Kama Biblia na Quran zingeletwa Mahakamani zithibitishe yaliyomo ndani yake, Quran ingeangukia pua

Sina hakika na uliyoandika lakini hoja yangu ni kwamba umeonesha una akili,kwa sababu umejibu hoja ya mleta mada kwa facts zako, kila mchangiaji akijibu kama wewe na kuweka emotions pembeni basi mtapata mnachojadili hapa

Hongera
 
Sawa sasa jibu
Kwa Nini pedophilia Muhammad aliiba kazi za wayahudi akafanya zake , kwa Nini asiandike kazi za waarabu?
 
The Identity of the pre-Islamic Allah [Part 1]

Muslim polemicists seemingly never tire of misrepresenting the arguments of their opponents, specifically Christian apologists. And instead of addressing the best that the other side has to offer, these dawagandists normally go after the worst arguments that are (unfortunately) raised by those who really have no in-depth knowledge of either Christianity or Islam.
Take the issue of Allah being the moon god, for example. These apologists will post articles or videos attacking those who claim that Muslims are worshiping a moon deity. Yet these same individuals rarely touch on the real issue raised by those who are somewhat knowledgeable about Christianity and Islam.
After all, the point isn’t whether Muslims are worshiping a moon god. The real objection centers on the identity of the pre-Islamic Allah worshiped by the pagan Arabs at Mecca.
One such Muslim taqiyyist who has chosen to address the worst that the other side has to offer, as opposed to addressing the real issue, is Sami Zaatari. Here is what he writes concerning the charge leveled against Muslims regarding their worship of Allah:
One claim that has often been thrown against the religion of Islam is that the Muslim God, Allah, is a moon God! This claim has been widely circulated amongst many missionaries with an agenda to try and ‘disprove’ Islam.
So, do we the Muslims worship a moon God? Well, if the answer is a yes, then we would at least expect to find a verse within the Quran saying Allah is indeed a moon God, and that the Muslims should worship the moon. So does such a passage exist in the Quran? The answer is an emphatic no, there is not a single verse in the Quran (let alone the hadiths) that refers to Allah as a moon God, nor is there any verse about worshiping the moon, on the contrary there is a verse within the Quran that explicitly says the OPPOSITE:
041.037 Among His Signs are the Night and the Day, and the Sun and the Moon. Do not prostrate to the sun and the moon, but prostrate to Allah, Who created them, if it is Him ye wish to serve.
So the Quran explicitly forbids the Muslims from worshiping the moon, as well as the sun, and it goes on to clearly state that Allah, created the moon! So how can anyone claim that Muslims worship a moon God when we have such a clear and explicit verse in the Quran saying the exact opposite? This is what we call dishonesty, dishonesty in it’s highest form, and it’s very sad that some people are deceived by such arguments passed on by certain missionaries.
So in conclusion, the case is clear, Allah created the moon, and has commanded the Muslims to NOT worship the moon, the case is closed: Allah is NOT a moon God. (Do Muslims Worship A Moon God?)
Instead of responding to Zaatari’s tirade against Muslims worshiping a moon deity, what we will seek to do in this article is to present the one objection that Zaatari and his ilk rarely (if at all) address, namely, the identity of the pre-Islamic Allah at Mecca. We will present evidence to prove that the Allah which the Meccans worshiped was associated with the moon, e.g. the pagans viewed the moon as representing their supreme god whom they called Allah. In that way, Muslim polemicists such as Zaatari will be forced to respond to the real issues, and not waste their time on the claims of those less informed in this area.

The Prevalence of Moon Worship in Arabia
What Zaatari, and others like him, conveniently overlook and forget to mention is that the pagans of Mecca ran around the kabah seven times, much like the Muslims do till this day. Evidence exists to show that the number of circumambulation corresponded to the number of the heavenly bodies which the pagans thought existed and which they associated with certain gods. Significantly, the celestial object that the pagans associated with the chief deity was not the sun, but the moon!
The Arabic words may provide the key in understanding why the moon was taken to be the head god, or the celestial body associated with the high god. The Arabic word for moon (qamar) is masculine in gender, whereas the word for sun (shams) is feminine. Since the pagan Arabs were, for the most part, a patriarchal culture it only makes sense that they would have taken the moon as the symbol of the supreme god, in light of it being a masculine noun.
As the late Muslim translator Abdullah Yusuf Ali explained in regards to the paganism of Arabia:
5. To revert to the worship of the heavenly bodies… A few individual stars did attract the worshippers’ attention, e.g. Sirius the Dog-star, the brightest fixed star in the heavens, with a bluish tinge in its light… It is probably Sirius that is referred to as the fixed star in the Parable of Abraham (vi. 76). With regard to the fixed stars in their myriads, the astronomers turned their fancy to devising Groups or Constellations. But the moving 'stars', or planets, each with a motion and therefore will or influence of its own. As they knew and understood them, they were seven in number, viz.: (1) and (2) the moon and the sun, the two objects which most closely and indubitably influence the tides, the temperatures, and the life in our planet; (3) and (4) the two inner planets, Mercury and Venus, which are morning and evening stars, and never travel far from the sun; and (5), (6) and (7) Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, the outer planets whose elongations from the sun on the ecliptic can be as wide as possible. The number seven itself is a mystic number, as explained in n. 5526 to lxv. 12.
6. It will be noticed that the sun and the moon and the five planets got identified each with a living deity, god or goddess, with characteristics and qualities of its own…
7. Moon worship was equally popular in various forms. I have already referred to the classical legends of Apollo and Diana, twin brother and sister, representing the sun and the moon. The Egyptian Khonsu, traversing the sky in a boat, referred to the moon, and the moon legends also got mixed up with those about the god of magic, Thoth and the Ibis. In the Vedic religion of India the moon-god was Soma, the lord of the planets, and the name was also applied to the juice which was the drink of the gods. It may be noted that the moon was a male divinity in ancient India; it was also a male divinity in ancient Semitic religion, and the Arabic word for the moon (qamar) is of the masculine gender. On the other hand, the Arabic word for the sun (shams) is of the feminine gender. The pagan Arabs evidently looked upon the sun as a goddess and the moon as a god.
8. Of the five planets, perhaps Venus as the evening star and the morning star alternately impressed itself most on the imagination of astro-mythology. This planet was in different places considered both male and female… Mercury is a less conspicuous planet, and was looked upon as a child in the family, the father and mother being the moon and the sun, or the sun and the moon (according to the sex attributed to these divinities), or else either the sun or the moon was the father and Venus the mother (the sexes being inter-changeable in the myths)…
10. These cross-currents and mixtures of nature-worship, astral-worship, hero-worship, worship of abstract qualities, etc., resulted in a medley of debasing superstitions which are summed up in five names, Wadd, Suwa‘, Yaguth, Ya‘uq, and Nasr, as noted in paragraph 3 above… If Wadd and Suwa‘ represented Man and Woman, they might well represent the astral-worship of the moon and the sun… On the other hand, it is possible that the worship of Jupiter and Venus itself got mixed up with the worship of the sun-moon pair… Further, it may be that Nasr (the vulture, falcon, hawk, or eagle, the Egyptian Horus) also represents a solar myth, mixed up with the cult of the planets…
11. It may be noted that the five deities mentioned here to represent very ancient religious cults are well-chosen. They are not the names of the deities best known in Mecca, but rather those which survived as fragments of very ancient cults among the outlying tribes of Arabia, which were influenced by the cults of Mesopotamia (Noah’s country). The Pagan deities best known in the Kaba and round about Mecca were Lat, ‘Uzza, and Manat. (Manat was also known round Yathrib, which afterwards became Medina.) See liii. 19-20. They were all female goddesses. Lat almost certainly represents another wave of sun-worship; the sun being feminine in Arabic and in Semitic languages generally. "Lat" may be the original of the Greek "Leto", the mother of Apollos the sun-god (Encyclopedia of Islam, I, p. 380). If so, the name was brought in prehistoric times from South Arabia by the great Incense Route (n. 3816 to xxxiv. 18) to the Mediterranean. ‘Uzza probably represents the planet Venus. The origin of Manat is not quite clear, but it would not be surprising if it also turned to be astral. The 360 idols established by the Pagans probably represented the 360 days of an inaccurate solar year. This was the actual “modern” Pagan worship as known to the Quraysh contemporary with our Prophet… (Yusuf Ali, The Holy Qur’an: Text and Translation, Appendix XIII. Ancient Forms of Pagan Worship, pp. 1620-1622; bold emphasis ours)
If Ali is correct that the sun represented Allat, then wouldn’t this make it rather obvious that the moon must have symbolized Allah?
Now where did Ali derive the understanding that the number seven is a mystical number? Was it from the Holy Bible and the fact that God is said to have rested on the seventh day, thereby hallowing it (cf. Genesis 2:2-3)? Let us read fn. 5526 to find his answer:
"Seven Firmaments." The literal meaning refers to the seven orbits or firmaments that we see clearly marked in the motions of the heavenly bodies in the space around us... In poetical imagery there are the seven Planetary spheres, which form the lower heaven or heavens, with higher spheres culminating in the Empyrean or God's throne of Majesty... The mystical meaning refers to the various grades in the spiritual or heavenly kingdom, the number seven being itself a mystical symbol, comprising many and yet form an indivisible integer, the highest indivisible integer of one digit. (Ibid., p. 1567; bold emphasis ours)
Thus, the pagans at Mecca during Muhammad’s time worshiped the sun and the moon, along with the planets and stars. This explains why the Meccans ran around the kabah and between the hills of Safa and Marwa seven times, as well as throwing seven stones at Mina; they did this in veneration of these seven heavenly objects!
As one author stated:
According to al-Shahrastani, (d. 1153), an opinion prevalent among the Arabians was that the circumambulation of the Kaaba originally symbolized the motion of the planets (Rodwell, 1915, p. 455)… The number seven, one quarter of the number of days in a lunar month, is a lunar number. Herodotus mentions the use of the seven stones by the Arabs when taking solemn oaths. The historian Masudi (d. 956) records an old belief that the Kaaba was dedicated to seven heavenly bodies. In pre-Islamic times the Kaaba was to be circumambulated seven times, keeping the Kaaba on the left, the sinistral feminine side. The pilgrim had to run between the hills of Safa and Marwa seven times. Seven stones were thrown by each pilgrim at Mina, and so on. Some of these practices, as we have seen, have lasted to the present day. (Benjamin Walker, Foundations of Islam: The Making of a World Faith [Peter Owen Publishers, London & Chester Springs, 1998], pp. 46-47; bold emphasis ours)
The evidence further shows that moon worship was rather prevalent throughout Arabia. As Y. Ali had to acknowledge in explaining the Quran’s swearing by the moon:
“… The moon, next after the sun, is the most striking luminary to our sight. Its reflected light has for us even a greater mystery than the direct light of the sun, which looks to us like pure fire. The moon was worshipped as a deity in times of darkness.” (Ali, p. 1644, fn. 5798; bold emphasis ours)
In fact, scholars and historians alike admit that Arabs particularly loved and worshiped the moon, especially in South Arabia. One such noted historian of Arabic civilization is Philip K. Hitti, who wrote that,
“The religion of South Arabia was in its essence a planetary astral system in which the cult of the moon-god prevailed. The moon, known in Hadramawt as Sin, to the Minaeans as Wadd (love or lover, father), to the Sabaens as Almaqah (the health-giving god?) and to the Qatabanians as ‘Amm (paternal uncle), stood at the head of the pantheon. He was conceived as a masculine deity and took precedence over the sun, Shams, who was his consort. ‘Athar (Venus, corresponding to the Babylonian goddess Ishtar, Phoenician ‘Ashtart), their son, was the third member of the triad. From this celestial pair sprang the many other heavenly bodies considered divine. The North Arabian al-Lat, who figured in the Koran, may have been another name for the sun-goddess.” (Hitti, History of the Arabs from the Earliest Times to the Present, new preface by Walid Khalidi [Palgrave Macmillan, 2002; paperback, revised tenth edition], pp. 60-61; bold emphasis ours)
And:
“The Bedouin’s beliefs centered upon the moon in whose light he grazed his flocks. Moon-worship implies a pastoral society, whereas sun-worship represents a later agricultural stage. In our own day the Moslem Ruwalah Bedouins imagine that their life is regulated by the moon, which condenses the water vapours, distills the beneficent dew on the pasture and makes possible the growth of plants. On the other hand the sun, as they believe, would like to destroy the Bedouins as well as all animal and plant life.” (Ibid, pp. 97-98; bold emphasis ours)
Wendell K. Phillips concurs with Hitti:
“The moon was the chief deity of all the early South Arabian kingdoms - particularly fitting in that region where the soft light of the moon brought the rest and cool winds of the night as a relief from the blinding sun and scorching heat of day. In contrast to most of the old religions with which we are familiar, the Moon God is male, while the Sun God is his consort, a female. The third god of importance is their child, the male morning star, which we know as the planet Venus.” (Phillips, Qataban And Sheba: Exploring Ancient Kingdoms On The Biblical Spice Routes Of Arabia [Victor Gollancz Ltd.: London 1955], p. 69; bold emphasis ours)
And:
“The spice route riches brought them a standard of luxurious living inconceivable to the poverty-stricken South Arabian Bedouins of today. Like nearly all the Semitic peoples, they worshipped the moon, the sun, and the morning star. The CHIEF GOD, the moon, was a male deity symbolized by the bull, and we found many carved bull's heads, with drains for the blood of sacrificed animals.” (Ibid, p. 204; bold and capital emphasis ours)
In light of the foregoing, the questions that Muslim propagandists such as Zaatari need to answer are the following.
Since the pagan Arabs viewed the moon as the chief deity and/or the heavenly object associated with the supreme god, what word would they have used to denote this belief of theirs?
Specifically, doesn’t common sense tell us that these Arabs would have called the moon Allah seeing that this was the word which they used in reference to the god they thought was supreme over the rest?
In other words, since the moon was considered a deity, and/or the celestial body of a god, wouldn’t the pagans have called it ilah in Arabic? After all, this happens to be the generic word for god in the Arabic language, and it only makes sense that the pagans would have used this Arabic term in reference to the moon.
And wouldn’t we expect to find them referring to the moon as Allah as well, seeing that the pagans viewed it as the chief deity?
This, perhaps, explains why even scholarly sources admit that the moon was called ilah and Allah before Muhammad’s time.
For instance, here is what one professor wrote concerning the phrase ilah, from which Allah originates:
The god Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the Moon God, but early in Arabian history the name became a general term for god, and it was this name that the Hebrews used prominently in their personal names, such as Emanu-el, Israel, etc., rather than the Ba'al of the northern Semites proper, which was the Sun. Similarly, under Mohammed's tutelage, the relatively anonymous Ilah BECAME Al-Ilah, The God, or Allah, the Supreme Being. (C. S. Coon, "Southern Arabia, A Problem For The Future", Papers Of The Peabody Museum Of American Archaeology And Ethnology, 1943, Volume 20, p. 195; capital and underline emphasis ours)
Another source says:
Allah. Islamic name for God. Is derived from Semitic El, and originally applied to the moon; he seems to have been preceded by Ilmaqah, the moon god. ("Allah" in E. Sykes, Everyman's Dictionary Of Non-Classical Mythology [J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., London, E. P. Dutton & Co. Inc., New York, 1961] p. 7; underline emphasis ours)
This makes perfect sense. After all, how could the pagans not have addressed the moon as Allah when they took it to be the representation of their supreme deity?

