Acts17apologetics in search of historical Jesus; Evidence for crucifixion?

In answer to the video "The Significance of Jesus' Resurrection"

The whole matter of Jesus' end in this world appeared as if the Jews had succeeded in their evil, murdering plots because, among other reasons, Jesus was missing, or as the Quran says God "tawaffa" him, purified him and made him ascend to Heaven. This instead prevented the humiliation that wouldve happened if his enemies got to the body. If they presented it to the people in a humiliated state, leading to a psychological victory for the Israelites 

4:158"Allah took him up to Himself". 

They couldnt even kill him, nor could they damage his body and God states He would raise him up to himself, meaning that not only his body wouldnt be humiliated but it would be honored by God instead.

God thus lifted Jesus up and did not leave a trace of him with them yet even without proof for their claims, the Israelites that wanted him dead managed to start a rumor that quickly spread and was believed. The resulting confusion was similar to that of the rumor of the prophet Muhammad's death during the battle of Uhud 3:144. Roman crucifixions occured daily and by the hundreds, of any agitators to the point that they would sometimes run out of wood for the crosses. The accusing Jews could easily pass off their boastful claims as fact in those circumstances, regardless of whether they truly believed their own claim or not. This rumor spread among both friends and foes. It is entirely possible at this point that not only the Jews were unaware of Jesus' true whereabouts, but neither were his followers. The confusing absence of a prophet has been a means of testing the followers left behind, whether they would remain on the clear path outlined by the prophet when he was in their midst, maintain his directives, or start innovating in the religion and go back to their sinful ways. This occured with Moses, as he retreated away from his people to receive revelation, just as it did with Muhammad when many fell into despair during the battle of Uhud, and later when he died 

3:144"And Muhammad is no more than a messenger; the messengers have already passed away before him; if then he dies or is killed will you turn back upon your heels?" 

The Nazarenes, like the calf-worshiping Jews thus failed the test of steadfastness in the absence of their prophet. As the rumours of Jesus' death started by his enemies became widespread, his disillusioned followers retrospectively painted the whole thing as a divine masterplan, with all the Christologies that ensued. Those among them that maintained Jewish law were sidelined by Paul's movement very early on, and within just 2 generations the little remnant of Judaism within the Jesus sect was erased. It was supplanted by a wave of converts from the greco-roman world who found in this transformed and readapted original Jewish sect, a favorable echo for their own beliefs, naming this new religion, Christianity. 

It is thus meaningless to argue that because the corruptions the Quran denounces were introduced early on, then it follows that these were original teachings of Jesus. Had Moses and Aaron not quickly and violently corrected the corruptions to their teachings, executing the guilty by the thousands, nothing would have prevented the same kind of falsehood to be passed off as "genuine teachings" of Moses, as was done with Jesus 

5:117"I said not to them except what You commanded me - to worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; but when You took me up, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things, Witness". 

Jesus did not have the occasion to do as Moses and Aaron did very early on so as to prevent the lies attributed to them from becoming "orthodoxy". However, if they escaped Jesus condemnation, it does not mean God was unaware of their evil doings. Isnt it surprising that the Lord's prayer taught by Jesus himself (as opposed to every other prayer that others taught to say in Jesus’ name), never mentioned Jesus, nor vicarious atonement, nor him as messiah, nor him as intermediary, nor any trinity, among anything else Christological? This foundational prayer is more anti-christian than any passage one may find in the entire Bible.

 

We're not talking about the lack of Christological references in terms of labels, but in terms of concepts. The prayer is far removed from the ideas established by the Pauline movement, the creeds of the Church Fathers and later councils. Not only are those concepts absent but every sentence of the prayer clashes with mainstream Christian tenets. For example vicarious atonement, not only isnt it mentioned by name or implicitly as a concept, but in addition we have Jesus, who is supposed to be the embodiment of that notion, refuting it 

"forgive us our sins, as we have forgiven those who have sinned against us". 

No need for Jesus, forgiveness is attained through one's own efforts. The same is conveyed in the parable of the prodigal son Lk15. The unrighteous son is forgiven by his father simply for turning to God in sincere repentance. Not only is he forgiven but he is welcomed with a warm celebration. It is his state of contriteness that brought him back to life, not the blood on the cross "he was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found".

The idea of vicarious atonement stems from the notion of human depravity; none may claim righteousness on his own due to a sinful nature that pollutes every deed and thought. Yet Jesus undermines that notion too; temptation isnt the product of inherent human depravity and satanic influence. Rather it is God, who is perfectly righteous, whom the worshiper asks 

"not to lead us into temptation". 

Jesus teaches his followers to begin the prayer by calling upon "our" Father who is in heaven, not to the divine son who is on earth. Nothing distinguishes Jesus from a regular believer in terms of sonship to the Father. The same fatherhood that applies to him applies to the others. It is the Father's name only that is to be hallowed, His will is to be done, and He is the Sustainer of the devotees, including Jesus

 "Give us today our daily bread". 

These innovations might have initiated among Jesus' close circle, through re-interpretations of his teachings, or among the wave of new converts that supplanted them. To this new, outer circle, the claim that he was captured and killed resonated as closer to the truth and a more honest assessment of his disappearance.

His gruesome death became an attractive narrative of heroism and martyrdom not only for the sake of his followers but for the entire human race. 

Jesus is portrayed as fearing death and wanting to avoid it Jn7:1,11:54,Luke 22:42. He begged God (himself) 3 times, putting his forehead to the ground, to take his soul before experiencing suffering and death in Matt26:38. He does not want to experience what he was about to go through but nevertheless submits his will to that of the father, whether he decides to make him bear the cup of suffering or not 

"Yet not My will, but Yours be done". 

Clearly, had he been given the choice, he would have refused "dying for the sins of mankind" despite having supposed foreknowledge of the divine plan of salvation since the beginning of creation, a plan which he himself sketched together with his divine partners. It also shows one of the co-equal partners submitting his will to another. Yet we never see the reverse, with the Father obediently submitting his will to the Son or the Holyspirit. That "hesitation" from Jesus cannot be attributed to his human nature as he himself states that it is his soul that feared and doubted Matt26:38. Then, when on the cross Jesus grieves for God's abandoning him. Even Revelations5 which is sometimes quoted to defend the notion of a predetermined divine masterplan of salvation through Jesus, is in fact speaking in eschatological terms, just as the whole book does. It speaks of the salvation of some people after events of great tribulation, ie the end of times. Then we have Heb5:7 throwing in the ambiguous statement that Jesus' prayers were heard and accepted by God, and this includes the desperate cry to "let this cup pass from" him. The realization of his prayer, his inability to take on the full brunt of the "sins of mankind" came in the form of Simon of Cyrene who relieved Jesus from his cross and carried it half way till Golgotha Matt27:31-33. 

This embarrassing change to the divine master plan of salvation forced another author in Jn19:17-18 to have Jesus carrying his own cross, the symbol of mankind's sins, all the way until he reached Golgotha where he was crucified. The cross in fact was not a Christian symbol until the 6th century. Could the whole "Simon of Cyrene" tale be orthodoxy's early response to a story popularised by certain gnostics that it was not Jesus but Simon who had been nailed to the cross?

