Was the Qiblah in Petra? Response to Dan Gibson | Dr. Shabir Ally
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.ย. 2024
- A viewer asks, “Dan Gibson claims that the #qiblah [direction of prayer] of early #Muslims was Petra, not #Mecca. Is this true?” Dr. Shabir Ally explains why the claim doesn’t make sense and makes a compelling argument that Gibson’s scholarship shouldn’t be taken seriously.
► DONATE: www.quranspeaks...
► SUBSCRIBE: www.youtube.co...
COMMENT, LIKE and SHARE
Facebook: / letthequranspeak
Instagram: / quranspeaks.tv
Dear viewers, please donate to support the show: www.quranspeaks.com
Research it yourself, Dan has provided enough tools to confirm his case (more than most academic's have done):
nabataea.net/explore/founding_of_islam/qibla-tool/
Dan official site:
nabataea.net/
@@markscheepers9908 th-cam.com/video/b-cZncVmtIU/w-d-xo.html
At first learn your religion then criticize others.
So going by shabirs theory we should reject the works of Muhammed and Jesus as they were both fringe scholars(as he puts it)according to the main stream authority of Jewish scholars!!Jesus and Muhammed were both heretics but yet you believe/follow then but if a non Muslim what to produce archeological evidence to prove something against the historical narrative we have been fed by the muslims then he becomes a fringe scholar and should not be taken seriously, hypocrisy at its finest shabbir
The fools among the people will say: *'What has turned them from the Qibla to which they were used?'* Say: 'To Allah belong both East and West: He guides whom He will to a Way that is straight.' _(Qur'an __2:14__2)_
Baitul-Maqdis (Jerusalem) and Petra, *both cities* are located *almost to the north* from the city of *Madinah.*
(5 degrees differences in bearing between both cities, from Madinah, and about 30 degrees West to be exact).
_If_ Petra is supposedly to be considered as "Mecca", hence the changing to the new Qibla would still facing to *almost the same north direction* !!! , _thus_ some people of Madinah at that time (as the above mentioned verse) _won't be argued_ at all to the prophet Muhammad s.a.a.w, but indeed *they did argued.*
Meaning, the prophet s.a.a.w. and muslims were facing to south, towards Mecca as the new Qibla.
... therefore, to consider or to proclaim Petra as Mecca is just *_merely a conjecture_* !!!
_also,_
The following is more even funny, nonsense, illogical yet uncomprehended .....
th-cam.com/video/HHSlbNbYXIw/w-d-xo.html
Al Aqsa
_circa __5:30__ to __9:16_
Dan Gibson mentioned that *Al-Aqsa Mosque and Al-Haram Mosque are both in Petra,* just a 8 kilometers in distance apart !!! ...{ in the same city ! }
If both *Mosques* are in Petra... thus, the *verse of changing direction of a new Qibla* doesn't make any sense at all !!! ...because of its facing the same direction to the same city of Petra ! _(note: during that time, the prophet already lived in Madinah.)_
...so again, to consider or to proclaim Petra as Mecca is just a *_merely conjecture_* !!!
Ask Allha
It's just ad hominem attack to Dan Gibson, and then misrepresentation of Dan Gibson arguments.
He argues that they accidentally pointed to Petra.
Now lets calculate the odds that they all accidentally pointed to the same ancient site that just so happens to fit the exact description of Mecca when hey could have all accidentally pointed to some completely uninhabited place.
Is 11 mosques all?😂
@@sevedsplan5932130 mosques, not 11. We are talking about the early mosques and they all face Petra.
Incidentally is the word you are looking for. There is more to it than that. Everything that describes Mecca is true concerning Becca and not true concerning Mecca.
Becca has the temples. Becca has the zamzam water via springs. Mecca doesn't have zamzam water. it has a well that leads to no where in order to catch rain water. That is not Zamzam water. Zamzam water is not rain water. Zamzam water is not desanilized water (salt water with the salt removed). Mecca has nothing there that goes back 1000 years and barely anything 100 years. The oldest structure of note is a fort built by the Ottomans. Muhammad wasn't around when the Ottomans built their empire.
But at Becca (Petra) you have everything. So how is Becca not the Quranic Mecca? You don't even have Mecca on any ancient maps, but Becca (Petra) is there. Becca is also the first city of note where Arabs were identified. The first Arab city. Kind of disrespectful to your own ancestors to diss it just because your faith tells you to or lack thereof.
He is clueless about it as well but Dan also ignored the ZamZam Water question he couldn't answer that as well which indicates both these don't exactly know the reason why mosques were facing different city which has no ZamZam Water source coz blackstone can be moved but you can't change the location of ZamZam Water source. If Petra was the original city then it should have the ZamZam Water source as well but if it wasn't then why all those mosques were facing that one city.
@@Givi-qe4bz There is Zamzam water in Petra. The Zamzam water are the wells you tap water from all across the city's landscape. In many respects, the city is literally located above an underground reservoir that could be called the Zamzam reservoir. You cannot argue the same about Mecca, because all of its Zamzam water is just desalinized Red Sea Water. I can even argue for why the Black Rock was relocated at Mecca, although the precise reasoning for that precise location is quite nonsensical as it could just be located in the middle of the Rub'al-Khali.
To know why you have to go back to Islam's true origins, the Roman Empire. And what exactly was the Roman Empire, it was essentially a city-state that parasited off everyone around it and grew to such splendor and size that it had to reinforce this relationship indefnitely to military fanaticism. That in turn is what created the Empire, the extent of land Rome controlled that is.
The Caliphate/Abbasids wanted to do the same thing. So instead of taking Rome, which would had been the ideal choice, they made their own Rome, which they named Mecca. Probably because they were unoriginal and the place the Black Stone had sat was called Becca (the Arab name of Petra in case you didn't know Petra is a Greek name and the people in the area spoke Arabic, not Greek).
You know the person has lost the point.. When he talks too much but says nothing..
"Before the development of astronomy in the Islamic world, Muslims used traditional methods to determine the qibla. These methods included facing the direction that the companions of Muhammad had used when in the same place; using the setting and rising points of celestial objects; using the direction of the wind; or using due south, which was Muhammad's qibla in Medina. Early Islamic astronomy was built on its Indian and Greek counterparts, especially the works of Ptolemy, and soon Muslim astronomers developed methods to calculate the approximate directions of the qibla, starting from the mid-9th century. In the late 9th and 10th centuries, Muslim astronomers developed methods to find the exact direction of the qibla which are equivalent to the modern formula. Initially, this "qibla of the astronomers" was used alongside various traditionally determined qiblas, resulting in much diversity in medieval Muslim cities."
Agree
@@proudamerican7662 You are not getting the point. To navigate is easier, since you make small adjustments on the way. But deciding that this was is pin point accurate direction of something from hundred of miles away is not an easy task.
@@proudamerican7662 Good that you finally acknowledge that.
Therefore Gibson main argument about the direction of mosques has no standing. Furthermore all other arguments about city of weeping and so on, doesnt prove anything. By the arguments he could prove many other cities of being into "real mecca".
So quite weak research, and he hasnt published even the paper. Simply because its hasnt been done the rigth way an academic should do. Professor King is just one of many who have criticized as this being a childish theory with no evidence. Neither historic nor arquelogical. Or even geographic. Pretra was under Byzantine Empire as their vassal state, Ghassanid.
I believe David King needs to go back and do his Home work John A
he didnt explain anything
There is nothing to explain
@@muhammedshanushan3931 clearly there is
@@nox6948 and that is ....
@@muhammedshanushan3931 uhh...the whole point of this video? Was the qibla in Petra and why all the early mosques were directed there and not the location of mecca.
@@nox6948 and didn’t you see the response?
If one mosque made a mistake.. then his arguments can be accepted.. but looking at the number of mosques which made the 'mistake'..his arguments fall apart..
Not necessary.. if the mathematical theory is told you 2+2=5 than you will have wrong answer each time.. first we need to examine the mythology that has been used to determine the direction of the macca and biased on that we can know about the true location
@@FAISAL-od4zx the diff between Dan Gibson n Shabeer is that Gibson is talking with hard physical evidence n shabeer n yourself are talking bout mythologies.. i take dan gibson's side on this unless you can bring something more convincing to support your arguments instead of "mythologies".
KG KRESHNEN who cares what gibson says Muslims know that the first prayer direction was Jerusalem and God changed it to Mekka during revelation to the prophet saw.
@@mnstr2173 really? How was it all poiting to Petra before pointing to Mecca? Why so diff to agree that the shift in the kibla was more of a political n economic decision.. why it always has to be something divine doing this n that?
KG KRESHNEN it makes sense that it was divine because firstly it’s mentioned in the Quran it was to see who really follows the last prophet and it doesn’t matter if you believe in Islam or not but it makes much sense to do such a thing it’s like sending a new holy book gospel after Torah and Quran after gospel and Mecca after Jerusalem Muslims and the prophet (saw) prayed to direction of Jerusalem until the Revelaton of direction change came it’s in Surah baqarah
There is no argument here. Just trying to cover up serious questions raised by Dan Gibson
Dear Litle boy, have the question crossed your mind who financed Dan Gibson to do all these travelling ? Usually researchers reveal this information. Second, at the end of his video, he has quickly wrapped up about multiple qurans, false qurans etc. based on his little finding about petra. Third zam zam, unlimited source of water in middle of desert. Fourth, existance of petroleum, world biggest petroleum reserve. Petrolium comes from living nature buried under soil. So you have both Dans arguments and his motives are highly questanable.
@george shah really??? there is absolutely no evidence that the nabataens (people who built petra before islam) believed in or worshipped idols... if you look at any other civiliasation that worshipped idols, many of these idols have been preserved till this very day in their respective locations (idols from the aztec - maya - egyptian civilisation are a small example). while petra has not one, not one idol or state, meaning that the idols never existed in petra to be worshipped from the first place. in fact, petra has crescent marks carved into the rocks and records that show residents of the city named abdullah
Oh yeah so serious that he is a fringe scholar who has been refuted by David King on the issue.
@@MonirKhan-un2gr Zam zam isn't special. The soil in Mecca has no signs of life before 100 years after Hijrah. "Financed"? He lived in the Arab region for 3 decades I believe. You haven't even watched the summary of his documentary.
@@MonirKhan-un2gr Assalam alaykum brother,
It is because motives are always questionable that looking at the verifiable evidence presented may be our duty, since we are not to be a people's driven by blind following of that which we have no knowledge, as opposed to reason and reflection.
I am Muslim, I checked the evidence, and it shakes me to the core. Dr Shabir's mode of answering the evidence shakes me even more. Alhamdulillah that this only strengthens my faith in Allah and the Quran, even if it leads me to rethink my faith in the Ulema.
