Good decision. Just in case you aren't aware of this; Bill Warner, years ago, uploaded a video to TH-cam that was a bombshell. I studied Geek and Roman history pretty intensively at university but the explanations given for the fall of the Western half of the Roman Empire never made sense to me. Warner's video answered just about every question I ever had on the subject. Below is the link to that video in case you are interested. th-cam.com/video/t_Qpy0mXg8Y/w-d-xo.html
@@farazahmadkhan2542 You lowiq mohemadan, the Christian faith is not dependent on a book. Christians don't say that the Bible is the perfectly preserved word of God right down to the letter. Comparing the Bible and the koooran is like comparing apples to oranges. Both books have different sources of origins and different modes of transmission. The followers of the Bible don't claim that the Bible is the unaltered, literal word of God. It's well known among Christians that the Bible is a compilation of books written by men, transmitted by men and preserved by men. The Christian faith is not dependent on the Bible. The Bible is just a historical record of people's experiences with divinity over the course of time. On the other hand, the koooran has plenty of variants, yet mohemadans believe that there is only one koooran and that the variants are the 7 different recitations. But this is a bogus claim and a lie and propaganda because this claim doesn't live up to academic scrutiny. The mohemadans only make up this lie about there being one koooran and 7 different recitations to make themselves feel better.
@@farazahmadkhan2542 Faraz... 🤣🤣🤣🤣 From Your preserved Quran Allah says he is a false God and Muhammad is a false prophet ? Do You Know ??? Read Quran 5 ; 67 Quran 8 ; 71 Quran 52 : 48 Sahih Muslim 2190a These were the Chances for Allah To prove allah is God But Whats this Allah Had a change of mind instead He exposed himself and he himself proves Muhammad is a false prophet.. Quran 69 ; 44 to 46 ( Aorta cut ) Sahih al bukhari 4428( seems like aorta cut ) Sunan Abu dawood 4512 and 4513 ( Muhammad confirmed aorta cut ) Sunan ibn maaja 1622 ( perpetual Agony for 3 years ) Where did Allahs Quran 52 ; 48 go ???? Sahih al bukhari 2588 He was carried by Two people while his Feet was dragging to the Ground Where Did Allahs Quran 5 ; 67 And quran 8 ; 71 go ???? So The Choice is yours... Allah a false God.. Muhammad is a false prophet The Jewish women zainab is more powerful than Allah and Muhammad So Go and Worship the jewish Women Instead .. Poor boy
@@farazahmadkhan2542 If Bible isnt True , Then how come john 15 ; 20 Is True ... The All Apostle of Jesus Died for the Sake of Gospel as said In John 15 ; 20 James Thomas Peter, Bartholomew ( nathanael) Mathias Matthew, Mark , Luke , Andrew , James Simon John ( was not to Die as he was the only one to be alive out of the 12 Apostles As lord Jesus said in Bible john 21 ; 21 to 23 ) Check history If you want ... Lord Jesus is Lord of his Word.... Even in quran he said ((Quran 19 ; 33)) Peace be on me , when the Day i was born , die and raise back again... He told the same in John 10 ; 17 to 18 Lord Jesus is Lord of his Word. He Proved everything he said ... Your Allah cant even fulfill a simple promise made to Muhammad and Ran away scared of a Jewish women... He Doenst even know to fulfill his end time promise he said It would Happen before 700 A.D Sahih Muslim 2953 a Just dont Mock yourself Buddy Rather Know Truth....
I have to say that i never thought about it. But I think there's something else here, Apparently, one day, one of the Followers of Muhammed heard another one reciting a verse in a different way, so he challenged him, and they went together to see Muhammed, they recited to him, and Muhamed told them: You're right and he's right (about two recitations of the same verse that were so different that it sparked a quarrel) I think Muhammed forgot what he alleged was revealed to him, because he was a liar, and liars forget their lies, and in fact nothing was revealed to him, he just made it up. So in order to get away with his lies, he told his followers that it was revealed to him in different dialects. But its true that the whole thing does not make sense.
As my parents always used to say: “if you tell 1 lie, now you need to remember it, but also cover it with more lies and this will be your undoing” Eventually you won’t be able to remember what was the LIE & what was the TRUTH, now you brain has a dilemma & this causes a mental overload. That’s why it was sooooo easy to call Mohammad out for LYING. Notice how Jesus ALWAYS said: “I tell you the TRUTH” when stating a fact, and he NEVER LIED, EVER. The TRUTH is always easier to recite than a LIE, coz the TRUTH NEVER CHANGES.
How can u receive one revelation in 7 different ways? I think that man was on drugs or under the influence of alcohol when the revelations came bcos only drunkards drug addicts hear things in more than one way
I do not mind you criticizing islam but what i do mind is that you think jesus is god it's idolatry to believe that and i don't think that you have to be a muslim to believe that why not become a unitarian christian (biblical) and still believe islam is false
I love you my brother in Christ please keep up the work you do . I am from Middle East but I never heard anything you are saying because it’s not allowed I always known that Christ is the truth but I never knew it was so easy to proof islam can not be true thank you 🙏
Great work indeed! For more Arab insights I recommend Christian Prince, who goes into the Hadits and tells stories about Mmd that will blow everyone's minds. There are many sites, some a lot more encompassing than his own "Arabian Prophet" th-cam.com/channels/7wffWCb-k1F7oEyGMR8TTg.html
Well, that's an interesting departure from the usual Pfander Films presentations. Jay Smith is doing a 'tafsir' on his earlier talks on the history of Islam. How cool is that?!
You ask"why were the other books burnt?". Come to think of it"Who were the people who burnt not just books but whole libraries all over the world and why would they" seems to be another good question. I wonder what the answer could be.
Actually it is proposed by some authors that the real source of Quran was a meanwhile lost manuscript written in Aramaic from a Christian sect. Many "dark" (disputed) sentences would make real sense if interpreted as Aramaic originals.
God bless Jay smith A genuine truth seeker, God using him mightily to save thousands of souls from deception, thank God for the work you are doing through Mr. Smith. God bless him and his ministry abundantly.
USA USA the bible has gone through scrutiny n it’s still standing but the Quran hasn’t. The secrets behind the quran came out in May n the number of qurans found n the many differences in them are shocking. Too many holes in one book
USA USA you can never compare the Quran to the Bible why? The Bible is full of miracles from Jehovah but there’s no miracle from allah nor Mohammed in the quran. Not even a prophecy 😂😂😂😂
When an Uzbek gal was trying to convince me of islam she mentioned these two qurans, and I knew they differed and were made long after the death of muhammad, but she wouldn't check out the facts on this. Nice to see all your work on all this.
