Author Topic: Antiquated sources parroting fables re Baca & Macoraba, copied by later sources  (Read 500 times)


  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 3854
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad

Because so many encyclopedias and dictionaries lump fact and fictional "tradition" together under the category of "History", it creates a false impression that Islamic so-called "tradition" that masquerades as ancient history, is historical. This exceedingly unscholarly approach is misleading, even though most publications carefully couch any references that suggest a pre-4th century AD Mecca or Kaaba, with qualifiers like "According to Islamic tradition...." or "According to legend....". It is essentially and admission that Islamic so-called "tradition" is unhistoricial. Yet because historical fact and Islamic fictional "tradition" are intertwined under the heading of "history" in these publications, young students and others with limited capacity for critical thought or those that are simply predisposed to believe unhistorical Islamic fables, fail to notice that those "qualifiers" are in effect disclaimers that if anything are an admission of the absence of historicity. In the end such articles wind up as doing little more than advancing lies, through exercises in mind control, whether intended or not. Yet Muslims quote these sources and lionize these western encyclopedia information gatherers, as if they were eye witnesses to what was supposed to have taken place thousands of years before them!

It should be no surprise that when encyclopedia authors want to include an article on humming birds, for example, they would go to an expert on humming birds for information. So when it comes to information about Islam it would seem reasonable that they would go to Islamic theologians, Imams or Muftis for information, without realizing that the Islamic so-called "tradition" they are peddling, was all created and put to the pen in the 7th-10th centuries AD without reference to any actual historical record from before the 6th century AD. In other words Islamic "tradition" regarding any pre-4th century Mecca is pure created fiction.

When it comes to events that took place during the 18th to early 20th centuries, or even a century or two before the period the individual encyclopedia contributors were contemporary to, the information they pass along may well be reliable and historical. Indeed that is how historical record is developed. But when it comes to an 18th to early 20th century author parroting fables from unhistorical sources, in regard to things that were supposed to have taken place thousands of years before them, they were obviously as information deprived as some modern day parrots choose to be, who regurgitate the same. We have a forum category dedicated to: "Exposing the error or deception of encyclopedias, textbooks and other "authorative" sources, that intertwine Islamic "tradition", with historical record"

It is important to note that available evidence suggests the Arabic language did not exist until into the Christian era, yet some go as far as to suggest similarities between names of places like that of 2nd century Ptolemy's "Macoraba" with "Mecca" (perhaps because they both begin with an "m"?).

Yet in spite of the fact that nobody can deny that such vain wishes will never constitute evidence, we find an endless procession of those that try to rename Mecca, as if it were synonymous or interchangeable with "Macoraba" and even "Baca". Once again, the antiquated 18th to early 20th century dictionaries and encyclopedias are parroted without end, even by modern day encyclopedias!

Even worse is their need to believe that a 4500 year pre-Muhammad history of Mecca, was orally transmitted down through the ages, by a bunch of illiterate pagans in the backwaters of the SW Arabian desert that Islamic history tells us were worshiping the moon, sun, stars and jinn devils through 360 idols in Mecca - even into as late as the 7th century AD!

Thus it should come as no surprise that the enemy, Satan, influenced Muhammad's often self-serving "revelations" that communicate the exact opposite of the love and peace of the prophets, patriarchs and witnesses of the 1600 year record of revelation of the true God YHWH to mankind, with Muhammad having denied the whole subject of the Gospel.

Yet by the time that same 7th century had rolled around, in which those naked pagan's were worshiping their moon god and venerating their black stone idol in the SW Arabian desert, the Gospel had been spread throughout the Middle East, Northern Africa and up into Europe. Here's a map of those Christian lands:

Yet Islam's leaders fool Muhammad's followers into believing that an army of pagan's from the SW Arabian desert that went on an imperialistic rampage of rape, pillage, plunder and slaughter, throughout the Arabian Peninsula and conquered Christian lands all the way up into France and Austria, somehow "civilized" the world by compelling the vanquished to prostrate themselves toward the Quraish pagan's black stone idol in Mecca 5 times a day, while praying in the "vain repetitions of the heathen" (as the scriptures refer to Salat), in the names of the Arabian pagan's deity "Allah" and his "messenger" Muhammad.

Yet even 6-8 centuries before Muhammad, the civilized world had already built the first analog computer, known as the Antikythera mechanism: