The current channel that is out to critique me is giving me the best motivation to make more videos on this topic. He tried to pretend to be an atheist but it is clear now that he is a Muslim.
It is. Fred Donner, who I recall worked with or was Luling's student, comments on his great intellect but dismisses his work almost out of hand. I've never seen Donner address why he dismisses Luling in either lectures or his own work.
@@karenthompson1337 I have, yeah. While I feel he does present some good information and theories, I do agree that he's a bit too on the apologetic side for Islam. His disagreement with Robert Hoyland about the level of violence in the conquest period being a good example.
@@johnamaral6415 I'm not sure 'no-one has dared' to make it available on the internet in pdf - Luling's is a very large book, 580 pages and a bit difficult to read, so it would be a bit of an effort to capture and turn into a pdf. Christoph Luxenberg's book, a follow-up to Luling's is available on the 'net.
Hi Mel.. add to your collection 😁 not so long just a few years ago the party of SPD/ Germany remove a member politician that criticize islam.. his name is (Thilo Sarrazin) he is also an Author and has his own books
It’s basic psychology to understand that money talks. This is a given that doesn’t really need evidence. But thanks for the assurance from you and Lloyd. No guessing once the evidence speaks.
Lüling was a Christian monotheist. For him, the Trinity and divinity of Jesus were unbiblical. He initially studied Protestant theology. After graduating, he refused to take an oath to the triune God and therefore did not receive his doctorate.
A key moment was the 1978 publication of the book Orientalism by Edward Said. This book argues that western scholarship on the Islamic world is a racist political project that seeks to justify western colonialism and perpetuate systems of injustice. This has been one of the most influential books in the last 50 years. It is taught in universities all over the world. The term orientalist has become a dirty word, and current scholars need to distinguish their work from that of the orientalists in the 19th and 20th centuries.
It will be no surprise then to learn that Said lists a number of Post-Modernist Marxist-leaning academics as his influences: Foucault, Derrida, Chomsky. He claims to be a Palestinian but while born in Jerusalem, his family has stronger ties to Egypt.
Hi Mel! I am a Quranist muslim who has followed the work of Inarah. Lulling does propose the hypothesis that the Quran advocates a unitarian christianity and that the Mushrikeen are followers of the Trinity. However Lulings disciple dr Christoph Luxemburg proposes the hypothesis that the Quran advocates a trinitarian Christianity and that the Mushriikeen are unitarian christians who mock the believers with the word ”Three”. What is your hypothesis in this matter? Do you agree with Luling or Luxenburg?
Luling's thesis has a lot to do with his own CV. His first studies were Protestant (Christian) theology Due to his anti-Trinitarian views and rejection of the divinity of Jesus (both of which were anti-biblical for Lüling), it was impossible for Lüling to serve in the church as a pastor or to pursue a theological doctorate.
I did not know that Luling was a biblical unitarian. I do know however that Luxemburg is a biblical trinitarian. Have read Luxemburg’s book a couple of times and watched his videos . Inshallah I plan to read in detail Lulings works too.
So in other words, Western academia treats Islamic studies the exact opposite of how it treats Biblical studies. I've read a book or two by historical critical scholars of Islam, and they frequently lament the complacency and deference to Islamic tradition in the field. Much of it also of course has to do with mea culpas about the legacy of Orientalism, the book and phenomenon, anti-racist ideas, post-colonialist ideology, etc.
There is no good reason to believe that PC culture hasn't affected academia. Now the severity may vary from one institution to the next but in general when there is a substantial amount of funding involved, you have a conflict of interest.
Hearing about Smith's approach to "academia" is revolting and nauseous. One can not be considered an objective scholar when he approaches the topic with such utter and blatant bias. I wonder if he would be so lenient and favourable when analyzing Christian Orthodoxy? The guy self admits that he is bought out, that his approach is biased, his work should be treated not as academic but as propaganda. What a sad state have universities turned into 😢.
What makes it even worse is that he was a Presbyterian minister. Why would he not see the need to be truthful? It is strange. Political correctness has a strong hold on people.
‘… Smith studied at University College, Toronto,[22] receiving a Bachelor of Arts degree with honours in oriental languages circa 1938.[23] After his thesis was rejected by the University of Cambridge,[24] supposedly for its Marxist critique of the British Raj, he and his wife Muriel Mackenzie Struthers spent seven years in pre-independence India (1940-1946), during which he taught Indian and Islamic history at Forman Christian College in Lahore. …’ - Wikipedia Marxist views remained his core throughout his life, Presbyterianism be damned : ‘… Religion in the contemporary sense of the word is for Smith the product of both identity politics and apologetics …’
I read a synopsis- can anyone confirm if this is true? Luling believed Muhammad was also an archangel messenger? " The author projects his own vision (Protestant Christian) and thinks that Muhammad was an archangel-messenger, disguised on earth in the shape of a human being. He affirms: "First of all there can be no doubt that the Prophet considered himself to be, like Jesus Christ, an archangel having been pre-existent.... The archangel-messengers Jesus and Muhammad are disguised on earth in the shape of human beings as a trial to the unbelievers and believers" (pp. 28-29). Even Shi'i Muslims, who criticize the Sunni interpretation, as well as Sufis and Islamic philosophers, do not share this understanding."
