even existed or that the Arabs worshiped a single unitarian monothesitic God called Allah.

Please can you provide this proof or not. If you can't then just say so. And if you can not then please tell Yahay to change his post to "WE DON"T KNOW" or "IT IS SPECULATED" or it is "THE MYTH OF MUSLIMS..."

I have provided you the proof for the Worship of YHWY dating back to at least 1500 BC. Why can't you do the same for your GOD?

Abdul said...

I know which account I trust - just look at the endless historical inaccuracies in the OT.

I've just shown you evidence of the Qur'an correcting a very subtle one - and there are loads more if you are interested.

The Qur'anic account of Ishmael is the true one - you just can't trust the OT accounts.

Abdul said...

RadicalModerate -

"This might come as a shock to you but the Pharaoh of Egypt is also the KING OF EGYPT. So you are bringing up a non issue"

*Rolls eyes in disbelief* ;)

Go back and read again Rad

Radical Moderate said...

Abdul

yeah thats all you can do is roll your eyes and smack yourself in the head. Because you can not provide any proof for the Claim that Ishmael settled in Mecca, the Mecca actually existed in 1000 BC, or that the Arabs worshiped a single unitarian monotheistic God named Allah.


FYI GEN 20 there is no reference to pharaoh, you might want to check that website you are getting your information from. Just thought I would let you know.

Radical Moderate said...

Abdul

One more thing, you do realize that the king of Egypt would come from a great house right?

Abdul said...

Correction - it is Genesis 40:13,14,17.

Doesn't change the point that is being made - which amazingly seems to be going completely over your head.

Radical Moderate said...

Abdul

you said...
"Doesn't change the point that is being made - which amazingly seems to be going completely over your head."

There is no point, since it has nothing to do with the fact that You Muslims can not prove any of the claims put forth by the snowman in this post.

So can you do it or not yes or no?

Let me repeat the questions,

1. Can you prove that Ishmael settled in Mecca?
2. Can you prove that Mecca even existes in say a 1000 BC, maybe that is to hard for you so lets say 500 BC?
3. Can you prove that the Arabs of the Levant or Arabia worshiped a single unitarian monothesitc God named Allah?

All the things I have asked you I ahve proven about the Worship of YHWY, the existence of a tribe called Israel in the land of Cannan, etc...

So why can't you do the same?
If Mecca had been settled since the time of Ishmael around 2000 BC then there would be some record of it. There is a record of every other settlement no matter how small in the land of Israel, and in Egypt, Mesopotamia etc... why not Mecca?

Let me give you another example. One of the things that is remarkable about the excavations in Israel, is that prior to the time of the Exodus there is massive evidence of Pig Farming in the land of Canaan. After the exodus the record of Pig Farming begins to drop off, you can actually follow this on a map with the conquest of Cannon.

Well anyway have fun smaking your head and rolling your eyes. But if you can not come up with any evidence for the questions that I asked then please remain silent. Its time for you to put up or shut up.

Ali said...

david is a lying hyporcrite. i'm pakistani, i've 18 channels from pakistan on my tv.
the police are corrupt, just like in india. they don't report rapes or anything. david here is claiming it was because she's a christian she got denied justice.
once again, we're showed how sharia is in fact not used. shameful david and his ministry of lies.

Yahya Snow said...

Radical Moderate wrote:

Let me repeat the questions,

1. Can you prove that Ishmael settled in Mecca?
2. Can you prove that Mecca even existes in say a 1000 BC, maybe that is to hard for you so lets say 500 BC?
3. Can you prove that the Arabs of the Levant or Arabia worshiped a single unitarian monothesitc God named Allah?
----

Me: Arab oral tradition is enough proof for us. Be fair, you believe Jesus turned water into wine based on what? External evidence? No.

So what do you base that belief on? Yopu base that belief upon anonymous Gospel writers who as Bart Ehrman points out received their "info" from a rich oral tradition!

And to throw a good old Americanism, a curve ball in there, the subsequent scribes are KNOWN to be liars. How can you trust your Gospels? There is NO external evidence which backs that Gospel claim up...

You see, you are inconsistnet. You will accpet info from a book which is know to be anonymous (would you trust a history book if you doid dot know who authored it, never mind the author's credentials? No), anti-historical and known to be scribed by some liars.

Hmmm, perhaps you would like to take that back to Shamoun and bring something more consistnet and sensible to talk about.

Going back to your point concerning Mecca, Patricia Crone has been responded to - If I can fish out the link/pdf doc I will but I'm pushed for time.

But to reiterate, ALL the points are backed by Arab oral tradition. You should accpet it as you accpet the oral tradition the Gospel writers got their material from and your Gospel writers are anonymous.

Inconsitency is the sign of a failed argument. Yours is inconsisitent, thus faled...


I guess you are back at the drawing board.

Iron sharpens iron as one man sharpens another.

Peace

Radical Moderate said...

@Yahya Snow

Good to see you we were worried, thought maybe the Jinn got you.

You said...

"Arab oral tradition is enough proof for us"

Can you show me where I ever appealed to oral tradition to prove my point?

How is the name of YHWY written in stone by the enemies of Israel not once but twice in 1500 BC relying on oral tradition?

How is the name of the tribe of Israel in the land of Canaan written on stone by the enemies of Israel in 1200 BC oral tradition?

