❖ Historical Misconceptions Propagated by Atheists
In recent times, a few atheists have attempted to construct false assumptions by misinterpreting historical traditions according to their own whims. In particular, they aim to cast doubt on the existence of Makkah and the Ka‘bah, and vainly try to associate these with some other place, such as Petra. Their approach is not only intellectually dishonest but also involves distorting historical references to support their claims.
❖ Objection on Referring to Makkah as “Umm al-Qurā”
Claim of the Atheists:
Atheists argue that the Qur’an refers to Makkah as “Umm al-Qurā”, implying that it is the mother of all cities and the oldest city in the world.
Reality:
The Qur’an refers to Makkah as “Umm al-Qurā” because it holds a sacred and honored status in the sight of Allah. As Imam Ibn Kathir states:
“Makkah is called Umm al-Qurā because it is superior to all other cities. It was the abode of the Prophets (عليهم السلام), the birthplace of the Prophet ﷺ, and it houses the Ka‘bah, which was constructed for the purpose of worship.”
(Tafsīr Ibn Kathīr)
It is clear that “Umm al-Qurā” does not mean the oldest city. If one assumes that this term proves the antiquity of Makkah, it is a misunderstanding and an act of intellectual dishonesty. Just as the Qur’an calls wine “Umm al-Khabā’ith” (the mother of evils), it does not imply that wine is the oldest substance—drawing such a conclusion is childish.
❖ Reference to the Ka‘bah in the Qur’an and Historical Interpretation
Claim of the Atheists:
An atheist presented the following verse from Surah Āl ʿImrān (3:96):
"إِنَّ أَوَّلَ بَيْتٍ وُضِعَ لِلنَّاسِ لَلَّذِي بِبَكَّةَ مُبَارَكًا وَهُدًى لِّلْعَالَمِينَ"
“Indeed, the first House established for mankind was that at Bakkah—blessed and a guidance for the worlds.”
Reality:
This verse refers to the Ka‘bah as the first place of worship built for humanity. It does not suggest that Makkah is the oldest city. The verse confirms the antiquity of the Ka‘bah, not of the city itself. Deriving the city’s age from this verse is illogical.
❖ Objection on Makkah Being an Agricultural City
Claim:
Atheists cite a narration from Ibn Ishaq and al-Ṭabarī which mentions that when ʿAbdullāh (the Prophet’s ﷺ father) went to visit Āminah, his clothes had traces of soil. From this, they argue that Makkah must have been an agricultural city, which contradicts known geography.
Reality:
The narration does not indicate that Makkah was a full-fledged agricultural city. The term “mazraʿah” refers to any land where even a few date trees or some grass may have grown. Such small gardens were common in the Arabian Peninsula.
The claim that Makkah had vast farmlands is a misconception. Even minor labor in a small orchard could result in soil sticking to clothing. It does not require expansive agricultural fields.
❖ Objection on the Mountain Passes and Routes of Makkah
Claim:
Atheists argue that Makkah should have mountain passes at its entrances, yet present-day Makkah lacks such features.
Reality:
A “mountain pass (darrah)” is a route that runs between two mountains. Makkah does, in fact, have multiple such routes.
From Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, it is narrated:
The Prophet ﷺ entered Makkah through “Kadā’” (the upper mountain route of Makkah).
(Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, Kitāb al-Maghāzī)
The paths leading to Makkah lie through mountains and valleys, and these were commonly used in ancient times. The atheist objection displays a lack of archaeological understanding.
❖ Objection on Makkah as a Trade Center
Claim:
Atheists question what the residents of mountainous Makkah ate or how they survived economically, especially in the absence of agriculture.
Reality:
The people of Makkah were primarily merchants. They imported food and goods from other regions, raised animals like camels and goats, and sold products such as milk. Their economy was based on trade.
Many renowned cities throughout history, such as Venice, developed purely through commerce without agriculture. Thus, this objection is based on a weak and baseless assumption.
❖ Objection Based on Ptolemy’s Maps and the Mention of “Makoraba”
Claim:
Atheists state that the ancient geographer Ptolemy did not mention Makkah but instead referred to a city named “Makoraba”.
Reality:
Numerous historians opine that “Makoraba” is indeed a reference to Makkah, and it means “the house of God.”
“Makoraba means Lord’s Makkah or Allah’s Makkah.”
Ptolemy’s maps contain multiple geographical inaccuracies because they were compiled based on information heard from caravans and travelers.
The depiction of Makoraba outside the mountains and Makkah within a valley is merely a cartographic error, not evidence against Makkah’s existence.
❖ Conclusion:
The objections raised by atheists are rooted in intellectual dishonesty, weak arguments, and distorted historical facts. The existence of Makkah and the Ka‘bah is firmly established not only through the Qur’an and Sunnah, but also through testimonies of non-Muslim historians.
