Qibla

People keep asking about Dan Gibson’s Petra theory. Here’s the short answer from a Qur’an-only lens.

Dan says the original Qibla was in Petra, not Mecca. His whole argument hinges on Hadith-era sources, mosque alignments, and historical speculation. But here’s the contradiction: he uses Hadith to support his theory, yet distrusts the very Muslims who preserved those Hadith. You can’t have it both ways. Either you trust the early ummah or you don’t. And if you don’t, then how can you trust any theory based on that same chain?

As Muslims, we follow the Qur’an first and foremost. That’s the one source Allah says is protected [15:9]. And the Qur’an is very clear:

• The Kaaba is the “first House” ever built for humanity [3:96].
• That House is located in “Bakkah.”
• That House is the one Abraham and Ishmael purified [2:125–127].
• The Maqam Ibrahim is there, and we are told to pray at it.
• That House is tied to the rituals of tawaf, prostration, and Hajj [22:26–29].

So what does this mean? It means the Qibla—the prayer direction—is tied to the same House built by Abraham. That House, by every living Muslim record and uninterrupted practice, is the Kaaba in Mecca.

Gibson tries to say “Bakkah” was Petra, but that’s his own speculation. The Qur’an never says that. It simply uses “Bakkah” when talking about the ancient foundation, and “Mecca” when referring to the city during the Prophet’s time [48:24]. It’s not a contradiction; it’s a timeline.

Now ask yourself: if Gibson’s theory were true, how would every single Muslim around the world—from Yemen to China—just “forget” where the Qibla was? It’s not one book that would need to be rewritten—it’s millions of huffaz, thousands of prayer-leading imams, and entire populations who would all need to silently agree to change it.

Impossible.

Even today, you can’t get 50 Muslims to agree on the moon sighting. How would you get millions to suddenly switch direction and nobody raise a word? Islam is passed down through lived practice. That’s how we know how to pray. How many raka’at. What direction to face. We follow the imam because that’s how prayer has been preserved.

If we accept the Qur’an, we also accept that Allah would never allow His prayer system to vanish. And He hasn’t. The direction is still the same because the ummah preserved it. If Allah allowed the direction to be lost, then how is that religion still intact? It wouldn’t be.

Even if we entertain Dan’s idea—say the Kaaba was relocated. Then what? As Allah says: “To Allah belong the East and the West—wherever you turn, there is the Face of Allah.” [2:115]. And: “We only made the previous Qibla to test who follows the Messenger.” [2:143].

So it’s not about geography. It’s about unity. Even if the Kaaba was knocked down tomorrow, we’d still face one direction together. That’s Qibla. That’s what matters.

Gibson’s biggest problem isn’t even archaeology—it’s inconsistency. He accepts Hadith claims when they support his theory (like Qibla changes), but rejects the ummah that passed them down. He trusts ruins over people; maps over revelation; outsiders over believers. That’s not scholarship. That’s bias.

We, on the other hand, trust the one thing Allah said is perfect and preserved: the Qur’an. And the Qur’an ties Qibla, Hajj, the Kaaba, Maqam Ibrahim, and the rituals—all to the same House. The one that has never moved.

So yeah, you can distrust Saudi governments. You can critique the commercialization of religion. That’s fair. But don’t throw away the whole tradition just because you don’t like the real estate developers around it.

The Qur’an is preserved. Prayer is preserved. And the Qibla is preserved. Don’t let Shaytan distract you with theories that lead you to abandon unity or salah itself. That’s the real danger.