How is YHWY written in stone as well as the royal house of DAVID in 800 BC by the enemies of Israel oral tradition?

How is the Name of YHWY written in SILVER a direct quote from the TORAH, in 700 BC relying on oral tradition.

How is going to the DSS scrolls and the name of YHWY written over and over and over again relying on oral tradition?

Can you show me where I ever used oral tradition for any of the things that I proved?

If I have this for the one true living God YWHY, then why don't you have this for ALLAH?

Abdul said...

RadicalModerate -

I have just given this example for two reasons.

1) It shows that the Hebrew Bible is the victim of countless anachronisms. What is written in there about Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph (as) is based upon traditions, and these traditions were already thousands of years old by the time scribes began writing them down - precisely why they are awash with these tell tell inaccuracies.

2) I have just given you an example whereby the Qur'an deftly corrects one very subtle historical blunder and it is not the only one - there are plenty of others. The Qur'an is completely consistent with what we know of the world and history - The Bible is not - FACT.

Like Yahya has just said you are totally inconsistent on this. You will quite gladly accept information from a book which is known to be anonymous and is anti-historical (you know it's quite amazing that you should bring up archaeology and the historical record to try and discredit our traditions - people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones).

All the issues about Ishmael were backed up by ancient Arabian oral tradition. If you do not accept this as legitimate then you should also deny the traditions you have in the OT - because the OT was written at least one thousand odd years after the events took place through an Israelite ORAL TRADITION!!!

Joseph Blenkinsopp, Emeritus Professor of Biblical Studies at the University of Notre Dame, notes that the past four of five decades have seen a growing consensus that the Genesis narrative of Abraham originated from literary circles of the 6th and 5th centuries BCE as a mirror of the situation facing the Jewish community under the Babylonian and early Persian empires.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham#Historicity_and_origins

Hence the anachronisms ;)

Finally - prove to us now that Abraham (as) travelled from the region of Mesopotamia 4000 years ago and settled in the land of Canaan with his family. See how you get on using the same criteria you've tried to impose on us.

And remember Rad - inconsitency is the sign of a failed argument....

Abdul said...

RadicalModerate -

1) The name Israel first appears in the stele of the Egyptian pharaoh Merneptah c. 1209 BCE, "Israel is laid waste and his seed is not."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ancient_Israel_and_Judah#Iron_Age_I

2) The next ascertained mention of "Israel" dates to the 9th century BC, found on the Mesha Stele.

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

Not exactly proof for the existence or migration of Abraham (as) though is it?

You also said, not that I am disputing it, but proof would be nice...

"How is the name of YHWY written in stone by the enemies of Israel not once but twice in 1500 BC relying on oral tradition?"

?

But don't forget my last question about Abraham (as).

Yahya Snow said...

Radical Moderate wrote:

Can you show me where I ever appealed to oral tradition to prove my point?

Me: Are you for real? I guess you just realised the drivel Shamoun armed you with was inconsistent and flawed – the hard way.


I’m not sure if Shamoun or Wood have tod you this. The material which I presented in the post is in ARAB ORAL TRADITION.

Stay switched on Radical. Bear the above sentence in mind. I want to walk you through a process of CONSISTENT THOUGHT AND COMPARISON.

Now, if you know anything of what Papias wrote about one of your gospel writers (anonymous authors, hmmm…) you will know he stated he got his info “from an elderly informant”. Hmm, that’s an ORAL TRADITION.

Seen as scholars highlight that NONE of the Gospel writers were eye-witnesses, it means your Gospels are ENTIRELY based on a supposed oral tradition (let’s, for a moment, forget about the forgeries added in by the subsequent scribes – some of which may still be lingering in what you call the NT today, hmm…).

Now that we have established the WHOLE of your gospel literature is based on ORAL traditions we need to ask why you have decided to blabber on about archaeological verification of BASIC Arab oral tradition (i.e. THEIR genealogy and info concerning THEIR place of residence, Mecca) while NOT applying the SAME scrutiny to the more varied and complex details in the ORAL traditions of the Gospels.

I shall not even bother to ask you to recant. Pride is common place in evangelical Christian apologetics. If Shamoun armed you with this nonsense, send him over to clear up his own mess. You are NOT his guinea pig to test his brain waves on!

Now that you have brought up the issue of archaeology, I could trot out Dr Fatoohi’s book and cite the problems (inconsistencies in the Exodus account – in YOUR BIBLE). Hey, why don’t I hold onto that one and just leave you with a taster which scuppers your appeal to archaeological verification…



“As there is no direct evidence to attest to the Biblical stories of Joseph and Moses, we can only search for circumstantial evidence” – page 23 of his book

Why are you not asking for archaeological proof to verify these Biblical stories? Because you don’t have any!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Be intelligent. The lack of archaeological proof for a story/account is NOT proof against it.

For some reason you were sent (by Shamoun?) to waltz over here and shed suspicion on the BASIC oral tradition mentioned just because you had not seen any archaeological evidence for it.

Yet, you have not seen archaeological evidence for the stuff in your Gospels or the stories about Moses and Joseph. Consistent? NO!!!!