Cant wait for Jay's next video. I'm so eager to know what more stuff will Jay unwrap next time.. Good work Jay. All the best and thanks for your determination and hard work on exposing the true Islam.
Language evolves over time. The English we speak today is not the same as the English written in the Constitution. People cannot comprehend what was said 250 years ago. How can you expect someone to know what was said 300 years earlier? I doubt what is said today is the same after 1500 years.
Australia was founded only in 1788, we as a nation are only 230 or so years old but that s roughly how long it took till Al Bukhari compiled the mess in a more messy pile of mess.
12:19 he did not repeat it a second time. The first time was omar suggesting the idea to abu-bakr, and abu-bakr said the prophet never did it but omar convinced him. The second time is abu-bakr giving the order to zaid, and this time zaid says (to abu-bakr) the prophet never did it, but he convinced him. So it's not the same guy repeating it twice, it's the same kind of exchange repeating itself but with different people.
@@franciscusgomarus5086 I'm a sworn enemy of Muhammad but honestly, does anyone fall for that pseudohistorical "the historical figure I don't like never existed" trick any more? Try "proving" the existence of Socrates or Cleopatra using a fine-toothed comb approach. You can come up with some plausible-sounding nonsense to deny the existence of any figure in antiquity.
Jay, any thoughts on the Abu Bakr and Uthman recensions being related to the Ridda Wars? Been decades since I studied this part of history but if I remember them correctly they started up almost instantly after Muhammad died. The story that has come down to us is that this was an effort to put down apostates (I think) but that may be a later explanation (or my misunderstanding). Back in the 1990's I wondered if those who refused to recognize Abu Bakr did so because their understanding of the 'Qur'an' was based on passages that Bakr and company did not like and were trying to expurgate. Now the burning makes sense (to me at least). Essentially, the Qur'ans of the 'apostates' had to be burned after Bakr came up with a NEW Qur'an otherwise there would be real and eternal questions about why the variants (as is happening now). Same with Uthman. Some of these 'apostate' Qur'ans may have still been in existence in his time and the only safe thing to do (from his perspective) was to burn ALL Qur'ans and then release his own version.
Dear sir, Do you subscribe to the theory that Islam could be a survival or rather continuation of one of the none trinitarian Christian sects/cults such as the Arrians? I know that Arrianism originated in Alexandria. Thank you. For the benefit of some people who may not know, Arius was a bishop who believed that jesus was created by God. In other words they denied his divinity. What does this remind you of Had to add this. When the barbarians overran the western Roman empire many of them had been following this form of christianity for several centuries, rather than paganism. This did not go down well with the local catholic population....in the long term pagans like the Frank's and Saxons did better as they eventually converted to trinitarian christianity.
You re kind of right,it is always the same,gnosticism,or attacking Trinity.Heretics,among other,most likely told Muhamed that we worship Mary,heretics today still don't understand difference between worship and veneration,and Mary is important for doctrine of Jesus,and Trinity. Muhameddism is just another heresy.Google "muhamedism Catholic answers". Also recommend Catholic world Report,and TH-cam Catholic answers,Counsel of Trent,Timothy Gordon.St. Joseph and Mary pray for us!
I would say Islam is a MISH-MASH of all of the Middle Eastern belief systems. There are some hints to Jesus divinity even in Qur'an- for instance, Jesus is a WORD from Allah, and a spirit from him.
@the truth in logic the truth Is God you do know that I'm attacking Islam. I'm also not trying to promote a form of christianity that was popular with the German tribes. Lol dont think people are getting the point. The point is the dubious origins of mohammedanism.
@@lindaclark6148 think that's a valid point. One of the reasons, or rather, speculations about Arrianism is that the teutonic tribes found christ's death on the cross unpalatable. A supreme sky god who was not killed by his creations was another matter! Perhaps the arabs were psychologically similar.
Re: differences in dialect, vowel sounds aren't the only thing that distinguishes them (although I don't know about Arabic in specific). Vocabulary can differ regionally, as can grammatical features and characteristic phrasing. But it's not clear to me how this would make a difference, unless the Quraysh (sp?) were speaking a very Nabataean- or Aramaic- influenced Arabic, as I've heard they might have.
I’m not sure if it’s a big deal that these ‘original’ Korans no longer exist, assuming that they did in the first place. It was common practice to dispose of the original MS when making a copy, at least in the Roman and post Roman world. Why bother to keep an old and probably tattered MS when you have a nice new and clean copy? Moreover, the doctrine that the Koran was the perfectly preserved word of God and that it was therefore wrong to dispose of it only emerged in the 9th century (I think, from memory). As such, once the provinces received these Korans and made copies over several years or decades for distribution to towns and cities throughout the province, it would probably have been quite normal for the original to have been disposed of, particularly as it would have become tatty and worn from the hands of several copyists. It’s also possible that the MSS may have been destroyed during the Mongol invasions and sackings of the 13 &15th centuries. In Baghdad, the Tigris was said to have turned black from the ink of thousands of books that were thrown into it. Although it is reported that thousands of books were also taken to Iran by the Mongols. The MSS may also have been destroyed by fire or in another accident, or removed to another city. In short, just because we don’t have them now, doesn’t mean that they never existed. In fact, it would be remarkable, and probably accidental, if they had survived. Having said all that however, I do enjoy these videos and I appreciate how much work goes into them. Best wishes.
Fascinating hypothesis, but we do have quite a few extant ancient Qur'ans, but all from the 8th and 9th centuries, which we will go through in the upcoming videos. Remember that Muslims NEVER burn Qur'ans, nor dispose of them, but store them in the domes of mosques. So, where are all of the original 9 Qur'ans? Why, after 1400 years can we not find even one!?? Meanwhile Christians have retained over 365 either partial or complete New Testaments from before the 6th century, yet, the Muslims cannot even retain one of the original Qur'ans which went to cities which were not burned, or destroyed, or flooded during the intervening 1400 years? The Mongols never destroyed Qur'ans, but destroyed literature they deemed unworthy, and sacreligious.