The predictions Jesus makes as regards his impending death on the other hand are portrayed as willful self-sacrifice. In these versions, we see other inconsistencies. When he tells his disciples, several times and explicitly how he would die, they are taken by complete surprise when the events unfold Matt16,17,20,Mk8,9,10,Lk9,18. Not once are they depicted, following his supposed death, as patiently waiting his predicted resurrection after just 3 days. Neither are they depicted recalling the secret miracle once it unfolds. Even when he appeals to prophecies at the third and last prediction of his death 

Lk18:34"The disciples did not understand any of this. Its meaning was hidden from them, and they did not know what he was talking about". 

Clearly, there was a general atmosphere of confusion as to Jesus' disappearance, a confusion which the writers could not deny as it corresponded to the reality they knew about and witnessed. But, because they were writing from the lens that he was crucified, they had to retrospectively paint this confusion as a misunderstanding by the disciples of Jesus' clear predictions. Between Jesus' desire to avoid death, his repeated predictions as to his willful execution, the misunderstandings of the disciples, the story line lacks consistency and seems muddled. We see the same pattern with other major themes retrospectively applied to Jesus, such as his messiahship, again painted as shrouded in obscurity due to the "misunderstanding" of his closest disciples. The simple reason is that the historical Jesus did not go around claiming to fulfil the messianic predictions of the HB. The claim was later made for him. If he did, people would have laughed their lungs off, including the Romans. The Gospel writers, writing at least 50 years after the events knew that what Jesus accomplished had nothing to do with the highly anticipated establishment of the kingdom of God. They were thus left with no option other than painting the whole matter as they did.

Prior to Jesus becoming God, the pagans scoffed at the notion of a human savior dying a cursed death then resurrecting. But the later introduction and spread of the deviant notion of Jesus' divinity made the Christian religion fit more easily into their paradigm. 

As the Quran says in the context of Jesus' supposed divine sonship 

9:30"they immitate the saying of those who disbelieved before".

Gentiles of the region believed in Mithraism, a religion already spread all throughout Europe and Asia minor centuries prior to the birth of Christianity. Among such beliefs is the death and resurrection of Osiris. Those ritually sharing in that death and resurrection through baptism had their sins remitted. The pagan Roman authorities thus welcomed the new religion seeing it was in congruence with centuries of tradition of dying and/or mutilated savior gods. 

As the early church father Justin Martyr conceded

"when we say...Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified, died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propose nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you consider sons of Zeus".

Paul, who was at most a hellenezied Jew, was explaining Jesus teachings in ways that were unheard of by Jesus' disciples. Paul's letters were written about AD 50-60, while the Gospels were not written until 60-90 meaning Paul's theories were already established before the unknown writers of the gospels started their works and earlier Christian thought was quickly branded heretical. The church was so weak that within the same generation of the disciples, this Jewish sect of the Nazarenes, whose distinction from mainstream Judaism was only in the belief that Jesus was the messiah, turned upon its heels, abandoned Jewish law, adopted concepts unheard of anywhere in Judaism. There is a reason why the Gospel writers including Paul do not quote the Hebrew Bible but the Greek Septuagint which was hated by the rabbis as it represented the Hellenization of many Jews of the time. The early church thus became irrelevant very early on following Jesus' departure, due to Paul's efforts at supplanting it, dismissing Jewish law as obsolete, reinterpreting core Semitic concepts of God so as to appeal to his pagan audience.

After Jesus' death, Paul's main problem was to convince his Jewish audience that the messiah's death, without accomplishing any of the messianic criteria, instead of being a failure was actually a necessity. He did so by introducing the doctrine of total depravity, making all humans de facto sinners and therefore in need of an atoning sacrifice Rom7:14-25,Rom3:10-11,5:13,8:7-8,1Cor2:14,Eph2:1-3,Titus3:3. His addressees however already believed in the resurrection of the dead, in a just God who forgave the sins of a penitent heart. Nothing was missing in their system that Jesus' sacrifice and resurrection could fix. Paul's redeeming hero was a redundancy to them, so he was obviously met with fierce resistance wherever he preached his unscriptural ideas. This led him to eventually turn to the gentiles among whom he found a much more favourable audience. All this is evident from a cursory reading of the NT and the writings of Paul. That is how Christianity was shaped, using its target audience's sensitivities all the while toning down to the maximum its Jewish heritage.

The sect that "won" and became "orthodoxy" achieved victory by political rather than epistemic means. The dominant branch was but one among many early, conflicting Christian sects, as even reflected in Paul's letters and the desperate struggles he had with them to maintain control of his own congregations. The process was not a difficult one considering Mithraism's tendency to accommodate with other rival cults, throughout its vast geographical spread, before and after Christianity. Christianity of course wasnt that accommodating, doing everything to supplant it due to the disturbing similarities. Many Church Fathers (Justin, Origen, Tertullian) attempted rationalizing Mithraism's similarities with their religion; "satanic imitations" being the standard explanation. The fine details of those similarities are now lost due to the Christian destructions of all "mithraes" they could put their hands on as well as persecute its followers. The task of reconstructing which themes Mithraism absorbed from Christianity so as to embellish its own narrative, versus what actually pre-dated Christianity, becomes a speculative task. But the presence of such vehement defenses by church authorities reveals their major embarrassment, their discomfort at their opponents' accusations of plagiarism. Instead of engaging their critics in debate, these church fathers and other Christian "orthodox" writers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries slandered their opponents with exaggerated or even false charges, shunned them or socially intimidated them. This pattern of engaging their critics is in itself revealing of their own insecurities.

Here are a few examples, it was in the 4th century that Pope Damasus I introduced the 25th of december as the birthday of Jesus (Christmas). He used the immensely popular  ancient mid-winter solstice Roman festival, which lasted for several days and culminated in the feast of 'Brumalia' on December 25th. This major celebration among pagans caused agonies for the Church, and since the early Christians had absolutely no idea of the day, month or even year of Jesus' nativity, it was a relatively easy matter to superimpose a Christian festival on the pagan one.

Easter similarly has its origins in a pagan celebration of nature’s resurrection, with rabbit and eggs symbolizing fertility and renewal. In fact it is well known that pagan Europe, up to the middle ages was undergoing a Christianization of their old rites and customs. This process facilitated European conversions.

Acts17apologetics creative Christians; the Gospels' revisionism?

In answer to the video "The Significance of Jesus' Resurrection"

The devastating defeat of having their messiah dying, was retrospectively written as a divinely planned victory since before the universe's creation. IT was then put in writing by several unknown authors whom nobody knows, who attributed their works to Jesus' close disciples yet these disciples are reported to have fled the scene at Jesus' arrest. Add to this the fact that not even a single historian exists, attesting to the wonderful and cataclysmic events surrounding the crucifiction that were allegedly witnessed by an entire city.

The NT itself testifies to the fact that his close circle, let alone the rest of his followers never approached the dead body and could not therefore burry it. The passage of Acts13:27-29, which is attributed to Paul, shows that the disciples included among those guilty for the execution anyone who took part in the recovery of Jesus' body. Thus, Paul emphasizes that Jesus was buried not by his followers but by his enemies yet Jn19:38, which was written after Acts, speaks of 2 elements among those who burried Jesus -Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus- as being secret followers of his. This obvious manipulation with the burial party being turned from hostile to favorable and positive is an effort to first of all circumvent the difficulty of having Jesus' body dumped in an unmarked pit as would have been done by his executioners, and second find reliable witnesses to the event. These invented characters would have then "faithfully" transmitted their testimony to their brothers in faith and Gospel writers, without being noticed.

How strange is it that Joseph of "Arimathaea" (a mysterious and unknown "city of the Jews" Lk23:51) was a Jesus disciple Matt27 yet he is unheard of until the very end. He is a convenient hybrid to the whole plot; close enough to the Jewish elite to avoid suspicion so that he may approach the body, but yet a closet Christian. HE is a

"honourable member of the Jewish council, also waiting for the kingdom of God".

Regardless, this Joseph was needed to rescue Jesus' body. Thats not to speak of another similar character only found in John3, called Nicodemus, a "ruler of the Jews" who was allegedly attracted to Jesus because of his miracles yet besides the "water to wine" one, Jesus' hadnt yet performed any miracle, did not begin his ministry, even though Jn2:24 states many miracles were performed only to later claim that a healing he performed in Capernaum was only his second miracle Jn4:54.

Contradictions and sidestepping aside, this Jewish ruler was supposedly convinced from seeing water turned to wine that "no man can do these miracles..except God be with him". One can only wonder what would have his reaction been had he seen what Pharao's magicians were able to do when urged to replicate Moses' miracles.

Apostate prophet exposes Christian desacration; Jesus followers restore Jerusalem temple?

In answer to the video "Muhammad's Destruction of Idols"

When Jerusalem became Christianity's holy city, the Christian authorities would allow entry to some exiled Jews once a year to mourn the destruction of their Temple. One cannot but notice the cynicism of the Christians who viewed in the desecrated ruins, the triumph of their religion, the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy and thus satisfactorily left it as it is. In the Quran, besides them being subdued up to this day to the Christians, God warns them of further chastisement 17:8 whenever they return or persist in their wrong ways. Their known long and painful history in Christian lands bears testimony to this. The Quran further condemned them to have their security fully in the hands of others

3:112"Abasement is made to cleave to them wherever they are found, except under a covenant with Allah and a covenant with men".

It isnt God Himself who would repel their numerous enemies and Who would give them the upper hand on more powerful foes as he did in the times of Moses. Such security could either come from some Muslim states (of the past and today) in the name of Allah or from some non-Muslim states for other reasons. This is because

3:112"they have become deserving of wrath from Allah, and humiliation is made to cleave to them; this is because they disbelieved in the communications of Allah and slew the prophets unjustly; this is because they disobeyed and exceeded the limits".

Here the Quran plays on the concept of shade, the comfort provided by the pillars of clouds during their lengthy exodus, telling them they are now under the shadow of humiliation and oppression instead of the shadow of peace, comfort, protection, sustenance. 

In its usual pattern of drawing a line and not generalizing, the Noble Quran continues

3:113"They are not all alike; of the followers of the Book there is an upright party.."

Their own books speak of their cursed state, made to hang upon them, and destined to expire only at what they call "the end of days", which in their terminology refers to the Messianic era of bliss and utopia

Zech8:13"And it shall come to pass that [just] as you were a curse among the nations, O house of Judah and house of Israel, so will I save you-and you shall be a blessing. Fear not; may your hands be strengthened".

By the year 638, Muslim troops led by the Caliph Umar entered Jerusalem and as they cleared the garbage on the Temple mount and uncovered scattered jumble of architectural elements, they identified the ruins as those of Solomon's Temple, instead of Hadrian's, and decided to clear an area of around 35 acres.

It was covered in garbage and debris of all sorts that were cynically left to be accumulated by the Christians as a reminder of Jesus' vindication, then a small prayer house was built on the site. The whole area of the mount that was cleared is what is known today as Masjid Al-Aqsa, sometimes also referred to as Haram Al-Sharif. Umar also uncovered what is suspected to be the Foundation Stone; the Rock from where it is speculated the prophet Muhammad ascended to heaven on the Night Journey 17:1, and which is believed by the Jews to be the first part of the Earth to come into existence and from where Adam, Cain, Abel, and Noah offered sacrifices to God. So no, Umar, contrary to the islamophobic rant, did not steal temple mount, he restored this area that was abandoned by both Jews and Christians, to its purpose, dignifying and honoring it.

It would be interesting to mention here the passage of Genesis 49. The writer promises that rulership over Israel will stay in the house of Judah and that the law will remain studied and kept. Historically neither were fulfilled. Then it mentions shiloh and how nations will gather around that figure, followed by metaphors of abundance. This isnt the concept of an end times figure that shall reestablish Jewish glory and law. As assumed earlier by the author, both are supposed to remain uninterrupted, up to the point of the arrival of "shiloh". Christians claim Jesus is this shiloh.

But assuming Jesus is traced to Judah, despite it being a violation of Jewish law due to him not having a biological father, how can he be the shiloh when it says the scepter shall not depart from Judah UNTIL shiloh comes? It implies that kingship rights will be removed from Judah at some future point and then given to shiloh (which etymologically means "the one to whom it belongs"). For Jesus to be shiloh in that sentence, he needs to be from other than Judah, which doesnt fit the Christian position. Further, neither shiloh nor Jesus appeared when Jewish self-government was over with the capture of the last king from the tribe of Judah, Zedekiah, in about 586 B.C.E. And even when Jesus did appear, he did not do so as a ruler over the Jews. To preserve the integrity of their text, the rabbis are now forced to reinterpret the promise and project it to the long haul, as Christians do with Jesus' second coming as ruler. To the rabbis, "the scepter not departing from Judah" became an allusion to right of governance instead of actual rulership and "the one to whom it belongs" (shiloh) a future ruler who shall establish it. Yet this still doesn't solve the problem of the removal of Judah when shiloh appears. The solution for them is elsewhere. Up to the arrival of the Ishmaelite prophet and the establishment of the Muslim nation as the new torch bearers of the truth to the world, the Jews could have potentially returned to their former glory, provided they repented and returned to the straight path; abiding by their covenant and accepting the last messenger sent to them, Jesus. When shiloh "the one to whom it belongs" appeared, that door was shut and will remain so until the day of resurrection 

Ps132:12"If your sons keep My covenant, and this, My testimony, which I shall teach them, also their sons will sit on your throne forever".

The current state of Israel is illegitimate, ethically, legally, let alone scripturally. That is why it is a deeply fractured, majoritarly secular society and that despite the apparent independence, is actually living under humiliating subjugation to other nations on whose support its survival depends, as the Quran even tells them (as referenced earlier).

The Jews, until now and as corroborated by their rabbis and their books, have still not been given the divine authority to rebuild their destroyed temple on its previous location, in order to re-dedicate it to their religious rituals. Per the Torah it is God that must give them the right to do so, when a Jewish king and prophet is among them, to indicate the now lost original dimensions, the location of the altar, let alone get the Jews out of several insurmountable ritualistic difficulties such as sacrificing a red heifer, complicated purity requirements, identifying the priests, the specificities of their clothings. Jews cannot just decide to go and build the temple arbitrarily.

So they're waiting, and will keep on waiting, for their promised messiah to come and do the job. In the meantime, another nation has been raised in their stead as the torch bearers of the truth among the nations, with its own divinely restored Temple and its altar.

Apostate prophet visits Jerusalem; caliph Umar stole Temple mount?

In answer to the video "Muhammad's Destruction of Idols"

Umar did not steal anything, he restaured this area that was abandonned by both Jews and Christians, to its purpose, dignifying and honoring it. To understand the issue precisely, lets go back in time. 

Physical destruction and abasement came on Jesus' rejecters soon after his departure. In the years 69-73, the Temple of Jerusalem was razed to the ground as Jesus predicted in Matt23,24,Mk13,Lk23 (Quran 17:7,3:56), their priesthood was destroyed, the Israelites were slaughtered in large numbers women and children included, by the Romans. Many more were enslaved and sold in the markets, as Jesus prophesied lk21:24, deported throughout the Roman empire and colonies for hard labor. 

Some were boarded on prison ships and sent to Corinth for the digging of an isthmus. Soonafter in the years 114-135 they suffered further destruction and enslavement by the tens of thousands, impoverishment and scattering throughout the earth. The greatest abasement was that for the next 1900 years they would have no authority in this land that was divinely granted to them. Following Jesus, Judea would be wrecked and destroyed several times by pagan forces, in accordance with Jesus' prophecy that not a stone would be left standing on another, for the Israelites' rejection of him Luke21. 

The predictions as reported in the NT however seem to be retrospectively written. The Temple was destroyed in 70CE. The Gospels were written after that time. If the Prophecy of the Temple's destruction was made by Jesus in the 30s as is suggested in the Gospels, then one needs to explain why earlier NT books seem uninformed of it. We're not talking about the tearing down of a place of worship in some remote location, but of Jerusalem's Temple, known throughout the empire and beyond, a place of particular significance to the authors' own religion. Yet the book of Hebrews, written in the 60s describes it as a reality which is in competition with the nascent Jesus sect because it epitomises rabbinic Judaism.

Previous prophecies, in their own books warned them that should they turn away from the commands of God, as was the case with their rejection of Jesus, God Himself will uproot them from the land they were settled in. 

They were not settled in it to enjoy it as an unrestricted holiday resort but to assert therein true faith and righteousness. Failure to do so would instead turn their sacred shrine into an object of ridicule among the nations 2Chronicles7:19-22. Eusebius the early church father notes that

"stones from the Temple itself, and from its ancient sanctuary and holy place, were used for the building of idol temples, and of theatres for the populace".

The Romans, led by Hadrian sought to build upon its ruins their new city "Aelia Capitolina". To achieve that vast project, the erasure of the previous city of the Jews had to be complete. In the process, their oppression was so intense, their expulsion so effective following their repeated rebellions and the 3 years of vicious warfare led by their messiah Simon bar Kochba, that by the 4th century the exact location of the temple edifice was beyond recall

"Rabbi Yermiah, son of Babylonia came to the Land of Israel and could not find the site of the Temple" (Tractate Shevuot 1 4b).

If 4th century Christian historian Eusebius is to be believed, the new city that Emperor Hadrian built upon the ruins of Jerusalem was colonized by a "new race of Gentiles" after "a total destruction of its ancient inhabitants". The whole province of Judea was even renamed Philisti as a further humiliation, after the ancient inhabitants of the land and bitterest enemies of the Israelites, the Philistines.

The new laws forbid Jews to live in the city or anywhere between Jerusalem and Hebron. Capital punishment faced any Jew who so much as stepped foot in the city. The harshness went so far as imposing penalties on any Jews caught laying eyes on the city on their "day of mourning". A day of mourning is one where they would remember the calamities that befell them. In Josephus' words

"Jerusalem ..was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited".

The scarcity of archaeological evidences for the biblical stories attests to this.

As 4th century churchman Jerome tells us, a statue of Hadrian, seated on horseback, was erected on the levelled platform of Jerusalem's Temple Mount after the crushing of the bar Kochba revolt in 135 AD. The Roman Emperor despised the Jews for their insularity and arrogant claims for a single concept of the divine. Just as Hadrian had erected a Temple to Zeus on the top of Mt Gerizim close to which the Samaritan Temple stood, it isnt inconceivable that he had erected a similar temple in Jerusalem, more precisely a temple dedicated to Jupiter, next to his imperial statue, as some scholars suggest. 

It was not until the Christianization of the Roman empire late in the 4th century that these pagan "abominations" were eventually torn down. Stones from the ruined sanctuary were looted for use in later Christian structures. On the neglected esplanade the Byzantine emperor Justinian built a church to Mary Mother of God but little else. 

Apostate prophet raises an outcry; why destroy the idols of Dhul Khalasa and Ta'if?

In answer to the video "Muhammad's Destruction of Idols"

Whether one likes it or not, there is a pattern of the prophets. When they are sent with manifest arguments, warnings and prophecies, if the people do not heed during their time of respite then the prophecies come to roost, the opponents to the prophets are uprooted and the prophets and their followers established in the land. This pattern is all the more true in regards to a land declared sacred by God, and subsequently defiled.

A point came where the prophetic warnings were about to come to fruition and the prophet subsequently sent with Ali the final ultimatum to the tribes gathering for the annual pilgrimage from across the Arabian peninsula and the remaining Idolators of Mecca. They were unworthy of being the guardians of a land declared sacred by God since its establishment by their forefathers Abraham and Ishmael 8:34-35,53,9:17-22,28.

This is just as God, in the times of the children of Israel, declared Canaan sacred and unfit to any trace of idolatry Deut9,Lev18:24-8,20:22-3. The Israelites consequently had to exterminate or forcefully expell from it those who indulged in it and defiled it Ezra9:12, erasing all traces of idol worship, not allowing any covenant or peaceful outcome to its inhabitants. The only exception was an occasion where a Canaanite tribe disguised as coming from a foreign nation deceitfully or rather desperately, got into a peace covenant under oath with Joshua.

He was Moses' successor who had to carry on the task of cleansing the land from idolaters. When this desperate ploy of a nation trying to save the lives of their people from Bible loving Yahweists was uncovered, Joshua could not abrogate that peace covenant, contrary to the will of the rest of the community Josh9.

Similarly to Ali, Joshua, before engaging the Canaanites in battle, sent an ultimatum to the inhabitants, offering them three choices: to leave the land, surrender and declare peace, or stand up and fight. The native tribe of the Girgoshites accepted the first condition. However, thirty-one kings chose to fight and were eventually all defeated by a 40.000 strong Jewish army at the end of a 7 years struggle Josh4:13,Josh12. 14 years later, Canaan was entirely conquered and divided among the 12 tribes of Israel. In many areas however the native population was neither entirely exterminated, nor expelled as explicitly commanded and made binding on the Jews for al times to come Deut20:16,25:19. They were enslaved instead Judges1:28. This disobedience led the Israelities to gradually lose both their ethnicity through inter-mixing with the natives, and their monotheistic religion Judges3:5-7.