Inconsistency is the sign of a failed argument. If you were consistent you would have rejected the Bible straight away. But hey, maybe you already have rejected it and just like to use a bad base to bash Muslims from…

Now, I’m in a rush. I promise to hit a post up on a juicy problem in the OT which is discussed in detail in Dr Fatoohi’s book and is touched upon on Dr. M.M.Al-Azami’s work. Is that fine with your good self? Hmmm, that’s another fine mess Shamoun has got you into. Laurel and Hardy, anyone?

Iron sharpens iron, as one man sharpens another.

Radical Moderate said...

@Yahya Snow

When did I ever appeal to Papias? Who wrote that MARK, wrote the Gospel of MARK, not a anonomys author.

When did I appeal to any text in the New Testement?

Again I ask the question.

Can you show me where I ever appealed to oral tradition to prove my point?

Instead I used Stone, Silver, and written on Vellium.

So again i ask you Yahay what proof do you have for your claim that you KNOW that Ishmael settled in Mecca, and that the arabs worshiped a single unitarianism monotheistic God before Mohamed?

Do you have any evidence or not? If not then please change your post from "WE KNOW" to We speculate, we believe from our oral traditions, we have a theory etc... etc...

See the difference is I can say "I KNOW" from the writtings in STONE that

1. There was a group of nomadic people called the Shashu who worshiped a god called YHWH in at least 1500 BC.

2. This group of Nomadic people inhabited the land of the Levant and Arabia.

3.In 1200 BC, a tribe called ISRAEL was in the land of CANNAN.

4. In the 9th century a Moabite King rose up against Israel, which is now a kingdom, and carried away the Davidic Alter, as well as the Vessels of YHWH. This coraltes to 2 Kings 3.

5. In the 7th Century BC, a sliver scroll containing the text from the TORAH Numbers 6:24-26 invoking the name of YHWH. (To Abdul this text pre dates the exile, so it destroy's the theory that the Torah was written down from oral tradition during the time or after the time of the exile. Since the text pre dates the exile by a few hundred years.)

6. Finally the DSS find that dates back to the 2nd Century BC contains every book of the TANAK, except for the book of Ruth. In these scrolls the Name of GOD YHWH is written over and over and over again.

So Yahya do you have any of this type of evidence for your claim? YES OR KNOW?

If you don't then all the other nonsense you and Abdul have been spewing is nothing more then strawmen, a vain attempt to obfuscate the fact that you have no evidence for your claim.

Radical Moderate said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Radical Moderate said...

@Yahya Snow

When did I ever appeal to Papias? Who wrote that MARK, wrote the Gospel of MARK, not a anonomys author.

When did I appeal to any text in the New Testement?

Again I ask the question.

Can you show me where I ever appealed to oral tradition to prove my point?

Instead I used Stone, Silver, and written on Vellium.

So again i ask you Yahay what proof do you have for your claim that you KNOW that Ishmael settled in Mecca, and that the arabs worshiped a single unitarianism monotheistic God before Mohamed?

Do you have any evidence or not? If not then please change your post from "WE KNOW" to We speculate, we believe from our oral traditions, we have a theory etc... etc...

See the difference is I can say "I KNOW" from the writtings in STONE that

1. There was a group of nomadic people called the Shashu who worshiped a god called YHWH in at least 1500 BC.

2. This group of Nomadic people inhabited the land of the Levant and Arabia.

3.In 1200 BC, a tribe called ISRAEL was in the land of CANNAN.

4. In the 9th century a Moabite King rose up against Israel, which is now a kingdom, and carried away the Davidic Alter, as well as the Vessels of YHWH. This coraltes to 2 Kings 3.

5. In the 7th Century BC, a sliver scroll containing the text from the TORAH Numbers 6:24-26 invoking the name of YHWH. (To Abdul this text pre dates the exile, so it destroy's the theory that the Torah was written down from oral tradition during the time or after the time of the exile. Since the text pre dates the exile by a few hundred years.)

6. Finally the DSS find that dates back to the 2nd Century BC contains every book of the TANAK, except for the book of Ruth. In that book the Name of GOD YHWH is written over and over and over again.

7. Before the time of the exodus, pig farming was common in Canaan. After the time of the Exodus pig farming starts to disappear from the archeological record in Canaan.

Now this is speculation, but it does indicate that something happened that caused people to give up hog farming. People just do not give up a viable food supply with out a reason. This indicates that a group of people began to settle in the land that did not eat pigs. Like the Hebrews. Again that is speculation but put together with the other evidence it is logical to make that conclusion.

So Yahya do you have any of this type of evidence for your claim? YES OR KNOW?

Radical Moderate said...

@Abdul

Here is the information you requested on the name YHWH written in stone 1500 BC.

The Shasu of YHWH
"It is used in a list of enemies inscribed on column bases at the temple of Soleb built by Amenhotep III. Copied later by either Seti I or Ramesses II at Amarah-West, the list mentions six groups of Shashu: the Shasu of S'rr, the Shasu of Lbn, the Shasu of Sm't, the Shasu of Wrbr, the Shasu of Yhw, and the Shasu of Pysps.[1][2

Source

Also i responded to the only thing that I felt was relevant in your other rant in point number 5 to Yahay.

Again, please if you have any evidence to back up Snowmans claim then please provide it. If not then remain silent. Because everything else is just a strawman in a vain attempt to obfuscate your lack of evidence.

Abdul said...