Dialects can differ in pronunciation, true. They can ALSO differ in vocabulary and grammar, both of which show up just fine in a vowel-less text. For example, some linguists claim to be able to distinguish dialects in the (undotted) Old Testament. Here, for example, is part of the Sermon on the Mount in Scots. Ye ar the licht o the warld. A toun biggit on a hill-tap canna be hoddit; an again, whan fowk licht a lamp, they pit-it-na- ablo a meal-bassie, but set it up on the dresser-heid, an syne it gies licht for aabodie i the houss. See at your licht shines that gate afore the warld, sae at aabodie may see your guid deeds an ruise your Faither in heiven This obviously isn't English or American, but it is clearly within the "mutual intelligibility" range needed to be classified as a dialect. Even if it is an official minority language of the EU. And the verse above is taken from an actual published translation of the New Testament into Scots from the Greek. Let's take out the vowels (except for words that are just a vowel): Y r th lcht o th wrld. A tn bggt n a hlltp cnn b hddt, n gn, whn fwk lcht a lmp, th pttnbl a mlbss bt st t p n th drssrhd, n sn t gs lcht fr bd i th hss. S t yr lcht shns tht gt fr th wrld, s t bd my s yr gd dds n rs yr Fthr n hvn. Note in particular that what would be "lght" in vowel-less English is "lcht" in Scots. That's a DIALECT difference. What would be "blt" in English (built) is "bggt" in Scots (biggit). That's a DIALECT difference. It's true that SOME differences (warld vs world, Faither vs Father, heiven vs heaven) are erased by removing the worlds, but others are NOT. I have demonstrated previously that MODERN Arabic dialects can be distinguished without vowels. It may very well be the case that the dialects of Arabic relevant in the seventh century could not, BUT THIS IS A VERY UNLIKELY CLAIM THAT REQUIRES POSITIVE EVIDENCE. Not only that, it's a claim you don't NEED.
Mohammed lived near Petra, as evidenced by the tribes mentioned. A later Caliph built his political bases in Western rim of the Arabian Pennisula, several hundred kilometres to the south. Then there is the time difference. The potential for "Chinese whispers" is considerable.
Sorry, I couldn't read it with the vowels. I can infer some words because I know the passage but I still couldn't guess parts. Without the vowels it was gibberish. I wouldn't know what it was. I can't even guess many words. The spelling is so different it's completely different words. I'm familiar with the sound of Scotch English, German, French, Spanish, and can speak several dialects of English plus. A Filipino wouldn't be able to tell any that it was actual words much less which book it was from. It wouldn't even be a useful reminder to someone who was being told what it says. Filipinos and American blacks who hear standard English every day of their lives through the media have trouble reading and writing because of the difference between their preferred dialect and written English. Thinking a person who never heard a dialect & never saw the text can read it and know what it means without vowels is ludicrous.
@@MarkProffitt Your last sentence does not seem to be related to anything I wrote or implied. In fact you are making my point for me, which is that even without vowels, the "same" text in two dialects of the same language can be VERY different, so that to say "you can't have dialects without vowels" is ridiculous. I have exactly the same trouble with BEV that you have with Scots: I cannot follow it in ordinary script and in IPA I have little idea what language it is in. Compared with modern Arabic dialects, Scots and English are nearly identical. So it is quite difficult to believe that ancient Arab dialects differed only in their vowels (and in fact we know that it isn't true).
Hi Jay, I rhink that you have to look into your microphone or audio pick-up because theres that same distortion that interfered with your live feed with Al-Fadi
Once we have finished with the Qur'an, we will move back to the problems with the 7th century Islam, including this video...but we need to continue with the Qur'an while everyone's attention is on it.
6:29 Hmm, why is "USC-MSA" the old reference system, since it is the Web English reference.? Web is new, and English doesn't sounds like the original arabic. Doesn't sound logic. But, I'm no expert, I'm just asking. What is the actual system use in the arabic version of the hadiths collections ? And also, if you want to reach the muslims more than you want to reach other christians or the non-religious, why don't you use the system that the muslims are the most likely to use?
There are some unanswered questions: If the first Quran had been hidden under Hafsa's bed for 20 years, what were other Muslims in different parts of the Arab empire reading and reciting? They must have been reciting some other written version(s) of the Quran (not the one written by Zayd Ibn Tabit, at the behest of Caliph Bakr), because Caliph Uthman ordered them to be destroyed once his authorised Quran had been published and distributed.
I think Shabir shattered that perfect memorization theory when he said at first they weren’t worried about exact wording only exact meaning right? It wasn’t after all the editing and compiling of the text that Muslims could say perfect preservation... yes of the remaining text 😂..
I asked a Muslim apologist why Uthuman destroyed Hafsa’s copy. The answer I got was that Hafsa had made notes in the sides of the Quran and it would confuse people and so it was destroyed. What do you think?
@PfanderFilms the hadith used by the Shia and the Ibadi are different from those used by the Sunni (such as Sahih-al-Bukhari, etc.); I was wondering if their hadith also talk about some of the problems in the compilation of the Koran as well as maybe Muhammad’s bad deeds.
It would be like trying to write the history of ones family today from word of mouth. "What do they say your Great Great Great Grandfather did on Thursday the 4th of July 1782"
Only 5 generations? Each would need to be 47 years old between children. More like great great great great great great great great grandfather. By the way I do know what my relative from the 1700s was doing because IT WAS WRITTEN. 😄
If there was no reference to Mecca on ancient maps until 700 then can be no Muhammad. The man never existed he was a construct by Malik ibn Anas to justify the existence of God's laws to wit the Sharia.
Did enough Quraishi speakers reside throughout the 9 provinces? Otherwise if all 9 copies are written in that single dialect how would the provincials read and recite from them. They would either need bilingual scholars and imams or they would have to write even more copies from the original 9 but in all the local dialects. How could even that be done if there were no diacritical marks and vowelizations yet? You can see how this process would introduce errors into the local copies and from the corrupted local copies corrupted oral recitations. Then when new written versions are created from those corrupted oral recitations the corruption process repeats.
Using the deprecated reference system of volume number is pointless.. The normal reference system is much clearer. Good that you include both but no point underlining the deprecated one.
E يُرِيدُونَ أَن يُطْفِئُوا نُورَ اللَّهِ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَيَأْبَى اللَّهُ إِلَّا أَن يُتِمَّ نُورَهُ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكَافِرُونَ (32) القول في تأويل قوله : يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يُطْفِئُوا نُورَ اللَّهِ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَيَأْبَى اللَّهُ إِلا أَنْ يُتِمَّ نُورَهُ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكَافِرُونَ (32) قال أبو جعفر: يقول تعالى ذكره: يريد هؤلاء المتخذون أحبارَهم ورهبانهم والمسيحَ ابن مريم أربابًا =(أن يطفئوا نور الله بأفواههم)، يعني: أنهم يحاولون بتكذيبهم بدين الله الذي ابتعثَ به رسوله، وصدِّهم الناسَ عنه بألسنتهم، أن يبطلوه, وهو النُّور الذي جعله الله لخلقه ضياءً (1) =(ويأبى الله إلا أن يتم نوره)، يعلو دينُه، وتظهر كلمته, ويتم الحقّ الذي بعث به رسوله محمدًا صلى الله عليه وسلم =(ولو كره) إتمامَ الله إياه =(الكافرون), يعني: جاحديه المكذِّبين به. "They intend to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths and Allah refutes to surrunder to their will ; and insists to complete His light (words of light = Kuran = a guiding light ) even if the disbelievers hate this to be achieved " Abu-Ja'far said = The verse of Allah most High ; those who took their rabbins and priests and the Messiah son of Mary As Lords(gods) beside Allah to extinguish the light of Allah by their mouth means they want through belying the religion of Allah who sent Muhammad ;pbuh;as a messenger. and they hindered people with their tongues to nulify the religion of Kuran as to present it wrong and false ;n Allah insists that His religion shall be higher and His word should be elevated above their lies ;and the truth which He sent Muhammed with as a messenger . by the word disbelievers He refers to All those who belie Kuran and deny its truth as devine (and to be the word of Allah sent down by Him to clarify the way to those who want to be guided to the true religion of Him to submit to n worship A One Eternal God n Creator ; Allah .)