As a result God lifted His divine protection, and the Israelites could not contain their enemies anymore, becoming themselves slaves in that very land they had been promised and which they successfully conquered previously, the land in which they were supposed to lead a pious, grateful and free life following their Egyptian bondage. These periods of idolatry and submission to their neighbors were interrupted by short periods where, in answer to their desperate cries, God would choose certain individuals to gather them back to the straight path, reunite them under one religion and purpose, and give them back control of the land. These righteous members of the community would be endowed with God's spirit, empowered to be "judges" because of their morality, intelligence, valor, achievements Judges2,3. The Quran refers to them in 5:44. They commanded respect because of their known uprightness and their advices and judgements were highly regarded.

The community would however quickly fall back into spiritual degeneration and would disunite, after the judge's death or sometimes during his own life. For a period of about 300 years following the conquest of the promised land, this cycle of domination by the polytheists -Amalekites, Philistines, Ammonites, Midianites and other Semitic tribes- followed by a return to power through the rise of another God-chosen "judge" would repeat itself many times. It wasnt until the time of David's reign, Israel's second king, that the heathens would be entirely subdued once more as they were centuries before when the land was first invaded.

The Arabs at the time of the prophet, not only were guilty for corrupting the way of the land, but they were also preventing the righteous from it. By that late point in the prophetic history of communicating the divine message and laws of the land, one can say that among the pagans, the most obdurate and hostile to the establishment of Islam were the people of Dhul Khalasa in Yemen. They dubbed their temple "the Kaaba of Yemen" in order to lure the newly converted Arabs back to paganism and to their temple. The prophet peacefully called them to Islam, contrary to the appeals of his companions to invoke God's destruction upon them. Yet they would not desist even until that late stage of prophetic warnings, the unfolding of all prophecies and establishment of the way of God in front of their eyes, they were still trying to instigate spiritual corruption in the hearts of people that had just come out of the darkness of paganism.

This gave the prophet the right to apply God's unalterable law of retribution upon a nation of rejecters. A little over 100 men were sent to the temple and as he was marching, the prophet's emissary was met with resistance according to Hisham Ibn Al-Kalb. A battle took place, resulting in the killing of all enemy combatants and tearing down of the temple. There is surviving poetry of the event recounting how the women of the tribe were humiliated by the defeat of their men and destruction of the temple. As a side note and as is always the case when trying to interpret a report from the prophet, the principle is to take into account the whole corpus of ahadith and history, as well as the Quran, in order to find a pattern of thought and behavior, so as to fill in the blanks where there is ambiguity. In this case it is clear that only combatants could have been killed. Not unarmed citizen, as well as the weak.

There are countless ahadith, besides the rules of war laid down in the Quran, forbidding and condemning the purposeful targeting of women, children and the elderly during battle. Muslims could however be confronted to a situation where the necessity of war in self defence and the particular circumstances of a battle make it hard or impossible to distinguish between fighters and innocent civilians. Just as initiating fighting in certain times and places is forbidden (months of hajj or within the inviolable precincts of Kaaba) but should the enemy attack first then one is left with no option but to respond, the ethical rules of engagement should not prevent the Muslims from defending themselves should they be attacked at first, even if it carries the risk of causing unintended collateral casualties 

"The Prophet passed by me at a place called al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They are from them."

Had there been a pattern by the Muslims of disregarding innocents in warfare, the question wouldnt have been presented to the prophet but the very fact that it was, shows that by default, the Islamic rule is to avoid civilians or any entity that does not pose a threat. In jihad the overarching principle is to always be proportional in retaliation 

2:190"And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits". 

Such war ethics are absent in biblical warfare.

Had a similar report been read with the Judeo-Christian pattern of behavior towards other religions in ancient times the case would have been different. 

True prophets and men of God were divinely sanctioned to tear down pagan temples in all the land of Canaan and exterminate the unrighteous natives, men, women, elderly, children, infants and animals 1Sam15. Contrary to the aforementioned report where no intentional targeting of innocents is meant, God in the HB allegedly commands the purposeful and indiscriminate killing of all that breathes. In addition, the hadith comes in the context of preemptive warfare, as already pointed while the situation in the HB is not one of hostility against the Israelites, rather to allow their establishment. The purpose of such measures was to avoid the Israelites'  assimilation into the remaining pagan natives and adoption of their customs. And because the task was not thoroughly completed, with the Israelites intermarrying the natives, reverting to polytheism and worshipping in pagan temples, subsequent prophets and leaders were charged with destroying these rebuilt pagan temples once again and murder all their priests and false prophets. One notorious case is that of Elijah's mass slaughter of the false prophets of Baal.

This demonstrates the important point that God making a nation to inherit a land and placing on it the responsibility to preserve a certain din/way of life, is nothing but a matter of test that could equally result in their uprooting should they reach similar levels of transgressions. With dominion and authority comes great responsibility and accountability. God remains particularly watchful over the powerful nations 89:6-14 and does not fail crushing them with all their resources should He deem their existence harmful to their own selves and others. Ultimately this new people, the Muslims, were made successors in the land while being warned that if they transgress they will be swiftly requited. They will be replaced by the One encompassing them as He encompasses the whole earth, capable of erasing them completely then re-establish a similarly great human creation, even better yet in make should He want to 6:165,70:40-1,76:28.

Similar warnings were issued to the Israelites should they break the covenant after being established as a nation. They inherited a land which the previous possessors were enjoying in unrighteousness, hence their replacement Quran7:137,26:57-9,Deut8:19-20,Deut28-31,Deut9. This did not only happen with the Israelites, or Ishmaelites in the times of Muhammad, but previous nations that rejected their prophets were equally destroyed and another nation raised in their stead as trustees of God's favors

10:71-3,44:26,7:69,74,137,100"Is it not clear to those who inherit the earth after its (former) residents that if We please We would afflict them on account of their faults". 

The HB uses a very appropriate metaphore to describe that pattern, picturing a sacred land becoming sick of its inhabitants' practices to the point it cannot contain them anymore

Lev18:24-8"Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, because this is how the nations that I am going to drive out before you became defiled. Even the land was defiled; so I punished it for its sin, and the land vomited out its inhabitants..."  

Lev20:22-3"And you shall observe all My statutes and all My ordinances, and fulfill them, then the Land, to which I am bringing you to dwell therein, will not vomit you out. You shall not follow the practices of the nation that I am sending away from before you, for they committed all these [sins], and I was disgusted with them".

The prophet Solomon Prov2:21-22 and before him David spoke of that reality

Ps37:9-11"evildoers shall be cut off, and those who hope for the Lord-they will inherit the land. A short while longer and the wicked man is not here, and you shall look at his place and he is not there. But the humble shall inherit the land, and they shall delight in much peace".

The heritage of the earth in this worldly life is neither permanent nor everlasting. It is merely bestowed as a trial for different communities. That is why, everlasting heritage of the "land" is only possible in the Hereafter, in Heaven where those that will be established, the righteous believers, will never falter in their spirituality 21:105,39:73-4.

Apostate prophet laments the breaking of idols, couldnt Muhammad relocate them?

