Paran as Makkah

WAS PARAN MAKKAH OR NEAR MAKKAH???

Prominent Saudi Prince follows Moses Exodus Saga.

Our thesis that Moses’ journey started in Yemen and followed the tectonic line of volcanoes to the Holiest City of Islam, MAKKAH seems to have caused somewhat of a stir in the Kingdom and left the Israelis cold.

In a private note, a prominent member of the Saudi Royal family has asked to be kept in touch with further developments not only regarding the Exodus but also our thesis that the Temples of Jerusalem were never built on the Temple Mount but rather in their more logical position some 600 ft. further south over the City’s only natural supply of water, The Gihon Spring in the City of Jerusalem.

I will keep you posted on the developments in the Muslim and Arab world. The material has already been translated and posted on the internet in Urdu and Arabic.

Islam has claimed that the coming of Mohammed was foretold in the Bible in the following verse:

"And this is the blessing wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death and he said, 'The Lord came from Sinai and dawned from Mount Seir upon them; he shone forth from Mount Paran he came from ten thousands of holy ones: with flaming fire at his right hand. Yea, he loved His people; all those consecrated to him were in his hand: so they followed in thy feet, receiving direction from thee, when Moses commanded us a law, as a possession for the congregation of Jacob. Thus the Lord became King in Jeshurun when the heads of the people were gathered, all the tribes of Israel together." (Deuteronomy 33:1-5).

The controversy naturally revolves around any independent evidence that Paran was in the vicinity of Makkah.

We have already cited a medieval geographer on that score but one cannot be sure whether the identification was real or an attempt to strengthen the thesis that Mohammed was mentioned in the Bible. We would expect therefore that Muslims would favor that identification. In fact it is now taken for granted by the Muslim world. Perhaps that is the reason why the Saudis have expressed more interest in the thesis than the Israelis. However it does cause Islam a problem which they have preferred not to address over the centuries. For, if they accept Paran as Makkah, then they MUST at the same time accept that the Exodus took place in Saudi Arabia .

What is puzzling is that we cannot find any Islamic commentator who has taken the next and only logical next step. IF Mekkah is Paran then the Exodus MUST have taken place in Arabia . We have seen no Islamic commentator make that obvious conclusion.

What is much more startling is that Yemeni Jewish sages also identified Paran with Mekkah, surely against their interests and biases. The argument has been posited that Yemeni Jews for their own protection would not want rock the boat and that as the rise of Islam was undoubtedly a major world event in history and they believe that all such events are predicted in the Torah, they would have no problem is accepting the Muslim interpretation.

I will leave the reader to decide whether that is sufficient justification for Jewish sages to have accepted the identification that Paran is Makkah.

Ever,
Mike
September 2002
California

FOR MORE ... THE MOSES SERIES

Vision Video Associate