The Hubal Connection
There is additional evidence connecting the pre-Islamic Allah with the moon. According to the scholarly sources, the chief god worshiped at Mecca was Hubal, whom many authorities claim was the moon god.
Hubal Chief god of the Ka 'ba; a martial and oracular deity; a moon god. (Gods, Goddesses and Mythology, ed. C. Scott Littleton [Marshal Cavendish Corporation 2005], Volume 11, p. 137)
Hubal – an idol, the God of the Moon. Centuries before Islam, ‘Amr ibn Luhayy, a chief of the tribe of Jurhum who dwelt in Mecca before the coming of the Quraysh tribe, brought the idol to the city from Syria. It was set up in the Ka‘bah and became the principal idol of the pagan Meccans. The ritual casting of lots and divining arrows was performed in front of it.
Hubal was pulled down and used as a doorstep when the Prophet conquered Mecca and purified the Ka‘bah. See IDOLS: JAHILIYYAH (Cyril Glasse, The New Encyclopedia of Islam, Third Edition [Stacey International, 2008], p. 209; underline emphasis ours)
Of the 360 idols set up in the Ka‘bah, the most important was Hubal, the god of the moon. Upon the conquest of Mecca the Prophet cut open some of the these idols with a sword and black smoke is said to have issued forth from them, a sign of the psychic influences which had made these idols their dwelling place The Prophet turned the idol of Hubal into a doorstep. (Ibid., p. 235; underline emphasis ours)
al-‘Uzza. One of the more important idols of the pagan Arabs, closely associated with al-Lat and al-Manat. All three were considered to be females. It is known that human sacrifice had been made to them on occasion. The other principal idol of the Meccans was Hubal, god of the Moon. See IDOLS (Ibid., p. 543; underline emphasis ours)
Hubal A pre-Islamic deity represented by an idol in Kaaba that was destroyed by Muhammad when he conquered Mecca in 630. Patron of the Quraysh, leading tribe of Mecca. (The Oxford Dictionary of Islam [Oxford University Press, 2003], p. 117; underlined emphasis ours)
“The sira literature presents Mecca's cult as a pagan one to the god Hubal, and depicts the Arabian religious environment in which Muhammad grew up as overwhelmingly pagan – the final vestiges of the ancient near eastern religious tradition...” (The Cambridge Companion to the Qur’an, ed. Jane Dammen McAuliffe [Cambridge University Press, 2006], p. 24; bold emphasis ours)
“Among the many deities that the Arabs worshiped in and around the Ka‘bah were the god Hubal and the three goddesses Al-Lat, al- 'Uzza, and Manat. Hubal was originally a moon god, and perhaps also a rain god, as hubal means ‘vapor.’ …” (Mahmoud M. Ayoub, Islam: Faith and History [Oneworld Publications Ltd., 2005)], p. 15; bold emphasis outs)
"Khuza 'ah thus shared the guilt of Jurhum. They were also to blame in other respects: a chieftain of theirs, on his way back from a journey to Syria, had asked the Moabites to give him one of their idols. They gave him Hubal, which he brought back to the Sanctuary, setting it up within the Ka'bah itself; and it became THE CHIEF IDOL OF MECCA." (Martin Lings, Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources [Inner Traditions International, LTD. One Park Street, Rochestor Vermont 05767, 1983], p. 5; bold and capital emphasis ours)
“The Quraysh were wont to venerate her above all other idols. For this reason Zayd ibn-'Amr ibn-Nufayl, who, during the Jahilyah days, had turned to the worship of God and renounced that of al-'Uzza and of the other idols, said:
‘I have renounced both Allat and al-'Uzza,
For thus would the brave and the robust do.
No more do I worship al-'Uzza and her two daughters,
Or visit the two idols of the banu-Ghanm;
Nor do I journey to Hubal and adore it,
ALTHOUGH IT WAS OUR LORD WHEN I WAS YOUNG.’…
“The Quraysh had also several idols in and around the Ka'bah. The greatest of these was Hubal. It was, as I was told, of red agate, in the form of a man with the right hand broken off. It came into the possession of the Quraysh in this condition, and they, therefore, made for it a hand of gold. The first to set it up [for worship] was Khuzaymah ibn-Mudrikah ibn-al-Ya's' ibn-Mudar. Consequently it used to be called Khuzaymah's Hubal.
“It stood inside the Ka'bah. In front of it were seven divination arrows (sing. qidh, pl. qidah or aqduh). On one of these arrows was written ‘pure’ (sarih), and on another ‘consociated alien’ (mulsag). Whenever the lineage of a new-born was doubted, they would offer a sacrifice to it [Hubal] and then shuffle the arrows and throw them. If the arrows showed the word ‘pure,’ the child would be declared legitimate and the tribe would accept him. If, however, the arrows showed the words ‘consociated alien,’ the child would be declared illegitimate and the tribe would reject him. The third arrow was for divination concerning the dead, while the fourth was for divination concerning marriage. The purpose of the three remaining arrows has not been explained. Whenever they disagreed concerning something, or purposed to embark upon a journey, or undertake some project, they would proceed to it [Hubal] and shuffle the divination arrows before it. Whatever result they obtained they would follow and do accordingly.
“It was before [Hubal] that 'Abd-al-Muttalib shuffled the divination arrows [in order to find out which of his ten children he should sacrifice in fulfilment of a vow he had sworn], and the arrows pointed to his son 'Abdullah, the father of the Prophet. Hubal was also the same idol which abu-Sufyan ibn-Harb addressed when he emerged victorious after the battle of Uhud, saying:
‘Hubal, be thou exalted’ (i.e. may thy religion triumph);
“To which the Prophet replied:
‘Allah is more exalted and more majestic.’”
(Hisham Ibn al-Kalbi, The Book of Idols (Kitab Al-Asnam), Translated with Introduction and Notes by Nabih Amin Faris, pp. 19, 23-24)
Not only was Hubal considered the chief Meccan deity he was also identified as the lord and god of the kabah. Even the black stone of the kabah, which Muslims venerate till this day, was associated with Hubal:
“… The great god of Mecca was Hubal, an idol of carnelian.” (Maxime Rodinson, Muhammad [New Press, NY, May 2000 ISBN: 1565847520], p. 16; bold emphasis ours)
“… The Ka'ba which may have initially been a shrine of Hubal alone, housed several idols…” (Ibid., p. 40; bold emphasis ours)
“… The presiding deity was Hubal, a large carnelian kept inside the temple; 360 other idols were arranged outside…” (Malise Ruthven, Islam in the World [Oxford University Press, Second edition 2000], p. 15; bold emphasis ours)
“… Although originally under the aegis of the pagan god Hubal, the Makkan haram which centered around the well of Zamzam, may have become associated with the ancestral figures of Ibrahim and Isma'il as the Arab traders, shedding their parochial backgrounds sought to locate themselves within the broader reference-frame of Judeo-Christianity.” (Ibid., p. 17)
“… the god of Makka, Hubal, represented by a statue of red carnelian, is thought to have been originally a totem of the Khuza'a, rulers of Makka before their displacement by the Quraysh…” (Ibid. p. 28; bold emphasis ours)
“… At the time of Muhammad, the Ka'abah was OFFICIALLY DEDICATED to the god Hubal, a deity who had been imported into Arabia from the Nabateans in what is now Jordan. But the pre-eminence of the shrine as well as the common belief in Mecca seems to suggest that it may have been dedicated originally to al-Llah, the High God of the Arabs…” (Karen Armstrong, Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet [Harper San Francisco; ISBN: 0062508865; Reprint edition, October 1993], pp. 61-62; bold and capital emphasis ours)
“… Legend had it that Qusayy had travelled in Syria and brought the three goddesses al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat to the Hijaz and enthroned the Nabatean god Hubal in the Ka'abah…” (Ibid., p. 66; bold emphasis ours)
“… At the center of the town was the shrine called the Ka‘ba – a large, cubical building with a sacred black stone affixed in one corner – that was the sanctuary to the pagan god Hubal…” (Fred McGraw Donner, Muhammad And The Believers: At The Origins Of Islam [Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2010], 1. The Near East on the Eve of Islam, p. 35; bold emphasis ours)
“… In the Ka‘ba was the statue of the god Hubal who might be called the god of Mecca and of the Ka 'ba. Caetani gives great prominence to the connection between the Ka‘ba and Hubal. Besides him, however, al-Lat, al-‘Uzza, and al-Manat were worshipped and are mentioned in the Kur’an; Hubal is never mentioned there. What position Allah held beside these is not exactly known. The Islamic tradition has certainly elevated him at the expense of other deities.” (M. Th. Houtsma, E. J. Brill’s First Encyclopedia of Islam 1913-1936, Volume IV, p. 591; bold emphasis ours)
“… The question might even be asked whether and how far the Ka‘ba was regarded as an astral symbol. For the affirmative there is the fact that the Ka‘ba is the object of the tawaf and that tawaf and Kab‘a are represented by Muslim tradition itself as connected with the host of spirits round the throne of God. The throne of God is, as is well known, a cosmic magnitude, and the Ka‘ba and the Black Stone are described as the throne of God's khalifa on earth, Adam. The dance of the heavenly spirits can easily be interpreted as a dance of the planets. Moreover, golden suns and moons are repeatedly mentioned among the votive gifts (al-Azraki, p. 155 sqq.). According to al-Mas 'udi (Murudj, iv. 47), certain people regarded the Ka‘ba as a temple devoted to the sun, the moon and the five planets. The 360 idols placed round the Ka‘ba also point in this direction. It can therefore hardly be denied that traces exist of astral symbolism. At the same time one can safely say that there can be no question of any general conception on these lines. The cult at the Ka‘ba was in the heathen period syncretic as is usual in heathenism. How far also North Semitic cults were represented in Mecca cannot be exactly ascertained. It is not excluded that Allah was of Aramaic origin. The dove of aloe wood which Muhammad found existing in the Ka‘ba may have been devoted to the Semitic Venus.” (Ibid.; bold emphasis ours)
“… Before Muhammad appeared, the Kaaba was surrounded by 360 idols, and every Arab house had its god. Arabs also believed in jinn (subtle beings), and some vague divinity with many offspring. Among the major deities of the pre-Islamic era were al-Lat (‘the Goddess’), worshiped in the shape of a square stone; al-Uzza (‘the Mighty’), a goddess identified with the morning star and worshiped as a thigh-bone shaped slab of granite between al-Taif and Mecca; Manat, the goddess of destiny, worshiped as a black stone on the road between Mecca and Medina; and the moon god, Hubal, whose worship was connected with the Black Stone of the Kaaba.” (Peter Occhiogrosso, The Joy Of Sects: A Spirited Guide To The World's Religious Traditions [An Image Book published by DoubleDay, 1996], p. 399; underline emphasis ours)
Many scholars are also of the opinion that Hubal was simply the Arabic equivalent of the false god Baal:
“The Kaaba itself, which was the sanctuary of the Pagan Arabs, and remained such after they had embraced Islam, is a building about thirty-four feet high and about twenty-seven broad, so called from being almost a perfect square, as the name implies. In this building we find no less than 360 idols; a chief of them, Hubal, was at once the presiding god in the temple and the principal deity of the Koreishites, who were its guardians. The pre-eminence of this idol was evinced by the fact, that before it, the casting of lots with arrows took place. Prior, however, to its obtaining this honour, it passed through a term of probation, for we learn upon good authority, that for a considerable period it stood outside the walls of the Kaaba, patiently waiting for its admission. It was probably introduced when the sanctuary of the Koreish tribe was converted into the Pantheon of the whole of Arabia. The name of Hubal remains a mystery. The opinion that it is synonymous with the Babylonian and Syrian Baal or Bel is supported by the testimony of Arab authorities, according to whom Hubal was originally imported from Syria. These writers do not indeed maintain that Hubal was identical with Baal, but they admit Hubal to be an astronomical deity.
“Again, when it is stated by Abulfeda that the image of Abraham occupied the chief in the Kaaba, and that he was represented by Hubal, we may take it for granted that Hubal had a double character, like Baal, who was both the founder of the Babylonian empire and the solar deity…” (John Muehleisen Arnold, Islam: Its History, Character, and Relation to Christianity, Chapter I. The Land Of Its Birth, The Pre-Islamite Kaaba, pp. 26-27; bold emphasis ours)
And:
“As well as worshipping idols and spirits, found in animals, plants, rocks and water, the ancient Arabs believed in several major gods and goddesses whom they considered to hold supreme power over all things. The most famous of these were Al-lat, Al-‘Uzza, Manat and Hubal. The first three were thought to be the daughters of Allah (God) and their intercessions on behalf of their worshippers were therefore of great significance…
“Al-lat, also known as Alilat, was worshiped in the shape of a square white stone. She was know to other Semitic people in Syria and Mesopotamia, and was the Mother Goddess of Palmyra (in northern Syria), whose symbol was the lion. The Nabataeans of south Jordan and south Palestine worshiped her as the sun goddess, the giver of life. In Mecca, Al-lat had a haram (sanctuary) and a hima where the Arabs flocked to perform the rites of worship and sacrifice which would bring her favour upon them.
“Al-‘Uzza was worshiped in the form of three palm trees, a stone and an idol. She was the supreme deity of the tribe of Quraysh, the rulers of Mecca immediately before Islam. She had a temple and a hima there and was offered gifts in gold and silver and adorned with jewellery. Her name means ‘the most cherished’ but she was a cruel goddess who could be appeased only by the shedding of blood, both human and animal. Like Al-lat, al-‘Uzza was associated with the goddess of love, al-Zuhara, but was more closely linked with Al-lat. The two were often worshipped together and sometimes formed a trinity with Manat or the god Hubal. Replicas of them were carried by the clans of Quraysh when they went to war to inspire the fighters with courage and devotion…
“Hubal was associated with the Semitic god Ba‘l and with Adonis or Tammuz, the gods of spring, fertility, agriculture and plenty… Hubal’s idol used to stand by the holy well inside the Sacred House…” (Fabled Cities, Princes & Jinn From Arab Myths and Legends, text by Khairet al-Saleh, illustrations by Rashad N. Salim [Schocken Books, New York 1985], p. 28; bold emphasis ours)
Finally:
“In addition to the sun, moon and the star Al-Zuhara, the Arabs worshipped the planets Saturn, Mercury, and Jupiter, the stars Sirius and Canopies and the constellations of Orion, Ursa Major and Minor, and the seven Pleiades.
“Some stars and planets were given human characters. According to legend, Al-Dabaran, one of the stars in the Hyades group, fell deeply in love with Al-Thurayya, the fairest of the Pleiades stars. With the approval of the Moon, he asked for her hand in marriage. Al-Thurayya objected, saying coquettishly, ‘What would I do with a fellow like that, with no money?’” (Ibid., pp. 29-30; bold emphasis ours)
Since Hubal was identified with the moon, this means that al-Dabaran had received Hubal’s approval to go ahead with the marriage proposal. This indicates the kind of status accorded to Hubal by the pagan Arabs.
Now these facts present a major problem for taqiyyists such as Zaatari, as we shall see in the next part of our rebuttal.
(Endnote: Muslims may object to the identification of Hubal with Baal on the grounds that in some of the above quotations Baal is said to have been the sun god. This objection misses the point since it is to be expected that the word Baal would be used in reference to the particular celestial body which symbolized the prominent male deity in any given patriarchal culture. It, therefore, shouldn’t surprise us that Baal would be identified with the sun in those cultures which viewed this celestial body as a male figure. However, we would not expect the Arabs to associate Baal with the sun, which to them was a female deity. The Arabs would have associated the moon with Baal/Hubal, which they took to be the male god.)

