Did Mohammed even exist? Dr. Jay Smith

[Didacus]

There is credible evidence it seems that Mohammed never even existed;

#39: Jay DESTROYS THE BIOGRAPHY OF MUHAMMAD in 20 minutes!

 

In fact, there is no evidence that Mecca even existed until nearly 200years after Mohammed's supposed death; muslims claims that Mecca is the first human city and maintains that it has been consistently the most important center of humanity throughout all human history!

 

 

So pham... what are your thoughts on this?

I've listened to much of Dr. Jat Smith's work (and his colleagues), they've uncovered some stunning facts about the evolution of Islam....

[Machine_Washable]

On 12/14/2024 at 7:26 AM, Didacus said:

There is credible evidence it seems that Mohammed never even existed;

#39: Jay DESTROYS THE BIOGRAPHY OF MUHAMMAD in 20 minutes!

 

In fact, there is no evidence that Mecca even existed until nearly 200years after Mohammed's supposed death; muslims claims that Mecca is the first human city and maintains that it has been consistently the most important center of humanity throughout all human history!

 

 

So pham... what are your thoughts on this?

I've listened to much of Dr. Jat Smith's work (and his colleagues), they've uncovered some stunning facts about the evolution of Islam....

these are claims that even the revisionist western historians would reject as unserious. 

[Didacus]

What proof is there of the existance of Mecca in the time of mohammed?

[little2add]

On 12/14/2024 at 7:26 AM, Didacus said:

There is credible evidence it seems that Mohammed never even existed;

The fact that around 1,600 million people, give or take, belive in Mohammed is credible evidence, isn't it?

 

[Credo in Deum]

I think most scholars say there is sufficient evidence to think Muhammad was a real historical figure. As for Mecca being the oldest city and existing for the entirety of human history, nah. There is obsoletely no evidence that such a place existed prior to Muhammad or even during his life.  

 

[Nunsuch]

2 hours ago, Credo in Deum said:

I think most scholars say there is sufficient evidence to think Muhammad was a real historical figure. As for Mecca being the oldest city and existing for the entirety of human history, nah. There is obsoletely no evidence that such a place existed prior to Muhammad or even during his life.  

 

Mecca is also known by many other names, including Bakkah and Makkah. There is considerable evidence of its existence in many ancient sources, obviously preceding the birth of Mohammed, who was born there. 

[Didacus]

6 hours ago, little2add said:

The fact that around 1,600 million people, give or take, belive in Mohammed is credible evidence, isn't it?

 

No, it is not...  The number of fools do not prove the lie.

2 hours ago, Nunsuch said:

Mecca is also known by many other names, including Bakkah and Makkah. There is considerable evidence of its existence in many ancient sources, obviously preceding the birth of Mohammed, who was born there. 

I believe those claims are addressed as well by Dr. Jay and friends...

[Nunsuch]

46 minutes ago, Didacus said:

No, it is not...  The number of fools do not prove the lie.

I believe those claims are addressed as well by Dr. Jay and friends...

Is he a historian? No. Does he know historical method? No. They may be "addressed," but not persuasively and not with substance. You, of course, can 'believe" what you like, but that is a matter of faith, not evidence.

[GraceUk]

I don't really care if he existed or not. What does it matte r

[Credo in Deum]

7 hours ago, Nunsuch said:

Mecca is also known by many other names, including Bakkah and Makkah. There is considerable evidence of its existence in many ancient sources, obviously preceding the birth of Mohammed, who was born there. 

Now if you ask Muslims if it existed prior to Muhammad they will of course say yes. 

Edited 18 hours ago by Credo in Deum

[Nunsuch]

See, I would rather believe actual historians, rather than either an untrained Evangelical pastor or AI. But enough. You believe what you "feel" is right.

[Credo in Deum]

2 hours ago, Nunsuch said:

See, I would rather believe actual historians, rather than either an untrained Evangelical pastor or AI. But enough. You believe what you "feel" is right.

Well provide your historian sources instead of just your charming condescending attitude. 

[Didacus]

14 hours ago, Nunsuch said:

Is he a historian? No. Does he know historical method? No. They may be "addressed," but not persuasively and not with substance. You, of course, can 'believe" what you like, but that is a matter of faith, not evidence.

He's a doctor and his field is Islam... you obviously did not check his credentials.

9 hours ago, Nunsuch said:

See, I would rather believe actual historians, rather than either an untrained Evangelical pastor or AI. But enough. You believe what you "feel" is right.

Furthermore he relies on research done by peers who are well established historians, and he cites these references often in his discourses.

[Credo in Deum]

1 hour ago, Didacus said:

He's a doctor and his field is Islam... you obviously did not check his credentials.

Furthermore he relies on research done by peers who are well established historians, and he cites these references often in his discourses.

If the source isn’t from her or support her views it’s by default faulty.  If you challenge this position she will reference her extensive time in academia to bolster her side. 
 

There is a great article that challenges the historicity of a pre-Muhammad or pre-Islam Mecca found here:https://www.academia.edu/62044717/If_Mecca_Did_Not_Exist_in_the_Time_of_Muhammad_then_Who_Was_Muhammad_and_Where_Did_He_Live

*You will have to provide and email to down load the pdf, but it’s worth the read. 

I’m sure these researchers are also faulty though in Nunsuch eyes. 

12 hours ago, GraceUk said:

I don't really care if he existed or not. What does it matte r

The entire Islamic religion is depended on Mecca, Muhammad, and the Quran. If one of these don’t exist none of them do according to their religion.  That matters. 

Edited 7 hours ago by Credo in Deum

[Didacus]

The question is consequential indeed...

The Book, the man, the place...

 

Christianity has been challenged in the same way for centuries, over and over again, with often outright nefarious intent.  Christianity went to bat, and provided awnsers to the vast majority of the questions and came out the other side.

Why should Islam be exempt from such scrutiny?

(The Truth does not mind being questioned, lies however....)

PS - downloaded the link, thank you.  Will have a read of it for sure.

Dr. Jay is not the only scholar from academia who supports this 'theory' of mecca never having existed...  in fact they are a growing number...