Dan Gibson proves that the Mosques did not point to Mecca
I've made a rebuttal to this documentary on my channel if you wish to know the other side, then your critique will be fairer.
Dr. Shabir, please do not resort to attacking the character or credentials of people who are scrutinizing the history of Islam! One does not have to be a medical doctor or a forensic scientist to come to a conclusion that a headless corpse is dead. One does not have to be a journeyman mechanic to determine if a car has a flat tire. Please give a plausible explanation as to why the earliest mosques had qiblahs pointing towards Petra. Thank you.
A lot of them too, not 1 or 2 its 6 or 7 pointing directly at it.. not off by any means. I love the argument that muslims did know their cardinal directions that well but in the next video they will speak of them inventing/discovering much more difficult maths prior to this date. All people could orient structures at this time. It's all because no white man is going to sully our perfect religion. I'm a Muslim and that's what it is, they will never admit there are any mistakes.
@@chuckdeuces911 hi, do you have the location of the mosques that point towards Petra please?
@@GamerUK yes there's evidence and it has prove you watch the scared city of mecca you'll understand everything the truth
@@chuckdeuces911 it not 6 or 7...its130 or so
Very good point
Your not answering the question. You basically said Dan Gibson is bad and you shouldn't believe him. You are just mad that you grew that itchy beard for nothing. There is nothing in Mecca. No pottery, nothing before 8th century.
Yeah, he won't admit to that. Nor will he admit that any writings that were contrary to the Abbysids propaganda machine were burned and destroyed throughout their entire empire. Hence the literary void that existed then. But you won't hear him mentioning that factoid. This guy has completely discredited himself.
Read my posts above.
🤦🤦🤦
The beginning of Islam is Strange and the way of Islam journey to the end will strange too.... Well i think we need to talk to Sahabi Tree in Yordan, to clarify Gibsons 😂
@@rizanurmahadi7653 thats fine with me. I think there are two types of people. Those who are willing to admit that something makes no sense and those that will never admit to it and will go through hoops to prove their point. If i were a muslim, id ask why anyone cares if the stories are 100% true. if mohommed did this or did that. If he liked mint with his tea or honey? What difference would it make. What matters is the moral compass you create for yourself using the morality of a group of arabs in 700 ad as a starting point and then, building upon that using critical thinking, the wisdom of others, and common sense until you become an independent person.
Please give a valid answer to the question asked.
That was what we ask your missionaries of christianity and your missionaries never answer properly
I've already made a rebuttal to Dan's documentary on my channel if you wish to get the other side. Then you can critique accordingly
Valid answer?? never never never
You can try
Paulism is collapsing
You should be worried
I listened full 6 minute video but couldn't find single argument from his side on the points raised by Dan. Looks like Dan is right since other side is empty only making personal attacks on his scholar status.
There is no mention of city named Mecca's in any historic records before Islam, if it was merchant city than how come nobody mentioned it? There were no grape trees or water streams in today's Mecca location as mentioned in the book. IF Not Petra than may be some other location but definitely not the present Mecca.
Indian logic.
Regarding Islam.
That tells you all you need to know.
He said publishers are not interested in publishing Dan Gibson's books and he is therefore self published. Could this be that it is too hot to handle and everyone might get their heads "chopped off " because Dan Gibson might be on the right track. The response was ad hominum not vertitatem
Dude, we're talking about publishing in the Western world...
@@joshygoldiem_j2799 lmao tell that to Charlie Hebdo
Basically he said that the people who build the mosque didn't know how to find correct location of mecca. Many of them using a method that accidentally point to petra. I don't know if this is a good answer or only try to defend something with weak assumption.
Nonsense. If you study Arabic history, the caravan traders had to be good at determining directions as their trade depended on it before there were roads. Gibson documents and references this. This is the most common objection, that they "couldn't determine directions" - how can a caravan travel hundreds of miles without knowing which way to go, they could never return to Mecca!
@@theastronomer5800 yea sure they had also mecca maps(which google copied) at that time too you know but shhht don't tell no body it's a secret
@@vannymo2802 Sorry, but I don't follow your comment... What do you mean by "mecca maps"? Arabic navigation has been well studied and there are several good books published on the topic. Many ancient cultures used the stars for navigation and alignment, going back to the Neolithic period where they aligned ritual sites. Perhaps you have not looked into these facts?
If your objection is to the precise alignment, how do you explain that mosques from different places point to Petra to within an error of only 3 degrees, and a very similar error towards Mecca once they become aligned with Mecca? Clearly they are being oriented accurately towards a very specific point, not random.
@@theastronomer5800 the explanation is simple those people had no knowledge of science to be able to face the qibla in my own neighborhood we have a mosque not facing the qibla which was built maybe no more than 50 years ago i bet i can find you at least 10 mosques in the world facing the white house would that make it our qibla come on let the expert deal with it history studies is not for the layman to make big claims.
Please read my four objections to Gibson’s crazy antics. He does not know ANYTHING about early Islamic history and Muhammad ( pbuh )’s life.
Respectfully, and with apologies, I would like to say
(a) Dr. Shabir Ali has intentionally discredited Dan Gibson by saying he is a fringe scholar. He did not give evidence to that effect
(b) Dan Gibson has given lots of facts on the issue of mecca location. Some seem reasonable. Others not so. Dr. Shabir Ali should have addressed every single point
(c)If one study human civilization, all prophets before Isa (Jesus) saw are all located in today modern-day Israel, Jordan, Egypt, parts of turkey, etc and this goes back a few thousand years and how come suddenly we have a prophet that came from a city nearly 2000 km from civilization existing civilization
(d) Why there are no historical ruins in modern-day mecca
It's better that Dr. Shabir answer without discrediting other people views
It is not about discrediting anyone and making them feel bad, his point is valid. Dan Gibson who push this theory into mainstream, is an amateur archaeologist and untrained at the field. His work doesn’t fall under scientific research because he doesn’t publish his findings in peer review research papers like every scientist usually would do. Instead, it’s a trend where Evangelical scholars become amateur historian and archaelogist publish their “findings” in a book where they are not obliged to citation or fact checking. Don't get me wrong I love radical theories that are out f the box, but you have to understand that for this theory to succeed it has to bring substantial evidences. For now, it is more like a conspiracy theory than anything else.
The location of the holiest city is not something that will be erased from collective memory easily. Islamic resources usually have multiple accounts and opinions of historical facts many of these facts are not in favor of Islam or Muhamad, for a fact that big and lasting to not be even mentioned - even as a wrong opinion of someone as Arabic literature usually do with unpopular opinions- in the really vast Arabic literature make you not take this theory seriously. By the way, Arabic literature while unreliable in some details (like all historical texts) it has been shown time and time again that it is accurate at least in the major facts and even some not very major details, like the names of the caliphs the battles, the dates of events ...etc. These facts were shown to be true by comparing it to other contemporary resources Greek, Aramaic, and Arabic contemporary rock inscriptions, the date of the death of Omar for example, we have on a rock inscription and it coincides exactly with the date giving in Arabic liturture. So how can this literature be proven true for small details that can be easily lost from memory but at the same time it is completely oblivious to a very major event that would last centuries in the collective memory. Extadonary claims require extraordinary evidence.
@@user-hh2is9kg9j I have countered many of Dan Gibson arguments and also written to him. On 2 points he acknowledge he made mistakes. While I respect DG historical research I challenge him by researching and countering his argument. This is what Dr Shabir Ally should have done. Instead, he called him "a fringe scholar" with the intent to show that he is a nobody and has no credibility. If indeed he is a fringe scholar, Dr Ally should show evidence that he is one. This is what should have been done.
@@drrafick If he published in a peer-reviewed paper you wouldn't have to correct him on "2 points". That is how science works, you need to adhere to the scientific method cite your resources and have your work be reviewed by your peers. Anyone can publish a book about aliens and lizard people and it is more than fair to call them "fringe scholars".
Dan Gibson has nothing but theories
I am not a Christian nor a Muslim, so I haven't got a dog in this fight, however, he did not discredit Dan Gibson, he said it as it is, he gave you two people who are specialists and experts in this field, so gracefully accept it and walk away, Dan Gibson has intentionally or otherwise done a miserable job. As far as I am concerned Muslims always prayed to the same direction, Dan Gibson was criticised by scholars other than Shabbir Ally, non Muslim scholars have criticised his work and his intention.
Ask Dan Gibson on to your show
He ll never show up
Al Baqarah 2.14
And thus We made you exalted among all nations that you may be witnesses to the people and this Messenger your guard and witness. And O, beloved! We had not made that QIBLA upon which you had been BEFORE, but to see who follows the Messenger and who turns back upon his heals. And verily, indeed it was hard, but to those who were guided by Allah. And it does not behave Allah that He might waste your faith: Verily Allah is very Kind and Merciful to human beings.
Already mention 1200 years ago ,DAN GIBSON just did the study prove that yes it was really changed the QIBLA.
They don’t take him serious and by having him on the show gives validity to his claim. He will never be on this show.
Dan Gibson is a Researcher He should come and He will come
I think Dan Gibson do not know that initially the Kibla was towards Jeroslem (baitul Muqaddas)which is on the same line from Madina -Patra(Jordan)- Jerusalem.During a prayer Prophet PBUH changed the direction on Allah's will (Already mentioned in Quraan Surah Baqra) After that from then to till now the qibla is towards kaba....
That was just Shabbir Ali personally attacking Dan Gibson in a vitriol than objectively refuting Dan Gibson's findings.
There is plenty of material on TH-cam that scholarly refutes Dan Gibson you don't have to rely on this man in the video there is a ton of stuff I mean check it out and again I will point to the mosque in Eritrea as proof it's the first mosque outside of the Arabian peninsula and is pointing right at Mecca
@@hessam-deanhadaegh903 So your argument against over a dozen early mosques pointing directly towards Petra (with pinpoint accuracy), is to mention just ONE early mosque that doesn't?
That's a pretty weak argument.
@@Menzobarrenza your underlying premise is not proven. Watch some of the rebuttal videos in YT the break it down
@@hessam-deanhadaegh903 It absolutely is proven. I have seen the documentation.
Please provide me with these intended refutations. I am open to being proven wrong, despite how convincing the evidence is.
@Sports Entertainment Almost no scholars actually go out in the field to do the work.
They primarily just use the written documents of the Islamic tradition.
So, basically, the problem is that they are relying on the Hadith, which are written 150 years after Muhammad.
That's not historically reliable data.
I understand keeping your opinion due to the evidence you've seen.
In that case, I strongly advise you to keep looking into the evidence for Petra.