In answer to the video "Muhammad's Destruction of Idols"

This isnt the prophet's decision, but a divine one inscribed within an established pattern. the Quran retells the stories of past nations who were ordained, against a mightier ennemy and with God's help, to uproot unrighteousness and establish the will of God in a specific land. Such was the case with the Israelites back in the times of Moses who were commanded to cleanse the blessed land of Canaan from its unrighteous dwellers, to Saul/Talut and David 2:246-252, down to the Ishmaelites. Under the IShmaelite prophet and just as was commanded to the previous semitic prophets, they had to purge the ancient temple of monotheism in Mecca from its unworthy guardians who had swayed into the ways of polytheism

22:40-1"Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause except that they say: Our Lord is Allah. And had there not been Allah's repelling some people by others, certainly there would have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques in which Allah´s name is much remembered; and surely Allah will help him who helps His cause; most surely Allah is Strong, Mighty. Those who, should We establish them in the land, will keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate and enjoin good and forbid evil; and Allah´s is the end of affairs".

So just like it was ordained to Muhammad and the Children of Ishmael, Allah previously ordered in the days of Moses and the prophets of the children of Israel to fight in His way for specific purposes, see Deut1:41,Deut7,9:4-6,12:1-3,20:16-18 and allthroughout Deuteronomy. The Israelites are commanded to cleanse the land from idolatry, destroying all altars and not leaving a physical trace of it. All subsequent Israelite prophets were to purge all remaining traces of idolatry and evil from the land, by the sword without holding back whether it involves killing Jews or non Jews as prophecised in Isa1:25. In the HB, we read that God's established way of erradicating idolatry is so forecful that He sometimes even tasks non-Jews to do the job where the ISraelites failed, as stated in Jer48:10 concerning the Chaldeans sent to destroy the Moabites

"Cursed be he who performs the Lord's work deceitfully, and cursed be he who withholds his sword from blood"

or the Assyrians of Sennacherib raised by God and through whom He destroyed, exiled and enslaved the idolatrous Kingdom of Israel Amos6:11-14 or the Babylonians of Nebuchadnezzar whom God calls His servant for performing His will, sent firstly to inflict massacre upon the Israelites for their repeated transgressions, and then upon those Ammonites and Edomites that occupied the holy lands and reintroduced idolatry in it Jer25:9,49:19.

Later on it would be the non-Jew Cyrus, king of Persia who would be divinely aroused and commanded to wage war against the Babylonians until their defeat, expulsion from the holy land and the return of the Jews to Israel so as to re-establish monotheism in it Jer50:14-21,51:1,53. 

The same semitic pattern of prophethood is thus found in regards to Muhammad, the Ishmaelites and the Kaaba. God does not and never did tolerate the presence of idolatry in a land declared sacred and dedicated to monotheism. So God tasked His prophet with re-establishing the monotheistic practice at the Kaaba, and should his opponents try fighting and exiling him and his followers, they will consequently be uprooted from the land they had complete dominion over 17:76-7.

It was not the prophet's job to relocate the uninvited idols of the Kaaba, especially after years of warning those that put them there, against their corrupt practices, and the impending forceful expulsion.

Apostate prophet statue hunting; Allah's statue inside Kaaba?

In answer to the video "Muhammad's Destruction of Idols"

Allah was never an idol within the Kaaba, the Kaaba was dedicated to Him. The accumulation and piling up of idols above idols was due to the complacency and unrestrictedness that the Meccans and the custodians of the Kaaba felt as time went on. IT was their neglect regarding the status of the Kaaba and its original dedication to Allah alone. In fact their descendants would argue to the prophet Muhammad that had their innovations been harmful to the worship of Allah then Allah Himself would have prevented them and their forefathers from doing so

16:35,6:148"Those who are polytheists will say: 'Had Allah wished we would not have associated (aught with Him) nor our fathers, nor would we have forbidden anything.' So did belie those who were before them until they tasted Our punishment. Say: 'Have you any knowledge with you to adduce for Us? You follow nothing but conjecture, and you are nothing but idle talkers'".

Of course this unreasonable, deterministic argument that ignores the monotheistic principle of accountability and freewill in religion, in addition devoid of scriptural and prophetic support, disregards that God's disapproval has and does manifest itself, either as it did in the past with the destruction of nations that indulged in the same practices as theirs, or through the sending of prophets and revelations clarifying the right and the wrong as was unfolding to their eyes

6:149-151"Then to Allah (alone) belongs the conclusive argument. Had He wished, He would have surely guided you all aright...Say: 'Come, I will recite what your Lord has forbidden you from: that you do not associate anything with Him, and show kindness to your parents, and do not kill your children for poverty -We provide for you and for them - and do not approach indecencies, the outward among them and the inward ones, and do not kill the soul that Allah has forbidden save for justice. This He has enjoined you with so that you might understand. And do not approach the property of the orphan except in the best manner until he attains his maturity, and give full measure and weight with justice-- We do not impose on any soul a duty except to the extent of its ability; and when you speak, then be just though it be (against) a relative, and fulfill Allah´s covenant; this He has enjoined you with that you may be mindful; And (know) that this is My path, the right one therefore follow it, and follow not (other) ways, for they will lead you away from His way; this He has enjoined you with that you may guard (against evil)".

As to Hubal, the place from where it was brought from is uncertain, although all Muslim authorities of the past are united in that its origin is foreign. As already discussed above, it was fairly common in those ancient times for ideologies and religious beliefs to be exchanged through migrations and travels, as well as economic interests. We see this in our own times with people selling their inherited traditions and beliefs, customs and values for the sake of opening up business, political or other interests. The corrupt and materialistic custodians of the Kaaba were no different. They desired to attract as many far away people as they could, from every religious backround as possible, to the yearly pilgrimage, even puting portraits of Jesus and Mary on the Kaaba's wall according to tradition.
Hubal's "foreign" origin is partly the reason why he was not integrated into the "divine family" of Allah unlike the three "daughters of Allah", Allat, Manat and al-Uzza mentionned in the Quran. Thats also why Hubal never supplants Allah as the lord of the Kaaba. The cult associated with him involved divination and future forecasts. The custodian of the idol acted as the oracle. He requested blood sacrifice followed by a consultation of the divination arrows lying in front of him.

The Quran does not speak of Hubal, just as it doesnt mention the other deities of the Arab pantheon, except for al-lat, Manat and al-Uzza. These were specifically pointed because of their feminine gender, serving as an argument against the misogynistic pagans who, paradoxically, were not only worshiping females, but also gave them a status of influence alongside Allah, the supreme deity 53:19-23.

Their paradoxical mysoginy lied in the fact that they worshipped goddesses and yet murdered their infants if they were females.

Apostate prophet disapproves breaking idols; who was the Kaaba's true God?

In answer to the video "Muhammad's Destruction of Idols"

Forget about the Islamic stance, the Kaaba, to the pre-islamic Arabs, belonged to their supreme God Allah who commanded his prophet Abraham to settle in Mecca a monotheistic temple.

The Arabs were traders and they brought back all sorts of gods as time developed, in order to attract foreign tribes to their city, forming alliances with them. It is this introduction of idolatry which is the essential criminal act the Quran accuses them of in regards to the Kaaba.