RadicalModerate -

"In the 7th Century BC, a sliver scroll containing the text from the TORAH Numbers 6:24-26 invoking the name of YHWH. (To Abdul this text pre dates the exile, so it destroy's the theory that the Torah was written down from oral tradition during the time or after the time of the exile. Since the text pre dates the exile by a few hundred years.)"

Does this logically follow that the Torah was written by the 7th century? - No, of course not!

I like this bit...

"...so it destroy's the theory that the Torah was written down from oral tradition during the time or after the time of the exile..."

Yeah this inscription - which includes three lines from a prayer absolutely DESTROYS the theory!!! - ROFL

But back on topic - You are asking us for archaeological evidence that Ishmael (as) settled in Mecca. All I'm doing here is asking you to be consistent. Can you prove to us now that Abraham (as) travelled from the region of Mesopotamia 4000 plus years ago and settled in the land of Canaan with his family?

Just for once be consistent and apply a little bit of logic Rad. These posts of yours are getting more cringeworthy by the minute.

Abdul said...

Palm at the ready and forehead braced for impact

;)

Radical Moderate said...

@Abdul part 1.

You said...

“Yeah this inscription - which includes three lines from a prayer absolutely DESTROYS the theory!!! - ROFL”

Yes it does, just like the finding of the fragment of John destroyed the theory that John was written in 200 AD. There is now no serious scholar including Bart Ehrman who believes John was written prior to 100 AD.

The publishing of the finding of the silver scroll has caused the “reconstruction” theory to begin to fall out of favor for a number of reasons. One is the text itself, you can not have text from a book appear before you claim the book was written. Second the fact that the words were written on silver and placed in in a tomb, signify the importance and the sacredness of those words. Also the medium that it was written on sliver signifies the presence of Psalm 12:6 “And the words of the YHWH are flawless,    like silver purified in a crucible,   ...” And finally since the words match the text we have now it testifys to the accurate way in which the scribes copied the text.

So quoting a skeptic, who subscribes to a theory that is now falling out of favor in academic circles, just like the theory that John was written in the late second or early third century is not a position to stand on nor is it refutation against early writing of TORAH.

Radical Moderate said...

@Abdul Part 2

No on to your other nonsense you keep repeating.

“But back on topic - You are asking us for archaeological evidence that Ishmael (as) settled in Mecca. All I'm doing here is asking you to be consistent. Can you prove to us now that Abraham (as) travelled from the region of Mesopotamia 4000 plus years ago and settled in the land of Canaan with his family?”

Did I ever say I could? Did I ever say “I KNOW THAT ABRAHAM MIGRATED FROM MESOPOTAMIA? The answer is no, this is a obvious attempt by you to obfuscate the fact that you have no evidence for the claim being made, and it is a obvious red hearing\strawman,.

Now what I will say is this, “The bible tells us... or I believe what the bible says... or I have faith in the bible when it says Abraham migrating from Mesopotamia”. But to say “WE KNOW” that is a statement that says you can prove it. So I am asking you to prove it.

Radical Moderate said...

@Abdul part 3

I have already demonstrated what I can prove over and over and over again. The worship of YHWH, by a nomadic people as early as 1500 BC who occupied the LAVANT and Arabia. The Tribe of ISRAEL in Canaan in 1200 BC. This is important because Israel is not yet a kingdom, this correlates to the time of Judges. Then a few hundred years latter when the Kingdom of David is established we have a enemy of the KINGDOM of Israel caring away the DAVIDIC alter, and the Vessels of YHWH. This same king, and this same revolt is mentioned in 2 Kings 3. Since this happened before the exile, this is even more proof that the accounts of the bible were written down prior to the exile. Next we have he Silver scroll with the name of YHWH a direct quote from Numbers 6. Again predating the exile. So we have the name of God written in stone and silver, we have people worshiping this God who's name is written in STONE and SILVER, we have the descendents of Abraham “ISRAEL” appear in the land of Canaan as a tribe not as a kingdom after the Exodus, and we have Israel as a Kingdom with a Davidic alter. THAT IS WHAT I KNOW.

Also I KNOW that before the time of the Exodus, there was wide spread pig farming in the land of Canaan. After the Exodus the existence of pig farming begins to disappear from the archaeological record. This is even more amazing to me, because you can actually trace the route of the settlements with the biblical account.

Radical Moderate said...

Abdul Part 4

I would say that is more then enough proof for the existence of the descendents of Abraham worshiping YHWH not ALLAH, for the proof of ISRAEL in the land of Canaan, for the proof that Israel developed from a tribe into a Kingdom along the same time line as the events that the bible describes.


So if I can prove that shouldn’t you be able to prove that for the claim “WE KNOW Ishmael settled in Mecca”, and that the Arabs worshiped a single Unitarian monotheistic God of Mohamed?

Maybe asking for proof that Ishmael settled in Mecca is a little to tough for you. So I will remove that from my question. Can you prove this.

1. That Mecca existed prior to say 500 BC?
2. Can you prove that the Arabs of the Levant and Arabia worshiped a single Unitarian monotheistic God named ALLAH?

Radical Moderate said...

@Abdul part 5 and the final SMACK.