There is a lot of it now, and more keeps being discovered.
Yeah attack the man because you can't attack his ideas
DorsetMushroomHunter yes, exactly what King did, his refutation had no facts just a disrespectful bile filled rant. Worth a read.
Sadly, Dr Shabir start his argument by debasing Gibson expertise and playing a role of apologist. In other side Gibson argument is fascinating based on Quran narrative and Islam source. I am a muslim, and to be honest , we are poor in countering Gibson's work. I understand Dr Shabir and other muslim scholar have no option to respond other than to defend instead of offering solid argument.
Yudi Arianto, you are right. Why is this evasion of any logical reply so common in Muslim debate? I discuss Islam with Muslims and often a reasonable observation on an Islamic anomaly gets either diverted or answered by a non answer. Sometimes even by denial of the fact even when I show the reference from their own scriptures. Sometimes a verbal insult seems to be acceptable. Thank you for your post.
Yudi Arianto thank you for your honesty! May God bless you!
WHAT KIND OF RESEARCH ABOUT PETRA WAS THAT?
th-cam.com/video/MK9jLw9v4Nw/w-d-xo.html
Have the question crossed your mind - who financed Dan Gibson to do all these travelling ? Usually researchers reveal this information. Second, at the end of his video, he has quickly wrapped up about multiple qurans, false qurans etc. based on his little finding about petra using GPS which is not verified. Third zam zam, unlimited source of water in middle of desert. Fourth, existance of petroleum, world biggest petroleum reserve. Petrolium comes from living nature buried under soil. So i think Dans arguments and his motives are highly questanable and meant to spread propaganda targeted at muslims.
So, when the Muslims fled makkah, why did they flee to abyssinia? If Petra was makkah, why did the Muslims flee to abbysinia to escape quraysh persecution when they could've just went to the Christians ruling in Jerusalem, Damascus, Egypt etc.
Well..the location of Petra is much much logic than the current location we head to..
Well, Shabir, you should show your research data, to refute Gibson’s finding. That is how archeologist work, not just faith base polemic statesment, which any body can make and pleasing to those who do not think like archeologist.
GIBSON JJST HAS A NARRATIVE THAT APPEALS TO THOSE WHO KNOW LITTLE OR NOTHING OF THE TRADITIONS. ANYONE CAN MAKE UP ANALYSIS BASED ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO DRIVE HONME A NARRATIVE, IT DOES NOT MAKE IT RIGHT
Shabir is talking with no evidences but merely opinion promoting those scholars.
@@hessam-deanhadaegh903 If you type it in all CAPSLOCK it must be a true statement.
@@poyopoyo213 your wiser beyond your years young Jedi
@@hessam-deanhadaegh903 Traditions? Why should traditions be the hallmark? Can you prove scientifically or using GPS Coordinates that Dan Gibson has lost his way or is using circumstantial evidence? Would you provide us with correct guidance and not just traditions?
its not about "fringe scholars", but about verifiable, reproducable facts, geodesic data ...
Have the question crossed your mind - who financed Dan Gibson to do all these travelling ? Usually researchers reveal this information. Second, at the end of his video, he has quickly wrapped up about multiple qurans, false qurans etc. based on his little finding about petra using GPS which is not verified. Third zam zam, unlimited source of water in middle of desert. Fourth, existance of petroleum, world biggest petroleum reserve. Petrolium comes from living nature buried under soil. So i think Dans arguments and his motives are highly questanable and meant to spread propaganda targeted at muslims.
And you're gonna ignore the fact that David King answered this issue.
@@Soyodi tried to yet failed. bc he cant change the fact that all first qiblas point to Petra. thats litterally set in stone.
Gibson is using archeological evidence. It’s verifiable. The problem is Islam doesn’t have hard facts behind its beginning. Eventually the Dan Gibson proposals will sort itself out through peer research, Islam resides on the idea that they can simply use authority to establish facts or truth. The West is not based upon that. Thesis get pushed forward, they have their day,, are entertained, debated, and either hold up or do not. It is not a problem. However Islam wouldn’t be facing these problems if they had invested their cause in truth from the get go. Christianity did, when Jesus said seek the truth, it will set you free, (Christianity is comfortable with people being free) and that God is truth. Islam’s aversion to truth, ultimately, is damning of it. If it knew it was the truth, it wouldn’t insist on exercising authority and would instead encourage people to seek truth.
@@kaneinkansas seen this way, whole jesus story falls flat.
This guy is talking to much without saying anything. Moreover, he knows the truth but he cannot reveal or accept. Dan Gibson’s approach seems right.
Please read my response. Sorry for the typos as I did not review my dictated note.
@@khawaja1951 I have read your response. Could you please contest all (or many) of Dan Gibson's arguments from his many monographs on a website. That would be much more interesting and convincing. BUT you haven't addressed a very crucial thing (among others) which is the "Between Qibla". This was a phenomenon known throughout the Islamic polities in Iraq and Damascus. Dan Gibson has been saying this for a long time and now he has shown literary evidence of this by Arab historians lamenting the back and forth of qibla directions. Dan Gibson is on the ball. Gibson reveals one of these literary sources in his videos: "Silencing Objections #1". There may be more, but I've only come across this instance of an Arab historian from the 8th century testifying to it. I'm sure Gibson has many more. And when I say one instance, I'm not referring to one major mosque, instance is referring to an admission by a historian of this happening all over the place, really. Gibson makes this clear regarding the post-Petra phase.
@ayadollar khomaini Yes there is evidence. And the history that contextualizes this evidence, Gibson offers much explanation. You don't seem to understand that the Qiblas he discovered are just the background. The bulk of his research and conclusions are based on the geography of Petra itself and early Islam, who cares what is pointing there? The Hejaz is not a possible region for early Islam. Academic historians are of this view as well.
I was in conversation with another individual very, and I mean very, well-versed in early Islamic history. He doesn't agree with Gibson on many points, but he is firmly of the view that Petra was the original holy city (based on the genesis of the Arab military history and others evidences). It's not just Gibson. More and more and more, I repeat, more historians have rejected the Hejaz wholesale and they all are on different grounds, albeit not conflictual. This is no longer a controversy that way it was 30 years ago. It is become slowly, well now quickly, accepted history. Petra has NOT been proven, BUT Mecca has been disproven. So please understand that historians are not squabbling any more about Mecca, they gave up on that, what they are squabbling about is their own evidences and methodology with respect to Petra. I can direct you to a believing (conservative, in fact) British Muslim, a prolific author on the Qur'an, who chooses Petra as the holy city. He totally smashes to bits that "B"ecca meant Mecca. He has a TH-cam channel. Don't misunderstand me. I'm not on anyone's side. I am just outlining the state of this historical and academic topic. You didn't seem to grasp this.
@ayadollar khomaini Further the "Between Qiblas" are the least contentious part of the Gibson's findings. Here, Gibson is on firm ground. Everyone accepts that early Muslims did not pray to Mecca in the 7th century during the Rashidun "caliphates". Again it's Petra that is the problem, not Mecca ... because no one believes in Mecca anymore.
@ayadollar khomaini "Dan gibson is like someone claiming the Vatican used to be in Poland and then offering anecdotal evidence here an there, and ignoring the fact that it goes to all the historical evidence we know"... There is absolutely zero historical evidence that we know for a Mecca in the Hejaz. It's a backstory. Muhammad had followers. It's just that they weren't there.
Very poor interview of man knows very little !!!
Or..... he knows the truth bit won't admit it as to do so would get him killed as an apostate... pray for him to have courage and faith.
1:30 "They're looking at things from a historical, critical perspective. They're evaluating things based on facts on the ground rather than the faith in the minds of people". Well yeah that's how it works, if we based it all on faith you can claim anything. Pathetic.
faith means here what stated in the quran.. it says to face towards mecca... so we muslim keep to that... he can’t b explaining everything in details .. some things u hv to figure yourself.. of cause science is logic.. bt logic can b debunked by another logic..
@@SonOfCheepThrill Well yeah but it's still logic. So what's your point exactly?
@@rafeeeefar yeah logic up to a point where someone will do another research to debunk his theory.. in the meantime.. we muslim pray accordingly to our qibla towards mecca.. gd of him to do the research.. was it out of concern or just to mock.. bt anyway.. i hope things will turn out better for both parties..
@@SonOfCheepThrill According to our hearts yes, but not according to historical evidence which suggests otherwise. I am Muslim, but I'm not sure for how much longer...
@@rafeeeefar astaghfirullah my brother.. stay strong.. do not let whatever you see & hear misguided you.. hold steadfast to your belief in islam.. islam did not reject science .. u can use science to find its logic for certain matter.. as there are unseen things like judgment day , the angels etc that we don’t see but must believe.. do not be deluded by some facts being shown at you.. we see what our hearts want to see.. in surah all baqarah there are verse stating muslim to hold firm to the qibla (towards mecca).. do not just because some guy pinpoints petra is the actual mecca n you lose your faith.. trading your belief for something fragile like research & data is unthinkable for me.. i hope you take time out & reassess what you’re thinking you gonna do.. saddens me to hear you saying that.. take small step to understand & practice islam.. insya allah you’ll be ok.. whatever decision you’re going to make.. i wish all the best but just hope you do not forego your belief as a muslim.. i dua for you.. insya allah..
One more point to be noted is the entire Dome of the rock platform along with the AlAqsa mosque is oriented towards Petra by less than a minute accuracy. What more stronger evidences you need?
I agree with that,that one of the most important early Islamic shrines points towards Petra, if that is not evidence who knows what is
How would the early Muslims able to be that exact in pointing towards Petra? Mecca and Petra are in the same general direction with respect to Jerusalem.
You are grasping for anything you can find to undermine the religion of Islam.
@@besharafereg2198 Ancient people were not idiots, they knew geometry. Algebra is arabic...
Wondering if there are any mosques between Mecca and Petra which are towards Petra. This would be a true test, as they would be 180 degrees opposite.
@@Mratempa algebra was invented after the construction of alaqsa
From a Historical point of view I find Dan Gibson's writing fascinating. I also want to read David King's response and compare the two. Fact is, though, neither position is going to touch on my personal relationship with God. His guidance and mercies are far beyond the location of a structure or the determinations of Man. Alhamduillah.
David King's response was more of a personal attack than a refutation.
@Bill Wakefield Yes, but in fairness it is common for Learned men to err on the side of caution when addressing cutting edge research. One of the things that feeds Conspiracy theories is the reluctance of mainstream academics to make sudden and extreme turns in thinking. Know that the traditional story of the origins of Islam are as fraught with errors, misconceptions and politics as either Judaism or Christianity. Further, Arabic Tribal Law and Culture are inextricably enmeshed in Islam very much the same as Semetic History and Culture flavor Judaism, or European/Mediterranean culture colored Christianity. Ergo I take refuge in God who is All-compassionate and All-Merciful and leave the head scratching to people in need of a hobby. Just sayin......