One such major deity imported was Hubal. It was inserted among countless other deities, mainly playing the role of intercessors with Allah 46:28,39:3. As attested throughout the Quran and the traditions, Allah was the supreme God whom all Arabs recognized as the Almighty Creator, including the Hanif and both Arab Christians and Jews before the advent of Islam. Although the Quran denounces the religion of the polytheists, even names some of their prominent idols, it never does so on the basis of them supplanting Allah, the supreme God they recognized, with other more powerful or authorative deities. Rather the condemnation always is in terms of associating partners to Him in the dominion, as well as ascribing a progeny to Him.

There is abundant evidence in pre-islamic poetry depicting Allah as the Creator of the heavens, involved in human lives, sustaining them and inflicting retribution. A famous pre-islamic poem attributed to 'Adi ibn Zayd swears by

"Rabbi makkata wal salibi/The Lord of Mecca and of the cross".

It is well known that pre-Islamic Arabs, including pagans, Christians or Jews, referred to God with Allah, as well as Rabb/Lord. Several poets call the Kaaba the "House of Allah" (ibn Shihab, ibn al Hudadiya, ibn al Khatim). Not only that, there are poems associating pilgrimmage rites, including sacrifice at the site with veneration to Allah (al Nabigha, al A'sha).

Among the gods brought to Mecca, serving the funvtion of partners of Allah was Hubal whom tradition asserts was brought in from outside the Arabian Peninsula, either from Syria or Iraq by Amr bin Luhayy

"0 'Amr! you have invented various gods; At Mecca - idols around the House. And there was for the House One Lord from ever; But you have made for it several lords (which are now worshipped) by the people. Surely you should know that Allah is in no hurry; Soon He will choose for (His) House stewards other than you".

Although the People protested originally to the innovations of Amr bin Luhayy, they were quickly curtailed and cannot be compared in that sense to the Israelites who were sent countless prophets and shown numerous miracles, even during the time of Manasseh where idols had been placed within the Temple, and yet still refused listening.

With their Ishmaelites brethren, however, it only took a fraction of what their predecessors were shown from proofs, and it was enough to eradicate the corruption grafted into the religion of Abraham once and for all. This shows how deeply ingrained monotheism and the Abrahamic legacy was, in the hearts and minds of the Arabs, despite the passage of time and the religious innovations. Thus even a minute of straying by the Israelites is equivalent to 1000 years of deviation by the Ishmaelites at their own temple of the one God in Mecca. In the course of time, worshiping the transcendent Allah became difficult for the increasingly idolatrous Arabs. By the time of the prophet, although they still majoritarily recognized the superiority of Allah above all their interceding idols, many others had abandoned the worship of Allah altogether. The lack of representation of the supreme Allah among a myriad of statues and images proved too challenging to the shallow spirituality and primitive mindset of some of the ancients. This is seen in Abu Sufyan, the Quraysh chieftain and early enemy of the prophet, taunting the defeated Muslims at the battle of Uhud

"Superior may be Hubal!" On that the Prophet said (to his companions), "Reply to him." They asked, "What may we say?" He said, "Say: Allah is More Elevated and More Majestic!" Abu Sufyan said, "We have (the idol) Al-`Uzza, whereas you have no `Uzza!" The Prophet said (to his companions), "Reply to him." They said, "What may we say?" The Prophet said, "Say: Allah is our Helper and you have no helper." Abu Sufyan said, "(This) day compensates for our loss at Badr and (in) the battle (the victory) is always undecided and shared in turns by the belligerents".

The hadith is longer but what transpires is that at no point does Abu Sufyan negate the prophet's declaration that Allah is the superior Deity. He knew that Hubal was only an intercessor with Allah. Hence instead of reaffirming Hubal's superiority in answer to the prophet, he boasts that contrary to the Muslims, he has more gods in support. Ibn Abbas, as quoted by the historians including ibn Hisham, relates other parts of the exchanges that occured on that same occasion. When Abu Sufyan called out the besieged Muslims and that Umar answered, Abu Sufyan asked him

“By Allah o ‘umar! Did we not kill Muhammad?” Umar answered back, “By Allah, you did not. He can hear you speaking now".

Abu Sufyan, on that same occasion where he taunted the Muslims with Hubal's superiority, still swears by Allah. He was an example of Arabs that knew of Allah's position but had abandoned worshiping him in favor of more "trending" and physically tangible deities. That even people like Abu Sufyan never denied Allah's superiority is seen at his time of conversion, stating that

"By Allah, I thought that had there been any ilah/deity with Allah, he would have continued to help me".

As he regretfully remembers his time as a pagan, he doesnt blame himself for not believing in Allah, or for doubting His superiority, but for ascribing partners to Him. This was exactly the Quran's reproach towards these Ishmaelites.

Apostate prophet finds semitic pattern; Idolatry spreading among Ishmaelites?

In answer to the video "Muhammad's Destruction of Idols"

Prior to the rise of the prophet Muhammad and the retribution befalling the heedless Ishmaelites, idol worship continued to flourish and even spread to the centers inhabited by their Christian and Jewish neighbors, namely Najran and Yathrib.

The Jews of Yathrib tolerated idol worship, coexisted with it, and finally befriended it so as to develop their trade with the pagan Arabs. Although idolatry was important to the pre-Islamic Arabs, yet they did not develop any elaborate mythology around their gods and goddesses as did ancient people around the world such as the Greeks, Romans or Hindus.

No trace of such things can be found in the pre-Islamic poetry and traditions. This fact further indicates that polytheism and idol worship were not indigenous to the Ismailite Arabs but were grafted on to the Abrahamic tradition. One of such polytheistic influences came from Noah's descendants. For instance it is documented in Arab history as well as the Torah that some of them -such as the branch descending from Ham- inhabited the region of Canaan. This Noahide branch reverted to idol worship. This is why in the HB these Noachide descendants of Ham, along with all pagan tribes including the Philistines who apprently knew God despite their perverted spirituality 1Sam4:7, were systematically slaughtered by the Israelites.

 The Canaanites and Noahide descendants had reached the utmost of their spiritual depravation Gen15:16,Deut9 and had to be uprooted in order to make way for a new nation to be tested in turn. Archaeological evidence suggests that Canaanite pagan worship was ongoing on the location of what would later become Temple mount. The Canaanite relatives of the Israelites, who are actually Abrahamic descendants, such as the Moabites descendants of Lot and Edomites whose father is Esau may very well have emulated their ancestors by worshiping YHWH.

Jethro Similarily proclaims to Moses that YHWH is greater than all gods Ex18:7-12. Jethro was a Midianite-Kenite (from Midian the son of Abraham and Kenite from Cain whose descendants lived among all the people of the Levant). That monotheism preceding the arrival of the Israelites in Canaan was corrupted with time, as happened to the Israelites themselves. These non-Israelite Abrahamic descendants grafted their own evil inclinations and foreign religions to their original monotheism. These crimes made them unworthy of remaining in a land declared sacred by God and dedicated to monotheistic worship. The same would be done through the Ishmaelite prophet Muhammad, commanded to uproot, willingly or forcefully, those who had disfigured the religion of their forefather Abraham, who had perverted the purpose for which a settlement was established on that land of Mecca 8:34-35,53.