I think the reason why there was need to write the Quran down in the first place where people said to have memorise the Quran are dieing is because selected few were made to memorise only section of the readings given to Mohammed meaning to get the whole Quran all the selected few must be alive or atleast transmitted the part they memorise to a disciple. So if part of the selected few are gone without transmitting what they have and Mohammed the origin source is dead then that part is lost for life and therein is truly the CRISIS. This is just presenting my view of the part of the lecture and hence it is my personal interpretation.
Secondly, there is no need to make another copy and destroy evidence when you have one already done and kept under a bed except you discover something or you need to put forth something but in order for it to stand unchallenged or cover up you destroy the evidence. But I wonder if you can destroy all evidence because some part of what you thought to have been destroyed must have been transmitted orally, written somewhere following the example of first compilation by transmitters and most written may have been kept secret to be found later to comply with oral transmission to only those worthy
●What Do YOU Think About The Book "Revelation of the Child" ( the book contains signs of Muhammad's coming ), Written 70 Years Before the Birth of Muhammad in Hebrew? ○Thanksful.
lol chinease whispers... I didn't knew the english expression that we in french call "téléphone arabe" I think that anyone reading it might understand it's meaning in english but for the sake of dissipating any doubt: "arabian telephone"
Waraka, the Rabbi of the Judea-christian community with Kadijah, had converted the young orphelin arabe to his religion, which recognized Jesus as the Christ=the Messie, but didn't fully understand the meaning of the Son of Man. They evangelized (=the Quran) the arab tribe and went to conquer Jerusalem for the imminent Return of the Christ. But the Christ didn't come back; they had to fabricate a new religion to preserve their power. Muhammad , the title on the Dome of Rocher, was a good start.
It seems the codification is still on-going. These Islamic "scholars" should have realized that they can't defend the fake faith and history of Islam. Not only these "scholars" are guilty of worshipping idols, they are also guilty of leading Muslims to hell.
According to Christian Prince , and based upon the arabic words for 'unlettered prophet'', Muhammed was NOT illiterate in the sense you are describing it. The phrase 'unlettered prophet' means he was a pagan-and was not versed in the torah and gospels. Also, there are many references to Muhammed WRITING. So please don't put yourself out on a limb. You have a lot of great information. I would hate for it to be undermined by inaccuracies ( if what he is suggesting is accurate of course) .
I've wondered if when Mohammed complains to Jibril that he can't read he meant he didn't know the language. He couldn't read Hebrew or Greek. It's still a bizarre story with the same problems.
Legendary JAY SMITH. GOD BLESS YOU
Like Yassir Qadhi said... "There are holes" in the standard narrative...
I just ordered a few qur’an’s from political Islam by Bill Warner
Good decision. Just in case you aren't aware of this; Bill Warner, years ago, uploaded a video to TH-cam that was a bombshell. I studied Geek and Roman history pretty intensively at university but the explanations given for the fall of the Western half of the Roman Empire never made sense to me. Warner's video answered just about every question I ever had on the subject. Below is the link to that video in case you are interested.
th-cam.com/video/t_Qpy0mXg8Y/w-d-xo.html
generous quran by osama dakdok is probably a good translation since he's a christian
@@commentfreely5443 Mr Dakdok is a superb teacher.
Very dificult work you did God bless you big knowledge thank you
Dr ; jay smith
You are amazing
I salute You , Ambassador for Lord Jesus Christ,,
Lots of Respect to You and your Team
Hatun ..
Amen
@@farazahmadkhan2542 You're deflecting. How about defending the subject matter on the video.
@@farazahmadkhan2542
You lowiq mohemadan, the Christian faith is not dependent on a book. Christians don't say that the Bible is the perfectly preserved word of God right down to the letter.
Comparing the Bible and the koooran is like comparing apples to oranges. Both books have different sources of origins and different modes of transmission. The followers of the Bible don't claim that the Bible is the unaltered, literal word of God. It's well known among Christians that the Bible is a compilation of books written by men, transmitted by men and preserved by men. The Christian faith is not dependent on the Bible. The Bible is just a historical record of people's experiences with divinity over the course of time.
On the other hand, the koooran has plenty of variants, yet mohemadans believe that there is only one koooran and that the variants are the 7 different recitations. But this is a bogus claim and a lie and propaganda because this claim doesn't live up to academic scrutiny. The mohemadans only make up this lie about there being one koooran and 7 different recitations to make themselves feel better.
@@farazahmadkhan2542
Faraz...
🤣🤣🤣🤣
From Your preserved Quran
Allah says he is a false God and Muhammad is a false prophet ?
Do You Know ???
Read
Quran 5 ; 67
Quran 8 ; 71
Quran 52 : 48
Sahih Muslim 2190a
These were the Chances for Allah To prove allah is God
But Whats this
Allah Had a change of mind instead
He exposed himself and he himself proves Muhammad is a false prophet..
Quran 69 ; 44 to 46 ( Aorta cut )
Sahih al bukhari 4428( seems like aorta cut )
Sunan Abu dawood 4512 and 4513 ( Muhammad confirmed aorta cut )
Sunan ibn maaja 1622
( perpetual Agony for 3 years )
Where did Allahs Quran 52 ; 48 go ????
Sahih al bukhari 2588
He was carried by Two people while his Feet was dragging to the Ground
Where Did Allahs Quran 5 ; 67
And quran 8 ; 71 go ????
So The Choice is yours...
Allah a false God..
Muhammad is a false prophet
The Jewish women zainab is more powerful than Allah and Muhammad
So Go and Worship the jewish Women
Instead ..
Poor boy
@@farazahmadkhan2542
If Bible isnt True ,
Then how come john 15 ; 20
Is True ...
