Most Muslims are completely unaware of the dark secrets of Islam, such as the egregious one on which we will concentrate here.

As we have shared previously, Islam is verily a syncretic stew of religious concepts derived from Judaism, Gnostic Christian tales, Greek philosophy, and other texts found in 7th-Century Arabia. The Qur’an is an incoherent rant of legalistic mandates and professions of glory centering around a supreme deity, “Allah.” In this text, we will attempt to prove that the basis for Allah in the Qur’an was fashioned out of the pagan god of Muhammad’s father, “Hubal,” which was also the principal idol of pre-Islamic times in Mecca (for some, aka. Makkah). *And, Hubal was the only idol in the Kaaba shrine that Muhammad did not destroy.

This is preposterous, say the Muslims. Muhammad was “Abrahamic;” he worships the same GOD as the Jews and Christians!  Well, that was exactly what he needed you to believe, else, his story would have ended 1400 years ago. In order to confer some legitimacy to this “Allah,” he conflated the story of Mecca and the Kaaba with the Jewish Patriarchs and the GOD of Abraham and Moses. As discussed in our previous essay, “Did Abraham or Ishmael Ever Go to Mecca?, we offered renunciation to the myth that ties “Ibrahim” to the Kaaba. In ~1500 BC, at the approximate time of Abraham, Mecca didn’t exist. Two millennia later, Muhammad would rewrite history and attempt to convince listeners that (at ~175 years-old) Abraham somehow crossed the hostile, barren desert with his then-banished bastard son, Ishmael, to establish the Kaaba on a sand dune in the middle of nowhere, and then cross back over the desert in time to die with his people in Canaan.  Ridiculous.  Case closed.

*Other reading on this subject: documented why we Christians reject the claim that the Meccan Arabs are descendents of Ishmael.In keeping with our assertions, we would also like to point out that the Holy Bible contradicts the Muslim assertion that the Ishmaelites were worshiping the true God Yahweh.  Click Here for Part 1 and Here for Part 2.

Most Muslims know nothing of the fatal errors in the Qur’an or the extra-Quranic ties to Hubal. The others who do know are not talking. The cultural cost of acknowledging Islam’s many falsities–including its pagan origin–is too great. Similar in many respects to Mormonism (another Biblically derived cult given by mysterious angelic revelation), Islam is a massive industrial and societal complex that spans the globe. Adherents are quick to counter any intellectual inquiry that disagrees with orthodoxy with retaliation and harm, as we see daily in the news. The fruits of this fanatical and fantastical religion are plain for all to see. Despite its countless flaws and demonstrable historical errors (i.e., denial of death, burial and resurrection of Christ), Muslims still maintain a position that “its verses are true and have remained intact since their original revelation by God (care of a frightening angel, no less, that seemingly possessed Muhammad to consider suicide).” Western Islamophiles in academia like Craig Considine of Rice University provide Islam the cover it needs to perpetuate these myths for its compulsive indoctrination.

Clearly, the prophet of Islam, Muhammad, was monotheistic in his outward zealotry and violence against all forms of paganism and polytheism. So, admittedly, at first blush, the notion of pagan origins seems ludicrous. However, it begins to make perfect sense when considering Muhammad’s interaction with Jews and Christians of his day, who would have naturally sought to discredit the pagan–if not polytheistic–practices by him, his family and friends through observation of Hubal at the Meccan pagan shrine, Kaaba, with the idolatrous Black Stone of Mecca–to which, all Muslims now face in prayer.

After being introduced to the Jewish GOD during his work as an illiterate camel herder turned caravan raider in Mecca, he realized that, surely, this “Elohim” of Jewish history must be the same deity to whom his father and grandfather prayed and worshipped. Certainly, Muhammad, a very proud man, could not be associated with the other villainous pagans! From this watershed moment, he set out on a mission to cohere his Arabian statue god with the almighty Elohim of the Torah in order to win converts. This would prove difficult among Christians and Jews, who were not as gullible as the less-informed Arab peasants, who would join his murderous spree and slaughter of children (See: Slaughter of the Banu Qurayza).

Until this time, Hubal was merely one of many pagan statues in the (now, most revered) shrine in Mecca, the Kaaba (also “Ka’bah). Muhammad famously sacked the Kaaba and destroyed all of the pagan idolatrous graven images, except for one, the god of his father’s tribe, “Hubal,” which is most commonly associated with the crescent moon.

In 1905, David Samuel Margoliouth wrote that “Between Hubal, the god whose image was inside the Ka’bah, and Allah (“the God”), of whom much will be heard, there was perhaps some connection.” Most Muslims are completely unaware of this alleged attribution of Allah to Hubal, because Imams and Sunni Clerics have spent centuries attempting to discredit and disavow any overt connection, for failure to acknowledge the Abrahamic lineage would blow Islam out of the water. The cultural cost of conceding pagan roots would be utter devastation. Similarly, anyone who dares to challenge Islam in such a manner, surely subjects himself to drastic measures of retribution. The cost to one’s credibility (and, assuredly, to one’s safety) for the intellectual war that would ensue deters many scholastic cowards in their craven silence.