If you can not do that, then please have YAHYA change his post from “WE KNOW” to “Even though we have no evidence for this, and all the evidence points to the contrary, we believe this because the Quran says so. And since we have faith in the Quran we dismiss all the other evidence when it disagrees with the Quran. Because we have blind faith that the QURAN is the word of GOD. We have nothing else but the Quran, and the Quran is always right even when it is proven wrong and you can not convince us other wise. No matter if God himself came down from heaven in the form of a man and slapped us around with a large trout we still will believe the Quran because we are that gullible.”

Well he can put it in his own words but you get the idea.

Allow me to smack you upside the head with your own palm. Oh man that has got to hurt.

Radical Moderate said...

@Yahya

A couple of things I left out. First thank you for thinking I got my information and or arguments from Sam and David. That really is a compliment since both Sam and David totally destroy the pathetic arguments from Muslims.

Actually I believe I told you this in my bio that Archeology is a passion of mine. I often go out Arrow head hunting in the fields of IL. I have found many artifacts including a tomahawk stone.

I was even scheduled to go on a dig at in Israel but the Israel\Lebanon war canceled the dig.

The funny thing is that Sam has encouraged me to write a article for AI on how the archeological record proves again and again and again the biblical accounts. Maybe I will now since I have seen its devastating power on Muslims.

With that said I look forward to your article attacking your own religion. That should be fun.

sam1528 said...

radical moderate ,

What is so faith shattering about your post?

Its not surprising that the 'israelite descendants' of Prophet Abraham(as) worshiped YHVH as it a name of God in hebrew. What is the issue? All of us muslims believe in the Israelite Prophets , descendants of Prophet Abraham(as). Its our article of faith. Prophet Muhammad(saw) was the only non Israelite Prophet.

Then you try to pull a fast one by asking for archaeological evidence of
1.Ishmael was a arab?
2. Ishmael settled in Mecca?
3. He worshiped a god named Allah, or used Allah in reference to the one true God of Abraham.?

You should know better , a so called passionate amateur archaeologist, that there has never been any archaeological digs in and around Mecca. If there is none , how can you find archaeological evidence? Logic , isn't it?

The next best avenue is the oral tradition which is being addressed in the article.

Are you saying since we muslims address god as Allah not YHVH we are wrong? Why are we wrong? Pronunciation or the meaning of YHVH?

Is YHVH = trinity?

Radical Moderate said...

@Abdul

I forgot to mention this in response to your "Do you have proof for Abrham...."

The bible account is that Abram left the City of UR in Mesopotamia. We KNOW that the city of UR existed. How do we know this, because we have mention of UR in other texts, inscriptions, monuments etc.. of other cultures and people. Also the city of UR has been found and was and is being excavated.

So if we know that the city of UR existed how come we don't know that Mecca existed?

@Yahya
If you want to go the "Oral Tradition route" the difference between the Oral tradition of Christians and Jews is that it is backed up by the historical and archeological records. You can not make that same claim for your "oral tradition" because if you could you would of already.

@Sam1528 I don't know why I bother, but your point on Mecca never being excavated, is semi correct. When the Saudi's expanded and developed Mecca a few decades ago, they had the opportunity to allow researches to come in and do a survey. I can't remember if they did or not, but I would wager that if they did it was shut down right away. Like what happened in Medina.

However that is irrelevant, since we know a awful lot about the people and kingdoms of North Western, South, and East Arabia. And none of them mention MECCA.

Abdul said...

RadicalModerate -

"Did I ever say “I KNOW THAT ABRAHAM MIGRATED FROM MESOPOTAMIA? The answer is no"

What??? Don't you believe what is written in your Bible Rad?

You see - you should KNOW Rad but this type of stance is quite typical of the modern Christian apologist.

The kind of admission that you have just made seems totally alien to the Muslim - it really does (and should). Either you believe, with total conviction, that your Bible is the word of God - and therefore KNOW that what it speaks is the TRUTH or you don't.

Do you not have such confidence in your scripture - is that it?

Rad - "Well apparently Abraham left Ur to settle in Canaan"

God - "What do you mean - apparently?"

Rad - "Well, how can I know for sure?"

God - "?????????????"

Well done Rad - Christian apologetics at its best ;)

On the other hand we Muslims do KNOW, with a complete and unwavering conviction that Ishmael settled in Mecca - Why? - Because God told us so. It really is as simple as that (and so it should be).

If you don't like that - tough!!!

Abdul said...

RadicalModerate -

It actually says Ur of the Chaldeans - another blatant anachronism. Pretty obvious why.

Conclusion...

Bible is historically unreliable and archaeology (Rad's fair weather friend) has proven this time and time again.

Radical Moderate said...

Abdul, ,Abdul, Abdul that last smack to your head really must of destroyed what was left.

I said very clearly that all though I believe what the bible says regarding Abraham migration from Ur, I can not say "I KNOW" as in I have evidence other then the faith I have in the bible" That is the difference, sorry your not making that connection.

Secondly this faith in the bible is not only based on my faith in GOD, but also the fact that every time we look around in regard to what we can prove from the historical and archeological records we find that the bible is not only correct but accurate.

Something you can not claim for the bizarre beliefs you Muslims have for your Koran and your pre Islamic history.

Why is it that I can prove that the city of UR existed but you can not prove that Mecca existed. Why is it that I can prove that a group of Nomadic people worshiped a God called YHWH going back as far as 1500 BC, but you can not prove that the Arabs worshiped a single unitarian monotheistic god called Allah?