We resume our discussion concerning the identity of the pre-Islamic Allah worshiped by the pagans at Mecca.
The Problems Posed by the Islamic sources
As we saw in the previous section, evidence exists to show that the chief god of the Meccans, especially of Muhammad’s Quraysh tribe, was actually Hubal. The data we presented also indicates that the pagans took Hubal as the lord of the kabah, since they viewed this to be his very own sanctuary.
Now this creates problems for the Muslim assertion that Allah was the presiding deity of Mecca and that the kabah was actually his shrine.
The practice of the polytheists who were of a patriarchal bent was to build a sanctuary around a single male deity, specifically the one they viewed as the chief or greatest of all the gods. There is absolutely no example of a pre-Islamic shrine, whether a stone or building, built for two male deities at the same time. Rather, all the evidence shows that the houses that the polytheists built accommodated only one male deity along with his female consort.
This means that if, as Muslims believe, Allah and Hubal were two separate deities then they could not both be the chief god of Mecca and the lord of the kabah at the same time. After all, if the pagans did believe that Allah was the supreme god of their pantheon, as well as the god of the kabah, then they would not have forced him to share his shrine with another male deity.
Therefore, it seems reasonably certain that the pagans identified Hubal as Allah, which explains why the Islamic literature associates the Meccan shrine with both.
The following citations from Philip K. Hitti puts this all together quite nicely:
Hubal (from Aram. For vapour, spirit), evidently the chief deity of al-ka'bah, was represented in human form. Beside him stood ritual arrows used for divination by the soothsayers (kahin, from Aramaic) who drew lots by means of them. The tradition in ibn-Hisham, which makes 'Amr ibn-Luhayy the importer of this idol from Moab or Mesopotamia, may have a kernel of truth in so far as it retains a memory of the Aramaic origin of the deity. (History of the Arabs from the Earliest Times to the Present, revised tenth edition, new preface by Walid Khalidi [Palgrave Macmillan, 2002; ISBN: 0-333-63142-0 paperback], p. 100; bold emphasis ours)
And:
Allah (allah, al-ilah, the god) was the principal, though not the only, deity of Makkah. The name is an ancient one. It occurs in two South Arabic inscriptions, one a Minean found at al-'Ula and the other Sabean, but abounds in the form HLH in the Lihyanite inscriptions of the fifth century B.C. Lihyan, which evidently got the god from Syria, was the first center of the worship of this deity in Arabia. The name occurs as Hallah in the Safa inscriptions five centuries before Islam and also in a pre-Islamic Christian Arabic inscription found in umm-al-Jimal, Syria, and ascribed to the sixth century. The name of Muhammad's father was 'Abd-Allah ('Abdullah, the slave or worshiper of Allah). The esteem in which Allah was held by the pre-Islamic Makkans as the creator and supreme provider and the one to be invoked in time of special peril may be inferred from such koranic passages as 31:24, 31; 6:137, 109; 10:23. Evidently he was the tribal deity of the Quraysh. (Ibid., pp. 100-101; bold emphasis ours)
If Hitti is correct regarding Allah being the Quraysh’s tribal deity (and Muslims would agree that he was) then this provides additional proof that Allah was a name for Hubal. Note the following syllogism:

Hubal was the chief deity of the Quraysh.

Allah was the chief deity of the Quraysh.

Therefore, Hubal was Allah in pre-Islamic times.

This explains why many scholars believe that the Meccans used the titles Hubal and Allah interchangeably in respect to the same deity:
“Verse 3 looks rather simple: So let them worship the lord of this House. The lord is evidently Allah, whereas the House is evidently the Kaba. But the fact that Allah should be referred to as the lord of the Kaba and not merely as Allah must have a special significance, which has to be clarified. It seems that the Quran deliberately mentions the House in order to allude to the origin of the position of Quraysh as ahl al-haram. For, it was the Kaba from which Quraysh derived their prestige among the Arabs. That the Ka'ba was the origin of the sacred position of Quraysh was, of course, well known to them. Moreover, it seems that already in pre-Islamic times, Quraysh attributed their sacred position to the benevolence of the deity of the Kaba, to whom they used to refer as Hubal and whose statue was situated inside the Kaba. The pre-Islamic talbiya of those who worshipped Hubal, i.e., Quraysh, read:
labbayka llahumma labbayka, innana laqah
harramtana 'ala asinnati l-rimah
yahsuduna l-nasu 'ala l-najah
Labbayka, Oh, Lord, labbayka, we are immune,
You have protected us from the edges of the lances,
People envy us for our success.
“From the Quranic point of view, the deity of the Ka'ba is, of course, Allah who was worshipped by the pre-Islamic Arabs as the High God, and the Ka'ba itself was known as baytu llahi, so that the titles Hubal and Allah may be regarded as interchangeable. Whatever the case may be, Quraysh are summoned in our sura to draw the inevitable conclusion from their own awareness of the fact that their protection and immunity had come from the deity of the Ka'ba. The conclusion is that they must turn this deity into their sole object of veneration. This means that they must give up shirk, i.e., abandon the worship of the lesser idols which were attached to the High God. The statues of these idols were placed next to the Ka'ba (but never inside), so that Quraysh are actually required to devote themselves exclusively to the worship of the rabb of the Ka'ba itself, the one and only origin of their immunity, welfare and prosperity. As Muqatil puts it: akhlisal-'ibadata lahu… –dedicate your worship exclusively to him. (Uri Rubin, The Ilaf of Quraysh: A Study of sura CVI, Source: Arabica, T. 31, Fasc. 2 (Jul., 1984), pp. 165-188; bold emphasis ours)
And:
“We have evidence that black stones were worshiped in various parts of the Arab world; for example, Clement of Alexandria, writing ca. 190, mentioned that ‘the Arabs worship stone,’ alluding to the black stone of Dusares at Petra. Maximus Tyrius writing in the second century says, ‘The Arabians pay homage to I know not what god, which they represent by a quadrangular stone’: he alludes to the Kaaba that contains the Black Stone. Its great antiquity is also attested by the fact that ancient Persians claim that Mahabad and his successors left the Black Stone in the Kaaba, along with relics and images, and the stone was an emblem of Saturn…
“The Black Stone itself is evidently a meteorite and undoubtedly owes its reputation to the fact it fell from the ‘heavens.’ It is doubly ironic that Muslims venerate this piece of rock as that given to Ishmael by the angel Gabriel to build the Kaaba, as it is, to quote Margoliouth, ‘of doubtful genuineness, since the Black Stone was removed by the ... Qarmatians in the fourth [Muslim] century, and restored by them after many years; it may be doubted whether the stone which they returned was the same stone which they removed.’
“Hubal was worshipped at Mecca, and his idol in red cornelian was erected inside the Kaaba, above the dry well into which one threw votive offerings. It is very probable that Hubal had a human form. Hubal's position next to the Black Stone suggests there is some connection between the two. Wellhausen thinks that Hubal originally was the Black Stone that, as we have already remarked, is more ancient than the idol. Wellhausen also points out that God is called Lord of the Kaaba, and Lord of the territory of Mecca in the Koran. The Prophet rallied against the homage rendered at the Kaaba to the goddesses al-Lat, Manat, and al-Uzza, whom the pagan Arabs called the daughters of God, but Muhammad stopped short of attacking the cult of Hubal. From this Wellhausen concludes that Hubal is no other than Allah, the ‘god’ of the Meccans. When the Meccans defeated the Prophet near Medina, their leader is said to have shouted, ‘Hurrah for Hubal.’
“Circumambulation of a sanctuary was a very common rite practiced in many localities. The pilgrim during his circuit frequently kissed or caressed the idol. Sir William Muir thinks that the seven circuits of the Kaaba "were probably emblematical of the revolutions of the planetary bodies.’ While Zwemer goes so far as to suggest that the seven circuits of the Kaaba, three times rapidly and four times slowly were ‘in imitation of the inner and outer planets.’
“It is unquestionable that the Arabs ‘at a comparatively late period worshiped the sun and other heavenly bodies.’ The constellation of the Pleiades, which was supposed to bestow rain, appears as a deity. There was the cult of the planet Venus which was revered as a great goddess under the name of al-Uzza.
“We know from the frequency of theophorus names that the sun (Shams) was worshiped. Shams was the titular goddess of several tribes honored with a sanctuary and an idol. Snouck Hurgronje sees a solar rite in the ceremony of ‘wukut’…
“The goddess al-Lat is also sometimes identified with the solar divinity. The god Dharrih was probably the rising sun. The Muslim rites of running between Arafat and Muzdalifah, and Muzdalifah and Mina had to be accomplished after sunset and before sunrise. This was the deliberate change introduced by Muhammad to suppress this association with the pagan solar rite, whose significance we shall examine later. The worship of the moon is also attested to by proper names of people such as Hilal, a crescent, Qamar, a moon, and so on.
“Houtsma has suggested that the stoning that took place in Mina was originally directed at the sun demon. This view is lent plausibility by the fact that the pagan pilgrimage originally coincided with the autumnal equinox. The sun demon is expelled, and his harsh rule comes to an end with the summer, which is followed by the worship, at Muzdalifah, of the thunder god who brings fertility…
“Islam owes the term ‘Allah’ to the heathen Arabs. We have evidence that it entered into numerous personal names in Northern Arabia and among the Nabatians. It occurs among the Arabs of later times, in theophorus names and on its own. Wellhausen also cites pre-Islamic literature where Allah is mentioned as a great deity. We also have the testimony of the Koran itself where He is recognized as a giver of rain, a creator, and so on; the Meccans only crime was to worship other gods beside Him. EVENTUALLY Allah was only applied to the Supreme Deity. ‘In any case it is an extremely important fact that Muhammad did not find it necessary to introduce an altogether novel deity, but contented himself with ridding the HEATHEN Allah of his companions subjecting him to a kind of dogmatic purification… Had he not been accustomed from his youth to the idea of Allah as the Supreme God, in particular of Mecca, it may well be doubted whether he would ever have come forward as the preacher of Monotheism.’” (Ibn Warraq, Why I Am Not A Muslim [Prometheus Books, Amherst NY, 1995], pp. 39-40, 42; bold and capital emphasis ours)
This further implies that the Islamic sources couldn’t simply get rid of the notion of the kabah belonging to Hubal, or erase the fact that he was the chief deity of the Meccans, since this part of their history was still embedded within the recollections of the Arabs. What they tried to do was disassociate the Muslim deity from Hubal.
However, in separating Hubal from Allah, Muhammad and his followers created major problems for their position, namely, the Meccan shrine accommodating two separate gods.
Renowned Islamicist Patricia Crone notices these problems in her book:
“Third, what deity did Quraysh represent? The Meccan shrine accommodated Hubal, and there are supposed to have been several minor divinities in its vicinity, their number becoming prodigious in some sources. But as has just been seen, Quraysh do not appear to have been guardians of Hubal, and it evidently was not idols such as Isaf and Na’ila that provided their raison d’etre. Who, then?…” (Patricia Crone, Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam [Gorgias Press LLC, 2004], p. 189; bold emphasis ours)
And:
“The tradition clearly envisages them as guardians on behalf of Allah, the God of Abraham, and the future God of Islam…” (Ibid., p. 190)
Crone then raises some interesting questions:
"... But if Quraysh saw themselves as guardians on behalf of Abraham's God, all the while acknowledging the existence of other deities, their reaction to Muhammad becomes exceedingly hard to understand. When Muhammad attacked polytheism, Quraysh reacted with a vigorous defence of Allat, Manat, al-‘Uzza, and to some extent even Hubal, invoking them in battle against Muhammad and demanding belief in them from the converts whom they tried to make recant. In other words, they reacted by mobilizing all the deities in whom they had no vested interest against the very God they were supposed to represent. If they owed their superior position in Arabia to their association with Abraham's God, why was it the pagan deities they chose to defend? And if Abraham's God was the God of their fathers, why was it the pagan gods they chose to describe as ancestral? The tradition clearly has a problem on its hands in that it wishes to describe Quraysh as monotheists and polytheists alike: on the one hand they were repositories of the aboriginal monotheism that Muhammad was to revive; and on the other hand they were polytheist zealots against whom Muhammad had to fight. They cannot have been both in historical fact. If we accept that they resisted Muhammad more or less as described, the claim that they represented the God of Abraham MUST BE DISMISSED.” (Ibid., pp. 191-192; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Crone also brings up a few interesting points which militate against Allah and Hubal both sharing the same house if in fact they were separate deities, which is the Muslim contention.
“This does not, of course, rule out the possibility that they represented an indigenous deity known as Allah, and it is as guardians of such a deity that they are generally envisaged in the secondary literature. But this hypothesis is also problematic.
“Admittedly, up to a point it makes good sense. Allah is associated with a black stone, and some traditions hold that originally this stone was sacrificial. This suggests that it was the stone rather than the building around it which was bayt allah, the house of god, and this gives us a perfect parallel with the Old Testament bethel. The cult of the Arab god Dusares (Dhu Shara) also seems to have centered on a black sacrificial stone. According to Epiphanius, he was worshipped together with his mother, the virginal Kaabou, or in other words ka‘ib or ka‘ab, a girl with swelling breasts. A similar arrangement is met in Nabataean inscription from Petra that speaks of sacrificial stones (nysb’ = ansab) belonging to the ‘lord of this house’ (mr’ byt) and al-‘Uzza, another ka‘ib lady. If we assume that bayt and ka‘ba alike originally referred to the Meccan stone rather than the building around it, then the lord of the house WAS A PAGAN ALLAH worshipped in conjunction with a female consort such as al-‘Uzza and/or other ‘daughters of God.’ This would give us a genuinely pagan deity for Quraysh and at the same time explain their devotion to goddesses.
“But if Quraysh represented Allah, what was Hubal doing in their shrine? Indeed, what was the building doing? No sacrifices can be made over a stone immured in a wall, and a building accommodating Hubal makes no sense around a stone representing Allah. Naturally Quraysh were polytheists, but the deities of polytheist Arabia preferred to be housed separately. No pre-Islamic sanctuary, be it stone or building, is known to have accommodated more than one male god, as opposed to one male god and female consort. The Allah who is attested in an inscription of the late second century A.D., certainly was not forced to share his house with other deities. And the shrines of Islamic Arabia are similarly formed around the tomb of a single saint. If Allah was a pagan god like any other, Quraysh would not have allowed Hubal to share the sanctuary with him–not because they were proto-monotheists, but precisely because they were pagans.
“One would thus have to fall back on the view that Allah was not a god like any other. On the one hand, Allah might simply be another name for Hubal, as Wellhausen suggested: just as the Israelites knew Yahwe as Elohim, so the Arabs knew Hubal as Allah, meaning simply as ‘God.’ It would follow that the guardians of Hubal and Allah were identical; and since Quraysh were not guardians of Hubal, they would not be guardians of Allah, either. But as Wellhausen himself noted, Allah had long ceased to be a label that could be applied to any deity. Allah was the personal name of a specific deity, on a par with Allat, not merely a noun meaning ‘god’; and in the second century this deity had guardians of his own. When ‘Abd al-Muttalib is described as having prayed to Allah while consulting Hubal's arrows, it is simply that the sources baulk at depicting the Prophet's grandfather as a genuine pagan, not that Allah and Hubal were alternative names for the same god. If Hubal and Allah had been one and the same deity, Hubal ought to have survived as an epithet of Allah, which he did not. And moreover, there would not have been traditions in which people are asked to renounce the one for the other.” (Ibid., pp. 191-194; bold emphasis ours)
And:
“On the other hand, Allah might have been a high God over and above all other deities. This is, in fact, how Wellhausen saw him, and he has been similarly represented by Watt. It is not how he appears in the inscriptional material, in which he is very much the god of a particular people; and the fact that he was known as Allah, ‘the god,’ is no indication of supremacy: Allat, ‘the goddess,’ was not a deity over and above al-‘Uzza or Manat. But he could, of course, have developed into such a god, as the Qur’anic evidence adduced by Wellhausen and Watt suggests. If we accept this view, however, we are up against the problem that he is unlikely to have had guardians of his own in this capacity. Viewed as a high god, Allah was too universal, too neutral, and too impartial to be the object of a particular cult, as Wellhausen noted; no sanctuary was devoted to him except insofar as he had come to be identified with ordinary deities. A high god in Arabia was apparently one who neither needed nor benefitted from cultic links with a specific group of devotees. (Wellhausen may of course be wrong: maybe a high god in Arabia did benefit from such links. But if so, we are back at the problem of why Allah was made to share these links with Hubal).
“If Quraysh were guardians on behalf of an Allah above all other deities, they must thus have started as guardians of someone else. But as has been seen, they do not appear to have been guardians of Hubal, and Hubal was not identified with Allah, nor did his cult assist that of Allah in any way. And if we postulate that they started as guardians of an ordinary Allah who subsequently developed into a supreme deity, we reinstate the problem of Hubal's presence in his shrine. The fact is that the Hubal-Allah sanctuary of Mecca is an oddity; can such a shrine have existed in historical fact? There would seem to be at least two sanctuaries behind the one depicted in the tradition, and Quraysh do not come across as guardians of either.” (Ibid., pp. 194-195; bold emphasis ours)

