no. monotheism appears in the 17th century. Yawheh is in conversation with many other Gods. The early jews were henotheists.

Nope, it was Ishmael who introduced the worship of one God in Arab lands, even before there was a thing like judaism let alone christianity.

@@zaydkhan6885 That's not true at all. All of Ishmael's descendants were pagans. It was only until Arabs started converting to Judaism and later Christianity, that they abandoned paganism in favour of Abrahamic monotheism. Islam is over 1000 years too late.

I suppose you are a believer in OT. Abraham visited Egypt with Sarah. Pharaoh heard about her beauty even before they made it to Egypt, and claimed her for himself and gave Hagar as payment to Abraham. Isaac etc then becomes Egyptian Princes. Abraham and Hagar leaves Egypt, and they have a son. You can say, he was born here or there, without any basis. I think OT is full of nonsense.

@@almazchati4178 I think she was asking that Abraham and Ishmael never came to Arabia, not to Egypt.

@@cnav94 You can't prove a negative. Muslims believe that he came, and he had some followers among Arab tribes, hanifs, who were monotheists, and who gifted the Muslims with Quran's terminology. According to OT, Israelites are Egyptian, don't have anything with to do with Abraham. They may be influenced by his ideas though. That is my understanding from OT.

It is good that it is being questioned. I am all for it. Keep in mind that there is scant information coming out the sands. The scholarship is murky. If he/she can not identify the source though, a true scholar should say I don't know, not I have not found the source yet and by any means imply that Muslims are lying about it.

St John of Damascus wrote about ‘the heresy of the ishmaelites’ in the 7th century. There was an anti-Trinitarian movement where Arab Christians considered Jesus to be only a prophet of god and not also god. There are references to ‘Mhmd’ pre-7th century. Mhmd understood to mean ‘the praises one’, referring to Jesus. The shahada, which can be found in the earliest inscriptions of the dome on the rock built by ibn Malik in the 7thC, is an anti-trinitarian statement about there being one god and Mhmd (Jesus) is his prophet. 200 years later when the Hadith were assembled, the name Mhmd was hijacked and attributed to Islam’s own concept of prophet. But it’s clear that it was entirely plagiarised. I’m glad there is resource available now that challenges the faith. Islam deal with criticism by issuing Fatwas and having its critics killed. No different to how Scientology responds when it receives public criticism. It vilifies people into silence.

Just to add. I agree with you regarding truth. I think it is every aspiring Muslim’s duty to seek out truth. I think there are gatekeepers of truth in Islam, that keep information from the ummah. Dr Yasir Qadhi even stated that the subject of Quranic preservation is tenuous and shouldn’t be discussed in public. He goes on about high level students of knowledge only being sanctioned to have access to the information. That in itself is an elitist stance to have, to suggest that most Muslims out there aren’t sophisticated enough to look at the data and arrive at truth themselves. Essentially that the gatekeepers of Islamic knowledge aren’t prepared to let the cat out of the bag. I just think that is appalling. People devote their lives to the faith and are kept in the dark about its true history.

@@shredx81 Where is the reference to the praised one in Gospels as Jesus? His birth is both celebrated by Zoroastrian Magi and who must have switched sides to Herod, when they were unable to identify a babyJesus. Conveniently the baby Jesus escapes the death by fleeing to Egypt. No escape the second time though. Herod gets him. Herod must be really inapt not to know Joseph and Mary with a mortal boy disappeared to Egypt, and forgets about them when they return. You are full of BS. Jesus of Gospels is a Zoroastrian prophet. Has no relation to OT. Even the Pope does not believe your crap.

@@almazchati4178 Herod died while Jesus was in Egypt, the next Herod was then ruling there were multiple Herods, it is either a dynasty name or a title also.

That part of the Islamic texts we agree with. It's this part that isn't true press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691653419/book-of-idols pagan gods around Arabia during the time of Muhammad as shown in this film 🎥 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nc5mebCY25fTqY0.html

@@inquisitivemind007 Did some listening to the full lecture from Ahmad Jallad and some others he gave. He speaks on Pre islamic inscriptions that use the prayers to al Lat and above has only said that there were inscriptions that were monotheistic also. You’re very selective and actually misrepresenting the scholars you cut and paste as most of your videos are antithetical to their actual findings.

@@rickyalfred9710 yes there were prayers to al Lat but the question is when did it stop. He clearly says here kzfaq.info/get/bejne/btqdg5Nerd-cdZs.html that in the 4th century paganism/polytheism died off across Arabia.

@@inquisitivemind007 I’ll have a proper listen later. Jandal is right up near modern day Jordan. They would most likely be Christian. It would be very strange if across the whole peninsula the claim is there was no polytheism as the Quran which is a historical document also. Mentions and dialogues with pagans there is no recorded objection, “ hang on our people haven’t worshipped idols for 200 years”. The peninsula was a mixture of Christianity, Hanifism and the pagan system that was more to do with sociological dynamics and was common practice in the East also.

@@rickyalfred9710 likewise it would be equally strange that people don't mind scratching their monothestic beliefs on rocks but for some reason don't wish to scratch the polytheistic part. Dumat al Jandal is in north Saudi 🇸🇦 Arabia kzfaq.info/get/bejne/atukrMaHnd2Yips.html and en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumat_al-Jandal

From Yemen to Mosul, rock inscriptions completely drop polytheism in the 3rd to 5th Century AD.

Petra theory is nonsense. If you go to 1:33 Sean Anthony explains kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nNtgm6p9392blaM.html

@@inquisitivemind007 he does not really explain in that interview. I have read his book but I don't think he has researched this topic (i work in academia myself btw). At the core of the Petra theory is the fact that the early mosques consistently point to Petra (i have partially checked this on Google earth). This needs to be explained. The fact that there was a bishop in Petra is not a problem I believe. It seems that there was a christian quarter in the north of the city.

@@hans471 David King had responded to the Petra theory kzfaq.info/get/bejne/gdOjnNt_qcibn6M.html

@@inquisitivemind007 I also know DK's article. DK basically says that early muslims didn't have the knowledge to orientate the qiblas precisely. This is a weak argument from the start (with the same argument the pyramids should not exist). Also, DK is not able to explain the "data" i.e. the fact that the qiblas are orientated.

@@hans471 the first mosques pointed to Jerusalem

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/f8WTaLNpnbOWiJ8.html

@@inquisitivemind007 Thank you.