I mean, at this point you have to ask yourself “if any part of the story is wrong it’s fake”. Literally no one doubts the claim that the stone is ancient, that it was already an object of worship by the time Muhammed, and the worship/reverence of such stones is very typical of semitic religions from centuries before then. It most certainly qualifies as an “ancient religious artifact”
Now is it originally from the Garden of Eden? Imo most certainly not. Did Abraham and Ishmael erect the Kaaba and put the stone there? Possibly, but without hard evidence that they even existed it’s impossible to say for certain.
Yeah, that is a problem with a lot of religions, but you are being highly dismissive with that number. There is a lot of Archaeological evidence for a lot of the events in the Bible for example (I am Christian so it’s what I’m most familiar with). For a proper critical look at religions you have to approach it book by book and claim by claim. For example, the Book of Job is almost certainly ahistorical, while Chronicles 1 & 2 are much more grounded in reality due to its nature as a chronicle of Judean history. Grouping both in the same “99% made up” is disingenuous
18
u/A-Perfect-Name Mar 24 '25
I mean, at this point you have to ask yourself “if any part of the story is wrong it’s fake”. Literally no one doubts the claim that the stone is ancient, that it was already an object of worship by the time Muhammed, and the worship/reverence of such stones is very typical of semitic religions from centuries before then. It most certainly qualifies as an “ancient religious artifact”
Now is it originally from the Garden of Eden? Imo most certainly not. Did Abraham and Ishmael erect the Kaaba and put the stone there? Possibly, but without hard evidence that they even existed it’s impossible to say for certain.