ABRAHAM, ISHAMEL, HAGAR AND ARABIA

Abraham's wife, Sarah, thought herself too advanced in age to bear a child, so she encouraged Abraham to have a child with her handmaiden Hagar, in order that his name could be carried forward. But later on the Lord did bless Abraham and Sarah with a son.

Genesis 21:5 And Abraham was an hundred years old, when his son Isaac was born unto him.

Genesis 21:8 And the child grew, and was weaned: and Abraham made a great feast the [same] day that Isaac was weaned. 9 AndSarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking. 10 Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, [even] with Isaac. 11 And the thing was very grievous in Abraham's sight because of his son. 12 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called. 13 And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he [is] thy seed.

Genesis 21:14 And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave [it] unto Hagar, putting [it] on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba. 15 And the water was spent in the bottle, and she cast the child under one of the shrubs.

19 And God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the bottle with water, and gave the lad drink.

Muslims have actually been taught that the "well of water" referenced in verse 19 above is the well of ZamZam in Mecca, Saudi Arabia! That would mean that between verse 14 and 15 Hagar and Ishmael would have had to travel across a thousand miles of - at that time - uninhabited, unexplored, uncharted desert, on a single skin of water, only to arrive at one of the harshest environments that Arabia has to offer. In fact, all of the historians and geographers from several centuries B.C. and on into the Christian era, who wrote about the area where Mecca was eventually built in the 4th century A.D., described the area as being "uninhabitable". See the "Mecca" page for more.

The nearest location that anybody has placed Mt. Sinai to Mecca, is not within a thousand kilometers, across barren desert.

Primary map source Wikimedia Commons

Here is a sample Islamic site on the matter: "Abraham took Hagar and her son, Ishmael to a place near the Kabah; he left them under a tree at the site of Zamzam. No one lived in Makkah back then, yet Abraham made them sit there, leaving them with some dates, and a small water-skin. Thereafter he set out towards home."

So then apparently Abraham, Hagar and Ishmael walked across a thousand miles of unknown desert, Abraham dropped them off under a tree in what eventually became Mecca, and then Abraham "set out" on his thousand mile walk back home. Anything seem peculiar about that picture in light of the map above? Indeed we know that Hagar and Ishmael didn't go to Mecca because Ishmael lived in the Wilderness of Paran.

Genesis 21:21 And he dwelt in the wilderness of Paran...

Excellent maps of Paran and a photo of Mt. Paran are available at this link from which the below image was lifted.

Indeed when Ishmael was old enough to marry Hagar procured him a wife from Egypt, perhaps from her tribe, since she herself was Egyptian.

Genesis 21:21 And he dwelt in the wilderness of Paran: and his mother took him a wife out of the land of Egypt.

Are we expected to believe that Hagar traveled back the thousand miles through the desert from Mecca to Egypt, and then returned to Mecca, with Ishmael's wife? Of course that's not the case because the historical and scriptural evidence (again begging the question that the book of Genesis is correct on this, the book of Genesis hasn't been proven to be historical on everything) suggest that the 12 tribes that developed from Ishmael's sons inhabited the northern Sinai peninsula, the Wilderness of Paran and fertile crescent, and eventually migrated more toward the north.

Do you really believe Hagar and Ishmael crossed a thousand kilometers of terrain like this on a single waterskin, most of a thousand years before the advent of camel transport?

Mt. Paran is a hundred kilometers NORTH of Mt. Sinai and 1100 kilometers north

Please visit the web site at this link that details the new presumed location of Mt. Sinai, that has so many of Muhammad's followers so excited, before they see a map and realize it is still a thousand kilometers from Mecca.

Genesis 25:9 And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, which [is] before Mamre;

How did Ishmael cross 1200 kilometers of harsh barren desert in time to help Isaac bury their father?

this begs the question that whatever the BOOK OF GENESIS SAYS ABOUT ABRAHAM AND ISHAMEL  is true. ITS POSSIBLE THAT THE ISLAMIC VERSION OF THE STORY OF ABRAHAM, ISHAMEL AND HAGAR IS TRUE, AND WHOEVER WROTE THE BOOK OF GENESIS REINVENTED THE STORY. THIS ALL BEGS THE QUESTION ABOUT THE RELIABLITY OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

Also, Muslims do accept this story as a genuine miracle from the life of Jesus (peace be upon) simply because the Quran says so. For the very same reason we accept the miracle of Jesus' virgin birth and the miracle of his healing the sick and the miracle of raising the dead. Miracles are accepted on faith. Christians ALSO accept the miracle of the virgin birth on faith, among other miracles mentioned in the gospels.

Furthermore, Jesus making a clay bird and giving that bird life is not more "grand" than Jesus actually raising dead men and walking on water. None of these stories are more "legendary" than the other. Thus, on the face of it, there would appear to be no reason to suspect the story of Jesus making a clay bird and miraculously giving it life. Just because it is found in a non-canonical document does not by itself follow that this tradition could not go back to the first century.

If one wishes to dismiss this story of clay-bird miracle as a "legend," then how is Jesus' raising of Lazarus not a legend?JUST BECAUSE A STORY IS NOT FOUND IN THE BOOK OF GENESIS IT DOES NOT FOLLOW THAT IT IS A LEGEND.