Let’s see how long the deeply cherished virtues that come with the academic principle of peer-reviews will not eventually be subsumed by other more unlofty interests like power, influence and wealth.
I just read that part in Shoemakers book on the plane trip home. I was appalled about Smith, it’s $$ for certain and he’s got to be a close associate of Karen Armstrong!
But at least he is allowed. This doesn't come without risk, hence why he writes under a pseudonym. The normal state of affairs is academics can make their case and get peer reviewed, so it is not a free for all.
I looked at the Islamic revisionist page on Wikipedia the other day, for the section on those who counter the revisionists’ work, they resort to name calling. You’re called revisionist extremists and ultra revisionists. I was just waiting to read next that you’re MAGA revisionists as well 😅
It is such a funny thing to me that by pointing out where Islam has revised history and looking for more solid evidence a person can be labelled a revisionist. 😂
@@IslamicOrigins- it isn’t going to be amusing when we, again, slowly but painfully realize that there is indeed an organized and strategic design to silence truth that’s inconvenient, unpleasant, uncomfortable, embarrassing or disturbing.
Religious studies tends to give this type of deference to every religion except Christianity. I think the drop in Critical Islamic scholarship is more about this tendency than some hidden Islamic influence. The resultant errors are the same, but the motivations are not.
If the person running this channel or any other christian or atheist or orientalist wants to debate the reliability of Islamic historical records and Quran and Hadith Preservation I would be more than happy to debate this topic
Your religion is a farcical herecy conceived as an ethno-political expansionist system of oppresion and no matter what academia and its echo chamber might convince you of, the reality of your false prophet and his debauchery and example are made evident to all with half a brain. Enjoy screaming into the void.
Want to come on this channel and make your best case for the "reliability of historical records" next week? I suggest you can either do 10-15 minutes chunks of your case, followed by a few minutes response from me, or you can make your case and I respond to points as they come up slide by slide. Whichever format you prefer. If you need more time to prepare, we can move it back to a later date.
@@IslamicOrigins I would prefer a debate format. We can have 10 or 15 minutes opening statements each. then about an hour of open discussion. That seems a better format so that I can make my own arguments and also address your claims
@@gravewalkerjones935 your opinion is worthless like your religion. A simple reality is that biblical scholars like Bart Ehrman can shred christianity yet orientalists are too scared to debate muslims. Not just orientalists I have been challenging christians for a year to debate me on Hadith Preservation yet no christian is willing to debate this topic. Why are christians and orientalists so scared
Debate structure is great for theatre and sophistry but if you are serious that you can make a case that those sources are reliable, then let's just address what your case is. Historical criticism is just about asking questions. I have no idea what I'd be defending, a valid question? This will still allow plenty of space for debate. Your suggestion for an hour of free for all sounds like an exercise in rhetoric, which is not good for establishing the truth of claims. If you can make a valid case for the Islamic sources being reliable, that ought to be the focus.@@RefutingOrientalists
![MHMD [13] Do John of Damascus & the Chinese know more about the MHMDs?](/img/n.gif)
They should be ashamed of themselves, those "scholars"
About two seconds got cut at beginning, I was talking about the reaction to the last livestream on Saudi money into universities.
Petro dollar donations to Universities unfortunately muzzle criticism in academia but they can't stop our polemicists on social media platforms.
The current channel that is out to critique me is giving me the best motivation to make more videos on this topic. He tried to pretend to be an atheist but it is clear now that he is a Muslim.
@@IslamicOriginswhich channel is that?
It’s a shame what happened to Luling!! I’m glad the English version was printed during his life. However, only India would print it!!
It is. Fred Donner, who I recall worked with or was Luling's student, comments on his great intellect but dismisses his work almost out of hand. I've never seen Donner address why he dismisses Luling in either lectures or his own work.
@@starshipchris4518 I think Donner is a bit of an apologist for Islam. Have you read any of Donners books?
@@karenthompson1337 I have, yeah. While I feel he does present some good information and theories, I do agree that he's a bit too on the apologetic side for Islam. His disagreement with Robert Hoyland about the level of violence in the conquest period being a good example.
And no one has dared to make it available in pdf in the internet
@@johnamaral6415 I'm not sure 'no-one has dared' to make it available on the internet in pdf - Luling's is a very large book, 580 pages and a bit difficult to read, so it would be a bit of an effort to capture and turn into a pdf. Christoph Luxenberg's book, a follow-up to Luling's is available on the 'net.