A Proposed Solution
There is a solution to all of this, one which Muslims may not like. The way to solve this dilemma is to admit the fact that the Arabs initially viewed the word Allah as a generic term which could be used for any deity who was believed to be the greatest.
Scholars pretty much agree that Allah was a name used by different Arab pagans for one of their local deities, specifically the chief or high god. They further recognize that Muhammad took the pagan Allah worshiped by his particular tribe and transformed him into the one true God worshiped by all monotheists, so that he ended up divorcing his god from any similarly named pagan deity. Muhammad (more precisely, the unclean spirit which inspired him) did this so as to get the Jews and Christians to join his religion as well:
“… The name used for God was 'Allah', which was already in use for one of the local gods (it is now also used by Arabic-speaking Jews and Christians as the name of God)…” (Albert Hourani, A History of Arab Peoples [Warner Books Edition, paperback 1992], p. 16; bold emphasis ours)
“Historical evidence indicates that Allah was the name of an ancient Arabian high god in a pantheon of other gods and goddesses like those found in other ancient Middle Eastern cultures…” (Juan E. Campo, Encyclopedia of Islam [Facts On File Inc., 2009], p. 34; bold emphasis ours)
“ALLAH is a proper name among Muslims, corresponding in usage to Jehovah (Jahweh) among the Hebrews. Thus, it is not be regarded as a common name meaning “God” (or a “god”), and the Muslim must use another word or form if he wishes to indicate any other than his own peculiar deity. The source of this goes back to pre-Muslim times….
“The origin of this goes back to pre-Muslim times as Prof. Noldeke has shown… Muhammad found the Meccans believing in a supreme god whom they called Allah, thus already contracted. With Allah, however, they associated minor deities, some evidently tribal, others called daughters of Allah. MUHAMMAD'S REFORM WAS TO ASSERT THE SOLITARY EXISTENCE OF ALLAH. The first article of the Muslim creed, therefore–La ilaha illa-llahu,–means, only as addresses by him to the Meccans, ‘There exist no god except the one whom you already call ALLAH.

“Naturally, this precise historical origin is not clear to the Muslim exegetes and theologians. But that Allah is a proper name, applicable only to their peculiar God, they are certain, and they mostly recognize that its force as a proper name has arisen through contraction in form and limitation in usage.” (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, edited by James Hastings, M.A., D.D., with the assistance of John A. Selbie, M.A., D.D., and other scholars [Charles Scribner's Sons, New York; T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1908], Volume I. A-Art, p. 326; bold and capital emphasis ours)
“8 HUBAL.–Hubal was worshiped at Mecca; his idol stood in the Ka'ba, and he appears to have been, in reality, the god of the sanctuary. It is therefore particularly unfortunate that we have so little information respecting him. Wellhausen has plausibly suggested that Hubal is no other than Allah, 'the god' of the Meccans…
“In the Nabataean inscriptions we repeatedly find the name of a deity accompanied by the title Alaha, ‘the god.’ Hence Wellhausen argues that the Arabs of a later age may also have applied the epithet Allah, 'the god,' to a number of different deities, and that in this manner Allah, from being a mere appendage to the name of a great god, may gradually have become the proper name of the Supreme God. In any case it is an extremely important fact that Muhammad did not find it necessary to introduce an altogether novel deity, but contented himself with ridding the heathen Allah of all his ‘companions,’ subjecting him to a kind of dogmatic purification and defining him in a somewhat clearer manner. Had he not been accustomed from his youth to the idea of Allah as the Supreme God, in particular of Mecca, it may well be doubted whether he would ever have come forward as the preacher of Monotheism.” (Ibid., pp. 663-664; bold emphasis ours)
“Allah was known to the pre-Islamic Arabs; he was one of the Meccan deities, possibly the supreme deity and certainly a creator-god (cf. Kur’an, xiii, 16; xxix, 61, 63; xxix, 38; xliii, 87). He was already known, by antonomasia, as the God, al-Ilah (the most likely etymology; another suggestion is the Aramaic Alaha).–For Allah before Islam as shown by archaeological sources and the Kur’an, see ILAH.
“But the vague notion of supreme (not sole) divinity, which Allah seems to have connoted in Meccan religion, WAS TO BECOME both universal and transcendental; it was TO BE TURNED, by the Kur’anic preaching, INTO the affirmation of the Living God, the Exalted One.” (Brill’s Encyclopedia of Islam, Volume I, p. 406; bold and capital emphasis ours)
“The god Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the Moon God, but early in Arabian history the name became a general term for god, and it was this name that the Hebrews used prominently in their personal names, such as Emanu-el, Israel, etc., rather than the Ba'al of the northern Semites proper, which was the Sun. Similarly, under Mohammed's tutelage, the relatively anonymous Ilah BECAME Al-Ilah, The God, or Allah, the Supreme Being.” (C. S. Coon, "Southern Arabia, A Problem For The Future", Papers Of The Peabody Museum Of American Archaeology And Ethnology, 1943, Volume 20, p. 195; bold and capital emphasis ours)
“The customs of heathenism have left an indelible mark on Islam, notably in the rites of the pilgrimage (on which more will be said later), so that for this reason alone something ought to be said about the chief characteristics of Arabian paganism…
“The oldest name for God used in the Semitic word consists of but two letters, the consonant ‘l’ preceded by a smooth breathing, which was pronounced as ‘Il’ in ancient Babylonia, ‘El’ in ancient Israel. The relation of this name, which in Babylonia and Assyria became a generic term simply meaning ‘god’, to the Arabian Ilah familiar to us in the form Allah, which is compounded of al, the definite article, and Ilah by eliding the vowel ‘I’, is not clear. Some scholars trace the name of the South Arabian Ilah, a title of the Moon god, but this is a matter of antiquarian interest. In Arabia Allah was known from Jewish and Christian sources as the one god, and there can be no doubt whatever that he was known to pagan Arabs of Mecca as the supreme being. Were this not so, the Qur'an would have been unintelligible to the Meccans; moreover it is clear from Nabataean and other inscriptions that Allah means ‘the god’.” (Alfred Guillaume, Islam [Penguin Books, London, 1956], pp. 6-7; bold emphasis ours)
Allah. Islamic name for God. Is derived from Semitic El, and originally applied to the moon; he seems to have been preceded by Ilmaqah, the moon god. ("Allah" in E. Sykes, Everyman's Dictionary Of Non-Classical Mythology [J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., London, E. P. Dutton & Co. Inc., New York, 1961] p. 7; underline emphasis ours)
“Allah–The Arabic word for God. Probably derived from il ilah, ‘the god.’ Arabic Christians addressed God as Allah long before Muhammad was born. Allah was used by pre-Islamic pagans to designate A NOTABLE DEITY in their religious system. Muhammad repudiated these pagan and polytheistic meanings when he declared, ‘There is no god but Allah.’” (Timothy George, Is the Father of Jesus the God of Muhammad? [Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI 2006], p. 147; bold and capital emphasis ours)
I. Before Islam. That the Arabs, before the time of Muhammad, accepted and worshipped, after a fashion, a supreme god called Allah–“the ilah” or the god, if the form is of genuine Arabic source; if of Aramaic, from alaha, “the god”–seems absolutely certain. Whether he was an abstraction or a development from some individual god, such as Hubal, need not here be considered… But they also recognized and tended to worship more fervently and directly other strictly subordinate gods… It is certain that they regarded particular deities (mentioned in sura liii. 19-20 are al-‘Uzza, Manat or Manah, al-Lat [?]; some have interpreted vii. 180 as a reference to a perversion of Allah to Allat) as daughters of Allah (vi. 100; xvi. 57; xxxvii. 149; liii. 21); they also asserted that he had sons (vi. 100)… “There was no god save Allah”. This meant, for Muhammad and the Meccans, that of all the gods whom they worshipped, Allah was the only real deity. It took no account of the nature of God in the abstract, only of the personal position of Allah. “Allah,” therefore, was and is the proper name of God among Muslims. It corresponds to Yahwe among the Hebrews, not Elohim. No plural can be formed from it. To express “gods,” the Muslim must fall back on the plural of ilah, the common noun from which Allah is probably derived… But, though the name was the same for the Meccans and for Muhammad, their conceptions of the nature of the bearer of the name must have differed widely…” (Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, eds. H. A. R. Gibb & J. H. Kramers [Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY (N.D.)], pp. 33-34; bold emphasis ours)
“Allah is the contraction of two Arabic words, il and ilah–‘the god.’ Allah was commonly used in pre-Islamic Arabia, sometimes associated with an individual's personal name. For example, Muhammad was the son of Abdullah, which means ‘the servant of Allah.’ The Kabah in Mecca was the shrine of Allah–acknowledged as A ‘HIGH GOD’ above many lesser gods; by the time of Muhammad, however, the worship of Allah had become thoroughly paganized. As we have seen, THIS PRE-ISLAMIC PAGAN ALLAH was believed to have engendered three ‘daughters’ who were worshiped as goddesses, along with the stone-god, the moon-god, the pigeon-god, and numerous other deities. Muhammad broke decisively with this polytheistic confusion. He called on people to believe in Allah, not as the greatest deity in the Meccan pantheon, but as the one and only God there is. Islam began, then, as a vigorous return to an uncompromising monotheism. (Ibid., pp. 70-71; bold and capital emphasis ours)
“Both the concept of a Supreme God and the Arabian term [Allah] have been shown to be familiar to the Arabs in Mohammed’s time. What Mohammed did was to give a NEW and fuller content to the concept, TO PURIFY IT FROM ELEMENTS OF POLYTHEISM WHICH CLUSTERED AROUND IT.” (H.A.R. Gibb, Mohammedanism: An Historical Survey [Oxford University Press, London 1961], p. 54; bold and capital emphasis ours)
“Allah, the paramount deity of PAGAN Arabia, was the target of worship in varying degrees of intensity from the southernmost tip of Arabia to the Mediterranean. To the Babylonians he was ‘Il’ (god); to the Canaanites, and later the Israelites, he was ‘El’; the South Arabians worshiped him as ‘Ilah,’ and the Bedouins as ‘al-Ilah’ (the deity). With Muhammad he BECOMES Allah, God of the Worlds, of all believers, the one and only who admits of no associates or consorts in the worship of Him. Judaic and Christian concepts of God abetted the transformation of Allah FROM A PAGAN DEITY to the God of all monotheists. There is no reason, therefore, to accept the idea that ‘Allah’ passed to the Muslims from Christians and Jews.” (Caesar E. Farah, Ph.D., Islam [Barron's Educational Series, 2000, sixth edition paperback] p. 28; bold and capital emphasis ours)
The following liberal Muslim author also admits that Allah was initially the name used by the pagans for their sky god, and in time was elevated to the rank of the supreme god. He even goes so far as to acknowledge that Hubal was the central deity of the Meccans, despite the fact of erroneously assuming that Hubal and Allah were/are different gods!
“IN THE ARID, desolate basin of Mecca, surrounded on all sides by the bare mountains of the Arabian desert, stands a small, nondescript sanctuary that the ancient Arabs refer to as the Ka‘ba: the Cube. The Ka‘ba is a squat, roofless edifice made of unmortared stones and sunk into a valley of sand. Its four walls–so low it is said that a young goat can leap over them–are swathed in strips of heavy cloth. At its base, two small doors are chiseled into the gray stone, allowing entry into the inner sanctum. It is here, inside the cramped interior of the sanctuary, that the gods of pre-Islamic Arabia reside: Hubal, the Syrian god of the moon; al-Uzza, the powerful goddess the Egyptians knew as Isis and the Greeks called Aphrodite; al-Kutba, the Nabataean god of writing and divination; Jesus, the incarnate god of the Christians, and his holy mother, Mary.” (Reza Aslan, No god but God: The Origins, Evolution and Future of Islam [Random House, Inc., Later prt. Edition, 2005], 1. The Sanctuary in the Desert: Pre-Islamic Arabia, p. 3; bold emphasis ours)
And:
“In contrast, paganism among the sedentary societies of Arabia had developed from its earlier and simpler manifestations into a complex form of neo-animism, providing a host of divine and semi-divine intermediaries, who stood between the creator god and his creation. This creator god was called Allah, which is not a proper name but a contraction of the word al-ilah, meaning simply ‘the god.’ Like his Greek counterpart, Zeus, Allah was ORIGINALLY an ancient rain/sky deity who was ELEVATED into the role of the supreme god of the pre-Islamic Arabs. Though a powerful deity to swear by, Allah's eminent status in the Arab pantheon rendered him, like most High Gods, beyond the supplication of ordinary people. Only in times of great peril would anyone bother consulting him. Otherwise, it was far more expedient to turn to the lesser, more accessible gods who acted as Allah's intercessors, the most powerful of whom were his three daughters, Allat (‘the goddess’), al-Uzza (‘the mighty’), and Manat (the goddess of fate, whose name is probably derived from the Hebrew word mana, meaning ‘portion’ or ‘share’). These divine mediators were not only represented in the Ka‘ba, they had their own individual shrines throughout the Arabian Peninsula: Allat in the city of Ta’if; al-Uzza in Nakhlah; and Manat in Qudayd. It was to them that the Arabs prayed when they needed rain, when their children were ill, when they entered into battle or embarked on a journey deep into the treacherous desert abodes of the Jinn–those intelligent, imperceptible, and salvable beings made of smokeless flame who are called ‘genies’ in the West and who function as the nymphs and fairies of Arabian mythology… Although called ‘King of the Gods’ and ‘the Lord of the House,’ Allah was not the central deity in the Ka‘ba. That honor belonged to Hubal, the Syrian god who had been brought to Mecca centuries before the rise of Islam.
“Despite Allah’s minimal role in the religious cult of pre-Islamic Arabia, his eminent position in the Arab pantheon is a clear indication of just how far paganism in the Arabian Peninsula had evolved from its simple animistic roots. Perhaps the most striking example of this development can be seen in the processional chant that tradition claims the pilgrims sang as they approached the Ka‘ba:
Here I am, O Allah, here I am.
You have no partner,
Except such a partner as you have.
You possess him and all that is his.
“This remarkable proclamation, with its obvious resemblance to the Muslim profession of faith – ‘There is no god but God’ – may reveal the earliest traces in pre-Islamic Arabia of what the German philologist Max Muller termed henotheism: the belief in a single High God, without necessarily rejecting the existence of other, subordinate gods. The earliest evidence of henotheism in Arabia can be traced back to a tribe called the Ami, who lived near modern-day Yemen in the second century B.C.E., and who worshiped a High God they called dhu-Samawi, ‘The Lord of the Heavens.’ While the details of the Amirs’ religion have been lost to history, most scholars are convinced that by the sixth century C.E., henotheism had become the standard belief of the vast majority of sedentary Arabs, who not only accepted Allah as their High God, but insisted that he was the same god as Yahweh, the god of the Jews.” (Ibid., pp. 6-8; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Thus, the term Allah initially started out as a generic noun applicable to the high god worshiped by the pagans. Muhammad comes along and turns Allah into the proper name of his peculiar deity, much like Yahweh happens to be the proper name of the true God revealed in the Holy Bible.
This now brings me to my final section. Please turn to Part 3 for the finale.
 
😛
😛😛
 
Basi Gavana, msubiri tu @Dejal, mwache Yesu Kristo.


The Lost City


The Gospels tell us that Jesus's home town was the 'City of Nazareth' ('polis Natzoree'):




The gospels do not tell us much about this 'city' – it has a synagogue, it can scare up a hostile crowd (prompting JC's famous "prophet rejected in his own land" quote), and it has a precipice – but the city status of Nazareth is clearly established, at least according to that source of nonsense called the Bible.


However when we look for historical confirmation of this hometown of a god – surprise, surprise! – no other source confirms that the place even existed in the 1st century AD.


 
The Identity of the pre-Islamic Allah at Mecca [Part 2]

We resume our discussion concerning the identity of the pre-Islamic Allah worshiped by the pagans at Mecca.
The Problems Posed by the Islamic sources
As we saw in the previous section, evidence exists to show that the chief god of the Meccans, especially of Muhammad’s Quraysh tribe, was actually Hubal. The data we presented also indicates that the pagans took Hubal as the lord of the kabah, since they viewed this to be his very own sanctuary.
Now this creates problems for the Muslim assertion that Allah was the presiding deity of Mecca and that the kabah was actually his shrine.
The practice of the polytheists who were of a patriarchal bent was to build a sanctuary around a single male deity, specifically the one they viewed as the chief or greatest of all the gods. There is absolutely no example of a pre-Islamic shrine, whether a stone or building, built for two male deities at the same time. Rather, all the evidence shows that the houses that the polytheists built accommodated only one male deity along with his female consort.
This means that if, as Muslims believe, Allah and Hubal were two separate deities then they could not both be the chief god of Mecca and the lord of the kabah at the same time. After all, if the pagans did believe that Allah was the supreme god of their pantheon, as well as the god of the kabah, then they would not have forced him to share his shrine with another male deity.
Therefore, it seems reasonably certain that the pagans identified Hubal as Allah, which explains why the Islamic literature associates the Meccan shrine with both.
The following citations from Philip K. Hitti puts this all together quite nicely:
Hubal (from Aram. For vapour, spirit), evidently the chief deity of al-ka'bah, was represented in human form. Beside him stood ritual arrows used for divination by the soothsayers (kahin, from Aramaic) who drew lots by means of them. The tradition in ibn-Hisham, which makes 'Amr ibn-Luhayy the importer of this idol from Moab or Mesopotamia, may have a kernel of truth in so far as it retains a memory of the Aramaic origin of the deity. (History of the Arabs from the Earliest Times to the Present, revised tenth edition, new preface by Walid Khalidi [Palgrave Macmillan, 2002; ISBN: 0-333-63142-0 paperback], p. 100; bold emphasis ours)
And:
Allah (allah, al-ilah, the god) was the principal, though not the only, deity of Makkah. The name is an ancient one. It occurs in two South Arabic inscriptions, one a Minean found at al-'Ula and the other Sabean, but abounds in the form HLH in the Lihyanite inscriptions of the fifth century B.C. Lihyan, which evidently got the god from Syria, was the first center of the worship of this deity in Arabia. The name occurs as Hallah in the Safa inscriptions five centuries before Islam and also in a pre-Islamic Christian Arabic inscription found in umm-al-Jimal, Syria, and ascribed to the sixth century. The name of Muhammad's father was 'Abd-Allah ('Abdullah, the slave or worshiper of Allah). The esteem in which Allah was held by the pre-Islamic Makkans as the creator and supreme provider and the one to be invoked in time of special peril may be inferred from such koranic passages as 31:24, 31; 6:137, 109; 10:23. Evidently he was the tribal deity of the Quraysh. (Ibid., pp. 100-101; bold emphasis ours)
If Hitti is correct regarding Allah being the Quraysh’s tribal deity (and Muslims would agree that he was) then this provides additional proof that Allah was a name for Hubal. Note the following syllogism:

Hubal was the chief deity of the Quraysh.

Allah was the chief deity of the Quraysh.

Therefore, Hubal was Allah in pre-Islamic times.

This explains why many scholars believe that the Meccans used the titles Hubal and Allah interchangeably in respect to the same deity:
“Verse 3 looks rather simple: So let them worship the lord of this House. The lord is evidently Allah, whereas the House is evidently the Kaba. But the fact that Allah should be referred to as the lord of the Kaba and not merely as Allah must have a special significance, which has to be clarified. It seems that the Quran deliberately mentions the House in order to allude to the origin of the position of Quraysh as ahl al-haram. For, it was the Kaba from which Quraysh derived their prestige among the Arabs. That the Ka'ba was the origin of the sacred position of Quraysh was, of course, well known to them. Moreover, it seems that already in pre-Islamic times, Quraysh attributed their sacred position to the benevolence of the deity of the Kaba, to whom they used to refer as Hubal and whose statue was situated inside the Kaba. The pre-Islamic talbiya of those who worshipped Hubal, i.e., Quraysh, read:
labbayka llahumma labbayka, innana laqah
harramtana 'ala asinnati l-rimah
yahsuduna l-nasu 'ala l-najah
Labbayka, Oh, Lord, labbayka, we are immune,
You have protected us from the edges of the lances,
People envy us for our success.
“From the Quranic point of view, the deity of the Ka'ba is, of course, Allah who was worshipped by the pre-Islamic Arabs as the High God, and the Ka'ba itself was known as baytu llahi, so that the titles Hubal and Allah may be regarded as interchangeable. Whatever the case may be, Quraysh are summoned in our sura to draw the inevitable conclusion from their own awareness of the fact that their protection and immunity had come from the deity of the Ka'ba. The conclusion is that they must turn this deity into their sole object of veneration. This means that they must give up shirk, i.e., abandon the worship of the lesser idols which were attached to the High God. The statues of these idols were placed next to the Ka'ba (but never inside), so that Quraysh are actually required to devote themselves exclusively to the worship of the rabb of the Ka'ba itself, the one and only origin of their immunity, welfare and prosperity. As Muqatil puts it: akhlisal-'ibadata lahu… –dedicate your worship exclusively to him. (Uri Rubin, The Ilaf of Quraysh: A Study of sura CVI, Source: Arabica, T. 31, Fasc. 2 (Jul., 1984), pp. 165-188; bold emphasis ours)
And:
“We have evidence that black stones were worshiped in various parts of the Arab world; for example, Clement of Alexandria, writing ca. 190, mentioned that ‘the Arabs worship stone,’ alluding to the black stone of Dusares at Petra. Maximus Tyrius writing in the second century says, ‘The Arabians pay homage to I know not what god, which they represent by a quadrangular stone’: he alludes to the Kaaba that contains the Black Stone. Its great antiquity is also attested by the fact that ancient Persians claim that Mahabad and his successors left the Black Stone in the Kaaba, along with relics and images, and the stone was an emblem of Saturn…
“The Black Stone itself is evidently a meteorite and undoubtedly owes its reputation to the fact it fell from the ‘heavens.’ It is doubly ironic that Muslims venerate this piece of rock as that given to Ishmael by the angel Gabriel to build the Kaaba, as it is, to quote Margoliouth, ‘of doubtful genuineness, since the Black Stone was removed by the ... Qarmatians in the fourth [Muslim] century, and restored by them after many years; it may be doubted whether the stone which they returned was the same stone which they removed.’
“Hubal was worshipped at Mecca, and his idol in red cornelian was erected inside the Kaaba, above the dry well into which one threw votive offerings. It is very probable that Hubal had a human form. Hubal's position next to the Black Stone suggests there is some connection between the two. Wellhausen thinks that Hubal originally was the Black Stone that, as we have already remarked, is more ancient than the idol. Wellhausen also points out that God is called Lord of the Kaaba, and Lord of the territory of Mecca in the Koran. The Prophet rallied against the homage rendered at the Kaaba to the goddesses al-Lat, Manat, and al-Uzza, whom the pagan Arabs called the daughters of God, but Muhammad stopped short of attacking the cult of Hubal. From this Wellhausen concludes that Hubal is no other than Allah, the ‘god’ of the Meccans. When the Meccans defeated the Prophet near Medina, their leader is said to have shouted, ‘Hurrah for Hubal.’
“Circumambulation of a sanctuary was a very common rite practiced in many localities. The pilgrim during his circuit frequently kissed or caressed the idol. Sir William Muir thinks that the seven circuits of the Kaaba "were probably emblematical of the revolutions of the planetary bodies.’ While Zwemer goes so far as to suggest that the seven circuits of the Kaaba, three times rapidly and four times slowly were ‘in imitation of the inner and outer planets.’
“It is unquestionable that the Arabs ‘at a comparatively late period worshiped the sun and other heavenly bodies.’ The constellation of the Pleiades, which was supposed to bestow rain, appears as a deity. There was the cult of the planet Venus which was revered as a great goddess under the name of al-Uzza.
“We know from the frequency of theophorus names that the sun (Shams) was worshiped. Shams was the titular goddess of several tribes honored with a sanctuary and an idol. Snouck Hurgronje sees a solar rite in the ceremony of ‘wukut’…
“The goddess al-Lat is also sometimes identified with the solar divinity. The god Dharrih was probably the rising sun. The Muslim rites of running between Arafat and Muzdalifah, and Muzdalifah and Mina had to be accomplished after sunset and before sunrise. This was the deliberate change introduced by Muhammad to suppress this association with the pagan solar rite, whose significance we shall examine later. The worship of the moon is also attested to by proper names of people such as Hilal, a crescent, Qamar, a moon, and so on.
“Houtsma has suggested that the stoning that took place in Mina was originally directed at the sun demon. This view is lent plausibility by the fact that the pagan pilgrimage originally coincided with the autumnal equinox. The sun demon is expelled, and his harsh rule comes to an end with the summer, which is followed by the worship, at Muzdalifah, of the thunder god who brings fertility…
“Islam owes the term ‘Allah’ to the heathen Arabs. We have evidence that it entered into numerous personal names in Northern Arabia and among the Nabatians. It occurs among the Arabs of later times, in theophorus names and on its own. Wellhausen also cites pre-Islamic literature where Allah is mentioned as a great deity. We also have the testimony of the Koran itself where He is recognized as a giver of rain, a creator, and so on; the Meccans only crime was to worship other gods beside Him. EVENTUALLY Allah was only applied to the Supreme Deity. ‘In any case it is an extremely important fact that Muhammad did not find it necessary to introduce an altogether novel deity, but contented himself with ridding the HEATHEN Allah of his companions subjecting him to a kind of dogmatic purification… Had he not been accustomed from his youth to the idea of Allah as the Supreme God, in particular of Mecca, it may well be doubted whether he would ever have come forward as the preacher of Monotheism.’” (Ibn Warraq, Why I Am Not A Muslim [Prometheus Books, Amherst NY, 1995], pp. 39-40, 42; bold and capital emphasis ours)
This further implies that the Islamic sources couldn’t simply get rid of the notion of the kabah belonging to Hubal, or erase the fact that he was the chief deity of the Meccans, since this part of their history was still embedded within the recollections of the Arabs. What they tried to do was disassociate the Muslim deity from Hubal.
However, in separating Hubal from Allah, Muhammad and his followers created major problems for their position, namely, the Meccan shrine accommodating two separate gods.
Renowned Islamicist Patricia Crone notices these problems in her book:
“Third, what deity did Quraysh represent? The Meccan shrine accommodated Hubal, and there are supposed to have been several minor divinities in its vicinity, their number becoming prodigious in some sources. But as has just been seen, Quraysh do not appear to have been guardians of Hubal, and it evidently was not idols such as Isaf and Na’ila that provided their raison d’etre. Who, then?…” (Patricia Crone, Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam [Gorgias Press LLC, 2004], p. 189; bold emphasis ours)
And:
“The tradition clearly envisages them as guardians on behalf of Allah, the God of Abraham, and the future God of Islam…” (Ibid., p. 190)
Crone then raises some interesting questions:
"... But if Quraysh saw themselves as guardians on behalf of Abraham's God, all the while acknowledging the existence of other deities, their reaction to Muhammad becomes exceedingly hard to understand. When Muhammad attacked polytheism, Quraysh reacted with a vigorous defence of Allat, Manat, al-‘Uzza, and to some extent even Hubal, invoking them in battle against Muhammad and demanding belief in them from the converts whom they tried to make recant. In other words, they reacted by mobilizing all the deities in whom they had no vested interest against the very God they were supposed to represent. If they owed their superior position in Arabia to their association with Abraham's God, why was it the pagan deities they chose to defend? And if Abraham's God was the God of their fathers, why was it the pagan gods they chose to describe as ancestral? The tradition clearly has a problem on its hands in that it wishes to describe Quraysh as monotheists and polytheists alike: on the one hand they were repositories of the aboriginal monotheism that Muhammad was to revive; and on the other hand they were polytheist zealots against whom Muhammad had to fight. They cannot have been both in historical fact. If we accept that they resisted Muhammad more or less as described, the claim that they represented the God of Abraham MUST BE DISMISSED.” (Ibid., pp. 191-192; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Crone also brings up a few interesting points which militate against Allah and Hubal both sharing the same house if in fact they were separate deities, which is the Muslim contention.
“This does not, of course, rule out the possibility that they represented an indigenous deity known as Allah, and it is as guardians of such a deity that they are generally envisaged in the secondary literature. But this hypothesis is also problematic.
“Admittedly, up to a point it makes good sense. Allah is associated with a black stone, and some traditions hold that originally this stone was sacrificial. This suggests that it was the stone rather than the building around it which was bayt allah, the house of god, and this gives us a perfect parallel with the Old Testament bethel. The cult of the Arab god Dusares (Dhu Shara) also seems to have centered on a black sacrificial stone. According to Epiphanius, he was worshipped together with his mother, the virginal Kaabou, or in other words ka‘ib or ka‘ab, a girl with swelling breasts. A similar arrangement is met in Nabataean inscription from Petra that speaks of sacrificial stones (nysb’ = ansab) belonging to the ‘lord of this house’ (mr’ byt) and al-‘Uzza, another ka‘ib lady. If we assume that bayt and ka‘ba alike originally referred to the Meccan stone rather than the building around it, then the lord of the house WAS A PAGAN ALLAH worshipped in conjunction with a female consort such as al-‘Uzza and/or other ‘daughters of God.’ This would give us a genuinely pagan deity for Quraysh and at the same time explain their devotion to goddesses.
“But if Quraysh represented Allah, what was Hubal doing in their shrine? Indeed, what was the building doing? No sacrifices can be made over a stone immured in a wall, and a building accommodating Hubal makes no sense around a stone representing Allah. Naturally Quraysh were polytheists, but the deities of polytheist Arabia preferred to be housed separately. No pre-Islamic sanctuary, be it stone or building, is known to have accommodated more than one male god, as opposed to one male god and female consort. The Allah who is attested in an inscription of the late second century A.D., certainly was not forced to share his house with other deities. And the shrines of Islamic Arabia are similarly formed around the tomb of a single saint. If Allah was a pagan god like any other, Quraysh would not have allowed Hubal to share the sanctuary with him–not because they were proto-monotheists, but precisely because they were pagans.
“One would thus have to fall back on the view that Allah was not a god like any other. On the one hand, Allah might simply be another name for Hubal, as Wellhausen suggested: just as the Israelites knew Yahwe as Elohim, so the Arabs knew Hubal as Allah, meaning simply as ‘God.’ It would follow that the guardians of Hubal and Allah were identical; and since Quraysh were not guardians of Hubal, they would not be guardians of Allah, either. But as Wellhausen himself noted, Allah had long ceased to be a label that could be applied to any deity. Allah was the personal name of a specific deity, on a par with Allat, not merely a noun meaning ‘god’; and in the second century this deity had guardians of his own. When ‘Abd al-Muttalib is described as having prayed to Allah while consulting Hubal's arrows, it is simply that the sources baulk at depicting the Prophet's grandfather as a genuine pagan, not that Allah and Hubal were alternative names for the same god. If Hubal and Allah had been one and the same deity, Hubal ought to have survived as an epithet of Allah, which he did not. And moreover, there would not have been traditions in which people are asked to renounce the one for the other.” (Ibid., pp. 191-194; bold emphasis ours)
And:
“On the other hand, Allah might have been a high God over and above all other deities. This is, in fact, how Wellhausen saw him, and he has been similarly represented by Watt. It is not how he appears in the inscriptional material, in which he is very much the god of a particular people; and the fact that he was known as Allah, ‘the god,’ is no indication of supremacy: Allat, ‘the goddess,’ was not a deity over and above al-‘Uzza or Manat. But he could, of course, have developed into such a god, as the Qur’anic evidence adduced by Wellhausen and Watt suggests. If we accept this view, however, we are up against the problem that he is unlikely to have had guardians of his own in this capacity. Viewed as a high god, Allah was too universal, too neutral, and too impartial to be the object of a particular cult, as Wellhausen noted; no sanctuary was devoted to him except insofar as he had come to be identified with ordinary deities. A high god in Arabia was apparently one who neither needed nor benefitted from cultic links with a specific group of devotees. (Wellhausen may of course be wrong: maybe a high god in Arabia did benefit from such links. But if so, we are back at the problem of why Allah was made to share these links with Hubal).
“If Quraysh were guardians on behalf of an Allah above all other deities, they must thus have started as guardians of someone else. But as has been seen, they do not appear to have been guardians of Hubal, and Hubal was not identified with Allah, nor did his cult assist that of Allah in any way. And if we postulate that they started as guardians of an ordinary Allah who subsequently developed into a supreme deity, we reinstate the problem of Hubal's presence in his shrine. The fact is that the Hubal-Allah sanctuary of Mecca is an oddity; can such a shrine have existed in historical fact? There would seem to be at least two sanctuaries behind the one depicted in the tradition, and Quraysh do not come across as guardians of either.” (Ibid., pp. 194-195; bold emphasis ours)

A Proposed Solution
There is a solution to all of this, one which Muslims may not like. The way to solve this dilemma is to admit the fact that the Arabs initially viewed the word Allah as a generic term which could be used for any deity who was believed to be the greatest.
Scholars pretty much agree that Allah was a name used by different Arab pagans for one of their local deities, specifically the chief or high god. They further recognize that Muhammad took the pagan Allah worshiped by his particular tribe and transformed him into the one true God worshiped by all monotheists, so that he ended up divorcing his god from any similarly named pagan deity. Muhammad (more precisely, the unclean spirit which inspired him) did this so as to get the Jews and Christians to join his religion as well:
“… The name used for God was 'Allah', which was already in use for one of the local gods (it is now also used by Arabic-speaking Jews and Christians as the name of God)…” (Albert Hourani, A History of Arab Peoples [Warner Books Edition, paperback 1992], p. 16; bold emphasis ours)
“Historical evidence indicates that Allah was the name of an ancient Arabian high god in a pantheon of other gods and goddesses like those found in other ancient Middle Eastern cultures…” (Juan E. Campo, Encyclopedia of Islam [Facts On File Inc., 2009], p. 34; bold emphasis ours)
“ALLAH is a proper name among Muslims, corresponding in usage to Jehovah (Jahweh) among the Hebrews. Thus, it is not be regarded as a common name meaning “God” (or a “god”), and the Muslim must use another word or form if he wishes to indicate any other than his own peculiar deity. The source of this goes back to pre-Muslim times….
“The origin of this goes back to pre-Muslim times as Prof. Noldeke has shown… Muhammad found the Meccans believing in a supreme god whom they called Allah, thus already contracted. With Allah, however, they associated minor deities, some evidently tribal, others called daughters of Allah. MUHAMMAD'S REFORM WAS TO ASSERT THE SOLITARY EXISTENCE OF ALLAH. The first article of the Muslim creed, therefore–La ilaha illa-llahu,–means, only as addresses by him to the Meccans, ‘There exist no god except the one whom you already call ALLAH.

“Naturally, this precise historical origin is not clear to the Muslim exegetes and theologians. But that Allah is a proper name, applicable only to their peculiar God, they are certain, and they mostly recognize that its force as a proper name has arisen through contraction in form and limitation in usage.” (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, edited by James Hastings, M.A., D.D., with the assistance of John A. Selbie, M.A., D.D., and other scholars [Charles Scribner's Sons, New York; T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1908], Volume I. A-Art, p. 326; bold and capital emphasis ours)
“8 HUBAL.–Hubal was worshiped at Mecca; his idol stood in the Ka'ba, and he appears to have been, in reality, the god of the sanctuary. It is therefore particularly unfortunate that we have so little information respecting him. Wellhausen has plausibly suggested that Hubal is no other than Allah, 'the god' of the Meccans…
“In the Nabataean inscriptions we repeatedly find the name of a deity accompanied by the title Alaha, ‘the god.’ Hence Wellhausen argues that the Arabs of a later age may also have applied the epithet Allah, 'the god,' to a number of different deities, and that in this manner Allah, from being a mere appendage to the name of a great god, may gradually have become the proper name of the Supreme God. In any case it is an extremely important fact that Muhammad did not find it necessary to introduce an altogether novel deity, but contented himself with ridding the heathen Allah of all his ‘companions,’ subjecting him to a kind of dogmatic purification and defining him in a somewhat clearer manner. Had he not been accustomed from his youth to the idea of Allah as the Supreme God, in particular of Mecca, it may well be doubted whether he would ever have come forward as the preacher of Monotheism.” (Ibid., pp. 663-664; bold emphasis ours)
“Allah was known to the pre-Islamic Arabs; he was one of the Meccan deities, possibly the supreme deity and certainly a creator-god (cf. Kur’an, xiii, 16; xxix, 61, 63; xxix, 38; xliii, 87). He was already known, by antonomasia, as the God, al-Ilah (the most likely etymology; another suggestion is the Aramaic Alaha).–For Allah before Islam as shown by archaeological sources and the Kur’an, see ILAH.
“But the vague notion of supreme (not sole) divinity, which Allah seems to have connoted in Meccan religion, WAS TO BECOME both universal and transcendental; it was TO BE TURNED, by the Kur’anic preaching, INTO the affirmation of the Living God, the Exalted One.” (Brill’s Encyclopedia of Islam, Volume I, p. 406; bold and capital emphasis ours)
“The god Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the Moon God, but early in Arabian history the name became a general term for god, and it was this name that the Hebrews used prominently in their personal names, such as Emanu-el, Israel, etc., rather than the Ba'al of the northern Semites proper, which was the Sun. Similarly, under Mohammed's tutelage, the relatively anonymous Ilah BECAME Al-Ilah, The God, or Allah, the Supreme Being.” (C. S. Coon, "Southern Arabia, A Problem For The Future", Papers Of The Peabody Museum Of American Archaeology And Ethnology, 1943, Volume 20, p. 195; bold and capital emphasis ours)
“The customs of heathenism have left an indelible mark on Islam, notably in the rites of the pilgrimage (on which more will be said later), so that for this reason alone something ought to be said about the chief characteristics of Arabian paganism…
“The oldest name for God used in the Semitic word consists of but two letters, the consonant ‘l’ preceded by a smooth breathing, which was pronounced as ‘Il’ in ancient Babylonia, ‘El’ in ancient Israel. The relation of this name, which in Babylonia and Assyria became a generic term simply meaning ‘god’, to the Arabian Ilah familiar to us in the form Allah, which is compounded of al, the definite article, and Ilah by eliding the vowel ‘I’, is not clear. Some scholars trace the name of the South Arabian Ilah, a title of the Moon god, but this is a matter of antiquarian interest. In Arabia Allah was known from Jewish and Christian sources as the one god, and there can be no doubt whatever that he was known to pagan Arabs of Mecca as the supreme being. Were this not so, the Qur'an would have been unintelligible to the Meccans; moreover it is clear from Nabataean and other inscriptions that Allah means ‘the god’.” (Alfred Guillaume, Islam [Penguin Books, London, 1956], pp. 6-7; bold emphasis ours)
Allah. Islamic name for God. Is derived from Semitic El, and originally applied to the moon; he seems to have been preceded by Ilmaqah, the moon god. ("Allah" in E. Sykes, Everyman's Dictionary Of Non-Classical Mythology [J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., London, E. P. Dutton & Co. Inc., New York, 1961] p. 7; underline emphasis ours)
“Allah–The Arabic word for God. Probably derived from il ilah, ‘the god.’ Arabic Christians addressed God as Allah long before Muhammad was born. Allah was used by pre-Islamic pagans to designate A NOTABLE DEITY in their religious system. Muhammad repudiated these pagan and polytheistic meanings when he declared, ‘There is no god but Allah.’” (Timothy George, Is the Father of Jesus the God of Muhammad? [Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI 2006], p. 147; bold and capital emphasis ours)
I. Before Islam. That the Arabs, before the time of Muhammad, accepted and worshipped, after a fashion, a supreme god called Allah–“the ilah” or the god, if the form is of genuine Arabic source; if of Aramaic, from alaha, “the god”–seems absolutely certain. Whether he was an abstraction or a development from some individual god, such as Hubal, need not here be considered… But they also recognized and tended to worship more fervently and directly other strictly subordinate gods… It is certain that they regarded particular deities (mentioned in sura liii. 19-20 are al-‘Uzza, Manat or Manah, al-Lat [?]; some have interpreted vii. 180 as a reference to a perversion of Allah to Allat) as daughters of Allah (vi. 100; xvi. 57; xxxvii. 149; liii. 21); they also asserted that he had sons (vi. 100)… “There was no god save Allah”. This meant, for Muhammad and the Meccans, that of all the gods whom they worshipped, Allah was the only real deity. It took no account of the nature of God in the abstract, only of the personal position of Allah. “Allah,” therefore, was and is the proper name of God among Muslims. It corresponds to Yahwe among the Hebrews, not Elohim. No plural can be formed from it. To express “gods,” the Muslim must fall back on the plural of ilah, the common noun from which Allah is probably derived… But, though the name was the same for the Meccans and for Muhammad, their conceptions of the nature of the bearer of the name must have differed widely…” (Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, eds. H. A. R. Gibb & J. H. Kramers [Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY (N.D.)], pp. 33-34; bold emphasis ours)
“Allah is the contraction of two Arabic words, il and ilah–‘the god.’ Allah was commonly used in pre-Islamic Arabia, sometimes associated with an individual's personal name. For example, Muhammad was the son of Abdullah, which means ‘the servant of Allah.’ The Kabah in Mecca was the shrine of Allah–acknowledged as A ‘HIGH GOD’ above many lesser gods; by the time of Muhammad, however, the worship of Allah had become thoroughly paganized. As we have seen, THIS PRE-ISLAMIC PAGAN ALLAH was believed to have engendered three ‘daughters’ who were worshiped as goddesses, along with the stone-god, the moon-god, the pigeon-god, and numerous other deities. Muhammad broke decisively with this polytheistic confusion. He called on people to believe in Allah, not as the greatest deity in the Meccan pantheon, but as the one and only God there is. Islam began, then, as a vigorous return to an uncompromising monotheism. (Ibid., pp. 70-71; bold and capital emphasis ours)
“Both the concept of a Supreme God and the Arabian term [Allah] have been shown to be familiar to the Arabs in Mohammed’s time. What Mohammed did was to give a NEW and fuller content to the concept, TO PURIFY IT FROM ELEMENTS OF POLYTHEISM WHICH CLUSTERED AROUND IT.” (H.A.R. Gibb, Mohammedanism: An Historical Survey [Oxford University Press, London 1961], p. 54; bold and capital emphasis ours)
“Allah, the paramount deity of PAGAN Arabia, was the target of worship in varying degrees of intensity from the southernmost tip of Arabia to the Mediterranean. To the Babylonians he was ‘Il’ (god); to the Canaanites, and later the Israelites, he was ‘El’; the South Arabians worshiped him as ‘Ilah,’ and the Bedouins as ‘al-Ilah’ (the deity). With Muhammad he BECOMES Allah, God of the Worlds, of all believers, the one and only who admits of no associates or consorts in the worship of Him. Judaic and Christian concepts of God abetted the transformation of Allah FROM A PAGAN DEITY to the God of all monotheists. There is no reason, therefore, to accept the idea that ‘Allah’ passed to the Muslims from Christians and Jews.” (Caesar E. Farah, Ph.D., Islam [Barron's Educational Series, 2000, sixth edition paperback] p. 28; bold and capital emphasis ours)
The following liberal Muslim author also admits that Allah was initially the name used by the pagans for their sky god, and in time was elevated to the rank of the supreme god. He even goes so far as to acknowledge that Hubal was the central deity of the Meccans, despite the fact of erroneously assuming that Hubal and Allah were/are different gods!
“IN THE ARID, desolate basin of Mecca, surrounded on all sides by the bare mountains of the Arabian desert, stands a small, nondescript sanctuary that the ancient Arabs refer to as the Ka‘ba: the Cube. The Ka‘ba is a squat, roofless edifice made of unmortared stones and sunk into a valley of sand. Its four walls–so low it is said that a young goat can leap over them–are swathed in strips of heavy cloth. At its base, two small doors are chiseled into the gray stone, allowing entry into the inner sanctum. It is here, inside the cramped interior of the sanctuary, that the gods of pre-Islamic Arabia reside: Hubal, the Syrian god of the moon; al-Uzza, the powerful goddess the Egyptians knew as Isis and the Greeks called Aphrodite; al-Kutba, the Nabataean god of writing and divination; Jesus, the incarnate god of the Christians, and his holy mother, Mary.” (Reza Aslan, No god but God: The Origins, Evolution and Future of Islam [Random House, Inc., Later prt. Edition, 2005], 1. The Sanctuary in the Desert: Pre-Islamic Arabia, p. 3; bold emphasis ours)
And:
“In contrast, paganism among the sedentary societies of Arabia had developed from its earlier and simpler manifestations into a complex form of neo-animism, providing a host of divine and semi-divine intermediaries, who stood between the creator god and his creation. This creator god was called Allah, which is not a proper name but a contraction of the word al-ilah, meaning simply ‘the god.’ Like his Greek counterpart, Zeus, Allah was ORIGINALLY an ancient rain/sky deity who was ELEVATED into the role of the supreme god of the pre-Islamic Arabs. Though a powerful deity to swear by, Allah's eminent status in the Arab pantheon rendered him, like most High Gods, beyond the supplication of ordinary people. Only in times of great peril would anyone bother consulting him. Otherwise, it was far more expedient to turn to the lesser, more accessible gods who acted as Allah's intercessors, the most powerful of whom were his three daughters, Allat (‘the goddess’), al-Uzza (‘the mighty’), and Manat (the goddess of fate, whose name is probably derived from the Hebrew word mana, meaning ‘portion’ or ‘share’). These divine mediators were not only represented in the Ka‘ba, they had their own individual shrines throughout the Arabian Peninsula: Allat in the city of Ta’if; al-Uzza in Nakhlah; and Manat in Qudayd. It was to them that the Arabs prayed when they needed rain, when their children were ill, when they entered into battle or embarked on a journey deep into the treacherous desert abodes of the Jinn–those intelligent, imperceptible, and salvable beings made of smokeless flame who are called ‘genies’ in the West and who function as the nymphs and fairies of Arabian mythology… Although called ‘King of the Gods’ and ‘the Lord of the House,’ Allah was not the central deity in the Ka‘ba. That honor belonged to Hubal, the Syrian god who had been brought to Mecca centuries before the rise of Islam.
“Despite Allah’s minimal role in the religious cult of pre-Islamic Arabia, his eminent position in the Arab pantheon is a clear indication of just how far paganism in the Arabian Peninsula had evolved from its simple animistic roots. Perhaps the most striking example of this development can be seen in the processional chant that tradition claims the pilgrims sang as they approached the Ka‘ba:
Here I am, O Allah, here I am.
You have no partner,
Except such a partner as you have.
You possess him and all that is his.
“This remarkable proclamation, with its obvious resemblance to the Muslim profession of faith – ‘There is no god but God’ – may reveal the earliest traces in pre-Islamic Arabia of what the German philologist Max Muller termed henotheism: the belief in a single High God, without necessarily rejecting the existence of other, subordinate gods. The earliest evidence of henotheism in Arabia can be traced back to a tribe called the Ami, who lived near modern-day Yemen in the second century B.C.E., and who worshiped a High God they called dhu-Samawi, ‘The Lord of the Heavens.’ While the details of the Amirs’ religion have been lost to history, most scholars are convinced that by the sixth century C.E., henotheism had become the standard belief of the vast majority of sedentary Arabs, who not only accepted Allah as their High God, but insisted that he was the same god as Yahweh, the god of the Jews.” (Ibid., pp. 6-8; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Thus, the term Allah initially started out as a generic noun applicable to the high god worshiped by the pagans. Muhammad comes along and turns Allah into the proper name of his peculiar deity, much like Yahweh happens to be the proper name of the true God revealed in the Holy Bible.
This now brings me to my final section. Please turn to Part 3 for the finale.
 