The All Apostle of Jesus
Died for the Sake of Gospel as said
In John 15 ; 20
James
Thomas
Peter,
Bartholomew ( nathanael)
Mathias
Matthew,
Mark ,
Luke ,
Andrew ,
James
Simon
John ( was not to Die as he was the only one to be alive out of the 12 Apostles
As lord Jesus said in Bible john 21 ; 21 to 23 )
Check history If you want ...
Lord Jesus is Lord of his Word....
Even in quran he said ((Quran 19 ; 33))
Peace be on me , when the Day i was born , die and raise back again...
He told the same in John 10 ; 17 to 18
Lord Jesus is Lord of his Word.
He Proved everything he said ...
Your Allah cant even fulfill a simple promise made to Muhammad and
Ran away scared of a Jewish women...
He Doenst even know to fulfill his end time promise he said
It would Happen before
700 A.D
Sahih Muslim 2953 a
Just dont Mock yourself Buddy
Rather Know Truth....
@Jesus is not god you are the liar not Jay
This is an excellent series, thanks Dr. Jay !
keep up the good work jay. God bless
I respect that you have done this research. I think the information you give is very important.
Thank you sir Jay Smith
God bless your beautiful work.
those diacritical marks of the quran are turning out to be dire, critical issues of the traditional accounts.
Diacritical->dire critical 🤣🤣🤣
Very informative thanks Jay, I hope Muslims will be listening to this life saving video.
They totally don't have it. The best excuse is to say they burnt it.
I have to say that i never thought about it. But I think there's something else here, Apparently, one day, one of the Followers of Muhammed heard another one reciting a verse in a different way, so he challenged him, and they went together to see Muhammed, they recited to him, and Muhamed told them: You're right and he's right (about two recitations of the same verse that were so different that it sparked a quarrel) I think Muhammed forgot what he alleged was revealed to him, because he was a liar, and liars forget their lies, and in fact nothing was revealed to him, he just made it up. So in order to get away with his lies, he told his followers that it was revealed to him in different dialects. But its true that the whole thing does not make sense.
As my parents always used to say: “if you tell 1 lie, now you need to remember it, but also cover it with more lies and this will be your undoing” Eventually you won’t be able to remember what was the LIE & what was the TRUTH, now you brain has a dilemma & this causes a mental overload. That’s why it was sooooo easy to call Mohammad out for LYING. Notice how Jesus ALWAYS said: “I tell you the TRUTH” when stating a fact, and he NEVER LIED, EVER. The TRUTH is always easier to recite than a LIE, coz the TRUTH NEVER CHANGES.
How can u receive one revelation in 7 different ways? I think that man was on drugs or under the influence of alcohol when the revelations came bcos only drunkards drug addicts hear things in more than one way
Don't call warmongering pedophilic hyper sexualized il illusionist mentally disturbed and wait searching for words yes storyteller as a liar well yes
About the burning of manuscrips I agree fully with you!!!!!!
much blessings Jay.
Jay thanks for enlightening us
good video ,God bless you and your work.
Another great video👌 God bless you Dr Jay Smith.
Much love and respect from Pakistan ❤️
I do not mind you criticizing islam but what i do mind is that you think jesus is god it's idolatry to believe that and i don't think that you have to be a muslim to believe that why not become a unitarian christian (biblical) and still believe islam is false
God Bless you. Brother Jay Smith, thank you for all your efforts.
Anyway, thanks for a very interesting bunch of lectures! I am enjoying learning more history of different religions!
Thank you Dr Smith for your material !
Thanks Jay for the great awakening.
I love you my brother in Christ please keep up the work you do . I am from Middle East but I never heard anything you are saying because it’s not allowed I always known that Christ is the truth but I never knew it was so easy to proof islam can not be true thank you 🙏
Jay, God has given you knowledge to expose Satan evil ways of deceit
Great work indeed! For more Arab insights I recommend Christian Prince, who goes into the Hadits and tells stories about Mmd that will blow everyone's minds. There are many sites, some a lot more encompassing than his own "Arabian Prophet" th-cam.com/channels/7wffWCb-k1F7oEyGMR8TTg.html
🤡🤡🤡
@be positive haha another 🤡
Good stuff! Thank you
Well, that's an interesting departure from the usual Pfander Films presentations. Jay Smith is doing a 'tafsir' on his earlier talks on the history of Islam. How cool is that?!
We do have a preuthmaic text, Sanaa C1. there we can get an idea of what Uthman burnt. and why.
Thank you for moving the ball forward. GBU.
You ask"why were the other books burnt?". Come to think of it"Who were the people who burnt not just books but whole libraries all over the world and why would they" seems to be another good question.
I wonder what the answer could be.
Simple question - do we have examples of substantial collections of hadiths of the so-called prophet prior to the ninth century?
None whatsoever!
Aramaic was widely spoken during such times, so why they did not use it?
Cuz it was meant for the Arabs only?
Chinese was widely spoken why not chinese?
Actually it is proposed by some authors that the real source of Quran was a meanwhile lost manuscript written in Aramaic from a Christian sect. Many "dark" (disputed) sentences would make real sense if interpreted as Aramaic originals.
Jay, "the Lord bless and keep you " Num. 6:24-27. Make you a blessing to many muslim wonderful people who want to know truth. "Bible Bill"
God bless Jay smith
A genuine truth seeker, God using him mightily to save thousands of souls from deception, thank God for the work you are doing through Mr. Smith. God bless him
and his ministry abundantly.
God bless u Jay. Continue to dig deep n expose the lies of this cult. There’s no doubt this book is from satan.
Where's the tolerance for the fellow of the book? 😂😂😂
USA USA the bible has gone through scrutiny n it’s still standing but the Quran hasn’t. The secrets behind the quran came out in May n the number of qurans found n the many differences in them are shocking. Too many holes in one book
USA USA you can never compare the Quran to the Bible why? The Bible is full of miracles from Jehovah but there’s no miracle from allah nor Mohammed in the quran. Not even a prophecy 😂😂😂😂
More holes in the narrative, just as Sheikh Yasir Qadhi said. 🤣🤣🤣
When an Uzbek gal was trying to convince me of islam she mentioned these two qurans, and I knew they differed and were made long after the death of muhammad, but she wouldn't check out the facts on this. Nice to see all your work on all this.
Thanks for enlightenment !!!
God bless you!!
Cant wait for Jay's next video. I'm so eager to know what more stuff will Jay unwrap next time.. Good work Jay. All the best and thanks for your determination and hard work on exposing the true Islam.
Language evolves over time. The English we speak today is not the same as the English written in the Constitution. People cannot comprehend what was said 250 years ago. How can you expect someone to know what was said 300 years earlier? I doubt what is said today is the same after 1500 years.