The Quran names the idols brought by these Noachide descendants, and the Arabs of the peninsula adopted them 71:21 among other gods mostly because of the Nomadic migrations throughout the peninsula.

It is well documented archaeologically that most gods of the Arabian peninsula were introduced into the Southern kingdoms of Saba and Himyar in the 2nd century BC, through these nomadic routes. This also led to the Arabization of these idols' names. Some of these idols of Noah's times who were associated with the One God 23:24 include the Nisr, which is the "vulture-god". It was worshipped all throughout the Middle East, whether it went by this name or another. After Noah, generations after generations kept returning to polytheism all the while they worshipped the One supreme God 23:31-44,11:53-4,46:21-2. The names of these idols were thus preserved, just as the Israelites in their books carried on the name of Baal and other regional gods whom they started worshipping again at different portions of their history.

 The Meccans were thus originally monotheists, who lapsed into idolatry. Just as the Israelites lapsed into idolatry as recounted in the Hebrew Bible even intermarrying with polytheist Canaanites.

Apostate prophet unmasks great conspiracy; Muhammad creates Abrahamic legacy?

In answer to the video "Muhammad's Destruction of Idols"

By the time of the prophet Muhammad, the assimilation of the Abrahamic legacy into the regional polytheistic systems was such that only a distant echo had remained in their minds from their spiritual connection to Abraham. Just as happenned to the Temple of Jerusalem that slowly became transformed into a pagan shrine and idols were introduced in it 2kings21 the prime symbol of monotheism in Mecca became thus radically transformed through pagan influence.

As the Ishmaelites, like the Israelites throughout their history, drifted from the original path of monotheism, the Hajj pilgrimage became a celebratory occasion, and the Kaaba was stocked with idols and false deities supposed to bring the worshipers closer to the One God, Allah, whom they believed in. Men and women would run naked throughout the holy precinct. Merchants from all over would travel to the Kaaba and set up shop during the pilgrimage. People and tribes from all over Arabia would make the journey to Mecca to take part in the festivities. But this annual pilgrimage was in greater parts disconnected from the Abrahamic practice 22:26-7.

It was simply a time to make money instead of being charitable, drink alcohol, and commit immoral acts. The importance of the annual event perdured despite the corruption. It was maintained by those that settled in Mecca, and the Arabs of the entire peninsula that got attracted to it with time. These are the points brought to attention in 2:196-7. And then until v203 great stress is laid on the spiritual dimension, forgotten and neglected, of that occasion. No other nation can be compared to the Ishmaelites' handling of their spiritual legacy and sacred shrine, than their own Israelite brothers. They could not maintain the way of their forefathers despite the constant sending of prophets to them to bring them back to the right path. When the Arabs were admonished and urged to reform, they qualified the warnings as

16:24,27:68"stories of the ancients".

These Ishmaelites vaguely recalled the Abrahamic ways, but found no other constructive argument in their opposition but by denigrating it as old and useless stories, based on its ancienty and supposed obsolescence, inaplicability to the current circumstances. They never qualify these stories as "false". 

23:82-3"They said, "When we have died and become dust and bones, are we indeed to be resurrected? We have been promised this, we and our forefathers, before; this is not but legends of the former peoples".

It was in fact one of the Quran's oft repeated functions, to "remind" the people of the truth they were still somewhat aware of but that had been supressed by falsehood. The Quran openly states that

26:196"most surely the same is in the scriptures of the ancients".

It repeats, time and again, its role as the guardian and preserver of the truth present in the past scriptures. Along with Abrahamic and monotheistic practices known in pre-islamic days, going back to previous prophets, was the Zakat which the people knew they had to give away to the poor but rarely practiced or misused 19:30-31,54-55,70:24,Deut14:28-29,26:12-14, fasting 2:51,183-187,7:142,Deut9:9,Ex24:18,34:28,Matt4:2,Lk5:33-6 prayer that continued after Ibrahim established it in the settlement of the Kaaba 14:37,19:55,Dan6:10,Ps55:18,1Chr23:30 until it was disfigured 8:35, animal sacrifice, circumcision.

Other concepts propounded by previous prophets and which the Quran was reminding its addressees of, include the Resurrection, day of Judgement and accountability Matt13:24-43,1Kings17:17-24,2Kings4:17-37,13:20-1,1Sam2:6,Isa2:17,26:19,66:14,Ezek37:1-28,Ps71:20,Prov6:22,Prov31(see Rashi),Dan12:1-2,Quran29:36,54:36-9. There are pre-islamic poems with clear eschatological connotation, some of them speaking of the resurrection of the soul, and Allah being the judge of mankind. One such poems is that of Zuhayr who wrote in his muallaqat

"Do not conceal from Allah what is in your souls, trying to hide it. Whatever is concealed from Allah, He knows. It is delayed and entered in a register and stored up for the day of reckoning, or it is brought forward and avenged".

Labid wrote

"every human will one day come to know his striving when it will be disclosed before the God what has been extracted".

See also the lines of al-A'sha evoking fear of the final accounting

"when the resurrected souls will shake of the dust".

The Quran and the traditions speak of the hanif remnants that tried preserving the monotheism of Ibrahim, and these lines of poetry might echo these marginal beliefs. The majority of the pre-islamic Arabs however rejected bodily resurrection and otherworldy accountability, the Quran repeatedly condemns this attitude. This phenomenon is clearly seen with the "talbiya", the invocations the pilgrims coming from all over Arabia made during their rituals. Some of these have come down to us, referring to Allah as

"al wahid al qahhar rabb assamad",

while others clearly referred to the idols as subservient to him

"laa nabudul asnama hatta tajtahida li rabbiha wa tutabad" 

or "rabb al thalitha ukhra/Lord of the third goddess",

and others spoke of the One Lord of the last hour

"rabba assa'a".

All of this shows the multifaceted shades of idolatry among the pilgrims, some of them praising Allah alone, others associating with Him while maintaining Him above the intercessors, and others still referring to the day of judgement. This confirms the Quranic statement that the original religion established at the sanctuary was Abrahamic monotheism. It got disfigured with time, polluted with foreign concepts, although it maintained a recognizable foundation of truth, which the last prophet came to revive.

Sura 87, after summing up the pillars of divine truth, such as monotheism, intelligent design, resurrection, God's all-encompassing, intricate knowledge and sway over His creatures' affairs, spiritual purification through prayer and constant remembrence of God as being the ways to success in the Hereafter, it says that these are all concepts known, written and transmitted by the prophets, from Ibrahim to Moses. All of these things were known to the people whom Muhammad was addressing over 4000 years later but have been neglected for so long that only a dim remembrance of them remained

23:83"Certainly we are promised this, and (so were) our fathers aforetime; this is naught but stories of those of old".

Muhammad revived the corrupted, obscured and forgotten way of Ibrahim

6:161"Say: Surely, (as for) me, my Lord has guided me to the right path; (to) a most right religion, the faith of Ibrahim the upright one, and he was not of the polytheists".

The climax of that revival occured when he entered Mecca triumphantly, cleansed the Kaaba of its idols and rededicated it to its monotheistic purpose. Prior to that physical uprooting, the Quran would remind the Meccans of their legacy and duty towards the Kaaba, in many verses beyond the scope of that discussion.