Why is it that I can prove that a tribe called Israel existed in the land of Canaan in the time period that the bible says they should of existed? Why is it that I can prove that a David Kingdom existed, had vessels of their GOD YHWH, and even that a Moabite king rose up in rebellion exactly as the bible describes and in the right time frame. But you can prove absolutely nothing of your claims that Mecca existed from the time of Ishmael, or that the Arabs worshiped a single unitarian monotheistic God named Allah?

So which is more believable, the bible which is steeped in real archeological history, or the quran which is made up and has no attachment to history?

Abdul said...

RadicalModerate -

Don't worry about me Rad - I'm about to finish you off you poor confused apologist :)

You have just stated...

"I said very clearly that all though I believe what the bible says regarding Abraham migration from Ur, I can not say "I KNOW" as in I have evidence other then the faith I have in the bible" That is the difference, sorry your not making that connection"

You make it so easy Rad :)

So you finally admit that the only proof you have that there was an Abraham (as) and that he migrated from Mesopotamia to Canaan is in your Bible.

How is this any different to the position that Muslims are in over Ismael settling in Mecca?

You are demanding proofs for our tradition that you yourself cannot provide for your own lol - and this is the point that I've been trying to communicate to you for two days. Finally you see the fatal flaw in your own argumentation - and you just admitted it.

You are a class 1 joker Rad - seriously.

OK, so what do we know is that even the Jews knew and never disputed that the Arabs were descended from Ishmael - that even you had to concede.

We have a strong atttested to oral tradition that the Arabs, and the Meccans in particular, were well aware of their descent from Abraham (as) and Ishmael (as).

Throughout this entire dialogue you have asked for proof pertaining to this episode of Ishmael, but when asked to do the same for Abraham you have merely ran off a very selective list of much later Israelite history (mostly 1000 plus years later).

You also said "I believe the bible, because it can and is proven by historical evidence and archeological FACTS" - Now this is your main line of defence so let me obliterate it for all to see.

Just one historical inaccuracy is enough to cast serious doubt but I'll throw a few simple ones your way - heads up!!!

1)Mention of the Philistines in (Gen 26:1). This is the meeting between between Isaac and king Abimelech of the Philistines. The Philistines were a group of migrants from the Aegean or Eastern Mediterranean who did not settle in Caanan until sometime after 1200 BCE (1000 to 800 years after Abraham (as) and Isaac (as)) - So is the Bible Historically accurate? - not a chance!

2) Camels - Camels were not domesticated until well after 1000 BCE yet the stories of the Patriarchs are full of references to them being used as beasts of burden. You brought up the issue of pig bones disapearing from the arcaeological record - fair enough! - but be consistent. Archaeology has proven (through bone records) that Camels turning up in these narratives in this manner are totally inaccurate - strike 2!

3)Battle of Jericho - Archaeologists now know that Jericho had been deserted at the accepted Biblical date of the Conquest. Kathleen Kenyon confirmed this in 1995 by a thorough survey and extensive radiocarbon testing - Bible historically accurate? NON!!!

4) Pharaoh? Abraham calls the king of Egypt Pharaoh - historically inaccurate for exactly the same reason that it is inaccurate for Joseph to call him by such a title - Its an anachronism and therefore the archaeological record discredits your scripture.

I think that is enough to show why your scriptures cannot be trusted as being accurate.

Moreover, you have been totally duped into believing that Judaism and Christianity are the sole repositories of Monotheism and the Abrahamic tradition. Abraham was well know throughout the MiddleEast Rad and was well known by his decendents - the Arabs.

Your argumentation is woeful Rad - Epic Fail ;)

Radical Moderate said...

Abdul Abdul Abdul Quick response Part 1


This is just a quick response.
I wrote it before and I will write it again. There is a big difference between saying "YOU KNOW" something as fact which can be proven outside of your oral traditions. And saying "This is what I believe based on the written word of the bible" or even the quran or hadeeth etc..."

My objection to the snowman article was not that he believed something, it was that he stated it as a absolute fact. Something that can be proven.

Now you were right you got me on the "Arabs descendent's of Ishmael" which I acknowledged. However as stated above Yahya said "WE KNOW" ok so if you know it you can prove it in regards to Ishmael settling in Mecca. I would accept from Yahya if he changed his statement "We believe, or it is our oral tradition etc..." but that would require honesty and integrity. Something that is out of stock at the Yahya grocery store.

Radical Moderate said...

Abdul Abdul Abdul Part 2 of my short response.

Also he said that the Arabs worshiped Allah. Ok prove that as I have proven for the Worship of YHWH. We know a great deal about the arabs and their kingdoms and the occupiers of the Levant and Arabia. We know their gods, the cities, and settlements, the trade routs, business transactions names of Kings and cheiftans etc... from the 3 Mil BC on. THERE IS NO MENTION of MECCA, or of a single monotheistic unitarian god named Allah being worshiped.

Let me put this in comparison. We know that Yathrib existed from 500 BC (The Harran Inscriptions of Nabonidus) to 6 BC were Yathrib is mentioned in the sale of slaves found in Yemini inscriptions. But we find no mention of MECCA. If Mecca was he oldest city, if it was such a comercial hub of the caravan trade going back thousands of years then why no mention of it?

Do you understand the problem you Muslims have. You believe something inspite of the evidence to the contrary, based solely on your "oral traditions."