Australia was founded only in 1788, we as a nation are only 230 or so years old but that s roughly how long it took till Al Bukhari compiled the mess in a more messy pile of mess.
Thank you, Jay, for all your work in exposing the truth!
Blessing Jay.
God bless every one
GREAT Explanation.
Thanks a lot and May the almighty God Bless you and all people surround you, in Jesus Christ Name.
12:19 he did not repeat it a second time.
The first time was omar suggesting the idea to abu-bakr, and abu-bakr said the prophet never did it but omar convinced him.
The second time is abu-bakr giving the order to zaid, and this time zaid says (to abu-bakr) the prophet never did it, but he convinced him.
So it's not the same guy repeating it twice, it's the same kind of exchange repeating itself but with different people.
Lately, when I watch these videos I'm getting Islamic ads beforehand. Anyone else have that problem? This happens on Al Fadi's channel as well.
Not a problem, it's a tremendous blessing. Click the ads. The advertiser is giving a donation to the video.
These as well as other debates should also be translated/transcribed in Hindi .
The truth is that there never was a single Quran. Muhammad made this stuff up as he went alone, telling it in different ways to different folks.
If it was even him and not a later invention.
Did Muhammad even exist??? No evidence for his existence until more than 200 years after supposed events
@@franciscusgomarus5086 I'm a sworn enemy of Muhammad but honestly, does anyone fall for that pseudohistorical "the historical figure I don't like never existed" trick any more? Try "proving" the existence of Socrates or Cleopatra using a fine-toothed comb approach. You can come up with some plausible-sounding nonsense to deny the existence of any figure in antiquity.
If there have been no diacritical marks yet at Mohamets time, then the Birmingham pages are not as early as the carbon-dating suggests.
Good point
Jay, you should save a copy of Dar-us-Salan so when all of it is sanitized you will have it before it is corrupted.
Block chain copies to show it doesn't change.
I love the sweet innocent music at the start 🤣
Ancient south Arabian script had 30 letters. Phoenician had 22 a very similar script to paleo hebrew. All descending from hieroglyphs.
Look it up.
We love Jay Smith. May Jesus Bless him. Love from Indonesian Christians...
Why would Abu Bakr be afraid that large parts of the Qu'ran would be lost? Did he not have faith that Allah could preserve it?
Thanks Steve, a brilliant question...
Obviously not
Dr.Jay Smith I thank God for the wisdom knowledge and understanding Jesus grant you... I love this!
Jay, any thoughts on the Abu Bakr and Uthman recensions being related to the Ridda Wars? Been decades since I studied this part of history but if I remember them correctly they started up almost instantly after Muhammad died. The story that has come down to us is that this was an effort to put down apostates (I think) but that may be a later explanation (or my misunderstanding).
Back in the 1990's I wondered if those who refused to recognize Abu Bakr did so because their understanding of the 'Qur'an' was based on passages that Bakr and company did not like and were trying to expurgate. Now the burning makes sense (to me at least). Essentially, the Qur'ans of the 'apostates' had to be burned after Bakr came up with a NEW Qur'an otherwise there would be real and eternal questions about why the variants (as is happening now). Same with Uthman. Some of these 'apostate' Qur'ans may have still been in existence in his time and the only safe thing to do (from his perspective) was to burn ALL Qur'ans and then release his own version.
Ohhhh!tutututuh!
Before you get started, the problem with the first 2 Qur'an is that there AREN'T ANY! hahahahaha!
welcome back from fantasy land...
Dear sir, Do you subscribe to the theory that Islam could be a survival or rather continuation of one of the none trinitarian Christian sects/cults such as the Arrians? I know that Arrianism originated in Alexandria. Thank you.
For the benefit of some people who may not know, Arius was a bishop who believed that jesus was created by God. In other words they denied his divinity. What does this remind you of
Had to add this. When the barbarians overran the western Roman empire many of them had been following this form of christianity for several centuries, rather than paganism. This did not go down well with the local catholic population....in the long term pagans like the Frank's and Saxons did better as they eventually converted to trinitarian christianity.
NO
You re kind of right,it is always the same,gnosticism,or attacking Trinity.Heretics,among other,most likely told Muhamed that we worship Mary,heretics today still don't understand difference between worship and veneration,and Mary is important for doctrine of Jesus,and Trinity. Muhameddism is just another heresy.Google "muhamedism Catholic answers".
Also recommend Catholic world Report,and TH-cam Catholic answers,Counsel of Trent,Timothy Gordon.St. Joseph and Mary pray for us!
I would say Islam is a MISH-MASH of all of the Middle Eastern belief systems. There are some hints to Jesus divinity even in Qur'an- for instance, Jesus is a WORD from Allah, and a spirit from him.
@the truth in logic the truth Is God you do know that I'm attacking Islam. I'm also not trying to promote a form of christianity that was popular with the German tribes. Lol dont think people are getting the point. The point is the dubious origins of mohammedanism.
@@lindaclark6148 think that's a valid point. One of the reasons, or rather, speculations about Arrianism is that the teutonic tribes found christ's death on the cross unpalatable. A supreme sky god who was not killed by his creations was another matter! Perhaps the arabs were psychologically similar.
God bless you j
Re: differences in dialect, vowel sounds aren't the only thing that distinguishes them (although I don't know about Arabic in specific). Vocabulary can differ regionally, as can grammatical features and characteristic phrasing. But it's not clear to me how this would make a difference, unless the Quraysh (sp?) were speaking a very Nabataean- or Aramaic- influenced Arabic, as I've heard they might have.
I’m not sure if it’s a big deal that these ‘original’ Korans no longer exist, assuming that they did in the first place. It was common practice to dispose of the original MS when making a copy, at least in the Roman and post Roman world. Why bother to keep an old and probably tattered MS when you have a nice new and clean copy? Moreover, the doctrine that the Koran was the perfectly preserved word of God and that it was therefore wrong to dispose of it only emerged in the 9th century (I think, from memory). As such, once the provinces received these Korans and made copies over several years or decades for distribution to towns and cities throughout the province, it would probably have been quite normal for the original to have been disposed of, particularly as it would have become tatty and worn from the hands of several copyists.
It’s also possible that the MSS may have been destroyed during the Mongol invasions and sackings of the 13 &15th centuries. In Baghdad, the Tigris was said to have turned black from the ink of thousands of books that were thrown into it. Although it is reported that thousands of books were also taken to Iran by the Mongols. The MSS may also have been destroyed by fire or in another accident, or removed to another city.
