There is no historical record of Islam starting in the Hijaz region except for hadith fabrications of which the earliest date 300 years after muhammads death.
Old Testament evidence:
The word Baca is derived from the root which means to weep, but it nowhere means weeping, for which words of a different form are used. Here, as in 2 Samuel 5:23, it probably denotes some kind of balsam-tree, so called from the ?tears? of gum which it exudes. The vale of Baca or the balsam-trees was some vale which, like the vale of Elah or the terebinth (1 Samuel 17:2), and the vale of Shittim or acacias, took its name from the trees which grew there. Balsam-trees are said to love dry situations, growing plentifully for example in the arid valley of Mecca; and this is clearly the point of the reference. The vale of Baca was some waterless and barren valley through which pilgrims passed on their way to Jerusalem; but faith turns it into a place of springs, finding refreshment under the most untoward circumstances, while God refreshes them with showers of blessing from above, as the autumnal rains clothe the dry plains with grass and flowers.
This confirms the Jews knew of a Baca in Jerusalem.
Quran, as demonstrated also mentions Baca. Confirming, not rejecting the Jewish concept. Where is your proof this Baca of the jews is the wrong baca but should be mecca?
For me this is sufficient proof. Quran mentions the same place, and doesn't state the Jewish are placing this baca wrongly. Logic demands it must refer to Jerusalem.
Peace