@@phillipoleary2532 I am noticing some variance between what Mr King wrote and what he reports in videos. Certainly a recorded conversation allows for more spontaneous responses but I would think the fundamental position would remain the same. FWIW.
If Petra would have been the original site this would detrsoy Islam. It would proof Islam is a fake religion.Alhamdulillah all you want hope you enjoy your 4 wives and may sexslaves and 72 houries in jannah
@@SheikhAlladeen Thanks for your thoughts. I'm thinking that you may not appreciate the foundations of Islam based on an intimate individual relationship with God (swt). All of the Five Pillars, at their core, are intended to enhance the establishment and maintenance of that relationship. None eclipses it. I could be confined to a wheelchair on a desert island and still be a devout Muslim. Had it been the Will of God, Mohammed (pbuh) could have been an Inuit fisherman, the Quran could have been in swahili and we could all be praying towards Times Square. Please don't mistake the media for the message. FWIW.
If we continue arguing like this, I am sure our faith will lose lots of young people. Why can't you debate facts with facts? Respect Dan Gibson.
Yeah i agree... still dont get the answer from Shabir Ally
Thank you for saying that.
I'm telling you he's an intelligent man and he doesn't want to wreck Islam in any way he just wants to talk about it Dr Dan does.
@Ishmaelite Wanderer David King? lol
@Ishmaelite Wanderer Firstly, Dr Shabir Ally should not just say that people like David King have refuted the claim. He should get into the specifics and explain the refutation so that the audience knows that he has understood the issue as well as the refutation. Secondly, David King specializes in medieval Arab mathematics. This period starts from 9th century AD. Dan Gibson's research focuses on Qiblas of Mosques constructed immediately after the prophet's death, i.e. 7th and 8th century. How can King refute Gibson's research citing mathematicians from medieval period while the issue strictly concerns pre-medieval period and is archeological (Qibla calculation using Indian Circle) and not related to mathematics (algebra). Please go through Gibson's videos carefully, he has done everything very carefully, a fantastic job! One should not hastily write him off.
U guys should check out the channel al-mudarabah response to dan Gibson. . The quality and perfectness of the work done by the people their even prompted Dan Gibson to answer them ......
Lol..non Muslims here commenting suddenly become expert about Islam..
because they are tired of maintaining their irrational doctrinal trinity 😁😁
Summary of the response:
"I shall go with confirmation Bias".
Just like you Muslims! Very knowledgeable about the BIBLE!! but not about your own quran!!
You dont have to be Muslim to be an expert about Islam, but I happen to humbly be both
Just believe in rome trinity pagan
Invite Dan Gibson to your show..........
Go to Dan Gibson channel Neha. He’s a not a troll he provide facts and evidence
She doesn't dare.
Summary of the response:
"I am going to choose this opinion as valid because it supports my pre-existing belief, and I am going to reject anything and anyone - with ad hominem disqualifications- who contradicts me".
Did you not watch the whole video or something?
Not really. Dr. Shabir, on a number of times, has sited orientalist scholars and their opinions and also gave importance to their opinions. But Dan Gibson's claims are simply ridiculous.
@@omerali2690 I have a doctorate in magic and sorcery, awarded by Hotwarts, which is worth as much or more than Shabir Aly's doctorate.
@Carlos E You are entitled to give any amount of worth to anything you want, and that is fine, as long as you hold that opinion and not enforce it. But Dr. Shabir has got, doctrate from one of the best universities in Canada and that doctrate is recognized throughout the world.
Anyways, on the ligher note, if you really believe in Dan Gibson's ideas, you definitly must have earned that doctrate from Hotwarts. :)
@@carlose5751 Can you do a magic trick where you teleport over a border Carlos?
No mention of the eastern mosques that obviously pointed towards Petra. Dr Ally's narrative has holes in it methinks.
Ireland is just a piece of grey and treeless desolate place with no precious stones of any kind found there let alone emeralds. Even potatoes failed as a crop
@@arsalakhan8098 what does that have to do with anything?
Arsala Khan, obviously never been to Ireland then. What's that got to do with the early eastern mosques pointing towards Petra? Maybe they're not real mosques? Open your mind look for the truth. God bless.
WHAT KIND OF RESEARCH ABOUT PETRA WAS THAT?
th-cam.com/video/MK9jLw9v4Nw/w-d-xo.html
@@phillipoleary2532 I still go to Dublin, Waterford etc as well as Derry and Belfast regularly on conferences and since I don't drink alcohol then I wouldn't know about about the Irish Stout. I know Ireland better than you.
A classic smokescreen.
How about debating Dan Gibson LIVE and dispute his claims face to face?
Dr. Jay Smith may also be someone he could debate...but I am sure he won't.
Does the well respected Shabir Ally try to tell us that the brilliant scientists of the ancient Islamic world were so poor in their orientation… ?
character assassination and strawman-ing at it's finest,
first he hints that Dan doesn't have a Phd thinking that it discredits his work,
and resorting to San'a mosque in Yemen which is the murky case and disregarding that over a 100 mosque is facing petra astonishingly precisely for the time.
well not haviing a PhD does have a concrete disadvantage. One's research has not been properly peer reviewed, nor has formal research and investigation been produced under the auspeices of a bona fide research institution.
@ayadollar khomaini you do not have to have a PhD to present valid research or for it to be peer reviewed
So that is not a good argument
It needs to be looked at from an unbiased perspective
Dan Gibson's work is concrete, factual, detailed, seemingly accurate and has too many tangible proofs to false. Muslims will simply never always be realistic!! Seeking reasonability amongst them can be very frustrating. I do not take them seriously. He is talking about "authority in the field". That will be the most foolish source to consiider, since the knowledge and understanding of such authority may be based completely on falsehood. It will be like asking a european Jew to debunk the recent popular claim that the Hebrews were not europeans and were not white! It will be like asking a Christian to debunk the fact that Christianity was fueled by greek pagan philosophy! No muslim will step anywhere and publicly admit that "yes, we have been foolish all these years and Dan Gibson is right". By the way, why not put Dan on the show in person together with Muslim so called scholars to discuss the topic? No one can debunk anything without concrete facts!! Dan Gibson presented FACTS.
Please read my posts above.
@Hamza ForChrist in your dreams Hamza Al fraud.
I’m not satisfied with answer
He just explained it.
There are no EVIDENCES where muslims prayed towards Petra.
Not satisfied with the answer... GO RESEARCH IT YOURSELF THEN.
🐑
@@gladtidingstothestrangers7333 and there's no evidence early muslim praying towards what we called "mecca" now
@@MEOWNIST
What evidence would you like
@@gladtidingstothestrangers7333 scriptures from, let's say, 40 years after Muhammad (pbuh) passed. What do they tell? What about ibn al-Zubayr and him killing muslims and burning old qurans and scriptures? If possible, I would like more info on this (with sources).
@@johnvanderv.4219 Tell you what buddy.
Take my email. I'll explain over the phone. If you have a laptop/tablet or any pen + paper to take notes mate, even better, because I will give you full details.
I'm more than happy to take live-questions also.
Dan Gibson is an historian and unlike most historians actually gets his evidence at the source. He just points out the results he found. The fact that it contradicts the Islamic narrative is not his fault.
You are an Irish man given to Blarney Stone fantasies or even barmy
Arsala Khan may you find peace.
@@arsalakhan8098 WHAT KIND OF RESEARCH ABOUT PETRA WAS THAT?
th-cam.com/video/MK9jLw9v4Nw/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/YB3pd0aXEbU/w-d-xo.html
Not of any Hadith (truth, weak or fake narrated hadith) says about Petra. There is no evidence of it by Any Quranic Ayat. And The believe of Islam and fundamental systems never support the people of Petra and their believes.
This man doesn't present any factual proof and tries to refute Dan Gibson's simply by laughing.
Nor does he offer any arguments for why the current day ‘Mecca’ doesn’t match the historical accounts found in the Quran or other historical descriptions offered by other Muslim historians. He spent most of his time trying to attack the credibility of Dan Gibson as a ‘fringe’ scholar, rather than his arguments. I can understand the ‘there is nothing to see here folks’ attitude considering the significant impact Dan Gibson’s research would have on Islam if he is right. Imagine finding out millions & millions of Muslims have been preforming the Hajj in the wrong place all these years.
@Malay sadhukhan, the living proof is zam zam , there is no zam zam in petra.
@@monirahmedkhanexactly
He clearly could not respond what Dan Gibson's claims.
He did.
If you lack understanding
Woe to you.
i have learn about his arguments upon Qibla direction but believe me bro non of his point can prove that petra was 1st kaba...
Even where i am living we just have to tilt almost 3 to 5 degree
That dosen't makes any point someone can't prove Qibla direction through by error of 3 to 6/7 degrees...
If he think he is right he have to show any ancient mosque between Mecca to Petra And if he can't(and obviously he can't) then he have to accept he is wrong
2nd thing my brother If Petra isn't arabic word but Batra is arabic word, but you know very well there is not any ayah in Qur'an where Allah commanded Change your direction To "BATRA" or AL-BATRA
3rd point If Petra is the region where islam originates then Qur'an should be revealed in Aramaic language not in Arabic..
And some people are telling about that Quran isn't revealed in Arabic language with Vowels
But They are wrong Qur'an is revealed in Arabic language(without tanwin) But after 2nd khalifa when islam was expanding 3rd Khalifa Observed that non-arabs can't correctly read Qur'an as Quryash people do
So he put "Tanwin" to Arabic alphabets So anyone can read correctly as arabs..
Even in today world some arabs read Quran(without any tanwin) But for us(non-arabs) we can't read arabic without Tanwin But if any person do some degree or diploma in Arabic language he can read Arabic without Tanwin
And If you have any doubt You can use carbon dating of the Mushaf e Usmani (Quran verse written during the time of 3rd khalifa) present in the musem of Turkey..
May Allah Guide you one the right path
i can prove his every argument false but i can't write every thing here
But what i wrote here is sufficient to prove him wrong...
Jazakallah o khaira..
I've already made a rebuttal to Dan's documentary on my channel if you wish to get the other side. Then you can critique accordingly
@gladtidingstothestrangers7333 there are no trees in mecca
he did, it's just not everyone can get the point
"They would notice"
But they burned everything!!
Of course people would notic burning dosent mean anything there would be big wars
Yep.
Everything is Burnt.
@@fasihullah8386 It did happen in the middle of a multiple-year war I believe. Watch the original documentary or its summary by "Quranist Islam"
what he is trying to say is they would have partitioned. For example, why would the Shia have gone along with the Umayyad or Abbasid dictates that would have diverged from the Prophet's express wishes, they would not have, period.
@@hessam-deanhadaegh903 Fair point.
The limited Information on mecca in the quoran in indicates a fertile valley with river vines olive groves most unlike mecca and more like petra
Quran!
Source please?
A fertile valley?! Bro it says the complete opposite in the quran.
(رَّبَّنَاۤ إِنِّیۤ أَسۡكَنتُ مِن ذُرِّیَّتِی بِوَادٍ غَیۡرِ ذِی زَرۡعٍ عِندَ بَیۡتِكَ ٱلۡمُحَرَّمِ رَبَّنَا لِیُقِیمُوا۟ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ فَٱجۡعَلۡ أَفۡـِٔدَةࣰ مِّنَ ٱلنَّاسِ تَهۡوِیۤ إِلَیۡهِمۡ وَٱرۡزُقۡهُم مِّنَ ٱلثَّمَرَ ٰتِ لَعَلَّهُمۡ یَشۡكُرُونَ)
[Surah Ibrahim 37]
@@metaknight859 Thank you for this, such disinformation they spread...
Nowhere Quran describes Mecca valley as you have above. Read my four objections to Dan’s crazy theory. When I posted those 4 points on his original 5 videos, he blocked all comments. Look at them and see.
Endless waffle without disproving Gibson
Not only mosques from the South but mosques from the east, west and north are facing Petra.
Nope
@@hessam-deanhadaegh903 ya they are...and the Quran's description of Mecca fits with Petra more than the hejaz
@@mugzA21 nope , wrong the early mosques of Bahrain , qatar , najd areas of Saudi all face Makkah . In fact many holes in Gibson's theory include Jabal Al Noor location , the early.migration of muslims to Ethiopia via ships on 1 and half week journey from Makkah all refute his theory , he claims a cover up by umayyads, but forgets that shias and the extreme khawarij were always noting down changes in Arabia but their sources also say that Kaaba is in Makkah .
@@mohammedsiddiq9635 you mean they currently face Mecca in the Hejaz but one time faced Petra, right? Prove to me their original floor plans show Saudi Arabia and not Petra.
@@mohammedsiddiq9635 from Mecca in the Hejaz to Axum in Ethiopia it will take less time than ten days. Maybe give at most. However from the Gulf of Aqaba to Axum would most certainly take ten or eleven days.
Dan Gibson's work is solid and factual. Shabir Ally's "arguments" are very, very weak, to say it politely. To say it precisely, his arguments are not arguments at all!
Gina to except the crazy theory of Gibson you have to rewrite the whole well documented life story off the prophet Muhammad and early Islamic history.
1. It is well known that prophet Muhammad’s family on the mother side walls from Madina 240 miles north of Makkah, actually his mother died coming back from Modena to Mecca about halfway where she is buried and her grave can be seen there. If Petra is where the prophet was born then where would you place the city of Madina 240 miles north of Petra. It will be in the Mediterranean Sea!! Think about it.
2. The Prophet’s visit to Taif 70 miles south of Mecca is also a very well documented episode of his life. Taif is located 70 miles south of Makkah at and elevation of 6000 Fito buff’s sea level. There is nothing like that 70 miles south of Petra. I’ve been there it’s all desolate desert.
3. Zam Zam Water well is intimately associated with the history of Mecca and has been providing millions of gallons of drinkable water for the last 14 centuries. It is actually the reason the city of Mecca is there. Where is a water well of that nature near Petra.
water well is intimately associated with the history of Mecca and has been providing millions of gallons of drinkable water for the last 14 centuries. It is actually the reason the city of Mecca is there. Where is a water well of that nature near Petra.
You seem like an evangelical Christian Christian who are always desperately looking to show how their pagan religion is better than Islam. Like Jerry Falwell Junior you are just following a pagan god and pagan religion with no connection to Jesus Christ our biblical prophets. Your religion is basically Greco Roman paganism mixed with Judaism there by miss leading hundreds of millions of people.
Even Crone and Cook, which reject all "islamic tradition" said "why must out of arabian peninsula?" I argue with Al-Lat, Al-Uzza and Al-Manat..
He just recyling wansbourgh and hawting argument, hmm, if he want..
History was written decietfully, let's rewrite history for the future of Evolution. ALL RELIGIONS are made by man. And each borrow one from another. TO SAY CHRISTIANITY is Pagan. Well then so is Islam and Judaism. Its a common miss conception on borrowed beliefs. Worshipping the Sun and Moon And mother earth and the Stars. Seems like a polytheoistic consumption anyway Simplified religions don't exist. Science can't explain everything either. Our spiritual conscience thrives for peace anything religion that helps you find peace with yourself without harming others should it be Buddha. Ideology, hindu Yoga, Reincarnation, Christian Jew, or muslim. Doesn't matter its what your heart believes . Rather examine my senses and make a hypothesis on what males sense artifacts evidence rather then just take someone's word on it. RESEARCH IS THE LIGHT
This discussion did not answer the finding of Dan Gibson ..
How could he, without doing another Hole in the Narrative debacle?
Dr Shabir fails to actually address any of Dan Gibson’s argue nets and tries to attack his relative academic stature.
Have the question crossed your mind - who financed Dan Gibson to do all these travelling ? Usually researchers reveal this information. Second, at the end of his video, he has quickly wrapped up about multiple qurans, false qurans etc. based on his little finding about petra. Third zam zam, unlimited source of water in middle of desert. Fourth, existance of petroleum, world biggest petroleum reserve. Petrolium comes from living nature buried under soil. So you have both Dans arguments and his motives are highly questanable.
@Shan ail sorry but why was Rebecca married at 3 in the bible .. disgusting 🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢
You can give hundred excuses but what Dan Gibson explain is the truth.
No
It doesn't mean scene, no body noticed earlier around the world. Is it possible to change the direction of Kaba?. This is not your home that no body care about it.
Dan Gibson's method is flawed and his theory is a miserable failure.
Lol sure kiddo
@@ahmedmunna2280 Brother its pretty obvious. We can't even clearly say where the bodies of Husayn is. Where is his head buried? Where is Ali? We don't know. Many places claim to be the resting place. We can't even locate a body. It's very probable the Kaaba was moved. Whilst Uthman is burning copies of the Quran. We consider him rashidun caliph but he was related to Umayyads and the hadiths show many criticised him yet he was allowed to burn earlier copies of the quran. Umayyads went on to butcher ahl al bayat and even after Karbala many descendants that survived went on to get poisoned century after century. So we know there was a threat and Petra is very close to Syria. Makes sense that Abassids moved Kaaba to a quiet place away from the trade route in Saudi. It was strategically less threatening. Less earthquakes. Threat of Romans, other Arab tribes, Syria etc minimised. True Muslims shouldn't fight in the holy place but fight between Abassids and Umayyads were not in the right place. THere's a lot we don't know about our past. I think Dan Gibson is genuinely trying to help us as he is very respectful towards Islam. We should be open about this.
You didnt refute any of his arguments
He doing a lot of talking but ain't saying nothing. Dan Gibson stated facts, cited history and proved his point without a shadow of a doubt.
Dr. Shabir Ali & his likes are good at talking a lot about nothing, plus cover-ups.
No logical arguments - just words
Are you referring to Dan Gibson who has been refuted by David King?
Indeed, simple empty words with no meaning.
Shabir didnt refute any of Gibson's claims. He is a real coward!
He can't. You'd need Muslim archaeologists on the ground measuring the qiblas - wouldn't that be interesting to see... Can't wait for that research paper to show up!
I singlehandedly forced Gibson to remove and block all comments from his video.
Videos.
Please read my response above.
DUDE, GIBSON DOES NOT KNOW ANYTHING EITHER, HE HAS NOT SHOWN PROOF JSUT CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE,, NO SMOKING GUN
Dr Dan Gibson described your criticism how it happened. He even showed why certain mosques were directed toward jeruselum and not Petra or Mekka.
Look at my response above. Do you believe the early Muslims were carrying along GPS in their in their tool bag 1400 centuries ago???
@@khawaja1951
But all early mosques pointed toward Petra, can’t be a coincident.
Since when Dan get his doctorate Degree? lol.... He is no expert, just a self-employed entrepreneur who wanted some spotlight with his controversy.
@@xunqianbaidu6917
Dan Gibson mentioned that in the first hundred years of Islam Petra was where mosques pointed. Watch his documentary.
@OTTOMAN SLAP 03
But why did they all make the same mistake? Sure, they're not perfect, but all making the same mistake sounds a bit to perfect. Don't you think?
he didn't awnser any argument looool
Read my response above. Sorry for the typos. I did not review my note before posting. Gibson is foolishly comparing his GPS with 8 th century primitive data, lol
He has to say something even if it's amounting to nothing. It's better than keeping quiet. How could he?
Dan Gibson is on the right track .. but the grapes are sour for the old dude .. haha
Why do you mean He is on the right track do you know anything els?
@@jwal1685 , there's actually a substantial amount of evidence pointing to Petra as the primitive focus of worship. But its mostly ignored by Gibson because he doesn't engage with actual scholarship. Most striking is how he distanced himself from Patricia Crone, when in fact, anyone following the scholarly method would take Crone as his starting-point for constructing a thesis like this. Crone has done more than any other person to place a northwesterly origins of the Islamic tradition on sound scholarly foundations. So yes, Gibson is on the "right track" as Gakke says above, but it's not good enough to be right. You also need to construct a chain of evidence and airtight arguments if you're going to overturn well-established historical myths.
@@davidmontoute2074 But Gibson does construct a chain of evidence. I'm not following you.
U guys should check out the channel al-mudarabah response to dan Gibson. . The quality and perfectness of the work done by the people there even prompted Dan Gibson to answer them ......
PROOF ?
Not answered. Just talk. Sorry doc. You are not in position to respond to Dan.
This situation happens when you dont have correct answer but you have to give the answer😂😂😂
I've already made a rebuttal to Dan's docuementary on my channel to show the defensive perspective. Feel free to watch. It is a fact, Dan hasn't got a single piece of evidence, independent of Islamic literature, to prove Makkah was in Petra.
@@theguidancecounsellor2948 sorry dude, your rebuttal videos didnt break the theory of dan gibson.
damn his theory is so strong, based on geological and archeological fact.
i hope someone in the future can break his theory and giving us some relief insight.
@@theguidancecounsellor2948 LOL that is all I have to say
Ha ha ha.... very true
Dan has been destroyed
So disappointing to hear a scholar of the standing of Shabir Ally being so disingenuous in his answer. Come on Shabir. You are better than this.
