I never converted to Islam but your videos along with Al Fadi and others only strengthen my faith in Jesus and embolden me in my witness to Muslims and others.
21:00 How a Roman Emperor could knew that it was 'Umar' who was one of those who wrote a book? It was perhaps because it is what was told in Muslim circles at that time (mid 8th c.). Later, after the Abbassids (750) the 'Muhammad' story ( words coming from heaven) will become the mainstream narrative: the one that we know today.
All of you are so great! This is truly outstanding and genuinely very hard and awesome work by Mel and his team. Relishing for more information and evidence and can't thank you all enough! Keep it coming, please!
---- > Do you really think they care about the truth? According to the Quran Allah (We) sent the Apostles to the Arabs but they rejected them.(Sura 36: 13-16 ) With the invention of the Gutenberg press, the 1st century Holy Bible has been widely available since the 15th century. Ibn Kathir writes: “The names of the first two Messengers were Sham`un and Yuhanna, and the name of the third was Bulus, and the city was Antioch (Antakiyah).” quranx.com/tafsirs/36.13
Every day you guys come up with new material. Normally, what you guys are coming up with would be gathered together and later made into a book. As I understand it, what you are doing is what any scientist does: 1) looks at a problem, 2) gathers info, 3) tries different hypothesizes to make sense out of the info, 4) then comes to some conclusion (knowing there may be some future evidence that might adjust the conclusions). I look forward to your future evidence and conclusion.
Yes, that's how I view it. The viewers play a huge part in the process as collectively they are like one big supercomputer that filters out any errors or throws up anomalies in our findings. I think this is a great way to sift through the evidence but you need a thick skin as mistakes are inevitable and some people love nothing more than to point and jeer at a mistake. :) But I will eventually get around to writing a book when the material matures, at the moment we are hitting some solid stuff, which will be unlikely to get overturned, but only time will tell as there is so some much yet to be read and seen.
This is a fantastic, extensively done research. All kinds of evidence being collected from even source possible. This has to keep on going as long as it takes.
Wow I have been mesmerized by the volume of the materials you wonderful men have fished out and is making so much sense. Praise the Lord for all the inspiration and the energy you are putting in, can't wait for the next one. Thank you 😊 💓
AMEN HALLELUJAH GLORY TO GOD GREAT IS YOUR FAITHFULNESS TO ME IN THE MIGHTY NAME OF JESUS CHRIST 🙏🙏🙏🙏Each and every day, I do my best to share these awesome and powerful messages without fear and shame to the los
Hadith 104 Sunnah Niman Marah, the messenger of Allah said the first person with whom Allah will shake hands is Umar and the first person to be granted with salaam and taken to paradise, so Umar is better candidate than the messenger
Vijay Sharma & John P @ FACT: HADITH? Shifting from one topic/issue to another topic/issue? We Muslims know why? Here: As the last and final resort after failing severely and miserably to prove any against the truth of the so-called prophet Muhammad (pbuh), etc. and any single thing that matters or relates to? How? By 'cherry-picking' any single out of all those 'weak' and 'false' hadiths (sayings/narrations) by chance by taking and using it (the cherry-picked statement) as a tool (as a pretext) by means of mocking, degrading, maligning, etc. the real truth of prophet Muhammad (pbuh), etc? or, By 'cherry-picking' any single 'statement' of the hadith 'partially' (and not as a whole 'statement' instead) by chance by taking the actual meaning of the cherry-picked statement out of its original context as a pretext by means of mocking, degrading, maligning, etc. the real truth of the so-called prophet Muhammad, etc? or, By blindly believing by browsing through all those fully-biased non-Muslim haters and liars' websites and channels intentionally for (obtaining) false, fabricated interpolated information, biographies, made-up stories, tales, myths, etc. as a tool (as a pretext) by means of mocking, degrading, maligning, ruining, etc. the real truth of the so-called prophet Muhammad, etc? or, By dumbly listening and merely believing to any single non-Muslim’s liar, slanderer, hater, etc. and hearsay? Here! See below: @ Fact: The Qur'an and hadith: Qur'an, the one true word of Allah (The Creator), Lord of the worlds, is one single thing. While hadiths, all the words of the Creator's creations (humans) is another single thing. Both, are just 2 different things/matters. Absolutely fact! Allah (The Al-Mighty) Says: • "Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian." [Noble Qur'an, Surah Al-Hijr 15:9] Note: The Qur’an is perfectly preserved. While on the other occasion; Instead of all those 'authentic' ones, there are tens of hundreds of thousands of 'weak' and 'false' hadiths (sayings/narrations) in here and out there scattering around all over the place across the globe. That's fact! Here: For example, Anis Shorrosh, a well-known Arab missionary, says: ‘... Bukhari, collected twenty thousand of them, of which he rejected ten thousand, accounting them untrue. •Of the remaining ten thousand he accepted only 7,275, declaring the rest to be untrustworthy•. Abu Da'ud accepted authentic only 4,800 rules out of 50,000.[1] Similarly we find Norman Geisler and Abdul Saleeb claiming that: '...Bukhari, considered to be the most reliable collector, admitted that of the 300,000 hadith he collected, he considered only 100,000 might be true. He then narrowed this number down to 7,275, many of which are repetitions so that the total number is in fact near 3,000. •That means that even he admitted there were errors in over 295,000 of them•![2]' And, 'As to the abundance of the apocryphal traditions, we learn that the famous authority al-Bukhari choose only 7,000 out of a host of 600,000 traditions that were current in his time.[4]'
Note: 'Fact-proof and evidence' is all it takes. That’s what ‘truth’ is all about actually!
@@mdesyeticamat2235 As I published above: Riyad as-Salihin hadith 416. Why do you want the reference? All you are going to do is to give an excuse for its existence...
Loving your material, here in N. Z. Biggest challenge is how to communicate it to ordinary Muslims who have no real idea of their history or deep understanding of their own faith. Keep up the good work though. The more ammunition we have when they do turn the better. God bless!
You speak from a high place, as though you believe Christians are aware of the holes in their own story. The mere act of spotting the logical problems in someone else's version doesn't automatically imply that your own pet religion doesn't have the very same kinds of problems. #titusFlavius
@@buqtair3129 37 different versions of Koran and still counting...... so much for divine preservation of the Koran. Since the Standard Islamic Narrative has holes that is getting bigger by the day, let me invite you to give your life to JESUS. HE LOVES YOU AND DONT WANT YOU TO PERISH
The devil himself should have made this puzzle who put all the puzzle of Islam pieces and made a mish mash religion like that that you guys you are really doing a great job God bless
@@sidprice6214 tell about your profet and how he flew on his donkey ? And how he jumped on his 9 wives in one wash ? And how the devils jumped on him the whole night? Hhhaa are you serious yes right very consistent hhhhaaa I also flew on a donkey I am a profet kneel for me hhhaa
@@davidbond8044 its funny and ironic a westerner is trying to tell me what the Quran is saying and not saying Arabic is my native tongue so I advice you not to try to insult me in this way because of I start I will never finish from you so I want not to insult you so go and play somewhere else for your sake
@@sidprice6214 look whatever you consider an answer it doesn't interest me pls dont let start because you will feel insulted arabic is my native and I do understand your quran much more than you think your obvious false profet and Quran reer end is being exposed unless you dont know or pretend to be dead ggo and see (sneakers corner) (cire)and many more hide in your little cocoon from the truth soon you will have no where to hide if you answer this I will start revealing your obvious false profet so I advice you as follow human go and sell your rotten goods somewhere else next time I will not be so gracious so piss off
@@davidbond8044 look you are not telling me anything I dont know and it was written in syriac and not Persian and I dont know you insist I think we agree if you are trying to defend the false narrative of islam other wise old dont wate my time and yours ok
This adds a whole new dimension to John's definition of antichrist in 1 John 2 : 19 😲 1 John 2 : 18 Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. 1 John 2 : 19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us. I always assumed this refers to the western roman empire/church... but now it might cover Islam as the eastern half of the roman empire as well (Daniel 2 : 33). And it makes way more sense.
The Qur'an is a collection of lectionaries from Messianic Jews (Nazarene) that had the Hebrew Gospel as reported by the Father of the Church and, in addition from the Abbasid's. I would not be surprised that the so-called Meccan verses. were from the Messianic Jews and the Medina verses from the Abbasids.
I already mentioned earlier that ' ALI ' [ अलि ] means ' Bumble Bee ' the black colored male bee in Sanskrit Language. Sanskrit is the mother language of mainly all the current spoken Indian languages in the Indian Subcontinent. There is no other language that explains the exact meaning of the word Ali. You may / will find the etymological origin of some of the words from the spoken languages right from the region of Caspian Sea to Lithuanian language are from Ancient Sanskrit as well.
They are doing very good and very hard they are really, very close to reach the truth. They started from Abbasid started Islam, then they went down to Umayyad or the so called abdulmalik, then they went down to allyas ibn abi gabbisa , then the Petra nonsense , the Jerusalem noises then now they went down to Umber ibn alkhatab. They are ,really, very close to reaching the truth and soon they will discover that prophet Muhammad,actually, the one that started Islam and the traditional Islamic narrative is correct. They are ,really, very close keep up the good word.
@@mahmoodali1533 There is that point in GOT , in last season where until the last two episodes, the fans of GOT, think that Jon and Danaerys are going to overthrow Cersei and rule together as Targaryens, ( glorious ending cos it fits fan narrative).. Similar to that.. You sound like a fan brother.. Also what happened to GOT (HBO TV series)ending?!!!
isnt there a hadith that says Umar contributed three verses to the quran one of them being being the wearing of the veil. If three verses why not the entire quran.
Better than that, Umar is depicted as smarter than Muhammad and teaching Muhammad what his capabilities should be as a prophet. By the way, any similarity with the miracle of the multiplication of loaves and fishes is not a coincidence (there are also other hadiths where Muhammad performs this miracle once again): This hadith is narrated in the book Musnad by Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, also by Riyad as-Salihin 416 but with softer words. Feeding the bandits: The companion Abu Hurayra recounted that as a group of warriors led by Muhammad were on their way to battle, their food supply became so depleted that they complained to their leader that they were hungry and asked for his permission to slaughter some of their riding camels and prepare food. The Prophet gave his consent and they went to slaughter the beasts. They were met by Umar and informed him of the Prophet’s consent. Umar urged them to wait, and asked Muhammad if it was true that he gave his permission to slaughter the camels. The Prophet replied in the affirmative and Umar asked: “Then what will they ride on (in battle)” ? Muhammad commented that he could do nothing for he had no food to give the men. Umar retorted: “Messenger of God, there is something you can do. Order every man to bring whatever food he still has, assemble all the leftovers in one place and offer a prayer to God for His blessing, then distribute the food among the men”. The Prophet complied, offered the prayer and distributed the food. Miraculously, all the warriors ate to their heart’s content, and much food still remained. When he witnessed this miracle Muhammad exclaimed: “I testify that there is no God but Allah and I testify that I am the Messenger of Allah. Whoever meets Allah with these two testimonies without any doubt in his heart shall dwell in Jannah”.
I feel I need to explain what I'm doing as quite a few people are confused regarding my previous work on Iyas and now on Umar. It looks like I'm all over the place. There are two distinct questions that I'm trying to address, which look the same but actually have very different answers: 1) What did the SIN base its Muhammad character on? 2) Who did the - what I will call - the "634 sources" actually refer to? Let me address the second question first, as it is the easier to answer: it was Umar. Principally, he was the one in charge in that year. He led the conquest into Israel, as Thomas the Presbyter says he was seen east of Gaza etc. and several sources say he entered Jerusalem and spoke to Sophronius. He had a masjid built here. The second question is much more difficult to answer, as there was no one that matches the SIN's description of Muhammad: to put it simply it is a work of fiction. It is a composite of many characters and sources. It is ahistorical. So what do I think this composite was based on? Even a cursory look at the Sirah reveals that the Bible was used to generate this figure, drawing on elements from the story of Jesus and Moses. To take a couple of examples, Muhammad enters Mecca as a baby but instead of looking for an Inn, they are looking for a wet nurse for him. Another is Muhammad is lost at the Kaaba as a child just like Jesus at the Temple. As the SIN, talks about a Muhammad who is the founder, who began from 610 while in the cave of Hira, then there Iyas fits that component. He fits with Al Tabari and Chinese sources that talk about a king given weapons in a cave by Khusroe. He is king crucially when the Tayaye revolution starts in 618, but then the trail runs dry after that. Crucially, the 634 references to a Muhammad/prophet refer to him as linked to the Tai, just as Iyas was. But Umar also is linked to the Tayaye. Umar also reigned from the year of the first sighting/ reference to a Muhammad and a prophet armed with a sword, in both cases in Palestine. This historical component is distinct from the founder component of Iyas but is more important as this is a direct link to when the name Muhammad was used. Umar's link with the Temple Mount played a huge part in the various tales of Muhammad going to Jerusalem and ascending into heaven etc. We also think that in many of the key details about Muhammad, there are many parallels with Elagabalus, 23 parallels in fact that look spookily like much of the SIN's stories about Muhammad are based on Elagabalus, who was an Arab that once ruled the Roman Empire in the 3rd century. Other tiny elements of his story may have been based on Nehemiah ben Husiel, Abu Muslim and Mahmuda Babai. This may not even be an exhaustive list. Due to the mix of these elements, it is difficult to spot these borrowings. It is likely we will discover more on this list. I hope people can follow this and appreciate that this is a research in progress.
Sir.. Please look at the following.. I was shocked when i saw this in CPs channel.. First check out verse 66:5 from the Qur'an.. Then Sahih Al Bukhari 402.. Omar himself saying the verse 66:5 was revealed as "He said it".. Not Al-lah almighty but himself it seems.. Quoting here below "... Once the wives of the Prophet (ﷺ) made a united front against the Prophet (ﷺ) and I said to them, 'It may be if he (the Prophet) divorced you, (all) that his Lord (Allah) will give him instead of you wives better than you.' So this verse (the same as I had said) was revealed." (66.5)..." 😬 Omar is openly admitting he is Mhmd???? Hope this doesnt waste your precious time .. Also do enjoy your vacation GBU 💐✨
Fascinating! I left a comment asking about this very topic on one of your previous videos concerning the true identity of Mohammed as Ibin Kabisha (my spelling is awful, I probably butchered his name). You have come through again. This is a really fast changing field of inquiry and I have been loving the twists and turns as you burrow through the evidence to develop and refine your hypotheses. Your honesty as you admit emerging evidence changes or contradicts something you have said in the past is a wonderful example.
PALADIN @ FACT: JAY SMITH RUNS AWAY FROM DEBATE CHALLENGES Two Sundays ago, prominent Muslim debaters, Br. Zakir Hussain and Br. Ayaz Uddin, met Jay Smith at Hyde Park and challenged him to two debates. Smith refused to debate on the topic whether Jesus is God or not, his reasoning as he states is that it’s clearly obvious and thus not debatable. Well, can’t Brs. Zakir and Ayaz reply the same, that the Prophet’s prophethood is obvious and thus, not debatable? I find it very odd, that Jay Smith, religiously goes to Hyde Park to debate about Islam & Christianity, and when challenged with an actual debate, he refuses to do so. What is the point of screaming at people every Sunday, and boasting about your debate skills, if you’re refusing to debate on a stage, for a scheduled and moderated debate? Please enable subtitles to see what each person is saying in the videos. 1. Jay Smith Runs Away From Zakir Hussain's Debate Challenge [Enable CC/ Subtitles] th-cam.com/video/39TSvksIEAk/w-d-xo.html 2. Jay Smith Runs Away from Zakir Hussains Second Debate Challenge! [Enable CC/ Subtitles] th-cam.com/video/hbEf2pTt8iE/w-d-xo.html What is Jay afraid of? Why is he running from Muslims? Can any Christian tell us?
PALADIN @ FACT: JAY SMITH’S RUNNING SCARED AFTER UNFORESEEN DISASTER Jay Smith’s claims during his debate with Dr. Shabir about the Qur’an have seemed to cause more trouble than he initially thought they would. See, during the debate, he claimed to have introduced new research by a colleague of his, Dan Brubaker, based on Dan’s thesis on changes in the (manuscripts of the) Qur’an. Jay had stated that Dan’s thesis would not be published until next year and so Muslims would not have been aware of its contents. However, the University that Dan Brubaker submitted his thesis through, Rice University, made his thesis available publicly. Jay, nor Dan seemed to have known this, which is why Jay assumed Muslims would have to wait one full year before they would be able to read Dan’s thesis and respond to the claims in it. Which also meant Muslims would have to wait one full year to respond to Jay’s claims based on Dan’s thesis which he made during the debate. Unfortunately for both Dan and Jay, we got our hands on the thesis quite some time ago and already picked it apart. So when Jay was on the stage during his debate with Dr. Shabir, and he assumed that Muslims would have no idea of what he was saying or what the thesis contained, he made some pretty silly claims to bolster his bravado. Jay has now run into a major problem. After I posted that we had possession of Dan’s thesis and proved this with the thesis’ cover image, the University removed the thesis and it is no longer available. So we have a few questions that need to be answered: 1. Why was the thesis removed after my article was published? 2. Did Jay ask Dan to ask the University to remove it? 3. Why would Dan suddenly request for the University to remove the thesis? 4. Dan did not request the University to remove the thesis after the debate, so why the day after my article? 5. Did Dan give Jay the entire thesis or just a few photos? 6. If Dan did give Jay the entire thesis, why did Jay only claim to have taken a few photos? 7. If Jay did read Dan’s thesis, is he aware that he openly contradicts what Dan states? 8. Is Dan aware that Jay claimed things of Dan’s thesis that do not exist within it? 9. Why has the University removed the thesis? 10. Who requested the thesis be removed? For those who’d like to see where Dan’s thesis was once available and now is miraculously removed from the University’s page, please see our Brother Ahmed’s accessing of it: 1islam.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/cc-2014-riceuniversity.jpg?w=694&h=173 This article has been sent to Jay Smith. Will he respond to the questions, or does he realise he’s in a bit of a conundrum? Has Jay been put in an awkward position? Its sudden removal is quite telling. Jay does have reason to be concerned, why else would it be removed? Why else would Jay have Dan request the University to remove it? Jay knows that he’s screwed up big time and the fun is only just starting! See! More on Jay Smith: JAY SMITH CONCEDES HE ISN’T FAMILIAR WITH THE SOURCES USED callingchristians.com/2014/10/03/jay-smith-concedes-he-isnt-familiar-with-the-sources-used/ UPDATE ON THE PAPER, “RESPONSE TO JAY SMITH’S MISTAKES” callingchristians.com/2014/10/09/update-on-the-paper-response-to-jay-smiths-mistakes/ JAY SMITH’S STORY DOES NOT ADD UP callingchristians.com/2014/11/18/jay-smiths-story-does-not-add-up/ DEBATE REVIEW: JAY SMITH AND YUSUF ISMAIL - THE BIBLICAL AND QURANIC APPROACH TO PEACE & VIOLENCE callingchristians.com/2015/08/09/debate-review-jay-smith-and-yusuf-islam-the-biblical-and-quranic-approach-to-peace-violence/
PALADIN @ FACT: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF JAY SMITH'S [PfanderFilms] MISTAKES ABOUT THE QUR'AN • Analysis Of Jay Smith’s Allegations About The Qur’an MISTAKE #1: “One of the problem’s that we’ve had is that we’ve not really been able to look at the Qur’an.” - 18:22. At the very beginning of his presentation, Jay Smith attempts to falsely establish a conspiratorial narrative in which he claims that the Islamic world has been trying to prevent academic research of the Qur’an’s extant manuscripts. This however, cannot be more than furthest from the truth. It is universally known that the greatest Orientalist attempt at studying the Qur’anic manuscripts was undertaken by the Germans in the 20th century in which 15, 000+ photographs were taken of Qur’anic manuscripts located worldwide, unimpeded by the Muslim world. Consequent to this, the infamous history of the hiding of these photographs by Orientalists themselves, is recorded as follows: “As a preliminary result there was finally gathered a comprehensible mass of material stored with Bergstrasser in Munich, not the least a collection of about 15,000 photographs of folios of very old Koran codices from all over the world. As the one who inherited the task of continuing after World War 2 the work of his teacher Bergstrasser (d. 1933) and of Arthur Jeffery, and meanwhile as the successor to the chair of Bergstrasser in Munich, Spitaler spread the rumor that these materials had perished in the bomb attacks on Munich in the last months of World War 2. Still further, in a note from 1972 in a publication of his (see Rudi Paret [ed.], Der Koran, Darmstadt 1975, p.413) Spitaler fostered this rumor. But now in the ending 1990s it comes out that he was in possession of these approximately 15,000 photographs all the time since 1945, obviously to keep everybody else aloof from them in order to reserve exclusively to himself the right and possibility of exploiting them in the hope of producing something outstanding in Koran scholarship - what in the end he was obviously incapable of achieving. Such behaviour is well known in the history of scholarship as characteristic of mediocre scholars who never develop a sense of unselfish scholarship as mere search for truth but are oriented solely on their own personal career and questionable fame.” - “A Challenge to Islam for Reformation by Gunter Luling, Preface, XXI.” At this point, the quote that Jay uses at the timestamp of 18:29 is from Shaykh Muhammad Mustafa al-’Azami’s, “The History of the Qur’an: From Revelation to Compilation”, p. 315. As will become quite apparent, Jay’s modus operandi from this point onward is to mention the name of an author and to provide some apparent information4 based on these author’s works5, which when examined in relation to what he has claimed, there appears to be a consistent pattern of inventing conclusions, misrepresenting the research done or by manufacturing information outright. 4. While making his claims, Jay presents a bundle of papers grasped in his hands in which he states that the information from the authors he is appealing to, is contained within that bundle. However, not once does he give a citation from that bundle of papers. What is perplexing is that he ad libs his way through most of his presentation and never references a single quote from that bundle of papers. If anyone can provide an instance in which he cites a book by Dr. Deroche and gives a page number, I’ll be amazed. He attempts to convince the crowd that he has done his research by waving this bundle of papers around, but surprisingly he can’t give a single complete book, journal or thesis reference! 5. The literature of the authors he mentions by name, patently disagrees with his claims. One has to ask, has he actually read these works or not? MISTAKE #2: “Now up till a few years ago there was not much we could do about this claim, there was not much we Christians could do or anybody else because we were not given access to these manuscripts. We could go to the Topkapi Manuscripts, which is the one there in Istanbul, the one which most Muslims would look at as their standard. We couldn’t go to the Samarkand which was in Tashkent, we couldn’t go to the Husseini Manuscripts which was in Cairo.” - 19:48. I (the author) am quite surprised that he claims Christians were not given access to these manuscripts with the exception of up until a few years ago. This is odd, considering that one of the foremost works on the Husseini Manuscripts in which four folios were published was by Bernhard Mortiz in the year 19056. It is perhaps Jay’s intention to bolster the validity of his conspiratorial idea7, by claiming that Christians were denied access to the Cairo manuscripts for religious purposes. He fails to mention however, that the restriction was due to a major political fallout8 in the years following the British Occupation of Egypt from 1882 to 1953. His claims about the manuscripts from Samarqand are perhaps even more deceitful. The Samarqand manuscripts were studied extensively in Russia, not Uzbekistan, but in the city of St. Petersburg in 1891 by the Russian Orientalist A. Shebunin. The facsimile edition of the manuscripts was published by the Orientalist S. Pissareff in 1905, also from St. Petersburg in Russia. Dr. Saifullah documents9 that many folios from the codex have appeared in various auctions in the Western world. They appeared in America in the 1940’s, and were also auctioned off in London in 1992, 1993 and 6. See, Bernhard Moritz’s, “Arabic Palaeography: A Collection of Arabic Texts From the First Century of the Hidjra Till the Year 1000”, 1905. 7. His conspiracy theory, as previously stated is that the Islamic world hid the manuscripts from Christians so that they would not be able to examine them. This despite the Christian-Orientalist world having had access to them and publishing works about those manuscripts, as well as taking photographs of them since the 19th century. 8. I could be wrong, but according to history, the natives of a militarily occupied nation may not necessarily be enthusiastic to cooperate with their colonial masters. If Jay is willing to explain how the British military occupation of Egypt did not contribute to the lack of cooperation between the native Egyptians and their colonial occupiers, I’d be willing to give him the time he needs to justify his reasoning, however long or impossible that may be. 9. See, Dr. Saifullah’s history of the manuscript with full citations in his article, “The Qur’an of ‘Uthman at Tashkent (Samarqand)”. MISTAKE #3: “It is those 6 manuscripts that I’m going to zero in on, it is those manuscripts that we’ve finally, finally had Muslims look at.” - 20:46. Does he mean the extensive codifying/ cataloguing of them which has already been done for some time now, or does he mean the studying and examining of them? It’s obvious the former was done, otherwise how were the other books in Mistake #2 compiled? If he means the latter, then that already has been done for quite some time by Muslim scholars. One such work is Mu’gam al-Qira’at al-Qur’anniya by Ahmad Muhtar Umar and Abd al - al Salim Mukarram which has gone through two editions in Kuwait and at least one printing in Iran. There was also Mu’gam al - Qira’at by Abd al Latif Muhammad Hatib published in Syria10. Jay then proceeds to refer to Dr. Tayyar Altıkulaç and Dr. Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu whom he mentions here but never references once during his entire opening statement. We must ask if he has ever read any of their works or is he simply mentioning their names as an appeal to authority11, he also foregoes another scholar’s work published since 197212. 1. See, Arabica 57 (2010), p. 415 for more information and full citations as provided by Dr. Sadeghi. It’s interesting that Smith appeals to Dr. Sadeghi later in the debate, he even mentions that he’s read Dr. Sadeghi’s works. If he has indeed read Dr. Sadeghi’s published works, how can he possibly not know of the studies done by Muslim scholars on those manuscript collections which Dr. Sadeghi references and mentions by name numerous times in his journal publication? 2. Jay Smith frequently mentions the names of these two Muslim Turkish scholars, but not once does he quote them or give a single citation from them. There is one point later in the debate in which he references the number 93 from Dr. Deroche’s work but gives his own analysis and draws his own conclusions, which contradicts Dr. Deroche’s own conclusions. 3. See, S. al-Munajjid’s, “Dirasat fi Tareekh al-Khatt al-’Arabi Mundhu Bidayatihi ila Nihayat al-’Asr al-Umawi”, 1972. ...more More... To read the whole contents of this quite an extremely, lengthy article, click on the link below: thedebateinitiative.com/2015/07/08/a-critical-analysis-of-jay-smiths-mistakes-about-the-quran-2/
Be careful in these kind of texts (5:55) they are using metaphor which is popular in the middel east and usually such meanings are not transfered in the translation but there is no doubt in Shia religion that Ali is more important than Mohammad and even in some groups worship him.
If you only, or just, do a surface reading of the Bible or the Koran it’s easy to be led astray. When you dig into either one it quickly becomes apparent that there are major differences. It takes time and effort…but spending a little bit of our short time on earth for the privilege of spending eternity with God is worth it. Programs like this are excellent… It makes you ask questions and dig for answers. Just like the example given in Acts 17:11.
@@sidprice6214 would 2 of those be that 1) Jesus was not the Son of God, & 2) Islam is based on on the claimed divine revelation to Mohammed by the angel Gabriel? There’s also the fact that according to the Bible the Angels do not have sex in Heaven, Mathew 22:30 and yet the Koran promises perpetual ever renewing virgins? I’m sure there’s others but these 3 came to mind. Do your 3 match these?
@@sidprice6214 Thank you… I’m not trying to be adversarial. I know the vast majority of Muslims are very devout, family oriented, & hard working people. You made a claim, I asked some questions, then you restated that the Quran states there are only 3 differences? Which doesn’t mean there are only 3…unless you take it from the Quran’s point of view only. Now, back to my question on heavenly rewards…I find this: “Verily, for the Muttaqun [righteous], there will be a success (paradise); gardens and grapeyards; and young full-breasted (mature) maidens of equal age; and a full cup (of wine)” (An-Naba 78:31-34)? It seems to hinge on the translation of the word “WakawaAAiba”, which is found only once in the Quran, I believe, and some translations say it means companions while others say “beautiful women with round breasts,”? In searching for any other supporting info I see this: Hadith number 2,562 in the collection known as the Sunan al-Tirmidhi says, “The least [reward] for the people of Heaven is 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome of pearls, aquamarine and ruby.”? So, I cannot point to a specific reference to 72 virgins to be had specifically…yet one hears it mentioned in reference to martyrs all the time? Is it a specific teaching of the Wahhabists, Shia’s, Sunni’s or Alawites? It’s difficult to believe it’s a complete fabrication?
I was watching the video made by Dan regarding his Mecca/Qibla research. I noticed at 1hr 13-14 minutes in he talks about Umar destroying books in 636AD. Interesting.
Hey Guys, The piece I would add to this, is that I'm looking for a Guy, allied with the Jews, against the Byzantines, expelled with the Jews of Jerusalem in 622, this is the same year that Muhammed is supposedly expelled from 'Mecca', is Umar in Jerusalem during the war of 622? Then flees and dreams of a return? Or is there another Muhammed who is somehow an inspiration to Umar that was expelled from Jerusalem, flees to the east (perhaps to Yathrib by way of Petra) and then Umar is his protégé'?
10: 27 Leo III (d.741) : It attests that parts of the Muslim narrative (Umar, Ali, Salman, coming from heavens) is being elaborated to explain the existence of the Quran in the first half of the 8th c. The Arabs rule since 636 in the West.
Hey Mr. Smith, in one of the slides ( 23:26 ) it was written that Umar saved Christians from Byzantine when he conquered Jerusalem and was labelled savior (Farouq). Isn't that a mistake ? since Christianity was already the state religion of Rome at the time.
Murad, these were some Christian groups who did not believe in the trinity or that Jesus was the son of God. There was a lot of disagreements with the Byzantine church over the nature of Christ around the time that "Islam" supposedly came into existence in the holy land. These groups welcomed Umar when he invaded Jerusalem and believed he was the "saviour" who has come to save them from the Byzantine church., and called him "farouq" or "the saviour"
Dr. Jay, according to the Quran the first prophet was Adam, created by God. Therefore it is only logical that the final prophet would also be created by God, i.e Jesus who Muslims believe was born to a virgin and therefore without human intervention. Secondly, while Yeshua was a common name at the time Jesus lived, how many people before Muhammad actually had the name "Muhammad" in Arabia? Was prophet Muhammad the first Arab to have that name, even though it was a title? If this was the final prophet then why is there an entire chapter in the Qur'an on Mary, the mother of Jesus, shouldn't it have been on Amina instead? Again if Muhammad was the final prophet why are there only 4 references to him in the Qur'an? I believe Muslims have been deliberately misled by the authors of the Qur'an by calling the real Muhammad "Issa". Once "Issa" was separated from the real Muhammad, it became easier to spin a story around a new fictitious character. Looks like the renaming of Yeshua into "Issa" and his separation from the original title of Muhammad is where Islam began. So instead of looking for Muhammad, perhaps we should be looking at who turned Yeshua to Issa and when. According to Christian Prince, Yeshua was never "Issa" to Arab Christians. Mel's brief should therefore be when did the name Issa first appear among the Arabs and who exactly is responsible. There obviously is no point looking for Muhammad as by now it is clear that it is all a cleverly concocted tale about a person who never existed. Suspect this would have happened in the Abbasid era. It would make sense to check where in the original text, Yeshua was replaced with "Issa" to deliberately yet subtly mislead the audience.
I'm not sure I get your point. Who do you think the name "Issa" was originally meant to refer to? Yeshua/Jesus or a founder(real or mythical) of Islam? I would guess the Arab renaming of Yeshua to Issa could be analogous to the Greek renaming of Yeshua to Jesus. Biographical stories about Muhammad in the Quran would be inconsistent with the islamic belief that the Quran was revealed to Muhammad through the Angel Gabriel/Gibril. I remember seeing in a previous video on this channel about corrections done to old Quranic manuscripts, that the phrase "He said" was corrected to "Say!". "He" refers to Muhammad, and it wouldn't make sense to reveal to Muhammad something he had already said, and that's probably why it was changed into an instruction to Muhammad to say the text that followed. I'm here using "Muhammad" in the sense it's used in the standard Islamic narrative.
@@anderslvolljohansen1556 Perhaps you are right. Question is did the authors of the Qur'an import Issa from elsewhere to separate Yeshua from Muhammad or was it just renaming of Yeshua- personally I doubt.
@@sagarjackie7366 Your ideas seem interesting, but I don't yet understand them, and that's why I ask. Assuming the authors imported Issa from elsewhere, who would the name "Issa" refer to? Did they import the name only, or stories, legends and myths about the personality as well?
thank you for sharing. just shows how easy it is to turn the masses of people with just words, and of course the sword for those that don't believe in the lies. something i fear is happening in this country..... the BIG LIE normally leads to mass slaughter. i had to subscribe.
Dude, the difference between you and the academics is you ROCK! WHAT do I mean by rock? Fresh young blood to shake up and reinvigorate the system. It doesn't matter if you are right or wrong.whats important is you are intrducing many fresh new perspectives to consider without being judgemental.And I definitely don't trust the ignorant telephone game .of others, I trust you.
I don't think ibn al-Khittab (if the transliteration here follows the usual pattern) here means son of the book. If the 'kh' signifies خ and the dot under the 't' like usual signifes ط then that is a totally different root. This root actually has to do with preaching or giving a public address at least in Arabic.
@@preapple especially we know that Abd al malik enforced Arabic over his whole empire, previously that region being syriac/aramaic speaking regions of levant.
@@yakovmatityahu Sure, but check out the armenian historian named Lewond who says (quoting the emperor Leo III) that Umar, Salman and Abu Turab wrote the first Quran and that Al-Hajjaj trashed most of it and produced his own version retaining only a small portion of the earlier one.
Mel: Please describe how you had a change of hypothesis from Qabisa to Umar being the Muhammad? It seems the two Qabisas are historic figures in the formation of the first Arab kingdom in tachkistan. Leo III allegation is very potent!
JAY SMITH, MEL, What is your basis for worshiping Jesus? Whereas in the New Testament book there is no verse that shows there is relationship between Jesus and Christianity.
I want to acknowledge an error re. Al khattab. Khattab or Hattab is a name derived from the word "sermon" ( Khatib) (lit. book-narration). "Al-Khattab" means "the sermon-giver" (lit. the narrator). In my defence, we did all the last 6 videos over just 2 evenings, and I should have slowed down to double check that I have not mixed up two similar looking words. Son of the preacher. It would still fit however with what I said about the head preacher and apprentice preachers.
Dear Sir Kindly check out Sahih Mslm 1405e .. It mentions both Messenger and Umar in single verse making this deduction a bit hard to comprehend.. Like Umar and Mhmd coming in same verse in context or like speaking to each other and all .
Actually there are several more..like this in Hadith.. i was just going through some and thought this may be interesting .. Please do correct me if i am seeing something wrong . 💐
That was a dumb mistake on my part. I have since acknowledged it below. This is why we call these green papers, silly mistakes can occur but this is where the community comes in and roots out the errors.
@@Speakers154 it still may lead somewhere, it may link Omar to Amro ibn Ala’s “Ambro” since Al’as means wood in Hebrew, Khatab also means wood in Arabic, which goes along with Joe’s theory that Omar, Ambro and Omair are the same person
Umar was hafsah's father. hafsa held the material quranic bukhari 4982 & 4987. "umar says : My Lord agreed with me in three things Bukhari 4483. Umar took hold of his (M) hand and said, "Has Allah not forbidden you to offer the funeral prayer for the hypocrites? bukhari 1269
26:38 'Furqan' means many things (like many words in the Quran) Farouq would mean 'savior', but of whom? Who is saved by the conquest of Jerusalem by Arabs in 637? Japanese? 🤣 Posing the question is responding it.
Isn't it strange how we have these three individuals as mel put it....Muhammad....Ali....Salmon Al Farsi......these three important individuals also have their equals......The Son.....The Father and The Holy Ghost and we know definitely who they are.....is this just more than a coincidence......you guy's are unraveling the unthinkable in so revealing the truth behind the veil of centuries of misdirection from the only one true book we know as the Bible.....may God bless you and give you strength into convincing our fellow Muslims into the misinformation they have been led to believe from the eighth century to present day.....
Thankyou all Thus is fasnating Umar is the true Muhammed Muhammed of the Quran is just a mere character who was used to add"Salt"since the Quran has many verses eg kissing the black stones ,hijab,tdirection of the Kaaba This is a play book where by you can choose a character to represent a time or an event Too bad for Muslims And the claim we worship a man what about this "hooked"Muhammed called the saviour
I believe that after the Romans destroyed the Jewish Temple in 70 AD they build a temple dedicated to Jupiter on the site . I think that this was replaced by a Christian Church around 300 AD .
Somebody should please help me with these 2 questions.(1)How did the Byzantines(Romans) become Italians? Or are they the same people? (2)Why does the Allah of Quoran always address himself as first person plural, "We"? Is Allah Triune like Elohim of the Bible?
For some reason I think Umar and company had some kind of encounter with the Arians and become their followers. This might make Arius the philosopher of the early Islamic movement.
Could the Lakhmid/Tai/Tayyaye/Dashi parts have been brought in by the Abbasids? The Tayyaye/Dashi sound more Persian than Umar's Nabataean bunch. Could the Abbasid rewriting/redaction of the Quran have been when THAT material was inserted? I have to say, having studied Arthurian history/literature that, in many ways, 'Muhammad' appears to have LESS historical reality than Arthur Pendragon.
10 commanmatns of Mozes are told in Koran, Bible Thora. Every sentence , sura, word in Koran, Bible, Thora tells you to obay the 10 commandmants of mozes if you want to go to paradise when you die. God speaks in Bible like gods speaks in there, god speak in Koran like god speaks in there, God speaks in Thora like god spekas in there. Its the god. He speaks any way he likes. he wants. Its his own choise. Those three religions are the same.
What about making a comparison between the book/notes compiled by Umar in the 7th century and the book as it is now? That should expose every single holes in the narratives.
@Flat Sky Let the cards fall as they may. The truth will set you free Let's compare this to Heavens Gate Cult. Believers trying to catch a ride on the Hale Bopp comet in its cloaked UFO ! The cult failed but it still has fanatical believers. fact.
@Flat Sky it does matter if you want people to know the truth? just lay the facts before them, if they see the conclusion as "All their own idea" they will then be able accept the facts. That's how Jesus' parables worked.
@Flat Sky The entire Universe is built on the constants e and π: many of the fundamental laws of physics and other sciences rely over and over again on these two mathematical constants. π is encoded in Genesis 1:1, the first verse of the Bible/Torah and of the Old Testament written in Hebrew. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth (Genesis 1:1) בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ׃ (Genesis 1:1) From the Hebrew numerals system, And formula (NUMLETT*PROLETT/NUMWORD*PROWORD) = (28 * 23887872 x 10^27) / (7 * 304153525784175760) = 3.1415...X10^17. it matches the actual value of π until the 3.1415. π is the number of the circle, of completion, of what is closed and self-contained; as such, it's a good mathematical reference to the concept of a God Creator of all things, and of a Creation that includes everything that was created by God; e is encoded in John 1:1, the first verse of the gospel (John) of the New Testament written in Greek. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.(John 1:1) ἐν ἀρχηι ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (John 1:1) From the Greek numerals system, And formula (NUMLETT*PROLETT/NUMWORD*PROWORD) = (52 * 843625145625911083008 x 10^55)/ (17 * 94930224139983918429785786976 x 10^7) = 2.7183...X10^40. it matches the actual value of e until the 2.7183 e is the number of the relationship between the big and the small, of the bridge between the infinitesimal and the infinite; what number could be better associated with the Son, the One who was Sent by the Father, the One who is the only bridge for mankind to the infinite God who created the universe. The fine structure constant (α) value can be also derived from the above two key verses above by combining the verse gematria values of Genesis 1:1 with John 1:1 and calculating it's base value. The fine structure constant (α) value is considered the greatest mysteries of physics. Without it, it would be impossible to form even simple structures like atoms, molecules, planets, or stars. Verse gematria = Sum of all letter values. (Genesis 1:1 = 2701 & John 1:1 = 3607) you would get the fine structure constant (α) derived as 27013627^2 =0.00729736..e17. Given that the current α approx value recommended is currently 0.00729735. Furthermore, there is a pattern in the verse Gematria of Genesis 1:1 to John 1:1 = 2701-3627 = |27|01-36|27|; There are exactly a total of 27 books in the New Testaments which are the words and teachings of Jesus Christ. John 1:14 states that Jesus Christ is the Word of God which was made flesh and the only begotten of the father. Revelation 1:8 states that Jesus Christ is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending. Revelation 13:18 states that the number of the antichrist who will deceive the world in the end days is 666. And, the sum of integers from the beginning of 1 to 36 is exactly 666. Hence, (27) (01-36) (27) = (Jesus-the Alpha) -> (From the beginning to the end of the anti-christ 666) -> (Jesus-the Omega). The Bible is filled with unique proofs of being inspired by the Holy Spirit. Hundreds of detailed prophecies were written centuries before the events they accurately described. For example, just as the Old Testament foretold, the Messiah Jesus was born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14) in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2), as a descendant of Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3), Isaac (Genesis 17:19), and Jacob (Genesis 28:14). He was betrayed by a friend (Psalm 41:9) for 30 pieces of silver that were used to purchase the potter’s field (Zechariah 11:13). Then he was mocked and ridiculed, pierced in his hands and feet, and lots were cast for his clothing (Psalm 22:7, 16, 18). He died (Daniel 9:26) as a sacrifice for our sins and was buried in a rich man’s tomb (Isaiah 53:8-10). After a short time in the grave, he lived again (Psalm 16:10; Isaiah 53:10). Other religions follow books of teachings written by one person. The Bible consists of 66 books written by 40 or more authors over the course of more than 1500 years (from 1500 BC to approx. 90 AD) in three different languages (Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek). The Bible is the only book in the world ever written like this. In spite of this, the message throughout the Bible is the same. It is the message of salvation through God’s Son, Jesus Christ. Christianity is not about joining a church or a religious organization. It is not about following religious rules and ceremonies and man-made rituals. It is not about religion. Christianity is about having a personal relationship with God Himself, made possible because of Jesus Christ and what happened at the cross. And, let us consider this proposition. Supposing we were to call on ten eminent writers in our generation, all from one walk of life, in one place, at one time, and in one language, to write independently on some controversial subject, what do you think the result would be? Do you think there would be agreement and harmony when the ten essays are put together? The result will very likely, be a conglomeration of differing and conflicting views. We may call it a sort of literary hotchpotch. Considering then the manner in which the Bible came to be written, there can be no other explanation than this: The author was God himself. Beyond all the explanations, this belief is a matter of faith. Faith in God promise and his ability to preserve his words from the beginning.
@Flat Sky lslam says that he was not crucified and that he is not god made flesh, they have good reason to say that, as the Koran is written like a text book version of "opposition defiance disorder". They're not exercising their free will, their text and their behaviour is largely unconsciously driven, they do their "father's" work faith fully tho . It's the classic paradox, rebel against overstrict parents, then join a gang and get told what to do 24/7 Seriously we can't hurt God, that's laughable. We can only hurt ourselves.
could the muhammad of the hadith be a conglomeration of Iyas ibn qabesh (as you said in previous videos) and Umar I? the hadiths are legends after all.
10 :27 The only figure to have existed is Ali (Abu Turab) he was the amir of al Hira (Iraq) : we have an attestation in the second part of the 7th c. Salman and Umar as what will be recounted by the Muslim narrative have never existed. Only Ali got a certain role.
Even before you all took on this task just random history I've been exposed to has always led me to think Umar and al Malik both are Mohammed and they adopted the movement against the nicen creed . Al Malik father = Mohammeds mother wife personal myth if family around him Umar actions of conquest with the sword = Mohammed sword divinity. You found the final price the book Quran the apologetic lecture text to argue against Jesus devinity.
I just finished watching Joe's 3 piece, this is a lovely continuation of the Umar theory and seems to be seemless. Im sure in some of these Masjids there is incriminating material waiting to be found.
There is a third way-neither Sunni nor Shia. Ever heard of it? Ibadhist of Oman i'm told. Not a single combatant arrested has been from Oman. Oman should not be mentioned in the same breath as the rest of the Middle East according to RObert Kaplan in his book 'Monsoon'. Thoughts??? Tolerant people. Peaceful place. Quite liberal compared to pre-MBS Saudi.
@@Speakers154 I did have a link. To an online dictionary which showed that one of the translations of the Hebrew word Pulkan is salvation. Weird that YT doesn't allow links. I'll try to get info to you guys through one of your websites. You're doing interesting stuff.
"Purkan" or "Furkan" is an Aramaic word for "deliverance" or "salvation". Is this relevant? So is "Quran" an Arabic corruption of the Aramaic word? Thanks
The Syriac word "purqana" is Arabicized as "furqan", in a similar way as the Syriac "qeryana" (lectionary) is Arabicized as "Quran" (originally pronounced "qeryan"). However, early Muslims wanted people to believe that "Quran" is derived from "qara'a" (to recite), in order to cover up for the fact that there was no oral traditional in the origin of the Quran. They created that myth to hide the truth that most of the Quran was copied from other texts, as people would ask where the book came from, and to further reaffirm the fabricated biographies of Muhammad.
The dates referenced in Doctrina Jacobi and Thomas the Presbyter is mid-July and early February of 634. This was during Abu Bakr's reign according to Islamic chronology. Umar's reign didn't begin until late August of tha year.
Muhammad said that if there were a prophet after him, it would be Umar. Umar pretended a first that the two temple mount churches wouldn't be used by Muslims, but halfway through a seven year treaty he broke that agreement and converted them into mosques, closing down the daily sacrifice if the Catholic Liturgy therein. No Christians considered Muslims their savior. Jerusalem Christians were ruled not by Rome but by Constantinople's "Roman" emperor, who shared their faith and kept them as safe as he could.
THAT is amazing but ONLY a part of the puzzle.There is a Mihammed 2.,Umar and a MOHAMMED 1. REVEALED IN AJ Deus 's MHMT/ Mhmd paper from 2016. Available on line. Read it ! It will blow your mind. It also reveals ...the other book...
Kill the enemies. If you die you go to paradise. God says that. Who do i know taht? I am the son af god, i ma the prophet of god. Thats why i know that all. God made you the earth everything. God fight. If you die you will life for ever in paradise. You will there a good life. Thtas what you read in jewish, molsim and christian holy books.
I'm a Muslim and I didn't know about it
Thanks
The knowledge seekers are to be respected
I never converted to Islam but your videos along with Al Fadi and others only strengthen my faith in Jesus and embolden me in my witness to Muslims and others.
I really hope that all this material goes viral fast. The sooner we can get people out of Islam and into salvation the better.
These are blatant lies!
What an ignorant person are you!
@@thepoorsultan5112 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@thepoorsultan5112 true... Islam is built on lies ...they are being exposed right now...
The sooner we can get people out of islam, the sooner the destruction comes🤣
@@thepoorsultan5112 The lies and deceit of Islam are finally getting exposed..
21:00 How a Roman Emperor could knew that it was 'Umar' who was one of those who wrote a book? It was perhaps because it is what was told in Muslim circles at that time (mid 8th c.). Later, after the Abbassids (750) the 'Muhammad' story ( words coming from heaven) will become the mainstream narrative: the one that we know today.
You Christians are very beautiful people.
All of you are so great! This is truly outstanding and genuinely very hard and awesome work by Mel and his team. Relishing for more information and evidence and can't thank you all enough! Keep it coming, please!
Thank you, Zahra! Much appreciated. Mel
Excellent presentation. Thank you.
This is revolutionary. Islam will not outlive the 21st century. The truth will set Muslim people free.
---- > Do you really think they care about the truth? According to the Quran Allah (We) sent the Apostles to the Arabs but they rejected them.(Sura 36: 13-16 ) With the invention of the Gutenberg press, the 1st century Holy Bible has been widely available since the 15th century.
Ibn Kathir writes: “The names of the first two Messengers were Sham`un and Yuhanna, and the name of the third was Bulus, and the city was Antioch (Antakiyah).”
quranx.com/tafsirs/36.13
Every day you guys come up with new material. Normally, what you guys are coming up with would be gathered together and later made into a book. As I understand it, what you are doing is what any scientist does: 1) looks at a problem, 2) gathers info, 3) tries different hypothesizes to make sense out of the info, 4) then comes to some conclusion (knowing there may be some future evidence that might adjust the conclusions). I look forward to your future evidence and conclusion.
Yes, that's how I view it. The viewers play a huge part in the process as collectively they are like one big supercomputer that filters out any errors or throws up anomalies in our findings. I think this is a great way to sift through the evidence but you need a thick skin as mistakes are inevitable and some people love nothing more than to point and jeer at a mistake. :) But I will eventually get around to writing a book when the material matures, at the moment we are hitting some solid stuff, which will be unlikely to get overturned, but only time will tell as there is so some much yet to be read and seen.
Its the most logic conclusion, thanks mel & Jay
You guys,is a great team to enlightening Christianity especially Muslims.Thank you guys! Jesus bless and protect you.
This is just superb, congratulations to you and your team Mel
Thanks Simon! 👍
This is a fantastic, extensively done research. All kinds of evidence being collected from even source possible. This has to keep on going as long as it takes.
Wow I have been mesmerized by the volume of the materials you wonderful men have fished out and is making so much sense. Praise the Lord for all the inspiration and the energy you are putting in, can't wait for the next one. Thank you 😊 💓
AMEN HALLELUJAH GLORY TO GOD GREAT IS YOUR FAITHFULNESS TO ME IN THE MIGHTY NAME OF JESUS CHRIST 🙏🙏🙏🙏Each and every day, I do my best to share these awesome and powerful messages without fear and shame to the los
Hadith 104 Sunnah Niman Marah, the messenger of Allah said the first person with whom Allah will shake hands is Umar and the first person to be granted with salaam and taken to paradise, so Umar is better candidate than the messenger
Umar even teaches Muhammad he's supposed to perform miracles as a prophet (Riyad as-Salihin 416).
Vijay Sharma & John P
@ FACT: HADITH?
Shifting from one topic/issue to another topic/issue?
We Muslims know why? Here:
As the last and final resort after failing severely and miserably to prove any against the truth of the so-called prophet Muhammad (pbuh), etc. and any single thing that matters or relates to?
How?
By 'cherry-picking' any single out of all those 'weak' and 'false' hadiths (sayings/narrations) by chance by taking and using it (the cherry-picked statement) as a tool (as a pretext) by means of mocking, degrading, maligning, etc. the real truth of prophet Muhammad (pbuh), etc?
or,
By 'cherry-picking' any single 'statement' of the hadith 'partially' (and not as a whole 'statement' instead) by chance by taking the actual meaning of the cherry-picked statement out of its original context as a pretext by means of mocking, degrading, maligning, etc. the real truth of the so-called prophet Muhammad, etc?
or,
By blindly believing by browsing through all those fully-biased non-Muslim haters and liars' websites and channels intentionally for (obtaining) false, fabricated interpolated information, biographies, made-up stories, tales, myths, etc. as a tool (as a pretext) by means of mocking, degrading, maligning, ruining, etc. the real truth of the so-called prophet Muhammad, etc?
or,
By dumbly listening and merely believing to any single non-Muslim’s liar, slanderer, hater, etc. and hearsay?
Here! See below:
@ Fact: The Qur'an and hadith:
Qur'an, the one true word of Allah (The Creator), Lord of the worlds, is one single thing. While hadiths, all the words of the Creator's creations (humans) is another single thing. Both, are just 2 different things/matters. Absolutely fact!
Allah (The Al-Mighty) Says:
• "Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian."
[Noble Qur'an, Surah Al-Hijr 15:9]
Note: The Qur’an is perfectly preserved.
While on the other occasion;
Instead of all those 'authentic' ones, there are tens of hundreds of thousands of 'weak' and 'false' hadiths (sayings/narrations) in here and out there scattering around all over the place across the globe. That's fact!
Here:
For example, Anis Shorrosh, a well-known Arab missionary, says:
‘... Bukhari, collected twenty thousand of them, of which he rejected ten thousand, accounting them untrue. •Of the remaining ten thousand he accepted only 7,275, declaring the rest to be untrustworthy•. Abu Da'ud accepted authentic only 4,800 rules out of 50,000.[1]
Similarly we find Norman Geisler and Abdul Saleeb claiming that:
'...Bukhari, considered to be the most reliable collector, admitted that of the 300,000 hadith he collected, he considered only 100,000 might be true. He then narrowed this number down to 7,275, many of which are repetitions so that the total number is in fact near 3,000. •That means that even he admitted there were errors in over 295,000 of them•![2]'
And,
'As to the abundance of the apocryphal traditions, we learn that the famous authority al-Bukhari choose only 7,000 out of a host of 600,000 traditions that were current in his time.[4]'
Note: 'Fact-proof and evidence' is all it takes. That’s what ‘truth’ is all about actually!
@@mdesyeticamat2235 As I published above: Riyad as-Salihin hadith 416. Why do you want the reference? All you are going to do is to give an excuse for its existence...
Shared on Facebook and what's aap 😊
Loving your material, here in N. Z. Biggest challenge is how to communicate it to ordinary Muslims who have no real idea of their history or deep understanding of their own faith. Keep up the good work though. The more ammunition we have when they do turn the better. God bless!
You speak from a high place, as though you believe Christians are aware of the holes in their own story. The mere act of spotting the logical problems in someone else's version doesn't automatically imply that your own pet religion doesn't have the very same kinds of problems. #titusFlavius
@@buqtair3129 Tu quoque
@@buqtair3129 37 different versions of Koran and still counting...... so much for divine preservation of the Koran. Since the Standard Islamic Narrative has holes that is getting bigger by the day, let me invite you to give your life to JESUS. HE LOVES YOU AND DONT WANT YOU TO PERISH
@@JacobAdewumi no thanks
Now makes sense why Arabs saw Muhammed as teaching fables and tall tales
The devil himself should have made this puzzle who put all the puzzle of Islam pieces and made a mish mash religion like that that you guys you are really doing a great job God bless
@@sidprice6214 tell about your profet and how he flew on his donkey ? And how he jumped on his 9 wives in one wash ? And how the devils jumped on him the whole night? Hhhaa are you serious yes right very consistent hhhhaaa I also flew on a donkey I am a profet kneel for me hhhaa
@@davidbond8044 its funny and ironic a westerner is trying to tell me what the Quran is saying and not saying Arabic is my native tongue so I advice you not to try to insult me in this way because of I start I will never finish from you so I want not to insult you so go and play somewhere else for your sake
@@sidprice6214 look whatever you consider an answer it doesn't interest me pls dont let start because you will feel insulted arabic is my native and I do understand your quran much more than you think your obvious false profet and Quran reer end is being exposed unless you dont know or pretend to be dead ggo and see (sneakers corner) (cire)and many more hide in your little cocoon from the truth soon you will have no where to hide if you answer this I will start revealing your obvious false profet so I advice you as follow human go and sell your rotten goods somewhere else next time I will not be so gracious so piss off
@@davidbond8044 look you are not telling me anything I dont know and it was written in syriac and not Persian and I dont know you insist I think we agree if you are trying to defend the false narrative of islam other wise old dont wate my time and yours ok
@@davidbond8044 I know history more than you think you dont know me do dont presume
Amazing stuff! Keep up the good work.
Fascinating research Mel! Keep up the great work!
This adds a whole new dimension to John's definition of antichrist in 1 John 2 : 19 😲
1 John 2 : 18
Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.
1 John 2 : 19
They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.
I always assumed this refers to the western roman empire/church... but now it might cover Islam as the eastern half of the roman empire as well (Daniel 2 : 33).
And it makes way more sense.
finally answered already from all previous videos.Hopefully in the future it can be used as a white paper
The Qur'an is a collection of lectionaries from Messianic Jews (Nazarene) that had the Hebrew Gospel as reported by the Father of the Church and, in addition from the Abbasid's. I would not be surprised that the so-called Meccan verses. were from the Messianic Jews and the Medina verses from the Abbasids.
I would say messianic Jews and their more stricter Sadducees.
This is bringing to light a great darkness.
I already mentioned earlier that ' ALI ' [ अलि ] means ' Bumble Bee ' the black colored male bee in Sanskrit Language. Sanskrit is the mother language of mainly all the current spoken Indian languages in the Indian Subcontinent. There is no other language that explains the exact meaning of the word Ali. You may / will find the etymological origin of some of the words from the spoken languages right from the region of Caspian Sea to Lithuanian language are from Ancient Sanskrit as well.
Umar himself revealed some verses of the Qurans, for instance, he revealed verses about hijab, direction of prayers and others
They are doing very good and very hard they are really, very close to reach the truth. They started from Abbasid started Islam, then they went down to Umayyad or the so called abdulmalik, then they went down to allyas ibn abi gabbisa , then the Petra nonsense , the Jerusalem noises then now they went down to Umber ibn alkhatab. They are ,really, very close to reaching the truth and soon they will discover that prophet Muhammad,actually, the one that started Islam and the traditional Islamic narrative is correct. They are ,really, very close keep up the good word.
@@mahmoodali1533 There is that point in GOT , in last season where until the last two episodes, the fans of GOT, think that Jon and Danaerys are going to overthrow Cersei and rule together as Targaryens, ( glorious ending cos it fits fan narrative)..
Similar to that..
You sound like a fan brother..
Also what happened to GOT (HBO TV series)ending?!!!
@@nohaydios3590 Ending? Martin never finished the books.
@@mindscape1621 i was speaking only of the HBO series which already ended.. brother..
Pardon my slight slip of fingers ..
He also taught Muhammad that prophets can perform miracles, as Muhammad had no clue.
isnt there a hadith that says Umar contributed three verses to the quran one of them being being the wearing of the veil. If three verses why not the entire quran.
Better than that, Umar is depicted as smarter than Muhammad and teaching Muhammad what his capabilities should be as a prophet. By the way, any similarity with the miracle of the multiplication of loaves and fishes is not a coincidence (there are also other hadiths where Muhammad performs this miracle once again):
This hadith is narrated in the book Musnad by Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, also by Riyad as-Salihin 416 but with softer words. Feeding the bandits:
The companion Abu Hurayra recounted that as a group of warriors led by Muhammad were on their way to battle, their food supply became so depleted that they complained to their leader that they were hungry and asked for his permission to slaughter some of their riding camels and prepare food. The Prophet gave his consent and they went to slaughter the beasts. They were met by Umar and informed him of the Prophet’s consent. Umar urged them to wait, and asked Muhammad if it was true that he gave his permission to slaughter the camels. The Prophet replied in the affirmative and Umar asked: “Then what will they ride on (in battle)” ? Muhammad commented that he could do nothing for he had no food to give the men. Umar retorted: “Messenger of God, there is something you can do. Order every man to bring whatever food he still has, assemble all the leftovers in one place and offer a prayer to God for His blessing, then distribute the food among the men”. The Prophet complied, offered the prayer and distributed the food. Miraculously, all the warriors ate to their heart’s content, and much food still remained. When he witnessed this miracle Muhammad exclaimed: “I testify that there is no God but Allah and I testify that I am the Messenger of Allah. Whoever meets Allah with these two testimonies without any doubt in his heart shall dwell in Jannah”.
Let the truth set people free, because its only one truth way and answer and that's only jesus christ
I feel I need to explain what I'm doing as quite a few people are confused regarding my previous work on Iyas and now on Umar. It looks like I'm all over the place.
There are two distinct questions that I'm trying to address, which look the same but actually have very different answers:
1) What did the SIN base its Muhammad character on?
2) Who did the - what I will call - the "634 sources" actually refer to?
Let me address the second question first, as it is the easier to answer: it was Umar. Principally, he was the one in charge in that year. He led the conquest into Israel, as Thomas the Presbyter says he was seen east of Gaza etc. and several sources say he entered Jerusalem and spoke to Sophronius. He had a masjid built here.
The second question is much more difficult to answer, as there was no one that matches the SIN's description of Muhammad: to put it simply it is a work of fiction. It is a composite of many characters and sources. It is ahistorical.
So what do I think this composite was based on?
Even a cursory look at the Sirah reveals that the Bible was used to generate this figure, drawing on elements from the story of Jesus and Moses. To take a couple of examples, Muhammad enters Mecca as a baby but instead of looking for an Inn, they are looking for a wet nurse for him. Another is Muhammad is lost at the Kaaba as a child just like Jesus at the Temple.
As the SIN, talks about a Muhammad who is the founder, who began from 610 while in the cave of Hira, then there Iyas fits that component. He fits with Al Tabari and Chinese sources that talk about a king given weapons in a cave by Khusroe. He is king crucially when the Tayaye revolution starts in 618, but then the trail runs dry after that.
Crucially, the 634 references to a Muhammad/prophet refer to him as linked to the Tai, just as Iyas was. But Umar also is linked to the Tayaye. Umar also reigned from the year of the first sighting/ reference to a Muhammad and a prophet armed with a sword, in both cases in Palestine. This historical component is distinct from the founder component of Iyas but is more important as this is a direct link to when the name Muhammad was used. Umar's link with the Temple Mount played a huge part in the various tales of Muhammad going to Jerusalem and ascending into heaven etc.
We also think that in many of the key details about Muhammad, there are many parallels with Elagabalus, 23 parallels in fact that look spookily like much of the SIN's stories about Muhammad are based on Elagabalus, who was an Arab that once ruled the Roman Empire in the 3rd century.
Other tiny elements of his story may have been based on Nehemiah ben Husiel, Abu Muslim and Mahmuda Babai. This may not even be an exhaustive list. Due to the mix of these elements, it is difficult to spot these borrowings. It is likely we will discover more on this list.
I hope people can follow this and appreciate that this is a research in progress.
Sir..
Please look at the following..
I was shocked when i saw this in CPs channel..
First check out verse 66:5 from the Qur'an..
Then Sahih Al Bukhari 402..
Omar himself saying the verse 66:5 was revealed as "He said it"..
Not Al-lah almighty but himself it seems..
Quoting here below
"... Once the wives of the Prophet (ﷺ) made a united front against the Prophet (ﷺ) and I said to them, 'It may be if he (the Prophet) divorced you, (all) that his Lord (Allah) will give him instead of you wives better than you.' So this verse (the same as I had said) was revealed." (66.5)..."
😬
Omar is openly admitting he is Mhmd????
Hope this doesnt waste your precious time ..
Also do enjoy your vacation
GBU 💐✨
Also check out Sahih Al Bukhari 4483
It seems Umar can request to get Verses of the unchangeable " Qur 'an" based on his wish.. 😀😀😀
Fascinating! I left a comment asking about this very topic on one of your previous videos concerning the true identity of Mohammed as Ibin Kabisha (my spelling is awful, I probably butchered his name). You have come through again. This is a really fast changing field of inquiry and I have been loving the twists and turns as you burrow through the evidence to develop and refine your hypotheses. Your honesty as you admit emerging evidence changes or contradicts something you have said in the past is a wonderful example.
Marvelous ...Jay and Mel well done
Love this. History will unravel the truth.
Take notice muslims, listen and learn and don't just ignore.
PALADIN
@ FACT: JAY SMITH RUNS AWAY FROM DEBATE CHALLENGES
Two Sundays ago, prominent Muslim debaters, Br. Zakir Hussain and Br. Ayaz Uddin, met Jay Smith at Hyde Park and challenged him to two debates. Smith refused to debate on the topic whether Jesus is God or not, his reasoning as he states is that it’s clearly obvious and thus not debatable. Well, can’t Brs. Zakir and Ayaz reply the same, that the Prophet’s prophethood is obvious and thus, not debatable?
I find it very odd, that Jay Smith, religiously goes to Hyde Park to debate about Islam & Christianity, and when challenged with an actual debate, he refuses to do so. What is the point of screaming at people every Sunday, and boasting about your debate skills, if you’re refusing to debate on a stage, for a scheduled and moderated debate?
Please enable subtitles to see what each person is saying in the videos.
1. Jay Smith Runs Away From Zakir Hussain's Debate Challenge [Enable CC/ Subtitles]
th-cam.com/video/39TSvksIEAk/w-d-xo.html
2. Jay Smith Runs Away from Zakir Hussains Second Debate Challenge! [Enable CC/ Subtitles]
th-cam.com/video/hbEf2pTt8iE/w-d-xo.html
What is Jay afraid of? Why is he running from Muslims? Can any Christian tell us?
PALADIN
@ FACT: JAY SMITH’S RUNNING SCARED AFTER UNFORESEEN DISASTER
Jay Smith’s claims during his debate with Dr. Shabir about the Qur’an have seemed to cause more trouble than he initially thought they would. See, during the debate, he claimed to have introduced new research by a colleague of his, Dan Brubaker, based on Dan’s thesis on changes in the (manuscripts of the) Qur’an. Jay had stated that Dan’s thesis would not be published until next year and so Muslims would not have been aware of its contents. However, the University that Dan Brubaker submitted his thesis through, Rice University, made his thesis available publicly. Jay, nor Dan seemed to have known this, which is why Jay assumed Muslims would have to wait one full year before they would be able to read Dan’s thesis and respond to the claims in it. Which also meant Muslims would have to wait one full year to respond to Jay’s claims based on Dan’s thesis which he made during the debate.
Unfortunately for both Dan and Jay, we got our hands on the thesis quite some time ago and already picked it apart. So when Jay was on the stage during his debate with Dr. Shabir, and he assumed that Muslims would have no idea of what he was saying or what the thesis contained, he made some pretty silly claims to bolster his bravado. Jay has now run into a major problem. After I posted that we had possession of Dan’s thesis and proved this with the thesis’ cover image, the University removed the thesis and it is no longer available. So we have a few questions that need to be answered:
1. Why was the thesis removed after my article was published?
2. Did Jay ask Dan to ask the University to remove it?
3. Why would Dan suddenly request for the University to remove the thesis?
4. Dan did not request the University to remove the thesis after the debate, so why the day after my article?
5. Did Dan give Jay the entire thesis or just a few photos?
6. If Dan did give Jay the entire thesis, why did Jay only claim to have taken a few photos?
7. If Jay did read Dan’s thesis, is he aware that he openly contradicts what Dan states?
8. Is Dan aware that Jay claimed things of Dan’s thesis that do not exist within it?
9. Why has the University removed the thesis?
10. Who requested the thesis be removed?
For those who’d like to see where Dan’s thesis was once available and now is miraculously removed from the University’s page, please see our Brother Ahmed’s accessing of it:
1islam.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/cc-2014-riceuniversity.jpg?w=694&h=173
This article has been sent to Jay Smith. Will he respond to the questions, or does he realise he’s in a bit of a conundrum? Has Jay been put in an awkward position? Its sudden removal is quite telling. Jay does have reason to be concerned, why else would it be removed? Why else would Jay have Dan request the University to remove it? Jay knows that he’s screwed up big time and the fun is only just starting!
See! More on Jay Smith:
JAY SMITH CONCEDES HE ISN’T FAMILIAR WITH THE SOURCES USED
callingchristians.com/2014/10/03/jay-smith-concedes-he-isnt-familiar-with-the-sources-used/
UPDATE ON THE PAPER, “RESPONSE TO JAY SMITH’S MISTAKES”
callingchristians.com/2014/10/09/update-on-the-paper-response-to-jay-smiths-mistakes/
JAY SMITH’S STORY DOES NOT ADD UP
callingchristians.com/2014/11/18/jay-smiths-story-does-not-add-up/
DEBATE REVIEW: JAY SMITH AND YUSUF ISMAIL - THE BIBLICAL AND QURANIC APPROACH TO PEACE & VIOLENCE
callingchristians.com/2015/08/09/debate-review-jay-smith-and-yusuf-islam-the-biblical-and-quranic-approach-to-peace-violence/
PALADIN
@ FACT: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF JAY SMITH'S [PfanderFilms] MISTAKES ABOUT THE QUR'AN
• Analysis Of Jay Smith’s Allegations About The Qur’an
MISTAKE #1:
“One of the problem’s that we’ve had is that we’ve not really been able to look at the Qur’an.” - 18:22.
At the very beginning of his presentation, Jay Smith attempts to falsely establish a conspiratorial narrative in which he claims that the Islamic world has been trying to prevent academic research of the Qur’an’s extant manuscripts. This however, cannot be more than furthest from the truth. It is universally known that the greatest Orientalist attempt at studying the Qur’anic manuscripts was undertaken by the Germans in the 20th century in which 15, 000+ photographs were taken of Qur’anic manuscripts located worldwide, unimpeded by the Muslim world. Consequent to this, the infamous history of the hiding of these photographs by Orientalists themselves, is recorded as follows:
“As a preliminary result there was finally gathered a comprehensible mass of material stored with Bergstrasser in Munich, not the least a collection of about 15,000 photographs of folios of very old Koran codices from all over the world. As the one who inherited the task of continuing after World War 2 the work of his teacher Bergstrasser (d. 1933) and of Arthur Jeffery, and meanwhile as the successor to the chair of Bergstrasser in Munich, Spitaler spread the rumor that these materials had perished in the bomb attacks on Munich in the last months of World War 2. Still further, in a note from 1972 in a publication of his (see Rudi Paret [ed.], Der Koran, Darmstadt 1975, p.413) Spitaler fostered this rumor. But now in the ending 1990s it comes out that he was in possession of these approximately 15,000 photographs all the time since 1945, obviously to keep everybody else aloof from them in order to reserve exclusively to himself the right and possibility of exploiting them in the hope of producing something outstanding in Koran scholarship - what in the end he was obviously incapable of achieving. Such behaviour is well known in the history of scholarship as characteristic of mediocre scholars who never develop a sense of unselfish scholarship as mere search for truth but are oriented solely on their own personal career and questionable fame.” - “A Challenge to Islam for Reformation by Gunter Luling, Preface, XXI.”
At this point, the quote that Jay uses at the timestamp of 18:29 is from Shaykh Muhammad Mustafa al-’Azami’s, “The History of the Qur’an: From Revelation to Compilation”, p. 315. As will become quite apparent, Jay’s modus operandi from this point onward is to mention the name of an author and to provide some apparent information4 based on these author’s works5, which when examined in relation to what he has claimed, there appears to be a consistent pattern of inventing conclusions, misrepresenting the research done or by manufacturing information outright.
4. While making his claims, Jay presents a bundle of papers grasped in his hands in which he states that the information from the authors he is appealing to, is contained within that bundle. However, not once does he give a citation from that bundle of papers. What is perplexing is that he ad libs his way through most of his presentation and never references a single quote from that bundle of papers. If anyone can provide an instance in which he cites a book by Dr. Deroche and gives a page number, I’ll be amazed. He attempts to convince the crowd that he has done his research by waving this bundle of papers around, but surprisingly he can’t give a single complete book, journal or thesis reference!
5. The literature of the authors he mentions by name, patently disagrees with his claims. One has to ask, has he actually read these works or not?
MISTAKE #2:
“Now up till a few years ago there was not much we could do about this claim, there was not much we Christians could do or anybody else because we were not given access to these manuscripts. We could go to the Topkapi Manuscripts, which is the one there in Istanbul, the one which most Muslims would look at as their standard. We couldn’t go to the Samarkand which was in Tashkent, we couldn’t go to the Husseini Manuscripts which was in Cairo.” - 19:48.
I (the author) am quite surprised that he claims Christians were not given access to these manuscripts with the exception of up until a few years ago. This is odd, considering that one of the foremost works on the Husseini Manuscripts in which four folios were published was by Bernhard Mortiz in the year 19056. It is perhaps Jay’s intention to bolster the validity of his conspiratorial idea7, by claiming that Christians were denied access to the Cairo manuscripts for religious purposes. He fails to mention however, that the restriction was due to a major political fallout8 in the years following the British Occupation of Egypt from 1882 to 1953.
His claims about the manuscripts from Samarqand are perhaps even more deceitful. The Samarqand manuscripts were studied extensively in Russia, not Uzbekistan, but in the city of St. Petersburg in 1891 by the Russian Orientalist A. Shebunin. The facsimile edition of the manuscripts was published by the Orientalist S. Pissareff in 1905, also from St. Petersburg in Russia. Dr. Saifullah documents9 that many folios from the codex have appeared in various auctions in the Western world. They appeared in America in the 1940’s, and were also auctioned off in London in 1992, 1993 and
6. See, Bernhard Moritz’s, “Arabic Palaeography: A Collection of Arabic Texts From the First Century of the Hidjra Till the Year 1000”, 1905.
7. His conspiracy theory, as previously stated is that the Islamic world hid the manuscripts from Christians so that they would not be able to examine them. This despite the Christian-Orientalist world having had access to them and publishing works about those manuscripts, as well as taking photographs of them since the 19th century.
8. I could be wrong, but according to history, the natives of a militarily occupied nation may not necessarily be enthusiastic to cooperate with their colonial masters. If Jay is willing to explain how the British military occupation of Egypt did not contribute to the lack of cooperation between the native Egyptians and their colonial occupiers, I’d be willing to give him the time he needs to justify his reasoning, however long or impossible that may be.
9. See, Dr. Saifullah’s history of the manuscript with full citations in his article, “The Qur’an of ‘Uthman at Tashkent (Samarqand)”.
MISTAKE #3:
“It is those 6 manuscripts that I’m going to zero in on, it is those manuscripts that we’ve finally, finally had Muslims look at.” - 20:46.
Does he mean the extensive codifying/ cataloguing of them which has already been done for some time now, or does he mean the studying and examining of them? It’s obvious the former was done, otherwise how were the other books in Mistake #2 compiled? If he means the latter, then that already has been done for quite some time by Muslim scholars. One such work is Mu’gam al-Qira’at al-Qur’anniya by Ahmad Muhtar Umar and Abd al - al Salim Mukarram which has gone through two editions in Kuwait and at least one printing in Iran. There was also Mu’gam al - Qira’at by Abd al Latif Muhammad Hatib published in Syria10.
Jay then proceeds to refer to Dr. Tayyar Altıkulaç and Dr. Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu whom he mentions here but never references once during his entire opening statement. We must ask if he has ever read any of their works or is he simply mentioning their names as an appeal to authority11, he also foregoes another scholar’s work published since 197212.
1. See, Arabica 57 (2010), p. 415 for more information and full citations as provided by Dr. Sadeghi. It’s interesting that Smith appeals to Dr. Sadeghi later in the debate, he even mentions that he’s read Dr. Sadeghi’s works. If he has indeed read Dr. Sadeghi’s published works, how can he possibly not know of the studies done by Muslim scholars on those manuscript collections which Dr. Sadeghi references and mentions by name numerous times in his journal publication?
2. Jay Smith frequently mentions the names of these two Muslim Turkish scholars, but not once does he quote them or give a single citation from them. There is one point later in the debate in which he references the number 93 from Dr. Deroche’s work but gives his own analysis and draws his own conclusions, which contradicts Dr. Deroche’s own conclusions.
3. See, S. al-Munajjid’s, “Dirasat fi Tareekh al-Khatt al-’Arabi Mundhu Bidayatihi ila Nihayat al-’Asr al-Umawi”, 1972.
...more
More...
To read the whole contents of this quite an extremely, lengthy article, click on the link below:
thedebateinitiative.com/2015/07/08/a-critical-analysis-of-jay-smiths-mistakes-about-the-quran-2/
Be careful in these kind of texts (5:55) they are using metaphor which is popular in the middel east and usually such meanings are not transfered in the translation but there is no doubt in Shia religion that Ali is more important than Mohammad and even in some groups worship him.
If you only, or just, do a surface reading of the Bible or the Koran it’s easy to be led astray. When you dig into either one it quickly becomes apparent that there are major differences. It takes time and effort…but spending a little bit of our short time on earth for the privilege of spending eternity with God is worth it.
Programs like this are excellent… It makes you ask questions and dig for answers. Just like the example given in Acts 17:11.
@@sidprice6214 would 2 of those be that 1) Jesus was not the Son of God, & 2) Islam is based on on the claimed divine revelation to Mohammed by the angel Gabriel?
There’s also the fact that according to the Bible the Angels do not have sex in Heaven, Mathew 22:30 and yet the Koran promises perpetual ever renewing virgins? I’m sure there’s others but these 3 came to mind.
Do your 3 match these?
@@sidprice6214 Thank you…
I’m not trying to be adversarial. I know the vast majority of Muslims are very devout, family oriented, & hard working people.
You made a claim, I asked some questions, then you restated that the Quran states there are only 3 differences? Which doesn’t mean there are only 3…unless you take it from the Quran’s point of view only.
Now, back to my question on heavenly rewards…I find this:
“Verily, for the Muttaqun [righteous], there will be a success (paradise); gardens and grapeyards; and young full-breasted (mature) maidens of equal age; and a full cup (of wine)” (An-Naba 78:31-34)?
It seems to hinge on the translation of the word “WakawaAAiba”, which is found only once in the Quran, I believe, and some translations say it means companions while others say “beautiful women with round breasts,”?
In searching for any other supporting info I see this:
Hadith number 2,562 in the collection known as the Sunan al-Tirmidhi says, “The least [reward] for the people of Heaven is 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome of pearls, aquamarine and ruby.”?
So, I cannot point to a specific reference to 72 virgins to be had specifically…yet one hears it mentioned in reference to martyrs all the time?
Is it a specific teaching of the Wahhabists, Shia’s, Sunni’s or Alawites? It’s difficult to believe it’s a complete fabrication?
if Umar was the son of the book then how he begot the book? a son is not supposed to give birth to his parents or was it different back then?
I highly salute both of you
I was watching the video made by Dan regarding his Mecca/Qibla research. I noticed at 1hr 13-14 minutes in he talks about Umar destroying books in 636AD. Interesting.
Beside the main subjects, just love the opening and closing music background. What is it?
You guys are stunning. Have been totally stunning this last year or so.
Thanks John! Much appreciated.
Hey Guys,
The piece I would add to this, is that I'm looking for a Guy, allied with the Jews, against the Byzantines, expelled with the Jews of Jerusalem in 622, this is the same year that Muhammed is supposedly expelled from 'Mecca', is Umar in Jerusalem during the war of 622?
Then flees and dreams of a return?
Or is there another Muhammed who is somehow an inspiration to Umar that was expelled from Jerusalem, flees to the east (perhaps to Yathrib by way of Petra) and then Umar is his protégé'?
There will be a new special guest coming that will answer that question very soon.
@@Speakers154 amazing, on the edge of my seat here
Not only could Umar not save, he couldn't save a penalty if he had four pairs of hands.
10: 27 Leo III (d.741) : It attests that parts of the Muslim narrative (Umar, Ali, Salman, coming from heavens) is being elaborated to explain the existence of the Quran in the first half of the 8th c. The Arabs rule since 636 in the West.
Hey Mr. Smith, in one of the slides ( 23:26 ) it was written that Umar saved Christians from Byzantine when he conquered Jerusalem and was labelled savior (Farouq). Isn't that a mistake ? since Christianity was already the state religion of Rome at the time.
Murad, these were some Christian groups who did not believe in the trinity or that Jesus was the son of God. There was a lot of disagreements with the Byzantine church over the nature of Christ around the time that "Islam" supposedly came into existence in the holy land. These groups welcomed Umar when he invaded Jerusalem and believed he was the "saviour" who has come to save them from the Byzantine church., and called him "farouq" or "the saviour"
Great investigation congratulations
this presentation is historic
Surah 25 is called Al-Furqan and its interesting to read in light of this information
A compilation. Haven't forgotten all my Urdu - yet. کتاب امجموع
Astonishing scholarly work, great stuff!
Dr. Jay, according to the Quran the first prophet was Adam, created by God. Therefore it is only logical that the final prophet would also be created by God, i.e Jesus who Muslims believe was born to a virgin and therefore without human intervention. Secondly, while Yeshua was a common name at the time Jesus lived, how many people before Muhammad actually had the name "Muhammad" in Arabia? Was prophet Muhammad the first Arab to have that name, even though it was a title? If this was the final prophet then why is there an entire chapter in the Qur'an on Mary, the mother of Jesus, shouldn't it have been on Amina instead? Again if Muhammad was the final prophet why are there only 4 references to him in the Qur'an? I believe Muslims have been deliberately misled by the authors of the Qur'an by calling the real Muhammad "Issa". Once "Issa" was separated from the real Muhammad, it became easier to spin a story around a new fictitious character. Looks like the renaming of Yeshua into "Issa" and his separation from the original title of Muhammad is where Islam began. So instead of looking for Muhammad, perhaps we should be looking at who turned Yeshua to Issa and when. According to Christian Prince, Yeshua was never "Issa" to Arab Christians. Mel's brief should therefore be when did the name Issa first appear among the Arabs and who exactly is responsible. There obviously is no point looking for Muhammad as by now it is clear that it is all a cleverly concocted tale about a person who never existed. Suspect this would have happened in the Abbasid era. It would make sense to check where in the original text, Yeshua was replaced with "Issa" to deliberately yet subtly mislead the audience.
I'm not sure I get your point. Who do you think the name "Issa" was originally meant to refer to? Yeshua/Jesus or a founder(real or mythical) of Islam?
I would guess the Arab renaming of Yeshua to Issa could be analogous to the Greek renaming of Yeshua to Jesus.
Biographical stories about Muhammad in the Quran would be inconsistent with the islamic belief that the Quran was revealed to Muhammad through the Angel Gabriel/Gibril. I remember seeing in a previous video on this channel about corrections done to old Quranic manuscripts, that the phrase "He said" was corrected to "Say!". "He" refers to Muhammad, and it wouldn't make sense to reveal to Muhammad something he had already said, and that's probably why it was changed into an instruction to Muhammad to say the text that followed.
I'm here using "Muhammad" in the sense it's used in the standard Islamic narrative.
MAY THE LORD JESUS THE CHRIST BLESS EACH AND EVERY DAY OF YOU LIFE , AND ALL YOUR FAMILY. AMEN . I BELIEVE WHAT YOU SAID IS DIVINE. BE ALWAYS BLESSED.
@@anderslvolljohansen1556 Perhaps you are right. Question is did the authors of the Qur'an import Issa from elsewhere to separate Yeshua from Muhammad or was it just renaming of Yeshua- personally I doubt.
@@sagarjackie7366 Your ideas seem interesting, but I don't yet understand them, and that's why I ask.
Assuming the authors imported Issa from elsewhere, who would the name "Issa" refer to? Did they import the name only, or stories, legends and myths about the personality as well?
@@sagarjackie7366 Is part of your idea that passages in the Quran believed to be about the SIN Muhammad could instead be about Jesus(Yeshua)?
thank you for sharing. just shows how easy it is to turn the masses of people with just words, and of course the sword for those that don't believe in the lies. something i fear is happening in this country..... the BIG LIE normally leads to mass slaughter.
i had to subscribe.
we need a video with all these great men who do research.,.
Dude, the difference between you and the academics is you ROCK! WHAT do I mean by rock? Fresh young blood to shake up and reinvigorate the system. It doesn't matter if you are right or wrong.whats important is you are intrducing many fresh new perspectives to consider without being judgemental.And I definitely don't trust the ignorant telephone game .of others, I trust you.
I don't think ibn al-Khittab (if the transliteration here follows the usual pattern) here means son of the book. If the 'kh' signifies خ and the dot under the 't' like usual signifes ط then that is a totally different root. This root actually has to do with preaching or giving a public address at least in Arabic.
You guys are so wandefull keep pochen the truth Christ is in control 👏👏👏🙏🙏
I think Abd Malik is far stronger as a candidate for being prophet-author of the Quran and inaugurator of proto-Islam. Him and Al-Hajjaj.
Maybe they are the final publishers and distributors of Umars the Al Khittabs manuscript
@@preapple I think its a good point, that at least some of the Quranic material predates Abd Malik.
@@preapple especially we know that Abd al malik enforced Arabic over his whole empire, previously that region being syriac/aramaic speaking regions of levant.
@@ausonius100 Quran or qiryana was given to Umar(emir) by Mor gabriel of Beth Qustan...their is a video on this.
@@yakovmatityahu Sure, but check out the armenian historian named Lewond who says (quoting the emperor Leo III) that Umar, Salman and Abu Turab wrote the first Quran and that Al-Hajjaj trashed most of it and produced his own version retaining only a small portion of the earlier one.
Mel: Please describe how you had a change of hypothesis from Qabisa to Umar being the Muhammad? It seems the two Qabisas are historic figures in the formation of the first Arab kingdom in tachkistan.
Leo III allegation is very potent!
I really appreciate your lectures. But I need to view item at least twice to integrate that new information
JAY SMITH, MEL,
What is your basis for worshiping Jesus?
Whereas in the New Testament book there is no verse that shows there is relationship between Jesus and Christianity.
Great work to future generations.
I want to acknowledge an error re. Al khattab.
Khattab or Hattab is a name derived from the word "sermon" ( Khatib) (lit. book-narration). "Al-Khattab" means "the sermon-giver" (lit. the narrator). In my defence, we did all the last 6 videos over just 2 evenings, and I should have slowed down to double check that I have not mixed up two similar looking words. Son of the preacher.
It would still fit however with what I said about the head preacher and apprentice preachers.
You will eventually Acknowledge that the Islamic Tradition and the Quran is true IF YOU DO PROPER RESEARCH in the first place...(Do NOT Sulk now)
@@aaabrams1889 Liar. You have zero credibility.
@John Wick an in-house book never meant for public viewing strikes me as a lot more reliable than fake Islamic pr and dawahist propaganda.
Dear Sir
Kindly check out
Sahih Mslm 1405e ..
It mentions both Messenger and Umar in single verse making this deduction a bit hard to comprehend..
Like Umar and Mhmd coming in same verse in context or like speaking to each other and all .
Actually there are several more..like this in Hadith.. i was just going through some and thought this may be interesting ..
Please do correct me if i am seeing something wrong . 💐
I don’t think Khattab means book which is Kitab. Khattab means speaker
Mel made a good job but made a mistake about ” Ibn Khatab “ Khatab doesn’t mean book , it may mean wood
That was a dumb mistake on my part. I have since acknowledged it below. This is why we call these green papers, silly mistakes can occur but this is where the community comes in and roots out the errors.
@@Speakers154 it still may lead somewhere, it may link Omar to Amro ibn Ala’s “Ambro” since Al’as means wood in Hebrew, Khatab also means wood in Arabic, which goes along with Joe’s theory that Omar, Ambro and Omair are the same person
Umar was hafsah's father. hafsa held the material quranic bukhari 4982 & 4987. "umar says : My Lord agreed with me in three things Bukhari 4483. Umar took hold of his (M) hand and said, "Has Allah not forbidden you to offer the funeral prayer for the hypocrites? bukhari 1269
26:38 'Furqan' means many things (like many words in the Quran) Farouq would mean 'savior', but of whom? Who is saved by the conquest of Jerusalem by Arabs in 637? Japanese? 🤣 Posing the question is responding it.
@@sidprice6214 EI2 vol 10, p.820 and Crone & Cook (1977) p.4-5--154
I liked that "preacher s manual -quran"
Is that the reason why some verses in Quran keep saying “Say …..”?
This makes a lot of sense to me even though i was a Muslim.
In Turkey there are many men named Furkan
When the TRUTH is unpacking to the world.. then billions of lost people will gather to worship the KING! 🙏🙏
if you move the letters q and U and eliminate the F from Furqan you get quran
Pls do address the Chinese narrative and how it fits in this picture if it does at all
Isn't it strange how we have these three individuals as mel put it....Muhammad....Ali....Salmon Al Farsi......these three important individuals also have their equals......The Son.....The Father and The Holy Ghost and we know definitely who they are.....is this just more than a coincidence......you guy's are unraveling the unthinkable in so revealing the truth behind the veil of centuries of misdirection from the only one true book we know as the Bible.....may God bless you and give you strength into convincing our fellow Muslims into the misinformation they have been led to believe from the eighth century to present day.....
Thank you, Klive! May I say you have a cool name.
Sana'a palimpsest is dated to from 450 to 550 AD. We need to know if these source texts are authentic from those reverent dates.
Thankyou all
Thus is fasnating
Umar is the true Muhammed
Muhammed of the Quran is just a mere character who was used to add"Salt"since the Quran has many verses eg kissing the black stones ,hijab,tdirection of the Kaaba
This is a play book where by you can choose a character to represent a time or an event
Too bad for Muslims
And the claim we worship a man what about this "hooked"Muhammed called the saviour
I believe that after the Romans destroyed the Jewish Temple in 70 AD they build a temple dedicated to Jupiter on the site . I think that this was replaced by a Christian Church around 300 AD .
Somebody should please help me with these 2 questions.(1)How did the Byzantines(Romans) become Italians? Or are they the same people? (2)Why does the Allah of Quoran always address himself as first person plural, "We"? Is Allah Triune like Elohim of the Bible?
For some reason I think Umar and company had some kind of encounter with the Arians and become their followers.
This might make Arius the philosopher of the early Islamic movement.
What's happened to Sneakers Corner?
We need more details: birth, place, etc
Could the Lakhmid/Tai/Tayyaye/Dashi parts have been brought in by the Abbasids? The Tayyaye/Dashi sound more Persian than Umar's Nabataean bunch. Could the Abbasid rewriting/redaction of the Quran have been when THAT material was inserted? I have to say, having studied Arthurian history/literature that, in many ways, 'Muhammad' appears to have LESS historical reality than Arthur Pendragon.
10 commanmatns of Mozes are told in Koran, Bible Thora. Every sentence , sura, word in Koran, Bible, Thora tells you to obay the 10 commandmants of mozes if you want to go to paradise when you die. God speaks in Bible like gods speaks in there, god speak in Koran like god speaks in there, God speaks in Thora like god spekas in there. Its the god. He speaks any way he likes. he wants. Its his own choise. Those three religions are the same.
What about making a comparison between the book/notes compiled by Umar in the 7th century and the book as it is now? That should expose every single holes in the narratives.
@Flat Sky Let the cards fall as they may.
The truth will set you free
Let's compare this to Heavens Gate Cult. Believers trying to catch a ride on the Hale Bopp comet in its cloaked UFO !
The cult failed but it still has fanatical believers. fact.
@Flat Sky it does matter if you want people to know the truth? just lay the facts before them, if they see the conclusion as "All their own idea" they will then be able accept the facts. That's how Jesus' parables worked.
@Flat Sky How does this relate to Jesus?
@Flat Sky
The entire Universe is built on the constants e and π: many of the fundamental laws of physics and other sciences rely over and over again on these two mathematical constants.
π is encoded in Genesis 1:1, the first verse of the Bible/Torah and of the Old Testament written in Hebrew.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth (Genesis 1:1)
בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ׃ (Genesis 1:1)
From the Hebrew numerals system, And formula (NUMLETT*PROLETT/NUMWORD*PROWORD) = (28 * 23887872 x 10^27) / (7 * 304153525784175760) = 3.1415...X10^17. it matches the actual value of π until the 3.1415.
π is the number of the circle, of completion, of what is closed and self-contained; as such, it's a good mathematical reference to the concept of a God Creator of all things, and of a Creation that includes everything that was created by God;
e is encoded in John 1:1, the first verse of the gospel (John) of the New Testament written in Greek.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.(John 1:1)
ἐν ἀρχηι ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (John 1:1)
From the Greek numerals system, And formula (NUMLETT*PROLETT/NUMWORD*PROWORD) = (52 * 843625145625911083008 x 10^55)/ (17 * 94930224139983918429785786976 x 10^7) = 2.7183...X10^40. it matches the actual value of e until the 2.7183
e is the number of the relationship between the big and the small, of the bridge between the infinitesimal and the infinite;
what number could be better associated with the Son, the One who was Sent by the Father, the One who is the only bridge for mankind to the infinite God who created the universe.
The fine structure constant (α) value can be also derived from the above two key verses above by combining the verse gematria values of Genesis 1:1 with John 1:1 and calculating it's base value. The fine structure constant (α) value is considered the greatest mysteries of physics. Without it, it would be impossible to form even simple structures like atoms, molecules, planets, or stars.
Verse gematria = Sum of all letter values. (Genesis 1:1 = 2701 & John 1:1 = 3607)
you would get the fine structure constant (α) derived as 27013627^2 =0.00729736..e17. Given that the current α approx value recommended is currently 0.00729735.
Furthermore, there is a pattern in the verse Gematria of Genesis 1:1 to John 1:1 = 2701-3627 = |27|01-36|27|; There are exactly a total of 27 books in the New Testaments which are the words and teachings of Jesus Christ.
John 1:14 states that Jesus Christ is the Word of God which was made flesh and the only begotten of the father.
Revelation 1:8 states that Jesus Christ is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending.
Revelation 13:18 states that the number of the antichrist who will deceive the world in the end days is 666. And, the sum of integers from the beginning of 1 to 36 is exactly 666.
Hence, (27) (01-36) (27) = (Jesus-the Alpha) -> (From the beginning to the end of the anti-christ 666) -> (Jesus-the Omega).
The Bible is filled with unique proofs of being inspired by the Holy Spirit. Hundreds of detailed prophecies were written centuries before the events they accurately described. For example, just as the Old Testament foretold, the Messiah Jesus was born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14) in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2), as a descendant of Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3), Isaac (Genesis 17:19), and Jacob (Genesis 28:14). He was betrayed by a friend (Psalm 41:9) for 30 pieces of silver that were used to purchase the potter’s field (Zechariah 11:13). Then he was mocked and ridiculed, pierced in his hands and feet, and lots were cast for his clothing (Psalm 22:7, 16, 18). He died (Daniel 9:26) as a sacrifice for our sins and was buried in a rich man’s tomb (Isaiah 53:8-10). After a short time in the grave, he lived again (Psalm 16:10; Isaiah 53:10).
Other religions follow books of teachings written by one person. The Bible consists of 66 books written by 40 or more authors over the course of more than 1500 years (from 1500 BC to approx. 90 AD) in three different languages (Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek). The Bible is the only book in the world ever written like this. In spite of this, the message throughout the Bible is the same. It is the message of salvation through God’s Son, Jesus Christ. Christianity is not about joining a church or a religious organization. It is not about following religious rules and ceremonies and man-made rituals. It is not about religion. Christianity is about having a personal relationship with God Himself, made possible because of Jesus Christ and what happened at the cross.
And, let us consider this proposition. Supposing we were to call on ten eminent writers in our generation, all from one walk of life, in one place, at one time, and in one language, to write independently on some controversial subject, what do you think the result would be? Do you think there would be agreement and harmony when the ten essays are put together? The result will very likely, be a conglomeration of differing and conflicting views. We may call it a sort of literary hotchpotch. Considering then the manner in which the Bible came to be written, there can be no other explanation than this: The author was God himself. Beyond all the explanations, this belief is a matter of faith. Faith in God promise and his ability to preserve his words from the beginning.
@Flat Sky lslam says that he was not crucified and that he is not god made flesh, they have good reason to say that, as the Koran is written like a text book version of "opposition defiance disorder". They're not exercising their free will, their text and their behaviour is largely unconsciously driven,
they do their "father's"
work faith fully tho
. It's the classic paradox, rebel against overstrict parents,
then join a gang and get told what to do 24/7
Seriously we can't hurt God, that's laughable.
We can only hurt ourselves.
could the muhammad of the hadith be a conglomeration of Iyas ibn qabesh (as you said in previous videos) and Umar I?
the hadiths are legends after all.
legends even like in king arthur do mix things over time.
10 :27 The only figure to have existed is Ali (Abu Turab) he was the amir of al Hira (Iraq) : we have an attestation in the second part of the 7th c. Salman and Umar as what will be recounted by the Muslim narrative have never existed. Only Ali got a certain role.
Eye opener
Even before you all took on this task just random history I've been exposed to has always led me to think Umar and al Malik both are Mohammed and they adopted the movement against the nicen creed .
Al Malik father = Mohammeds mother wife personal myth if family around him
Umar actions of conquest with the sword = Mohammed sword divinity.
You found the final price the book
Quran the apologetic lecture text to argue against Jesus devinity.
I just finished watching Joe's 3 piece, this is a lovely continuation of the Umar theory and seems to be seemless. Im sure in some of these Masjids there is incriminating material waiting to be found.
The biggest challenge to this hypothesis is the Sunni/Shia split.
I never understood it. What is the reason do you think?
@@gacantabidix7206 Not too sure. All I know is the Shia really don’t like ‘Umar Ibn Al-Khattab which makes it hard.
There is a third way-neither Sunni nor Shia. Ever heard of it? Ibadhist of Oman i'm told. Not a single combatant arrested has been from Oman. Oman should not be mentioned in the same breath as the rest of the Middle East according to RObert Kaplan in his book 'Monsoon'. Thoughts??? Tolerant people. Peaceful place. Quite liberal compared to pre-MBS Saudi.
Islam appears to have started as Jewish and Christian gnistic offshoot later on with traditions and edited Koran made into Islam known now
Someone removed my post twice. Why?
Did you have a link? It is the algorithm.
@@Speakers154 I did have a link. To an online dictionary which showed that one of the translations of the Hebrew word Pulkan is salvation. Weird that YT doesn't allow links. I'll try to get info to you guys through one of your websites. You're doing interesting stuff.
Mohamad doesn’t mean temple either! Thats ma’’abad
"Purkan" or "Furkan" is an Aramaic word for "deliverance" or "salvation". Is this relevant? So is "Quran" an Arabic corruption of the Aramaic word?
Thanks
The Syriac word "purqana" is Arabicized as "furqan", in a similar way as the Syriac "qeryana" (lectionary) is Arabicized as "Quran" (originally pronounced "qeryan"). However, early Muslims wanted people to believe that "Quran" is derived from "qara'a" (to recite), in order to cover up for the fact that there was no oral traditional in the origin of the Quran. They created that myth to hide the truth that most of the Quran was copied from other texts, as people would ask where the book came from, and to further reaffirm the fabricated biographies of Muhammad.
The dates referenced in Doctrina Jacobi and Thomas the Presbyter is mid-July and early February of 634. This was during Abu Bakr's reign according to Islamic chronology. Umar's reign didn't begin until late August of tha year.
Muhammad said that if there were a prophet after him, it would be Umar.
Umar pretended a first that the two temple mount churches wouldn't be used by Muslims, but halfway through a seven year treaty he broke that agreement and converted them into mosques, closing down the daily sacrifice if the Catholic Liturgy therein.
No Christians considered Muslims their savior. Jerusalem Christians were ruled not by Rome but by Constantinople's "Roman" emperor, who shared their faith and kept them as safe as he could.
You're referring to weak narration 🤣. In an authentic narration, it's Ali Ibn Talib also his son in law.
How many original Qurans are there?
THAT is amazing but ONLY a part of the puzzle.There is a Mihammed 2.,Umar and a MOHAMMED 1. REVEALED IN AJ Deus 's MHMT/ Mhmd paper from 2016. Available on line. Read it ! It will blow your mind. It also reveals ...the other book...
Kill the enemies. If you die you go to paradise. God says that. Who do i know taht? I am the son af god, i ma the prophet of god. Thats why i know that all. God made you the earth everything. God fight. If you die you will life for ever in paradise. You will there a good life. Thtas what you read in jewish, molsim and christian holy books.
getting closer to the original quran now if only we can get it printed once the original is found.