A topnotch WordPress.com site

Monthly Archives: June 2019

Refuting the Claim Petra was the Qibla Before Mecca

Source: http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2016/10/refuting-claim-petra-was-qibla-before.html

The revisionist theory of Petra being an earlier qibla (prayer direction) for Muslims prior to Mecca is essentially part of a larger conspiracy theory amongst revisionists who posit Islam developed over a period of time after the Prophet. It will not come as a surprise that advocates of this revisionist theory also adopt ideas such as “the Quran was invented after the Prophet” (or even before the Prophet!) P

Jay Smith of Pfander Films is the chief advocate of such polemics in Christian-Muslim apologetics circles. One would imagine, to the embarrassment of serious-minded and more scholarly Christians.

Admittedly I don’t follow Jay Smith as closely as some but from the Islamic Awareness article, it appears Smith has revised his own theories; back in the early 2000s he used to claim the qibla was in the vicinity of Jerusalem and nowadays he’s claiming it is Petra.

Regardless of any shifts in his thinking, his theories fall flat on their face as shown on Islamic Awareness 15 years ago:

Modern studies have shown that in the early mosques astronomical alignments were used for qibla. Astronomical phenomenon such as sunrise or sunset during equinoxes, solstices, Pole star, Canopus, etc. were used to direct the mosques towards qibla. Concerning the early mosques in Egypt and Iraq, David King says:

The first mosque to be built in Egypt was built facing winter sunrise, and it was this direction which remained the most popular throughout the medieval period amongst the religious authorities. Likewise some of the earliest mosques in Iraq were built facing winter sunset. Only recently has it become known that astronomical alignments were used for the qibla, so that some modern historians (sic!) have mistakenly inferred from the orientations of the early mosques in Egypt and Iraq that they were not built to face the Kaaba at all, but rather to face some other sacred site. Now, however, we even know why such astronomical alignments were used

Is Mecca or Petra Islam’s true birthplace?

Posted September 27, 2018 by Mark Anderson11 comments

For well over a millennium Muslims have revered Mecca as the site of their holiest shrine, the Kaaba. And until recently Western scholarship always accepted the traditional Muslim origins narrative, which says that was where Muhammad began, in Arabia. But in the late 1970s, John Wansbrough and two of his students, Patricia Crone and Michael Cook, published books arguing for a radically different approach to Islam’s origins.[1]

Among other things, these revisionists said that Mecca was not Islam’s birthplace, which they located somewhere in the Fertile Crescent. Though Crone and Cook later repudiated the theory their book advanced, Crone at least held fast to the idea that Islam originated in the Fertile Crescent, possibly in Nabatea.

The Kaaba is now surrounded by towers, including one of the world’s tallest buildings.

While the trend among Western scholars of Islam is away from such radical doubt, four decades later some scholars still promote the idea that the Kaaba was not originally in Mecca.

Some of these revisionists say it was in or near Petra, while others refuse to speculate on the exact location. And this notion has begun to trickle down to others in the West, through the work of popular historian and documentary filmmaker Tom Holland, for example.[2] Since Muslims pray facing Mecca’s Kaaba multiple times a day, one thing this view would mean is that Muslims everywhere naively face the wrong direction in their most frequent act of worship.

Read more of this post

False Prophecies of the Bible

False Prophecy #1 – Matthew 12:40
Jesus incorrectly predicted the day of his own resurrection
False Prophecy #2 – Matthew 12:38-40
Jesus prophesied falsely about many major events in his own ministry
False Prophecy #3 – Matthew 2:23
A fraudulent claim that a prophecy was fulfilled
False Prophecy #4 – John 13:18
Jesus claimed that he fulfilled a “prophecy” in Psalm 41 that cannot possibly be talking about him
False Prophecy #5 – Matthew 2:12-18
Jeremiah never predicted “The Slaughter of the Innocents” like Matthew said he did
False Prophecy #6 – Matthew 1:11-12
If Old Testament prophecy is true, then Matthew’s genealogy proves that Jesus cannot be the Messiah
False Prophecy #7 – Matthew 1:23
Isaiah’s famous Messianic prophecy wasn’t one
False Prophecy #8 – Matthew 2:14-15
Matthew twists Hosea’s words and takes them badly out of context to create a “prophecy”
False Prophecy #9 – Matthew 5:18
This one verse, attributed to Jesus himself, contains two contradictions and a false prophecy Read more of this post

Five times prayer in Al-Qur’an

(QUR’AN 11:114) And establish the Prayer at the TWO ENDS OF THE DAY and in the FIRST HOURS OF THE NIGHT.113 Indeed the good deeds drive away the evil deeds. This is a Reminder to those who are mindful of Allah.