He's a fraud... just like the religion.
@@rogerdodger8415 another secret for you hillbillies (i am being sarcastic) we worship the black stone deep inside a cavern and it's connected to the fourth dimension don't tell no body
@@vannymo2802 I agree. And you have to walk around it seven times in a circle to please God.
I thought Dan Gibson started his research by trying to find the people and places in the Quran rather than focusing on the Qibla.
His firsthand knowledge of the region and his reading of the quran and hadith made him doubt whether these events happened in Mecca.
So what about all of the quranic and hadith evidence that describes geography and vegetation that matches Petra rather than mecca. The fact that muhammads cave where he received revelations faced the city - which the cave believed to be muhammads cave in mecca faces away from the city.
The evidence that nowadays people walking backwards and forwards between the two mountains can be done in approx. 45 minutes when the hadith mention muhammads wife took 3 days to complete this. I know the marble floors probably make this journey easier but 3 days easier? The location of mountains, vegetation and the lack if archeological evidence while constructing new buildings and sky scrapers also shows that the places mentioned in the Quran seem to match Petra rather than Mecca.
Maybe Shabir Ally is saving this refutation on the geographical evidence within Mecca and petra itself for another time.
I think how it started for Dan Gibson was that an (ex?) Muslim - or possibly a Quranist - asked him for the use of some photographs on his Nabataean website. In the course of the exchange, the person mentioned that he thought Petra to have been the original Mecca. Dan Gibson thought ithat was curious and filed the information away in his mind, until years later, whilst reading the "Sira Rasul Allah", he began to see the similarities in the description of Mecca with Petra (a site he knew intimately). So the idea of Petra=Mecca has actually been around for quite some time, and several Renaissance -era European scholars made this connection. So Dr. Shabir is incorrect to say that Dan Gibson just invented the entire thing in his head. There has been a consistent thread in revisiionist scholarhsip that has long rejected Mecca as the early Arab capital, for lack of any archeological or documentary evidence to support it. Gibson, unfortunately, hasn't really built on that scholarship. If he had, he could have made a much stronger case. Either way, though, Dr. Shabir has brought nothing to the table here, and seems profoundly uncomfortable with the entire subject.
@ashish sharma 🤣...🤓🥵
There is vegetation in Mecca just outside of the city there is a place not far called Taif.
Don't be ridiculous!
Look, I was troubled by a channel on TH-cam who was using those claims by Gibson to propagate Christianity. Gibson's research may be true or not, but discounting him down strictly because he is not Muslim, or, not investigating his claims only because his theories are non-traditional or not inline with muslim scholars is not grounds to dismiss him. Also, we know that Omar buried an original compilation of the holy quran. Also perhaps publishers don't want to publish his works because it will get the publishers head chopped off. All kidding aside, more research should be down to investigate his claims, because they are plausible. The main problem is, if people keep destroying the primary resources of evidence that scholars can rely on to debunk Gibson or to the contrary confirm his theories, then we will truly never know.
That’s the Islamic way don’t question and don’t use your mind or check facts. What ever is said in name of Islam is absolute and final there is no room for finding your own truth. Someone has already found out the truth so blindly follow it
@Siraj Haq , i'd say it's plausible - in broad outline - because the general focus of the Mu'minun was towards the conquest of Palestine and its surrounding areas. It is highly improbable that Muhammad's army would have been charging into the Transjordan in 630 whilst his army had barely even conquered Mecca some 600 miles away. First an improvised movement such as the Mu'minun would have to consilidate itself before taking on two far superior imperial armies in the north. Yet the Islamic Tradition wants us to believe that the conquest of Mecca and conquest the southern Transjordan happened at the same time. Also, the key primary battles to conquer Roman territory all happened in the Transjordan, and yet the Islamic tradition is entirely silent about Petra, even thought the city was the capital of Third Palestine (Palaestina Tertia). There are plenty of other reasons besides this, but honestly, Gibson is not the best exponent of these ideas. He focuses on the wrong thing: modern flat-map determinations of qibla, instead of the clear testimonial evidence which places the Masjid al Haram in this region.
@@davidmontoute2074 It's too much to say that he has focused on the "wrong thing". The religious history is important. But yes, Gibson does not get into the military history of the first 3-4 decades of the 7th century. Could you please recommend any books you know about this subject. Thank you.
@@paulthomas281 , i say "the wrong thing" with the sense that his qibla data is highly problematic, for a whole variety of reasons. David King illustrates some of those reasons, but he does it with extreme vitriol and sarcasm (not helpful in a scholarly debate). Given the inherent problems of determinng qibla with modern, flat maps and no consideration of what the Arab methodology might have been, Gibson has led his argument with the shakiest and most questionable data sources. A French Muslim commentator on YT has also looked into his work and found a series of extremely serious mistakes (and apparent misrepresentations) in his primary data. As for books on the conquest history, Hoyland's "In God's Path" gives a good general overview, but it glosses over the early battles in Syria and the Transjordan. To examine the latter, the best works are by Walter Kaegi: "Heraclius, Emperor of Byzantium" and especially "Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests". Also, Moshe Sharon has an excellent, lenghty essay on the conquest of Syria. I forget its exact title, but if you search his name together with "Arab conquest of Syria", i'm sure you'll find it.
@@davidmontoute2074 Mr. Gibson has explained in detail how he is NOT using flat map apps, and he has even revealed that he had been speaking (in person!!) to satellite software engineers at Google about the new technology so that he may grasp it (I forgot the name, but I can find it). As far as what the Arab methodologies might have been, this is where Dr. King actually loses me: he is insisting on medieval theories that ONLY mathematical methods could have determined the directions correctly.. whatever early Muslims were doing could not at all have been precise because they did not have mathematics. It was winter sunset this and winter sunrise that.... This is problematic. Mr. Gibson raises many ideas about how the Arabs before the 800s (without having been introduced to the Indian decimal system, Indian algebra, trig, 0 and pi, etc etc, nor having been introduced to the ideas of longitude and latitude in the House of Wisdom from Western travellers) how Arabs before the 800s could have been very, very precise in their orientations. Just because Mr. Gibson does not produce a toolkit like or as systematic as mathematical calculations does not mean he has not considered the possibilities and presented them. Further Dr. King has no knowledge of actual Islamic history 610-1010 or whenever (religion, polities, and empires) the way Mr. Gibson does, outside of Islamic innovations in the sciences. Mr. Gibson gives explanations (really good ones!) as to how and why the religion was shape-shifting. WE AGREE that more military battle history would be needed, but I think Mr. Gibson does not feel the need to focus too much on that. To leave you with this, Gibson's theory about the "Between Qiblas" is bang on to the point of fact. Why Al-Hajjajj does this, and when and what happened after he died. Remember, all of a sudden precise Mecca-orientations start around 727AD (80 or so years before the reception of mathematics into the Islamic world) and these very precise directions to Mecca continue. They still did not have mathematical competencies, but were getting it right. This shows they had other precise methods, which Dr. King won't consider, and Mr. Gibson is working to uncover. Dr. King is just in a position of denial about the second century of Islam (he's already condemned the first century to madness). This is the hugest problem in this polemic. Dr. King is of the view: if not X then can't be Y.. no way, no way. I know we are not going to agree. SO thank you heartily for your many reading suggestions. Much appreciated. And I'm sorry that I am unaware that you might be a scholar or graduate student.
Dan Gibbons great job is much appreciated.
No
His theory can be destroyed with one simple question. How on earth were early Muslims able to move mecca(a whole city) from Petra to Hijaz? You guys think mecca is the box that we walk around. No, dear idiots. Its the whole city including the box, zamzam, al safa, al marwa, and many other things. Go learn what we do and have there before you spit out your gibberish.
@@metaknight859 What nonsense. Petra was under Byzantine Christian rule and they tolerated the rise of Islam in thier area? The same people that the Muslims fought and eventually defeated? And the Byzantines faiked to notice that an entire population of Muslims moved to Mecca? You have to be nuts is what I say.
@@jumpingjack5651 I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Idk if you are with me or against me. Bro, you cant move a whole freak'n city with everything in it. And there must be leftovers from this movement, where are they? Where did the Byzantines mention that muhammed or islam appeared at their place? How were the muslims able to move zamzam from Petra to a desert that doesn't have water? You can't make water out of nowhere. Why did they choose Hijaz specifically? How were they able to move all the equipments from Petra to Hijaz which is a long distance and they did not have cars or vans or any high tech facility? Where exactly does it say that Abraham was in Petra?
Yes they failed to notice that cuz where on earth did they mention that a whole city with its citizens were moved?
Truth is bitter.
Let's have another glass!
Why is Dr Ally dismissing evidence by saying fringe scholarship. I have no dog in this fight but after watching Gibson’s video, his hypothesis about Mecca makes a lot of sense and also his response video to David King puts things to rest. More Open minded and secular studies are required towards this theory. Even after 13 centuries, wrong theories can be righted by the followers.
I've already made a rebuttal to this documentary on my channel if you wish to get the defensive perspective, which is only fair.
Kaba is located where the zam zam water well is located, and zam zam is in mecca, not in petra. Zam zam still provides water like a champion whereas the average lifespan of water wells in rainy places like Bangladesh Indonesian is 50-150 years. Why create controversies around a fact so simple and straightforward.
The possibilty that the qiblih was in Petra is something deserving greater examination and scholarship to test Dan Gibson's well defined and well supported hypothesis. Also, if it turns out to be true this should not disturb any Muslim in the least but rather should be viewed with excitement and fascination. Gibson's evidence is abundant and compelling, friends
@ashish sharma you are from india itself explains alot. 😁
@ashish sharma There is no way for previous people to know the exact direction to mecca, but rather the best estimate they could possibly get.
Look to the old maps of the world and compare it the modern ones, and tell me why they are not exactly identical.
In early islam, the rule was to face toward east for people in west, and the opposite for people in east during praying. The same was applied to north and south, and if Gibson wanted to show the truth, the could exam the exact direction of mosques later on in Islam if it is facing exactly Mecca or there was some slight deviation.
Dr Shabir also said that Don Gibson ignored other mosques just south to Petra to see if it really was facing towards Petra or Mecca.
This guy Gibson fabricated the facts in a way that only kids will believe him.
@@yuu9258
😂😂😂👍👍👍
@@abdulatifalsuleimani1513
Well said.
Haters just need SOMETHING to justify c their hate and cynicism.
They can't bring the hadiths or religious injunctions to justify a different qibla.
If they were right, there would be lots of evidence.
The only thing this proves is how DESPERATE those against Islam are.