In short, just because we don’t have them now, doesn’t mean that they never existed. In fact, it would be remarkable, and probably accidental, if they had survived.
Having said all that however, I do enjoy these videos and I appreciate how much work goes into them. Best wishes.
Fascinating hypothesis, but we do have quite a few extant ancient Qur'ans, but all from the 8th and 9th centuries, which we will go through in the upcoming videos. Remember that Muslims NEVER burn Qur'ans, nor dispose of them, but store them in the domes of mosques. So, where are all of the original 9 Qur'ans? Why, after 1400 years can we not find even one!??
Meanwhile Christians have retained over 365 either partial or complete New Testaments from before the 6th century, yet, the Muslims cannot even retain one of the original Qur'ans which went to cities which were not burned, or destroyed, or flooded during the intervening 1400 years?
The Mongols never destroyed Qur'ans, but destroyed literature they deemed unworthy, and sacreligious.
Dialects can differ in pronunciation, true.
They can ALSO differ in vocabulary and grammar, both of which show up just fine in a vowel-less text.
For example, some linguists claim to be able to distinguish dialects in the (undotted) Old Testament.
Here, for example, is part of the Sermon on the Mount in Scots.
Ye ar the licht o the warld.
A toun biggit on a hill-tap canna be hoddit; an again, whan fowk licht a
lamp, they pit-it-na- ablo a meal-bassie, but set it up on the dresser-heid,
an syne it gies licht for aabodie i the houss. See at your licht shines
that gate afore the warld, sae at aabodie may see your guid deeds an ruise
your Faither in heiven
This obviously isn't English or American, but it is clearly within the "mutual intelligibility"
range needed to be classified as a dialect. Even if it is an official minority language
of the EU. And the verse above is taken from an actual published translation of the
New Testament into Scots from the Greek.
Let's take out the vowels (except for words that are just a vowel):
Y r th lcht o th wrld.
A tn bggt n a hlltp cnn b hddt, n gn, whn fwk lcht a lmp, th pttnbl a mlbss bt st t
p n th drssrhd, n sn t gs lcht fr bd i th hss. S t yr lcht shns tht gt fr th wrld,
s t bd my s yr gd dds n rs yr Fthr n hvn.
Note in particular that what would be "lght" in vowel-less English is "lcht" in Scots.
That's a DIALECT difference. What would be "blt" in English (built) is "bggt" in
Scots (biggit). That's a DIALECT difference. It's true that SOME differences
(warld vs world, Faither vs Father, heiven vs heaven) are erased by removing
the worlds, but others are NOT.
I have demonstrated previously that MODERN Arabic dialects can be
distinguished without vowels. It may very well be the case that the dialects of
Arabic relevant in the seventh century could not, BUT THIS IS A VERY UNLIKELY
CLAIM THAT REQUIRES POSITIVE EVIDENCE.
Not only that, it's a claim you don't NEED.
Mohammed lived near Petra, as evidenced by the tribes mentioned.
A later Caliph built his political bases in Western rim of the Arabian Pennisula, several hundred kilometres to the south.
Then there is the time difference.
The potential for "Chinese whispers" is considerable.
Sorry, I couldn't read it with the vowels. I can infer some words because I know the passage but I still couldn't guess parts. Without the vowels it was gibberish. I wouldn't know what it was. I can't even guess many words. The spelling is so different it's completely different words.
I'm familiar with the sound of Scotch English, German, French, Spanish, and can speak several dialects of English plus.
A Filipino wouldn't be able to tell any that it was actual words much less which book it was from. It wouldn't even be a useful reminder to someone who was being told what it says.
Filipinos and American blacks who hear standard English every day of their lives through the media have trouble reading and writing because of the difference between their preferred dialect and written English. Thinking a person who never heard a dialect & never saw the text can read it and know what it means without vowels is ludicrous.
@@MarkProffitt Your last sentence does not seem to be related to anything I wrote or implied. In fact you are making my point for me, which is that even without vowels, the "same" text in two dialects of the same language can be VERY different, so that to say "you can't have dialects without vowels" is ridiculous. I have exactly the same trouble with BEV that you have with Scots: I cannot follow it in ordinary script and in IPA I have little idea what language it is in. Compared with modern Arabic dialects, Scots and English are nearly identical. So it is quite difficult to believe that ancient Arab dialects differed only in their vowels (and in fact we know that it isn't true).
Hi Jay, I rhink that you have to look into your microphone or audio pick-up because theres that same distortion that interfered with your live feed with Al-Fadi
When is your next viedo coming out?
Dr Smith, upload the video you did with mel of sneaker's corner about iyas ibn qabisha al ta'i being the real muhammad.
Once we have finished with the Qur'an, we will move back to the problems with the 7th century Islam, including this video...but we need to continue with the Qur'an while everyone's attention is on it.
6:29 Hmm, why is "USC-MSA" the old reference system, since it is the Web English reference.? Web is new, and English doesn't sounds like the original arabic. Doesn't sound logic. But, I'm no expert, I'm just asking. What is the actual system use in the arabic version of the hadiths collections ?
And also, if you want to reach the muslims more than you want to reach other christians or the non-religious, why don't you use the system that the muslims are the most likely to use?
There are some unanswered questions:
If the first Quran had been hidden under Hafsa's bed for 20 years, what were other Muslims in different parts of the Arab empire reading and reciting?
They must have been reciting some other written version(s) of the Quran (not the one written by Zayd Ibn Tabit, at the behest of Caliph Bakr), because Caliph Uthman ordered them to be destroyed once his authorised Quran had been published and distributed.
I think Shabir shattered that perfect memorization theory when he said at first they weren’t worried about exact wording only exact meaning right? It wasn’t after all the editing and compiling of the text that Muslims could say perfect preservation... yes of the remaining text 😂..
What a mess Muslims have, I’m so glad Christianity is nothing like that
It seems like this is part of a series, but it’s not easy to find the next video. Maybe put that in the description?
I asked a Muslim apologist why Uthuman destroyed Hafsa’s copy. The answer I got was that Hafsa had made notes in the sides of the Quran and it would confuse people and so it was destroyed. What do you think?
Evidently that is Jay's "Quran wrecking" shirt!
14:26 Do Arabic dialects differ ONLY in vocals????
No, in the diacritical dots as well, which change the consonantal text.
@@pfanderfilms Thank you!
@@pfanderfilmsThank you , now I understand! Before I thought, the diacritical dots are there only for putting in vocals.
@PfanderFilms the hadith used by the Shia and the Ibadi are different from those used by the Sunni (such as Sahih-al-Bukhari, etc.); I was wondering if their hadith also talk about some of the problems in the compilation of the Koran as well as maybe Muhammad’s bad deeds.