The Identity of the pre-Islamic Allah at Mecca [Part 3]

We now come to the final part of our analysis.
Is Muhammad’s Allah the God of the Holy Bible?
If the Arabic word Allah initially started out as a generic noun, instead of as a proper name, then this would allow for Jews and Christians to use the term in reference to Yahweh, the God of the Bible, while also allowing the Meccans to call Hubal by that name, without this implying that these groups were worshiping one and the same God.
Now as far as the Islamic Allah is concerned, Muhammad obviously tried to pass him off as the same God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He was convinced that the Jews and Christians would recognize his particular deity as being the same as Yahweh.
Muhammad failed to realize, however, that his depiction of the deity was(is) at odds with the Biblical description of God’s essential nature.
For instance, the Quran denies that Allah is a father to anyone, whether in a spiritual or a procreative sense, and rejects the Christian claim that Jesus is his Son (cf. Q. 5:18; 6:101; 9:30; 19:88-93; 39:4).
On the other hand, the God of the Holy Bible is depicted not simply as a spiritual Father to his people, but also as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. In fact, the inspired Scriptures view God’s role as Father as an essential and defining aspect of his very Being:
"For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family (all fatherhood) in heaven and on earth is named,” Ephesians 3:14-15
The Holy Scriptures are just as equally clear that Jesus’ relationship as the beloved Son is a necessary component of that divine paternity, so much so that to deny it is to deny that God is the Father and implies that God is a liar.
The Holy Bible goes so far as to claim that anyone who does deny that God is the Father and that Christ is the Son is basically an antichrist:
“Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also.” 1 John 2:22-23
“If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater, for this is the testimony of God that he has borne concerning his Son. Whoever believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne concerning his Son. And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life.” 1 John 5:9-12
It is therefore clear that Muhammad’s deity is not the majestic God revealed in the Holy Bible, and more specifically in the Person of the Lord Jesus Christ. The God whom the glorious Lord Jesus came to perfectly reveal loved mankind so much that he sent his unique, beloved Son to die for us, and then raised him back to immortal life as proof that he graciously forgives and eagerly desires to reconcile us to himself for his Son’s sake:
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.” John 3:16-18
“but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.” Romans 5:8-11
“For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit… What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? As it is written, ‘For your sake we are being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.’ No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God IN CHRIST JESUS OUR LORD.” Romans 8:3-4, 31-39
The following Christian writer explains it well:
“Most orthodox Muslims would have no problem with much of Paul’s sermon on Mars Hill: God is the Creator and sovereign Lord of history; God is both transcendent and immanent; there will be a final judgment. But the point about God raising Jesus from the dead introduces a deep divergence that cannot be explained away as a mere historical dispute about what happened on Good Friday and Easter Sunday. This difference has important implications for how we understand the reality of God himself. Christianity and Islam cannot simply embrace one another as ‘sister religions’ on the basis of a shared monotheism without regard to questions about Jesus and his cross and resurrection–issues in turn that presuppose further questions about Jesus and his relationship to God.
“We might frame the issue another way: Is monotheism enough? If we assume that the God of the Bible and Allah in Islam are not two separate gods but the same God differently understood (as many Muslims who have become Christians explain their own conversion to Christ), WE MUST STILL SAY NO TO THE QUESTION, ‘Is the Father of Jesus the God of Muhammad?’
“Kenneth Cragg helps sort out this difficulty. He notes that Muslims and Christians speak of the same subject when they speak of God, but they differ widely in the predicates they say about him. Of course, as we have seen, Christians and Muslims do share in common a number of predicates about God– the ninety-name beautiful names, for example. But Christians predicate something essential and irreducible about God that no Muslim can accept: We call him our heavenly Father. Bilquis Sheikh was a Pakistani woman of noble birth who had been a Muslim all her life. Through a series of dreams and strange encounters, she came to know and believe in Jesus Christ as her personal Savior and Lord. Quite appropriately, she titled the story of her conversion I Dared to Call Him Father…” (Timothy George, Is the Father of Jesus the God of Muhammad?, p. 75; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Concluding Remarks
Here is a summary of the facts which we presented throughout this series.
The pagan Arabs at Mecca, and around Arabia, worshiped the planets, including the sun and the moon.
They viewed the moon as the greatest of the gods, since it symbolized for them the highest-ranking deity in their pantheon.
Hubal was considered the chief god at Mecca, being the patron deity of the Quraysh.
The Meccans took the kabah as the shrine of Hubal, and associated him with the black stone.
Hubal was also considered to be the moon god.
This means that the kabah was the house of the moon god.
However, the Meccans viewed (at least this is what the Islamic literature would have us believe) Allah as the greatest of all the gods.
They also believed that the kabah was the sanctuary of Allah, and even associated him with the black stone.
If this is correct then it is hard to escape the conclusion that the pre-Islamic Allah of Mecca was none other than the moon god Hubal, being the name by which Hubal was called!
Since Muhammad came from this polytheistic environment, it is not surprising that he retained much of the pagan customs and rituals associated with the worship of the moon god as part of his newfound religion. What Muhammad did was reinterpret these practices so as to disassociate them from the pagan Allah whom the Meccans would have worshiped as the moon god Hubal.
As the late Muslim commentary Abdullah Yusuf Ali explained:
"After the Pilgrimage, in Pagan times, the pilgrims used to gather in assemblies in which the praises of ancestors were sung. As the whole of the pilgrimage rites were spiritualised in Islam, so this aftermath of the pilgrimage was also spiritualised. It was recommended for pilgrims to stay on two or three days after the pilgrimage, but they must use them in prayer and praise to Allah." (Ali, The Holy Qur’an: Translation and Commentary, p. 80, fn. 223; bold emphasis ours)
This means that all of the major Islamic practices, i.e. praying several times a day toward Mecca (salat), gathering together on Friday for congregational prayers (jumuah), giving alms (zakat), the greater and lesser pilgrimages (hajj, umra), the fast of Ramadan (saum), running around the kabah seven times (tawaf), kissing the black stone, shaving the head, animal sacrifices, running up and down the two hills of Safa and Marwa, throwing stones at the devil etc., were initially rites performed in connection with the worship of the moon god.
In fact, what makes this rather disconcerting is that Muhammad performed, and also commanded his followers to participate, in these pagan ceremonies while the polytheists were in control of Mecca and still had their 360 idols located around the kabah! It wasn’t until a few years later when Muhammad conquered Mecca that these idols were duly smashed:
Narrated Abdullah: When the Prophet entered Mecca on the day of the Conquest, there were 360 idols around the Ka'ba. The Prophet started striking them with a stick he had in his hand and was saying, “Truth has come and Falsehood will neither start nor will it reappear.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 583; *)
Yusuf Ali, in his explanation of the following text,
And complete the Hajj or 'umra in the service of God. But if ye are prevented (From completing it), send an offering for sacrifice, such as ye may find, and do not shave your heads until the offering reaches the place of sacrifice. And if any of you is ill, or has an ailment in his scalp, (Necessitating shaving), (He should) in compensation either fast, or feed the poor, or offer sacrifice; and when ye are in peaceful conditions (again), if any one wishes to continue the 'umra on to the hajj, He must make an offering, such as he can afford, but if he cannot afford it, He should fast three days during the hajj and seven days on his return, Making ten days in all. This is for those whose household is not in (the precincts of) the Sacred Mosque. And fear God, and know that God is strict in punishment. S. 2:196 Y. Ali
Stated that,
“… When this was revealed, the city of Makkah was in the hands of the enemies of Islam, and the regulations about the fighting and the pilgrimage came together and were interconnected. But the revelation provides, as always, for the particular occasion, and also for normal conditions.
“Makkah soon passed out of the hands of the enemies of Islam. People sometimes came long distances to Makkah before the pilgrimage season began. Having performed the Umrah, they stayed on for the formal Hajj.
“In case the pilgrim had spent his money, he is shown what he can do, rich or poor, and yet hold his head high among his fellows, as having performed all rites as prescribed. (Ali, The Holy Qur’an, p. 78, fn, 214: bold emphasis ours)
Hence, Muhammad and his followers were worshiping at a pagan shrine littered with the idols of false gods/goddesses!
Muhammad also adapted and modified the use of the lunar calendar from the Meccans, who obviously employed it as a result of their love for the moon deity.
They ask thee about the new moons. Say, `They are means for measuring time, for the general convenience of people and for the Pilgrimage.' And it is not righteousness that you come into houses by the backs thereof, but truly righteous is he who fears God. And you should come into houses by the doors thereof; and fear ALLAH that you may prosper. S. 2:189 Hilali-Khan
He it is Who appointed the sun a splendour and the moon a light, and measured for her stages, that ye might know the number of the years, and the reckoning. Allah created not (all) that save in truth. He detaileth the revelations for people who have knowledge. S. 10:5 Pickthall
Some Muslims get rather ingenious and claim that the Jews also follow a lunar calendar, as if this is somehow relevant to the identity of the pre-Islamic Allah worshiped by the pagans at Mecca.
Adopting a lunar calendar is not the issue, since following it doesn’t necessarily mean that a person is worshiping the moon as the astral rock representing the chief god.
Rather, the real issue centers on the reason why the pre-Islamic pagans chose to go with this calendar as opposed to the solar one, and the answer is obvious. Muhammad’s pagan tribe adopted the lunar cycle because they were so steeped in moon worship.
To, then, raise the issue of the Jews going by the lunar calendar is nothing more than a red herring and a straw man argument.
(Sidenote: The Jews actually go by a luni-solar calendar, not a purely lunar one. The Jews use intercalary months – exactly the thing that Allah/Muhammad objects to in Q. 9:36-37: *, *).
We also know from the historical and archaeological records that the crescent moon was an ancient pagan symbol of the moon god. Stars were also symbols of pagan deities.
It is therefore somewhat disconcerting to find Muslims placing the symbol of the crescent moon and five stars on top of their mosques and flags.
Muslims are quick to retort that this was a practice introduced centuries later since neither Muhammad nor his followers ever used the crescent moon and five pointed star as a symbol for the Islamic faith. The problem with this response is that it fails to explain why later generation of Muslims decided to employ this as their symbol, as opposed to something else, when such an emblem is clearly pagan in origin. As one online Muslim source admits:
“The crescent moon and star is an internationally-recognized symbol of the faith of Islam. The symbol is featured on the flags of several Muslim countries, and is even part of the official emblem for the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. The Christians have the cross, the Jews have the star of David, and the Muslims have the crescent moon, right?…
“What is the history behind the crescent moon symbol? What does it symbolize or mean? How and when did it become associated with the faith of Islam? Is it a valid symbol for the faith?
“The crescent moon and star symbol actually pre-dates Islam by several thousand years. Information on the origins of the symbol are difficult to ascertain, but most sources agree that these ancient celestial symbols were in use by the peoples of Central Asia and Siberia in their worship of sun, moon, and sky gods. There are also reports that the crescent moon and star were used to represent the Carthaginian goddess Tanit or the Greek goddess Diana.
“The city of Byzantium (later known as Constantinople and Istanbul) adopted the crescent moon as its symbol. According to some reports, they chose it in honor of the goddess Diana. Others indicate that it dates back to a battle in which the Romans defeated the Goths on the first day of a lunar month. In any event, the crescent moon was featured on the city's flag even before the birth of Christ. (Huda, The Crescent Moon Is it a symbol of Islam?; bold emphasis ours)
So the question remains, why did Muslims adopt a pagan symbol to represent their faith? We’ll leave that for Muslim taqiyyists like Zaatari to figure out.
In conclusion, our study has shown that the pre-Islamic Allah worshiped by the Meccan polytheists was by all accounts a pagan deity associated with the moon. The data that we looked at further suggest (quite strongly we might add) that the Meccans would have identified Allah as Hubal, the moon god.
Hence, even though Muslims do not worship the moon god, their religion is nothing more than a hodge-podge of the pagan moon worship of Arabia mixed in with specific Judeo-Christian beliefs. Muhammad (and his spirit) hoped that this syncretism of diverse and opposing religious traditions, which were prevalent at his time, would entice both the pagans and the monotheists to join his religion.
Yet in creating such a religious system, Muhammad and his spirit guide only managed to pervert the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, thereby misleading countless numbers from their only hope of salvation.
The fact is that, according to the Holy Bible, Allah is not only a false god but Muhammad was also one of the antichrists prophesied to come into the world.
With that said, we recommend that our readers also consult the addendum to this series since it answers some of the common Muslim objections against the notion of Allah being a name for the moon god in pre-Islamic Arabia.