Well defined and supported? Hahah! NO.
All you did was loom around the subject trying to deceive the listeners with your fancy empty explanation. You failed miserably
There is nothing to debate. It is so crystal clear.
You and your buddies here are nothing but Pathetic trools who are intimidated by Dr Shabir's intellect and have nothing to prove. Yaall looked at his appearance and thought oh.. he looks like one of those evil doers so he can't be right there fore just had to show your animosity, low lives have so much hate and they just can't hide it.
@@anoc5511 when I see someone like you, just opening their mouths and spewing stupidity and hate towards someone you don’t know all I can think of is the Quran that taught you how to act and behave like animals towards non-muslims. Obviously you’re not an intellectual person, I can see that from your writing. Do yourself a big favor and study and search before you try to defend what you don’t know, and what was planted in your head falsely.
I do feel sorry for people like you.
@@talhai7379 Do you mean it's crystal clear that the Mecca in the Hijaz is the original holy city? There is no clarity whatsoever. The clarity comes when we look at Northern Arabia and Jordan. It is as bright as day. The evidence is overwhelming. People say that Dan Gibson is not an academic historian but merely an author-historian, well he's done more real history than most PhDs. I've spoken to PhD students in Islamic Studies at the University of Toronto. They've told me that now all over the place PhDs in US/Europe/Canada are investigating more and more Gibson's and others' claims. And there are more and more Muslims too. One Muslim (a prolific author on the Qur'an) who has a TH-cam channel rejects Mecca outright. His name is Sam Gerrans.
Dan Gibson has debunked David Kings response. Why did you not state that. Dan Gibson gave dates Shabir Ally does not give dates for the sources that he alludes to. When he uses the phrase "early" he should state the date.
I've already made a rebuttal to Dan's documentary on my channel if you wish to get the other side. Then you can critique accordingly
I mean did this guy even watch the documentary? The evidence is much more compelling and sound than what he argues against
I have read your response. Could you please contest all (or many) of Dan Gibson's arguments from his many monographs on a website. That would be much more interesting and convincing. BUT you haven't addressed a very crucial thing (among others) which is the "Between Qibla". This was a phenomenon known throughout the Islamic polities in Iraq and Damascus. Dan Gibson has been saying this for a long time and now he has shown literary evidence of this by Arab historians lamenting the back and forth of qibla directions. Dan Gibson is on the ball. Gibson reveals one of these literary sources in his videos: "Silencing Objections #1". There may be more, but I've only come across this instance of an Arab historian from the 8th century testifying to it. I'm sure Gibson has many more. And when I say one instance, I'm not referring to one major mosque, instance is referring to an admission by a historian of this happening all over the place, really. Gibson makes this clear regarding the post-Petra phase.
As David King said,those mosques dont face Petra but face Winter Sunset & Sunrise. Because through them,Muslims tried to find direction of Kabba,Mekka
Petra is the original mecca.
Something is still wrong. He covered every inch of the story and every word he said with solid proof. But you, you just talk nonsense and you did not give any evidence that Macca is in Saudi Arabia. Of course, if we admit, then others and some of us will suspect our religion.
I've made a rebuttal to Dan's documentary on my channel, feel free to get the defensive perspective. Then you can critique.
Dan Gibson is absolutely correct, Mecca is and was in Petra not Saudi Arabia.
It doesn’t matter which direction Muslims pray. They are all in the wrong direction
Fringe scholars told us the earth is not flat, but now fringe scholars claim the earth is flat.
The story of Petra is believable
Interesting that Becca sounds very similar to Beqaa, the Beqaa Valley is geographically part of the Great Rift Valley that runs along the Sea of Galilee, the Dead Sea and into the Gulf of Aqaba, and on into the Red Sea. It is also interesting that the Quran talks about two bodies of water, one salty, like the Dead Sea and one sweet water, like the Sea of Galilee, that do not mix. These two waters are both below sea level and the gradient between the two is gradual, so that the river meanders because the water is moving slow enough that it will have a very distinct salinity gradient.
Interesting. Do you have any academic source discussing these?
@@AS-bm5xv you just need to be someone who can reason and read the Quran.. maybe you wil be the first academic to write something about it 😊 do t always listen to people but listen to Allah
3:96 is where the first house is. You’re not wrong at all is just people have been deceived by shaytaan through hadeeths. The same way people were deceived with Paul’s teaching in the New Testament and the Talmud with taurat
@@Dtiyah but didn’t Dan Gibson use Hadiths as his source? And what Hadith was used to deceive people regarding the location of where the prophet lived ? And why bring up Paul and the Talmud 😂
You lot are reaching so hard it's not funny. This is some “Half life 3 confirmed” nonsense.
A very very incomprehensible response. Frankly speaking quite a disappointing one . I was expecting a scholarly , argumentation and an in-depth answer to the research of Dan Gibson.
Unfortunately this is the dilemma of the present generation of Muslim clerics. They have virtually no ability in area of research and education. Over the past centuries they have in fact. lost education and the ability to probe and search for reality , resulting in presence of totally incapable people who do not possess the sense and courage to accept that the history present with them lacks scientific testimony
There is not a single scholar from Muslim world who could start an unbiased probe and research to counter a fairly comprehensive study of Dan. They don’t come even close to Dan in argumentation and prefer getting way like the present attempt of Dr Ally
Kaba is located where the zam zam water well is located, and zam zam is in mecca, not in petra. Zam zam still provides water like a champion whereas the average lifespan of water wells in rainy places like Bangladesh Indonesian is 50-150 years. Why create controversies around a fact so simple and straightforward.
Direction of prayer is non existent in the Quran. It actually speaks against any direction...
2:177
“It is not virtue that you turn your faces to the east and the west...”
No where in the Quran will you find Mecca and directional prayer in the Quran.
You also won’t find a layout of “how to pray.” According to the Quran.
You will find 2 specific names of “salaat” which are fajr and isha, which are morning prayer and night prayer. You’d be hard pressed to find more than that except when it says “to give glory to Allah during some of the night.”
Salaat, according to the Quran consists of 3 things.
1. Al dhikr (to understand) ie read scripture
2. Imaan (to believe)
3. Igama (to implement)
Whoever these scholars are that say you have to pray ritually 5 times a day towards a specific direction has not gotten this from the Quran itself. Therefore, it is not part of our duty as believers in Allah, the Quran, and Muhammad peace be upon him.
The ritual prayer also goes against the story of the Calf the Jews had to sacrifice, where they had barely done it because they asked for so many specifics. Specifics don’t matter, read the Quran to make your best judgement of what you need to do. Don’t read fabricated Hadith books invented over 100 years after the death of the Prophet. This is clear Shirk. The last and final revelation was none other than the Quran. If you believe in a book created after the Quran, this is setting up a partner to God’s book.
6:114
Is it other than god I should seek as judge?
And he it is who sent down to you the law set out and detailed.
And those whom we gave the law know that it is sent down from thy lord aright.
So be thou not of those who doubt.
6:115
And perfected are the words of thy lord in truth and justice.
There is none to change his words
And he is the hearing, the knowing.
11:1
Alif lam ra
A decree the proofs whereof are fortified then set out and detailed
From one wise, aware
31:16
And had all that is in the earth of trees but been pens
And the sea with seven more seas to aid it
the words of God would not run dry.
God is mighty, wise
2:256
No compulsion is there in religion (doctrine).
Sound judgement is clear from error.
And whoso denies idols and believes in god:
He has grasped a firm handhold which has no break.
And god is hearing, knowing.
You get specific from hadiths.
Jaguar Cat What kind of specifics? Specifics not found in the Quran? Sounds like shirk. Re read the story of the calf and the Jews. It’s the same concept with specifics
@@WinAllDayFC Not really, they were asking about which cow, the problem was that they barely could do it. They also ask specifics to avoid it.
Jaguar Cat Yeah really. All these specifics not found in the Quran and only found in the Hadith are not part of our religion of Islam. Did you not read any of the verses or look into them at all?
Who’s the only rule maker? Allah or what Bukhari hadiths say about what Allah meant to make specific?
Let the Quran and Allah speak for itself. Allah’s words are the Quran alone. Preserved since it’s reveal. Muhammad did a good job of this. If you think that he didn’t then you don’t believe the Quran. Our religion is not to be based upon anything but the Quran alone. Have you even read it?
I don't disagree with your larger point, but there are two verses which might be relevant but are not included. The first is the one that refers to either the best or middle prayer, depending on translation. Some Muslims then follow three instead of two prayers because of this, and others believe it refers to jummah. There is also as I recall a verse about turning the direction of prayer and those who follow the new direction versus those who don't. Inshallah someone will be able to cite both. Takes me forever to find things.
dan gibson has demonstrated that mecca isnt the islamic holy place. he does so with logic and evidence.
Mecca, the city that was the supposed centre of everything islamic by 632AD; you'd expect a recorded history richer than Rome. And yet, next to nothing: And no kaaba to pray to.
Kaba is located where zam zam water well is located, and zam zam is in mecca, not in petra. What more to argue ???
Thanks, I'm even more convinced that it's Petra. This man completely neglected multiple other pieces of evidence, and didnt even properly address the main claims of mosque orientation.
I've already made a rebuttal to Dan's docuementary on my channel to show the defensive perspective. Feel free to watch. It is a fact, Dan hasn't got a single piece of evidence, independent of Islamic literature, to prove Makkah was in Petra.
As David King said,those mosques dont face Petra but face Winter Sunset & Sunrise. Because through them,Muslims tried to find direction of Kabba,Mekka
This sounds like damage limitation.
Bang on!
Jay Smith also holds the same view of Petra being the qibla.
This whole “You can’t be an expert on Islam if you’re not Muslim” argument is the weakest argument I’ve ever heard. I have access to the same information as a Muslim and I’m not likely to be biased in my study. He points out his bias by saying that only recognized Muslims scholars can be listened to by Muslims. The reason you only allow these recognized scholars is because they say what you want to hear. That is why you accept those scholars only.
A flat earth believer only believes in the science of other flat earth “experts” because they confirm their beliefs.
David King has seriously embarrassed himself with his Petra Fallacy essay. The essay is not only lacking in modern scholarship but also tries to insulate himself by calling others bigots and Islamophobes. It is long past time that King retire and remain silent on issue he does not understand.
I have great respect for Dr. Shabbir, but he failed his task completely while responding to ridiculous ideas floated by Dan Gibson. I asked three questions from Dan Gibson on his first four or five videos several months ago. My questions were obviously enough to completely destroy his theory so he promptly blocked all comments on those videos please visit those videos and confirm. Here are the questions I posted on each of his video
1. If Petra was where Islam started and prophet Muhammad preached then where would he place the city of Modena 250 miles north of Mecca? 250 miles north of Petra would be the eastern Mediterranean sea or coast of current Israel. However Medina is still south of Petra And has always been. The relative position of Mecca and Medina has been well established relative to each other. Medina was north of Makkah on the caravan route to Syria and beyond.