It would be like trying to write the history of ones family today from word of mouth. "What do they say your Great Great Great Grandfather did on Thursday the 4th of July 1782"
Only 5 generations? Each would need to be 47 years old between children. More like great great great great great great great great grandfather.
By the way I do know what my relative from the 1700s was doing because IT WAS WRITTEN. 😄
@Mark Who of the 1024 great-9 grandfathers you are referring to?
Dear jay, you made it very clear that islam is just big LIE !
If there was no reference to Mecca on ancient maps until 700 then can be no Muhammad. The man never existed he was a construct by Malik ibn Anas to justify the existence of God's laws to wit the Sharia.
So basically there's no mention of Muhammed before the 7th century
God bless Muslim they need Jesus 🙏🏼
So the first compilation was by caliph abu bakr from 632 -634 AD. The second was by caliph uthman in 652 AD! Sahih al bukhari wrote so
Did enough Quraishi speakers reside throughout the 9 provinces? Otherwise if all 9 copies are written in that single dialect how would the provincials read and recite from them. They would either need bilingual scholars and imams or they would have to write even more copies from the original 9 but in all the local dialects. How could even that be done if there were no diacritical marks and vowelizations yet? You can see how this process would introduce errors into the local copies and from the corrupted local copies corrupted oral recitations. Then when new written versions are created from those corrupted oral recitations the corruption process repeats.
Al "buhari" 🤣 love Jay.
Using the deprecated reference system of volume number is pointless.. The normal reference system is much clearer. Good that you include both but no point underlining the deprecated one.
E
يُرِيدُونَ أَن يُطْفِئُوا نُورَ اللَّهِ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَيَأْبَى اللَّهُ إِلَّا أَن يُتِمَّ نُورَهُ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكَافِرُونَ (32)
القول في تأويل قوله : يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يُطْفِئُوا نُورَ اللَّهِ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَيَأْبَى اللَّهُ إِلا أَنْ يُتِمَّ نُورَهُ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكَافِرُونَ (32)
قال أبو جعفر: يقول تعالى ذكره: يريد هؤلاء المتخذون أحبارَهم ورهبانهم والمسيحَ ابن مريم أربابًا =(أن يطفئوا نور الله بأفواههم)، يعني: أنهم يحاولون بتكذيبهم بدين الله الذي ابتعثَ به رسوله، وصدِّهم الناسَ عنه بألسنتهم، أن يبطلوه, وهو النُّور الذي جعله الله لخلقه ضياءً (1) =(ويأبى الله إلا أن يتم نوره)، يعلو دينُه، وتظهر كلمته, ويتم الحقّ الذي بعث به رسوله محمدًا صلى الله عليه وسلم =(ولو كره) إتمامَ الله إياه =(الكافرون), يعني: جاحديه المكذِّبين به.
"They intend to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths and Allah refutes to surrunder to their will ; and insists to complete His light (words of light = Kuran = a guiding light ) even if the disbelievers hate this to be achieved "
Abu-Ja'far said = The verse of Allah most High ; those who took their rabbins and priests and the Messiah son of Mary As Lords(gods) beside Allah to extinguish the light of Allah by their mouth means they want through belying the religion of Allah who sent Muhammad ;pbuh;as a messenger. and they hindered people with their tongues to nulify the religion of Kuran as to present it wrong and false
;n Allah insists that His religion shall be higher and His word should be elevated above their lies ;and the truth which He sent Muhammed with as a messenger . by the word disbelievers He refers to All those who belie Kuran and deny its truth as devine (and to be the word of Allah sent down by Him to clarify the way to those who want to be guided to the true religion of Him to submit to n worship A One Eternal God n Creator ; Allah .)
Wow such proof. So impressive. I wonder why people might oppose a system with jizya. So weird. Lol.
Were there at Utmans time already spelling rules standardized?
Spelling mistakes? So much for PERFECTLY preserved then.
I think the reason why there was need to write the Quran down in the first place where people said to have memorise the Quran are dieing is because selected few were made to memorise only section of the readings given to Mohammed meaning to get the whole Quran all the selected few must be alive or atleast transmitted the part they memorise to a disciple. So if part of the selected few are gone without transmitting what they have and Mohammed the origin source is dead then that part is lost for life and therein is truly the CRISIS. This is just presenting my view of the part of the lecture and hence it is my personal interpretation.
Secondly, there is no need to make another copy and destroy evidence when you have one already done and kept under a bed except you discover something or you need to put forth something but in order for it to stand unchallenged or cover up you destroy the evidence. But I wonder if you can destroy all evidence because some part of what you thought to have been destroyed must have been transmitted orally, written somewhere following the example of first compilation by transmitters and most written may have been kept secret to be found later to comply with oral transmission to only those worthy
It's funny to think that the written Quran is as far removed from Muhammed as "Hamilton" is from the time of the founding fathers.
👏👏
So on the dating basis, did god make mistakes with the new testament?
The Quran must have been compiled towards the end of the 7th century and ascribed to Muhammad to give it authority.
●What Do YOU Think About The Book "Revelation of the Child" ( the book contains signs of Muhammad's coming ), Written 70 Years Before the Birth of Muhammad in Hebrew?
○Thanksful.
how was the bible compiled?
lol chinease whispers... I didn't knew the english expression that we in french call "téléphone arabe" I think that anyone reading it might understand it's meaning in english but for the sake of dissipating any doubt: "arabian telephone"
Waraka, the Rabbi of the Judea-christian community with Kadijah, had converted the young orphelin arabe to his religion, which recognized Jesus as the Christ=the Messie, but didn't fully understand the meaning of the Son of Man. They evangelized (=the Quran) the arab tribe and went to conquer Jerusalem for the imminent Return of the Christ. But the Christ didn't come back; they had to fabricate a new religion to preserve their power. Muhammad , the title on the Dome of Rocher, was a good start.
It seems the codification is still on-going. These Islamic "scholars" should have realized that they can't defend the fake faith and history of Islam. Not only these "scholars" are guilty of worshipping idols, they are also guilty of leading Muslims to hell.
Where is he presenting this from?
According to Christian Prince , and based upon the arabic words for 'unlettered prophet'', Muhammed was NOT illiterate in the sense you are describing it. The phrase 'unlettered prophet' means he was a pagan-and was not versed in the torah and gospels. Also, there are many references to Muhammed WRITING. So please don't put yourself out on a limb. You have a lot of great information. I would hate for it to be undermined by inaccuracies ( if what he is suggesting is accurate of course) .
I've wondered if when Mohammed complains to Jibril that he can't read he meant he didn't know the language. He couldn't read Hebrew or Greek.
It's still a bizarre story with the same problems.