(QUR’AN 2:238) Maintain with care the [obligatory] prayers and [in particular] THE MIDDLE PRAYER and stand before Allah, devoutly obedient.




(QUR’AN 30:18) And to Him is [due all] praise throughout the heavens and the earth. AND [exalted is He] AT NIGHT and WHEN YOU ARE AT NOON.



What Was Man Created From? Response 3

Source: http://islamiat101.blogspot.com/2012/12/what-was-man-created-from.html

Bismillah Hir Rehman Ir Raheem
Start In the Name Of Allah The Most Beneficent The Most Merciful

What was man created from, blood, clay, dust, or nothing?

  1. “Created man, out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood,” (96:2).
  2. “We created man from sounding clay, from mud moulded into shape, (15:26).
  3. “The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: “Be”. And he was,” (3:59).
  4. “But does not man call to mind that We created him before out of nothing?” (19:67, Yusuf Ali). Also, 52:35).
  5. “He has created man from a sperm-drop; and behold this same (man) becomes an open disputer! (16:4).

So From which thing is man made up of? Read more of this post

What Was Man Created From? Response 2

Source: https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/what_was_man_created_from___by_ansar_al__adl

By Ansar Al ‘Adl

The allegation is as follows:

What was man created from? A blood clot [96:1-2], water [21:30, 24:45, 25:54], “sounding” (i.e. burned) clay [15:26], dust [3:59, 30:20, 35:11], nothing [19:67] and this is then denied in 52:35, earth [11:61], a drop of thickened fluid [16:4, 75:37]

The obvious explanation to this question is that these references describe different aspects or stages in man’s creation. This has always been the understanding of such verses.

We will give a brief explanation of each verse, while presenting them in chronological order.

Most of the references refer to two different aspects of creation: Original creation and Embryological development.

Original creation

19:67 Does not man remember that We created him before, and he was nothing?

The phrase and he was nothing is the translation of the arabic wa lam yaku shay. Some confusion may have resulted because Yusuf Ali’s translation renders it as out of nothing, which is not very accurate at all. The phrase literally means, and he was nothing. Read more of this post

What Was Man Created From? Response 1

Source: http://www.understanding-islam.com/what-was-man-created-from/

Mr Katz, in one of his articles has stated that the Qur’an has given contradictory statements regarding the material from which man was created1. He states:

What was man created from? A blood clot [96:1-2], water [21:30, 24:45, 25:54], “sounding” (i.e. burned) clay [15:26], dust [3:59, 30:20, 35:11], nothing [19:67] and this is then denied in 52:35, earth [11:61], a drop of thickened fluid [16:4, 75:37]

Mr. Katz has also stated that the statement of the Qur’an regarding one of the stages in the development of the fetus is “scientifically wrong”. He writes:

The very first revelation starts out with providing an ingredient for contradiction:

In the name of thy Lord and Cherisher, who created –
created man, out of a mere clot of congealed blood.
— Sura 96:1-2

Apart from the fact that “a mere blood clot” is scientifically wrong…

In the article that follows, I shall present my point of view regarding the meaning of the verses which seem contradictory to Mr. Katz. I shall be very glad to reconsider my point of view if someone would be kind enough to point out any linguistic or logical fallacy in my interpretation of these verses.

A Scientific Error?

Before we proceed with the main point of Mr. Katz’s objection (that is, “What was man created from?”), let us first examine the “scientific error” that Mr. Katz has pointed out.

The Arabic word used by the Qur’an which has generally been translated as “a clot of blood”, is “`alaq” علق. The meaning of this word is given by “Qaamoos al-Muheet” as:

الدم عامة أو الشديد الحمرة أو الغليظ أو الجامد، القطعة منه: بهاء وكل ما علق، والطين الذي يعلق باليد، والخصومة والمحبة اللازمتان. وذو علق: جبل لبني أسد لهم فيه يوم على ربيعة بن مالك ودويبة في الماء تمص الدم و ما تتبلغ به الماشية من اشجر (القموس المحيط، باب القاف، فصل العين)

Blood in its normal state or blood which is extremely red or which has hardened or congealed, a piece thereof; every thing that sticks; clay that sticks to hands; unchanging enmity or love; Zu `alaq is the name of a hill of Banu Asad, where they defeated Rabi`ah ibn Maalik; An insect of water that sucks blood; that portion of a tree that is within the reach of animals.

Read more of this post