Theres a difference between rewriting a statement and reading it properly. For example when it says there is a temple revered by all the Arabs, and that, not only none ever qualified in the history of the Arabian peninsula than the one in Mecca, but also none ever came close to being majoritarily or even vastly revered, as would be the case with a random mosque or cathedral (revered by all members of their religions and the pre-islamic Arabs did not all have the same religion), then the proper conclusion is that it is speaking of the one in Mecca. As to geographical description, besides the fact it does not conflict with what Jeddah's coast is, it was shown how the statement from Diodorus is an amalgam from different sources who never been anywhere close to the coast nearby Mecca.
The hadith about the prophet wanting to make structural changes to the Kaaba, besides saying nothing of Ibrahim or Ismail, here is what proves he did exactly as he said he would:
First the short and misused version:
And here parts of the longer versionI would have dismantled the Kaaba and would have made two doors in it; one for entrance and the other for exit
As to pre-islamic sources, firstly the onus is on the revisionists to prove that what an entire people believes concerning their ancestral lineage is false and that they held a different belief before. Islam didnt show up and change a people's lineage so it cannot be accused of revisionism. Second, the revisionists need to show the prophet was unique in this claim, as well as explain why would anyone claim descendancy from Ibrahim in a vacuum, why wouldn't anyone raise an eyebrow at the proposition.heard 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) say that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) had observed: If the people had Rot recently (abandoned) unbelief, find I had means enough to reconstruct it, which I had not, I would have definitely excompassed in it five cubits of area from Hijr. And I would also have constructed a door for the people to enter, and a door for their exit. I today have (the means to spend) and I entertain no fearfrom the side of people (that they would protest against this change). So he added five cubits of area from the side of Hatim to it that there appeared (the old) foundation (upon which Hadrat Ibrahim had built the Ka'ba). and the people saw that and it was upon this foundation that the wall was raised. The length of the Ka'ba was eighteen cubits. when addition was made to it (which was in its breadth), then naturally the length appears to be) small (as compared with its breadth). Then addition of ten cubits (of area) was made in its length (also). Two doors were also constructed, one of which (was meant) for entrance and the other one for exit
The Adnanites of whom the prophet Muhammad was a descendant, were conscious of Ibrahim having constructed the Kaaba. Hadith books, which are based upon oral tradition and oral tradition in any culture, precedes the writing of that tradition, abounds with evidence such as the pre-Islamic poems of Jiran al-'Awd or Umayyah ibn Abi as-Salt speaking of the trial of the sacrifice which Ibrahim and Ismail went through. All history is a 'written' attestation to an ORAL tradition, meaning written word comes AFTER THE FACT. Just because pre-Islamic history became written down after a certain time period does not predicate it never existed. History did not fail to exist, because it was not written down.
As to Qusay, as attested by every sources, he was entrusted for the Kaaba's guardianship after the death of his father in law. He did not assume the position forcefully. His house was not the largest nor a palace, it is where the notables gathered for important decisions.