2. The city of Taif, 70 miles south of Makkah at 5000 ft above level has been intimately associated with prophet Muhammad an early Islam. The prophet travel to dive preaching his new message there and was rejected. Where is a similar resort 70 miles south east of Petra? There’s nothing but red sand desert for hundreds of miles south east to south west of Petra.
3. The Zamzam well is intimately associated with Makkah and early Islam. It has been providing millions of gallons of fresh water and without any incidence of an epidemic associated with this water, for the last 1400 years. Where is the counter part of Zamzam in Petra?
4. The earliest mosques out side of Mecca were all in Medina. Muslims have been visiting Medina continuously for 1400 years. All these mosques were oriented south towards Mecca. Does Gibson wants us to believe that Muslims visiting Modena were praying facing north towards Petra for about 100 years and then turned around 180° and started praying towards McCart to the south and no one noticed it?
@Siraj Haq He is simply showing his ignorance to the public.
he was Playing with Words
Interesting Shabir Ali had a transformation. He just learnt that he should not have cited Fringe scholars to Attack Christian Faith; He is able to explain its dangers in detail to his daughter.
Now he has a very innovative game plan!!!
Call all established , factual, measured and well attested research as Fringe,
Shabir's view of Scholarship is definitely one of its kind!!!
The Christianfaith is easy to refute. This is much more complicated than fictitious trinity.
Bukhari was given 600,000 Hadith and only reported 7,000 and was done in the 10th century. Gotta wonder why he rejected so much so long after the life of Muhammad.
Ahabir Allly lost the argument in the first minute of opening his mouth by labeling Gibson as a fringe Scholar immediately dismissing anything Gibson has to say. When you have to attack the credibility of someone you know they are probably right.
Shabir has finished his PhD, so, when will he debate Christian Prince?
Ne need 30,000 gathering
Just Go & Chk
Masjid e Aqsa Direction.
That's All .
Truth will Blast out.
unfortunately, you are running in circles, and you have never answered the question. Moreover, it is very weak of you to consider David King's fifty-page insulting article an answer.
Can you show one piece of evidence Dan brings which is independent of Islamic literature that proves Makkah was in Petra? If not can you name a single academic credential of Dan? I've made a rebuttal to this documentary on my channel already
Still couldn’t reject Dan properly and logically. Why don’t you accept his invitation for a debate?
I am a Muslim and this response doesn't hold up at all. Arabs were excellent navigators and would not make a silly error like pointing an entire Mosque in slightly the wrong direction. As Muslims we must research our history further. Technology is making this kind of research possible. Muslims must continue to research and learn about our own history.
The qiblah was in the direction of Palestine, then God commanded to change the qiblah to Mecca, so this why the first Islamic mosques were in the direction of Jerusalem
Kaba is located where zam zam water well is located, and zam zam is in mecca, not in petra. What more to research on this simple matter ?
But there are ancient mosques very close to Saudi Arabia which are clearly pointing towards Petra? As we know, there could have been a massive change around 200-300 years after Muhammad, like other things
@al-Haifawi yeah. Muslims should be more open minded 🤷🏻♂️ we shouldn't be blind sheep. Follow God, question Man
Kaba is located where the zam zam water well is located, and zam zam is in mecca, not in petra. Zam zam still provides water like a champion whereas the average lifespan of water wells in rainy places like Bangladesh Indonesian is 50-150 years. Why create controversies around a fact so simple and straightforward.
@@monirahmedkhan a well? There are wells in Chile, Japan, Cambodia, Canada and probably more, that have been giving water for thousands of years. If i know the Saudi family, they probably would add a water pump to zamzam if it showed signs of drying up. Islam is created around controversy, from the change of prayer direction, to the Bukahri Quran burnings and the 1400 year long war between Muslims. If only Muslims were not afraid of talking critically, we would have more peace and prosperity in the world.
@@bigelowtech There are no doubt gazillions of wells in the world. But zam zam is zam zam, the quality of zam zam water is unique, it creates perfect crystals according to Japanese scientists, contains minerals which nourish the body & kills hunger, and despite megacity mecca and millions of hazi uses its water, it's still standing like a champion. And yeah, if someone creates research on any other well that has the same blissful characteristics as zam zam, I want to see that research. But these things can not change the fact that Kaaba is located beside zam zam and zam zam is in mecca. Who prayed in which direction carries very little or no significance at all.
@@monirahmedkhan the water you speak of is no more unique than the mineral waters of Canada. You are telling a story, not presenting any astounding facts. The story is what drives people. I get that. But i also like facts.
Fringe scholar, wow. A 100 years ago or so, anyone with a bit of money and interest could have done archaeological studies and been considered a scholar or pioneer in their field. Why have no Muslim historians studied these mosques and determined the qiblas? They could easily confirm (or refute) Gibson's studies... Einstein was a "fringe scholars" as well, as were many other scientists and archaeologists. Don't attack the person Dr. Ally, send your archaeologists to the mosques and we'll see what happens.
Mr Shabir, you were not able to convince me.
What is also very important is the location of al-Aqsa. The Quran doesn't say that it was in Jerusalem, only much later sources do. This is what the earliest Islamic sources say though:
In the Book of Raids, early Muslim historian and biographer Waqidi described Muhammad’s stay in the village of Jiranah a few miles outside Mecca. He wrote, “The Prophet arrived in Jiranah on Thursday, and remained 13 nights. He then departed Jiranah after praying at the Al-Aqsa Mosque located on the shore of the river bed. The Prophet used to pray there whenever he came to Jiranah.”
Another early historian, Azraqi, described in his book Mecca and its Antiquities a discussion between two men named Muhammad ibn Tariq and Mujahid. Muhammad said, “Mujahid and I agreed on Jiranah, because he informed me the Prophet used to pray at the Al-Aqsa Mosque located on the shore of the river bed. The other nearby mosque, the Al-Adna Mosque, was built by a man from the Quraysh tribe.”
Another early Mecca historian, Ibn Ishaq al-Fakihi noted in his book Ancient and Modern Mecca that Muslims who wanted to perform the Umrah would first purify themselves at the neighboring villages of Tanim and Jiranah. The Al-Adna Mosque in Tanim was significant because Muhammad’s wife Aisha had purified herself there, and the Prophet himself had prayed in the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jiranah.
The above sources all indicate that the Al-Aqsa Mosque referred to by Muhammad in Quran 17:1 was the mosque in Jiranah. The famous mosque known today by the same name in Jerusalem was built almost a century later.
Dr Shabir and Dr Safiyyah, I have not yet seen a response from you both yet to my request from a week ago asking for 1) an authentic map from 600CE showing Mecca and the trade routes, and 2) discussions on Peter Townsend’s latest book Mecca Mysteries.
Your response would be greatly appreciated by the readership.
@The Astronomer Hi Astronomer, I am familiar with Dan Gibson's work and videos. He and Patricia Crone have both carried out thorough and scholarly research into the early origins of Islam and concluded that there is no contempory evidence in maps, archaeology or documentation to support the Islamic claim that Mecca was the "mother of all cities" on the Trade Routes.
I do not expect a response from Dr Shabir as to do so would be more nails in the coffin of Islam!
i think all Muslims not have map seri 600 CE.....
@@soparsirait4923 Hi Sopar, You are absolutely right , there are no authentic maps showing Mecca and the trade routes during or before the time of Mohammed. Its about time Muslims woke up to this fact.
There are only two ways to answer your questions. One is only Allah knows best. And the second is just for you to believe it.
@@martinfrost9984 I am a Muslim and also have a background in archaeology. We can't dismiss Dan Gibson as being a fringe scholar. Every Prophet, seer or super smart person was a fringe scholar. Dan Gibson is a leader in his field. We have always been told about the conflict between the Umayyads and Muslims. Even Uthman was considered a rightly guided caliph but he was related to the Umayyads. The second the prophet was poisoned, it is clear there was a looming threat on the doorstep of Islam. Umayyads butchered the Prophet's relatives in Karbala. Uthman burnt early Islamic literature. After Karbala, surviving heirs were poisoned for centuries. It's clear there was a threat. Since I was a kid i had a strong feeling something happened and we don't know about it. Dan Gibson has given me answers for all the doubts i ever had. DId I stop being Muslim? Of course not. Dan Gibson is not anti-Islam. He is a helper
As Dan Gibson claim that old mosque from India n China had different angle of the Qibla i personally think Its Impossible to ensure Its acurracy since Jordan n saudi are both can be considered east if you live thousand of miles away. Some people just depend on sunset as guidance.
Highly unlikely, as even in ancient India and China the navigation, astronomy were very evolved and much ahead from rest of the world. When Cheraman mosque was created, it was the first mosque outside the Arabia and local King of Kerala Kingdom (India) helped in building the mosque
HAVE YPU EVER LOOK UP AT NIGHT THOSE LIGHTS UP THERE DONT MOVE AMD HAVE BEEN IN THE SAME SPOT FOR AS LONG AS HUMANS HAVE BEEN ALIVE
@@charlestorruella8591 Actually it did change. Around 1degree every 70-80years
@@celebratinglife11"evolved, much ahead of the world". I don't think so.
Not for something as important as building a gathering place to pray. It's not like "yeah, let's just build a magnificent and deeply important building in that rough, general direction, it should be fine..."
The Kaaba is house of THE ROCK..
it seems like the name PETRA (meaning the rock) would be
the city of the rock.?
I respect Dr Ali, but when someone presents you with evidence, you need to address the evidence, not the standing of their credentials. The ancient heroic Prophets, like Jesus and Muhammad all went contrary to the scholarship of their time.
So if I tell you I haven't got a medicine degree but I'm the best surgeon in London you have to take me seriously? Of course not. Same here. His arguments for petra are dumb anyhow. I've made a rebuttal to his documentary on my channel if you're interested
The way Dan has posited and concluded his theory, the methodology itself is not academically sound or valid. Dr Shabbir need not spend time going into the specifics when the whole methodology is wrong.
As for the claim "You see multiple mosques facing Petra": sure, from thousands of mosques, maybe tens of them have used an inaccurate Celestial technique to assume the direction. There is nothing conclusive as Dan tries to make it seem.
The larger question is did Mecca exist in the time of Muhammad? And the worst part is first reference to Muhammad was found in Sira of Ibn Hisham, some 200 years after Muhammad. Why this big hole in Islam?