Hello Wakas,
Thanks for your post and the links. It makes a lot of sense, and I would have to re-read it to give any meaningful input.
I want to ask for now, and I am sure you have been asked this many times, what is your view of the understanding in Qur'an Geography, by Dan Gibson? (Which he says is taking the Qur'an at face value and deviating tradition) A scholar in this field said to me it hasn't received recognition in the academic world because the theory hasn't been tested in journal publications etc.
However that doesn't sit with me very well, and no-one has given a strong case why this is not credible. What would you say are the 3 strongest reasons why an alternate Holy City, as explained in Quran Geography, is NOT what the Qur'an describes, and instead the outline as has been presented in the link you provided?
I have no allegiances to any belief, just want to pursue truth.
Wasalam
Zack