Related Articles
 
Basi Gavana, msubiri tu @Dejal, mwache Yesu Kristo.


Getting a Name


The expression 'Jesus of Nazareth' is actually a bad translation of the original Greek 'Jesous o Nazoraios' (see below). More accurately, we should speak of 'Jesus the Nazarene' where Nazarene has a meaning quite unrelated to a place name. But just what is that meaning and how did it get applied to a small village? The highly ambiguous Hebrew root of the name is NZR.


The 2nd century gnostic Gospel of Philip offers this explanation:




What we do know is that 'Nazarene' (or 'Nazorean') was originally the name of an early Jewish-Christian sect – a faction, or off-shoot, of the Essenes. They had no particular relation to a city of Nazareth. The root of their name may have been 'Truth' or it may have been the Hebrew noun 'netser' ('netzor'), meaning 'branch' or 'flower.' The plural of 'Netzor' becomes 'Netzoreem.' There is no mention of the Nazarenes in any of Paul's writings, although ironically, Paul is himself accused of being a Nazorean in Acts of the Apostles. The reference scarcely means that Paul was a resident of Nazareth (we all know the guy hails from Tarsus!).




The Nazorim emerged towards the end of the 1st century, after a curse had been placed on heretics in Jewish daily prayer.




The Nazarenes may have seen themselves as a 'branch from the stem of Jesse (the legendary King David's father)'. Certainly, they had their own early version of 'Matthew'. This lost text – the Gospel of the Nazarenes – can hardly be regarded as a 'Gospel of the inhabitants of Nazareth'!


It was the later Gospel of Matthew which started the deceit that the title 'Jesus the Nazorene' should in some manner relate to Nazareth, by quoting 'prophecy':




With this, Matthew closes his fable of Jesus's early years. Yet Matthew is misquoting – he would surely know that nowhere in Jewish prophetic literature is there any reference to a Nazarene. What is 'foretold' (or at least mentioned several times) in Old Testament scripture is the appearance of a Nazarite. For example:




Matthew slyly substitutes one word for another. By replacing Nazarite ('he who vows to grow long hair and serve god') with a term which appears to imply 'resident of' he is able to fabricate a hometown link for his fictitious hero.


So how did the village get its name?


It seems that, along with the Nozerim, a related Jewish/Christian faction, the Evyonim – ‘the Poor’ (later to be called Ebionites) – emerged about the same time. According to Epiphanius (Bishop of Salamis , Cyprus, circa 370 AD) they arose from within the Nazarenes. They differed doctrinally from the original group in rejecting Paul and were 'Jews who pay honour to Christ as a just man...' They too, it seems, had their own prototype version of Matthew – ‘The Gospel to the Hebrews’. A name these sectaries chose for themselves was 'Keepers of the Covenant', in Hebrew Nozrei haBrit, whence Nosrim or Nazarene!


In other words, when it came to the crunch, the original Nazarenes split into two: those who tried to re-position themselves within the general tenets of Judaism ('Evyonim'-Nosrim); and those who rejected Judaism ('Christian'-Nosrim)


Now, we know that a group of 'priestly' families resettled an area in the Nazareth valley after their defeat in the Bar Kochbar War of 135 AD (see above). It seems highly probable that they were Evyonim-Nosrim and named their village 'Nazareth' or the village of 'The Poor' either because of self-pity or because doctrinally they made a virtue out of their poverty.


"Blessed are the Poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven."

– Matthew 5,3.


The writer of Matthew (re-writer of the proto-Matthew stories) heard of 'priestly' families moving to a place in Galilee which they had called 'Nazareth' – and decided to use the name of the new town for the hometown of his hero.
 
Dodgy Story, Dodgy Geography


The original gospel writers refrained from inventing a childhood, youth or early manhood for JC because it was not necessary to their central drama of a dying/reborn sun-god. But as we know, the story grew with the telling, particularly as the decades passed and the promised redeemer and judge failed to reappear. The re-writer of the Gospel of Mark, revising the text sometime between 140 and 150 AD, introduced the name of the city only once, in chapter one, with these words:




Ironically, an indication that this sole reference to a town called Nazareth in Mark is a late, harmonization interpolation is to be found in the Gospel of Matthew. Copying the same baptism episode from an early edition of Mark, the author of Matthew makes no mention of Nazareth:


"Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan to be baptized by him." – Matthew 3.13.


In the Greek New Testament no fewer than eleven variant spellings are used for Nazarene, Nazarean and Nazareth. In total the words occur thirty-one times. Though you would never guess from the English translations, on nineteen occasions Nazarene or Nazarean, not Nazareth, is intended. And in the Gospel of Mark, all four later occurences (1.24; 16.6; 10.47;14.67) the word used is Nazarene, not Nazareth.


Clearly, "Jesus the Nazarene" in the original tale became "Jesus, a resident of Nazareth" in the updated story of Matthew and Luke. Indeed, there are indications that an early layer in the development of Mark favoured Capernaum as the hometown of Jesus (home of the six most prominent disciples, venue for several key miracles, etc.).


We can trace the subsequent elevation of Nazareth in the Gospel of Luke. Luke is the writer who emphasizes JC's ties to 'Nazareth.' Luke is the writer who goes out of his way to demonstrate an anti-Capernaum stance. Scholars have concluded Luke was not a Jew himself because of his 'glaring errors in things Jewish'. He also makes mistakes in his geography. He knows little about the place and in his mini-drama describes an impossible incident:




Nazareth, in fact, is located in a depression, set within gentle hills. The whole region is characterized by plains and mild rises with no sharp peaks or steep cliffs. The terrain is correctly understood as a high basin, for in one direction is the much lower Plain of Esdraelon. But there is no disguising Nazareth is built in a valley and not on a mountain. Even the mediaeval town sat below the summit – protected from the wind. Beginning only in 1957, the Jewish suburb called 'Nazerat Illit' ('Upper Nazareth') was built to the top of the hills to the east of the city.
 
Hauna hoja ya maana ila unaongea ongea tu kama kichaa fulani ili kuwafurahisha na kuwadanya wagalatia wenzako kuhusu Quran

Unaongea mambo ambayo hata ukitakiwa utoe ushahidi hauna

Quran inasema hizo habari mtume Muhammad amesumuliwa na Mungu muumba mbingu na aridhi

Quran 3:44.
Hizi ni khabari za ghaibu tunazo kufunulia; nawe hukuwa nao walipo kuwa wakitupa kalamu zao nani wao atamlea Maryamu, na hukuwa nao walipo kuwa wakishindana.

Haya tuonyeshe katika hizo Injili zenu zilizo andikwa na waganga wa kienyeji akina Luka hu muujiza alioufanya Yesu wa kuumba ndege kwa udongo upo katika Aya namba ngapi?

Quran 3:49.
Na ni Mtume kwa Wana wa Israili kuwaambia: Mimi nimekujieni na Ishara kutoka kwa Mola Mlezi wenu, ya kwamba nakuundieni kwa udongo kama sura ya ndege. Kisha nampuliza anakuwa ndege kwa idhini ya Mwenyezi Mungu.
 
4th Century Pilgrim Route – and NO NAZARETH!








A generation after the dowager empress had gone touring, another geriatric grandee, the Lady Egeria, spent years in the 'Land becoming more Holy by the day'.


Egeria – a Spaniard, like the then Emperor Theodosius and almost certainly part of the imperial entourage – reached the Nazareth area in 383. This time, canny monks showed her a 'big and very splendid cave' and gave the assurance that this was where Mary had lived. The Custodians of the Cave, not to be outbid by the Keepers of the Well, insisted that the cave, not the well, had been the site of the divine visitation. This so-called 'grotto' became another pilgrimage attraction, over which – by 570 – rose the basilica of another church. Today, above and about the Venerable Grotto, stands the biggest Christian theme park in the Middle East.








4th Century Roman Map – and NO NAZARETH!





The Levantine coast from the so-called Peutinger map or "table" (Tabula Peutingeriana), with west to the top. The complete map is twenty-two feet wide and is so-named for Conrad Peutinger, a 16th century German antiquarian and is currently held in Vienna. The map is actually a medieval copy (12th or 13th century) of a 4th century Roman original (it shows Constantinople, founded in the year 328). The whole world known to the Romans is represented, from Spain in the west to India in the east.


In the section shown here, below the city of Aelia Capitolina (centre left), the map shows one site which had by this stage entered the Christian dreamscape – the Mount of Olives (red). The cartographer of this unique record named more than 3000 places. And guess what? – he does not mention Nazareth!
 
Kwa Nini Allah hakutunga character wake wa kiaarabu akachukua wa kiyahudi?
 
Kwa Nini Allah hakutunga character wake wa kiaarabu akachukua wa kiyahudi?
Binadamu kama akina Paulo ndio wanatabia ya kutengeneza character na kuwapoteza binadamu wenzao wenye uwezo mdogo wa kufikiri kama wewe

Tito 2:13 (KJV)
tukilitazamia tumaini lenye baraka na mafunuo ya utukufu wa Kristo Yesu, Mungu mkuu na Mwokozi wetu;
 
Hakuna utata katika suala la uandishi wa vitabu vya Torati na mwandishi wake kuwa ni Musa. Hiyo iko hivyo
Usilamishe tu iwe hivyo ndio maana mwanzo kabisa nilikwambia kuwa hivi ni vitabu vya imani uliyoyaeleza kuhusu biblia ni vitu ambavyo wewe unaamini.
 
HII NDIO BIBLIA ,HAIHITAJI KUJITETEA ,

KITU KAMA HIKI HUWEZI KUKUTA KWENYE QURAN , ZAIDI INAKOPI KOPI BILA HATA MPANGILIO

2petro 2

6.Tena akaihukumu miji ya Sodoma na Gomora,akiipindua na kuifanyamajivu,AKAIFANYA IWE ISHARA KWA WATU WATAKAOKUWA HAWAMCHI MUNGU BAADA YA HAYA
 
NI RAHISI KUROPOKA

BIBLIA INAJITHIBITISHA IMETOKA KWA MUNGU, MFANO UNABII HUU KAMWE HUWEZI KUUKUTA KWENYE QURAN ,HATA WAKUFANANA TU

Jiwe la Moabu

katika mwaka wa 1868 kule Diboni, Yordani Kulipatikana jiwe lifaamikalo kama MOABITE STONE lililogunduliwa na mwana akiolojia na mmishionari wa ujerumani Klein,

Jiwe hili linathibitisha vita ya wa moabu dhidi ya Israeli kama ilivyoandikwa katika 2Fal 2 na 3.

Kati ya shuhuda za kiakiolojia za kabila hili la wa moabu ni Jiwe la Mesha, linaloeleza ushindi wao dhidi ya mwana wa mfalme Omri wa Israeli.

JIWE HILI LILIKUTWA LIMEANDIKWA MANENO HAYA

“Mimi ni Mesha […] mfalme wa moabub […] Omri alikuwa mfalme wa Israeli, na akawatesa moabu Moabu […]Nilichukua kutoka humo vyombo vya Yehova […] ilihali nyumba ya Daudi ilimiliki Horonaimu

Jiwe la moabu ni maelezo ya matukio yanayofanana na 2 Wafalme sura ya 3. Watu kadhaa wa bibilia na mahali hutajwa:

Jiwe la MOABU Lilikuwa na umri unaokaribia miaka 3,000. Ni kipande cha jiwe la basalti jeusi lililosuguliwa likiwa na upande wa juu ulioviringishwa vizuri, lilikuwa na kimo cha karibu meta 1.2 likipita kidogo tu upana wa meta 0.6, na likiwa na unene unaokaribia meta 0.6View attachment 2407969
 

Ndio maana mahakamani kuna swali lazima uulizwe elimu yako
Ili Baraza lione atakayetoa ushahidi anauelewa wa mambo Kwa kiwango gani.

Hivyo ulichowasilisha na mada inayoendelea hakina mahusiano na hii inatokana na Elimu yako kuwa ndogo, hivyo unahaki kuchangia Kwa namna hiyo.

Ngoja niendelee kujadiliana na waalimu wako.
Wewe kaa uwe mtazamaji au ukiona mtu wa kiwango chako kwenye hii mada unaweza kujadiliana naye
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…