Some of these (mostly secular progressives like Craig Considine of Rice University’s Islamic Studies) who take the path of least resistance, claim that Hubal as a moon (or rain) god only derives from the speculation of the German scholar Hugo Winckler in the early twentieth century. Flouting the lunar connection, writers like David Leeming and Mircea Eliade have also described him as a warrior and rain god, in an attempt to put some distance between Hubal and the lunar imagery.

Other recent Islamophiles and sympathetic secular historians accede to the Islamic narrative by not identifying Hubal as a god of the moon nor rain, nor progenitor to the concept of Allah. These voices prefer to promote Hubal as “Baal of the Moabites,” or simply another golden idol in the Kaaba with which Muhammad quickly and correctly dispatched to the unspeakable annals of pagan history.

Islamic sources make no mention of the moon in connection with Hubal, to no surprise, as the Quranic message is wholly based on a (purely fictitious) tie to Jewish patriarchal lineage and, thereby, a sound Biblical legacy that would fundamentally reject idolatry, polytheism and refute Muhammad’s previous pagan worship. It follows, so say Islamists, that the blatant moon association shared by both (contrived) “deities” should be shunted aside and disregarded as mere coincident. After all, the crescent moon and star of Islam corresponds “only to the lunar calendar” used since pre-Islamic times, thus, having nothing at all to do with the statue that also coincidentally bears a crescent moon inscription, (just exactly like the ones that bedeck the minarets of all mosques).

But, as honest historians acknowledge, it wasn’t coincidence at all, if Muhammad was raised in a tribe that revered Hubal–whether adorned with a crescent moon or without. The moon imagery is not the singular accessory that links Hubal to Muhammad, nor is it inextricably essential to the theory Hubal was originally conflated with Yaweh to lend some vague credence, so as to bolster Muhammad’s, otherwise, fanciful story.

Hisham Ibn Al-Kalbi’s Book of Idols describes the Hubal idol as a human figure with a gold hand (replacing the original hand that had broken off the statue). He had seven arrows that were used (for who knows what). More recent authors emphasize the Nabataean origins of Hubal as a figure imported into the shrine, which may have already been associated with Allah–which is, likewise, our position.

Farzana Hassan sees these views as an extension of longstanding Christian Evangelical claims that Islam is “pagan” and that Muhamamad was an impostor and deceiver, when he stated:

“Literature circulated by the Christian Coalition perpetuates the popular Christian belief about Islam being a pagan religion, borrowing aspects of Judeo-Christian monotheism by elevating the moon god Hubal to the rank of Supreme God, or Allah. Muhammad, for fundamentalist Christians, remains an impostor who commissioned his companions to copy words of the Bible as they sat in dark inaccessible places, far removed from public gaze.”

Christian missionaries have argued over many years that “Allah” of the Qur’an was in fact a pagan Arab “Moon god” of pre-Islamic times, so what we are putting forth herein is not original, neither is it late-breaking news for CAIR and its operatives to disavow. The primary proponent of this view early on was Robert Morey, and, along with his missionary brethren, he propagated these views extensively. So, why are you just now hearing about this? Simple: few have the brazen mettle to speak of such things.

So, we unequivocally affirm Morey’s assertion that Allah and Hubal are one and the same entity.

According to some Christian writers, Hubal is actually Baal (notoriously referenced in the Bible). By these accounts, “Hubal being the Arabic for the Hebrew HaBaal, hence,”the Baal.”” Some, like Timothy Dunkin, an ardent supporter of Morey, have even summoned ancient Arabic, as well as European, literature to show Hubal has been the basis for Allah all along. This is why defenders of Islam anxiously analyze Allah and Hubal from historical, lexical and archaeological points of view, in order to confound people with data dump paralysis. Conversely, we suggest that the merging of Allah from Hubal is not a complex science at all (it’s obvious), despite attempts to the contrary (like desperate attempts to question secular research and the authenticity of pagan archaeological discoveries, etc.).

Islamic apologists contend that fancy lexical and epigraphic studies have confirmed that Hubal and “Ha-Baal” are different deities, so therefore, Hubal also can’t be Allah. However, we are neither claiming nor disavowing the Baal—Hubal connection. It is unnecessary to cohere another pagan deity, Baal, with Hubal, for it is irrelevant to our claim, albeit a very interesting aside project.

Moreover, Islamic scholars and scribes in academia contend that essays like ours represent continuation of “defective academic trends observed in previous lunar reconstructions such as fabricating evidence, misquoting sources and inability to consistently cite the correct bibliographic references, etc. etc.” and should be disregarded.

Bringing these claims to bear is a bold action for some. As another Christian writer has written in defense of his research, for fear of reprisals:

“It is very unfortunate that the Qur’an contains many expressions that seem to indicate that an ‘in good faith’ rejection of Islam is impossible and that those who reject Islam are either ignorant or know its truth and reject it for their own spiteful reasons. Because of this ingrained belief, many Muslims immediately view a questioning of their faith as an aggressive personal attack by someone with a hidden agenda…It is hard to challenge this kind of deeply rooted notion.”

In closing, no amount of discredit, humiliation, threats of death nor libel shall deter us from sharing the Biblical truth, saving souls from the suffering and scourge of Islam, and illuminating the blatantly false books upon which it is all based.