SO THE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS WOULD HAVE TO PROVE THAT WHATEVER THE BOOK OF GENESIS SAYS IS TRUE IN REGARDS TO THE ISSUE OF ISHAMEL, HAGAR AND ABRAHAM. HOW THEY COULD IS BEYOND ME. 

Not surprisingly, in order to resolve the obvious difficulty with placing Abraham or Ishmael at the place where Mecca was eventually built in the 4th century A.D. - a thousand miles from where they actually lived -

Of course this is utter non sense. Mecca did exist before Christianity: 

Mecca did exist before the advent of Christianity -Secular historical evidence

Makkah, or Mecca, is the centre of Islamic civilization. Qur’an terms it as Ummul Qura’ i.e. Mother of the Cities (6: 92 & 42: 7). It is the place to which all Muslims turn their faces five times a day and making a pilgrimage to it once in life is not only an obligation but the heartiest desire of every Muslim.Apparently it is only the importance of this city which gives us ‘mecca’ as a word in the English language meaning, ‘a place frequented for special purpose.’

But this is not all; its central position in the House of Islam has lead some jaundiced-eye critics of Islam to even doubt its historicity. They say that history of Arabia has no evidence for the existence of Makkah before the advent of Christianity.

Infact there are references to the city and sanctuary of Makkah even in the Old Testament. But in the following lines I will not bask upon references from the Bible but instead share a secular historical evidence to refute the lie.

Diodorus Siculus, a first century B.C. Greek historian while discussing Arabia writes;

“The people that inhabit these parts are called Bizomenians and live upon wild beasts taken in hunting.Here is a sacred temple in high veneration among all the Arabians.” (The Historical Library of the Diodorus the Sicilian, Translated by G. Booth, Esq., J. Davis Military Chronicle Office, London 1814 vol.1 p.184)

This certainly is a reference to Makkah. Georgi Zaidan (d. 1914 C.E.), a Christian Arab from Beirut writes in his book Al-‘Arab Qabl al-Islam (Arabs before Islam);

“There is no mention of Makkah or Ka’ba in the books of the Greeks of antiquity except what is found in the book of Diodorus Siculus of the first century before Christ in his discussion about the Nabateans. In that he refers to Makkah and he writes, ‘And beyond the land of the Nabateans is the region of Bizomenians. And there is a sacred temple in high veneration among all the Arabs.’”

And he does not just stop here, he even explains as to whom Diodorus refers to by using the word, “Bizomenians.” He writes (Arabic wording is given in the image above);

“As to the ‘Bizomenians’; sometimes by it are intended the Jurhamites or other Arabian tribes who were the custodians of Makkah.” (Al-‘Arab Qabl al-Islam, Al-Hilal publishers Cairo, second ed. vol.1 p.244)

So we find a Christian testifying for and expounding a historical evidence for Makkah from pre-Christian times.

Similarly another Arab Christian, Jesuit Louis Cheikho (d. 1927 C.E.) in his work titled, ‘al-Nasaraniyah wa adaabuha bayn ‘Arab al-Jahaliyyah’ (The Christianity and Its Literature amongst the Arabs of Pre-Islamic Times) also refers to the same quotation from Diodorus Siculus and takes it like Zaidan. (See al-Nasaraniyah wa adaabuha bayn ‘Arab al-Jahaliyya, Darul Mashriq, Beirut second ed. 1989 p.14)

I hope objective readers will find this piece useful.

 the most quoted 8th century Islamic "tradition" creator Ibn Ishak, originated the idea that Abraham commuted back and forth to visit Ishmael in Mecca, on the winged camel, or Baraq (Tarikh al-Tabari, I, page 165). He also employed this mythical creature to explain how Ishmael was able to attend Abraham's funeral near Hebron.

Additionally, in order to make the claim that Mohammed was descended from Ishmael, 8th century Islamic "tradition" creator, Ibn Ishak, also designed a genealogy for him. This was, of course, done without a single reference to any historical documentation that preceded Mohammed. This is the same genealogy that Muslims ascribe to today. Not only did Ishaq assign what were modern Quraysh Arabic language names, to the characters he created in Mohammed's lineage that were supposed to have lived thousands of years before, but he included only 40 generations between the two.

There are 2,670 years between Ishmael and Mohammed. Suggesting only 40 generations would require over 66 years per generation! Yet we know from actual Arabic historical record, for example, that the series of rulers in Saba and Himyar of Yemen begin with Karibil A. in the 9th century B.C., and run through Maadikarib III, King of Himyar, who was number 102, the last one in the series. He reigned between 575-577 A.D. These 102 kings span a period of about 1,400 years. A few of those rulers were brothers of the same generation so there are actually around 75 to 80 generations in that line, thus we can conclude that the average Arabian generation was about 17-20 years.

AS FOR THE PROPHET'S MARRIAGE TO AISHA SEE BASSAM ZAWADI'S REBUTTAL TO SAM SHAMOUN ON THIS. HOWEVER WE MUSLIMS DON'T FALL FOR THESE SILLY APPEAL TO EMOTION ARGUEMENTS AGAINST ISLAM.