BTW I would like to see the ISHNAD for that Oral Tradition. :)

Radical Moderate said...

Abdul Abdul Abdul Part 3 on my short response.


No to your other nonsense that i will respond to shortly. This is going to be fun.

First on Jericho, you are relying on a hypothesis from a archelogist who NEVER published a definitive study of the pottery for peer review. Also the only thing that was published was the raw data from the dig. This was after she died. This is important because she based her hypothesis on the absence of imported pottery from Cyprus. Something that shouldn't of been in the small area she was digging in the first place. So it's not that she did not find this pottery it's that she was digging in the wrong spot. Secondly she ignored the local pottery that was found in abundance. You really need to upgrade to the latest analysis which I will provide in a latter post. I might even make it a blog entry.

Second your comments on Cammels that was the funiest thing I have ever heard. What is your source on that. Because a simple google search will show that Camels both the one hump and the two hump camel's were domesticated in third and second milinium BC.

On Gen 20 and the Philistinian king. Can you show me where it says this king was a Philistine?

I think thats about it.
Oh that smack really must of hurt more then I thought. You better upgrade from asprin to vicadin cause whats coming next is really going to hurt.

Abdul said...

RadicalModerate -

Sorry for the delay in replying.

"If Mecca was he oldest city, if it was such a comercial hub of the caravan trade going back thousands of years then why no mention of it?"

As far as I am aware it wasn't a commercial hub until much later. I don't think that any Muslim has ever claimed that it was.

"Second your comments on Cammels that was the funiest thing I have ever heard. What is your source on that."

The Bible unearthed page 37 by:

Israel Finkelstein - an Israeli archaeologist and academic. He is currently the Jacob M. Alkow Professor of the Archaeology of Israel in the Bronze Age and Iron Ages at Tel Aviv University

and

Neil Asher Silberman - another archaeologist and historian with a special interest in history, archaeology, public interpretation and heritage policy. He is a graduate of Wesleyan University and was trained in Near Eastern archaeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Laughing now? ;)

"On Gen 20 and the Philistinian king. Can you show me where it says this king was a Philistine?"

I said Gen 26:1 - And there was a famine in the land, beside the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went unto Abimelech king of the Philistines unto Gerar

Oh dear :(

Jericho issue - do you have sources on this issue. Would like to look into this more myself.

"Do you understand the problem you Muslims have."

The real issue here is - do YOU understand the problem you Christians have?

Your Bible is full of historical errors Rad - I wouldn't say that it's completely without value but you might want to reign in that impulse to 'prove' the truth of the Bible by citing the historical record and archaeology.

Radical Moderate said...

@Adbul
On second thought I have decided not to do a lengthy report on Jericho, it would be to much and way over the head for someone who says "Camels were not domesticated until well after 1000 BCE" I'm still laughing at that one.

I will just add this. Radio Carbon dating that was done in 1995, from charred cereal grains, could of been contaminated by the Minoan eruption of Thera"

But even if we go by Kathlyn Kenyons date, it still puts the destruction of Jericho with in the historical record. It just switches who the "Pharaoh" was from King Tut, to Ahmose 1. Also it could be that we are looking at the wrong group of people as to who the Pharaoh was. The Pharaoh could be a Hyksos King.

Finally the evidence for the date in 1400 BC out ways the radio carbon dating, especially if the darting is contaminated by the Minoa eruption which has been shown in other tests of other finds.

Either way, the date of Jericho has not been settled, and even if it was a latter date it just changes who the Pharaoh was thats all it does.

Now putting all these tu quo que, false delimea's, red hearings, and strawman arguments aside.

My challenge still stands as it has not been met.

Can any Muslim prove the following.
1. That Mecca existed before 500 BC? i.e. Is there any mention of it anywhere in any of the massive amount of documentation that we have from the Arab kingdoms in that region at that time?

2. That Arabs worshiped a single unitarian monotheistic god named ALLAH?

If you can not provide proof then have Yahya Snow change the wording from "We know" to "We believe".

Thank you that is all.

Radical Moderate said...

@Abdul I'm laughing even harder now. Like I said you know a Muslim is in trouble when he has to go to a Jew to defend his position.

Kind of reminds me of the "90 foot tall skeleton" hoax that was played on Osama Abdulla a few years ago. Still laughing at that one. To this day he still will not acknowledge he was duped. lol

You drop some Jewish names but with out citing anything they wrote on the domestication of Camels.

A simple Google search "When were Camels domesticated" turns up the following. "The dromedary (thats the one HUMP Camel) is easy to domesticate and the first evidence for tame dromedaries dates back to the late third millennium BCE. "

Source

"Dromedaries were probably domesticated in coastal settlements along the southern Arabian peninsula somewhere between 3000 and 2500 BC."

Source

"The Bedouin name for Camelus dromedarius, is the "one-hump" dromedary, also known as the Arabian camel. These camels were domesticated even earlier than the Bactrians (two-humped, Asian camels), before 3000 B.C."

Source

And finally WIKI
"Dromedaries were first domesticated in central or southern Arabia some thousands of years ago. Experts are divided regarding the date: some believe it was around 4000 BC, others as recently as 1400 BC."

Source

So the best you can say is "experts are divided on the dating of domestication.

Now on to Gen 20. What translation are you using. I'm looking at the Hebrew and there is no פלשתי Pĕlishtiy in the text of Gen 20:1-2.

Also you do know that the word פלשתי Pĕlishtiy just means immigrants. Seriously man you need to do some research before you post. Its embarrassing.

Now back to Mecca.
You said "As far as I am aware it wasn't a commercial hub until much later."

What did they do for a living for thousands of years? You do realize that the climate of Mecca, is not suitable and never was suitable for long term habitation off of the land. People plants and Animals need rain fall.

Either way I think I'm done here.
Fact you have no FACTS to back up your statement that "WE KNOW".

Radical Moderate said...

Just another Yahay Snow Islamic Hoax exposed by the Radical Moderate.

Abdul said...

RadicalModerate -

"On second thought I have decided not to do a lengthy report on Jericho..."

Why - because you don't know your arse from your elbow when it comes to the subject?

"...it would be to much and way over the head for someone who says "Camels were not domesticated until well after 1000 BCE"

What someone like Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman?

Nice one Rad - go on, go laugh at two top Israeli archaeologists heheheh ;)

As for the sources you have provided - you might want to read them first. The first one you have provided confirms the point that I am making. Look closer at what I said - Domesticated as BEASTS OF BURDEN.

From the first source that you presented -

http://www.livius.org/caa-can/camel/camel.html

"From now on, long distance trade and desert nomadism became possible. The use of dromedaries in the second millennium BCE by nomadic tribes, as implied in the Biblical book Genesis, is almost certainly unhistorical and shows that Genesis was composed at a later age."

Nice one Rad - superb form as always.

Here is the sourcen I provided - again!!!

The Bible unearthed by: Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, Touchstone, page 37.

And what is your problem with Gen 20? - Twice now I've stated this - the verse in question is Gen 26:1 !!!!!

"Either way I think I'm done here"

Indeed ;)

Radical Moderate said...

@Abdul Abdul Abdul

"What someone like Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman?

Nice one Rad - go on, go laugh at two top Israeli archaeologists heheheh ;)"

Since you only dropped their names and provided no quotes from them I don't see how I could be laughing at them? Providing a page number from a book is not providing a quote. SO I'm still only laughing at you.

Now back to the Camel's
I specifically chose the first site for you to see if you would in fact do some research. Congradulations you passed the test. Now I find it interesting that Camels were domesticated in the 3rd Mil BC, but then it is denied they were used as beast of burden? Think about what this says about human beings, hourses were domesticated long long long before camels. So man could figure out how to put a bit in horse's mouth but not in a camel?

The things people have to do to deny the bible always amazes me.


Either way Abdul this has nothing to do with the fact that you can not provide broof for the claim that Mecca existed or that Arabs worshiped a single unitarian monotheistic God named Allah prior to Mohamed.

Can you provide broof of this or not? If you can not then it is just another Islamic Hoax refuted. One of many.

Abdul said...

RadicalModerate -

"I specifically chose the first site for you to see if you would in fact do some research. Congradulations you passed the test."

Oh I see, well thank goodness for that because up and till that point I had you pegged for a halfwit.

Nice try Rad lol ;)

Do a google book search for - The Bible unearthed and then find page 37.

I have just done it myself to see if the page number is available to view - it is.

Read and weep ;)

Radical Moderate said...

@Abdul

You said "Oh I see, well thank goodness for that because up and till that point I had you pegged for a halfwit."

Well I do speak to the level of my audience.

So can you answer my questions or not?

Yahya Snow said...

Radical Moderate

You are missing the point.

The information from Arab oral tradition is BASIC info such as geneaology and historical knowledge of THEIR birth place.

You would expect them to know this.

Think about it, if you told me your ancestors originated from Russia (before your forefathers moved to the US), I would not dispute it as its a basic detail of your lineage that you SHOULD know.

I'm not going to start asking for archaeological evidence!

Its a given. The same applies to the basic info from Arab oral traditions.

As for you getting shoddy argumentations from Dave and Sam. The reason I felt you got this level of argumentation from them was due to how inconsistent and shoddy it was.

As for you being interested in archaeology. Yes, I do recall you claiming to be keen on history.

I find it interesting that you will not believe the Bible unless there is archaeological evidence for the claims. I guess you have to throw much of it out.

I guess Sam and Dave will not be pleased...

Peace

Iron sharpens iron as one man sharpens another

Anonymous said...

The prophecy tells about Ahmad; 'Servant of God' whom will war to correct the wrongs and bringing judgement based on the law of God. He will also liberate Arabia from worshiping molten images. Wilderness (desert), villages and cities will glorify God since then. As can be seen today, whole of Arabia are worshiping,praising God and singing words of God daily.

And we continue reading Isaiah 42:18 - 25; about Children of Israel, whom will still be deaf and blind neglecting the message brought by this 'Servant of God'.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In Isaiah 42:1, it is not a coincidence upon seeing the writing of both אתמך (Atmc) אחמד (Ahmd). And the word before אתמך (Atmc), is עבדי (Abedi~My Servant). For indeed, It is indicating Ahmad; Abedallah (Ahmad; Servant of God).

Not to mention אתמך (Atmc) is a special term foretelling the coming of a righteous man and is used only ONCE throughout the entire Book. [could this be a copying error or an intended error?]

Children of Israel have been foretold upon the coming of Ahmad but sadly, only a few accepts.