Hi Mel.. add to your collection 😁
not so long just a few years ago the party of SPD/ Germany remove a member politician that criticize islam.. his name is (Thilo Sarrazin) he is also an Author and has his own books
In English? Well. I’ll look it up :)
It’s basic psychology to understand that money talks. This is a given that doesn’t really need evidence.
But thanks for the assurance from you and Lloyd. No guessing once the evidence speaks.
Please I want to know more! This all rinds me somehow of the mafia!
Lüling was a Christian monotheist.
For him, the Trinity and divinity of Jesus were unbiblical.
He initially studied Protestant theology. After graduating, he refused to take an oath to the triune God and therefore did not receive his doctorate.
A key moment was the 1978 publication of the book Orientalism by Edward Said. This book argues that western scholarship on the Islamic world is a racist political project that seeks to justify western colonialism and perpetuate systems of injustice.
This has been one of the most influential books in the last 50 years. It is taught in universities all over the world. The term orientalist has become a dirty word, and current scholars need to distinguish their work from that of the orientalists in the 19th and 20th centuries.
Therefore all opposition to ‘the glory of Islam’ will be canceled as such.
It will be no surprise then to learn that Said lists a number of Post-Modernist Marxist-leaning academics as his influences: Foucault, Derrida, Chomsky. He claims to be a Palestinian but while born in Jerusalem, his family has stronger ties to Egypt.
Islam has not been truthful about its origins since Abbassid times. "The more things change....." [You know the rest.]
Maybe not “since” probably “as a result of”
All we here is how evil Europeans were, but Muslims get a pass for their agressions.
Hi Mel!
I am a Quranist muslim who has followed the work of Inarah.
Lulling does propose the hypothesis that the Quran advocates a unitarian christianity and that the Mushrikeen are followers of the Trinity.
However Lulings disciple dr Christoph Luxemburg proposes the hypothesis that the Quran advocates a trinitarian Christianity and that the Mushriikeen are unitarian christians who mock the believers with the word ”Three”.
What is your hypothesis in this matter? Do you agree with Luling or Luxenburg?
Luling's thesis has a lot to do with his own CV. His first studies were Protestant (Christian) theology
Due to his anti-Trinitarian views and rejection of the divinity of Jesus (both of which were anti-biblical for Lüling), it was impossible for Lüling to serve in the church as a pastor or to pursue a theological doctorate.
I did not know that Luling was a biblical unitarian. I do know however that Luxemburg is a biblical trinitarian. Have read Luxemburg’s book a couple of times and watched his videos . Inshallah I plan to read in detail Lulings works too.
@@economicianWdym with „i have watched his“ ? Luxenberg writes under a pseudonym and never spoke in public
@Bibo71635
He actually has his own youtube channel:
m.youtube.com/@christophluxenberg6242
So in other words, Western academia treats Islamic studies the exact opposite of how it treats Biblical studies.
I've read a book or two by historical critical scholars of Islam, and they frequently lament the complacency and deference to Islamic tradition in the field.
Much of it also of course has to do with mea culpas about the legacy of Orientalism, the book and phenomenon, anti-racist ideas, post-colonialist ideology, etc.
But you only purify gold at the highest possible temperature while others are unworthy of such requirements simply because they’re not of any value.
There is no good reason to believe that PC culture hasn't affected academia. Now the severity may vary from one institution to the next but in general when there is a substantial amount of funding involved, you have a conflict of interest.
That subject alone is worth to be researched: the silencing of truth on the origin of Islam.
Just reading Shoemakers book.
Hearing about Smith's approach to "academia" is revolting and nauseous. One can not be considered an objective scholar when he approaches the topic with such utter and blatant bias.
I wonder if he would be so lenient and favourable when analyzing Christian Orthodoxy?
The guy self admits that he is bought out, that his approach is biased, his work should be treated not as academic but as propaganda.
What a sad state have universities turned into 😢.
What makes it even worse is that he was a Presbyterian minister. Why would he not see the need to be truthful? It is strange. Political correctness has a strong hold on people.
‘… Smith studied at University College, Toronto,[22] receiving a Bachelor of Arts degree with honours in oriental languages circa 1938.[23] After his thesis was rejected by the University of Cambridge,[24] supposedly for its Marxist critique of the British Raj, he and his wife Muriel Mackenzie Struthers spent seven years in pre-independence India (1940-1946), during which he taught Indian and Islamic history at Forman Christian College in Lahore. …’ - Wikipedia
Marxist views remained his core throughout his life, Presbyterianism be damned : ‘… Religion in the contemporary sense of the word is for Smith the product of both identity politics and apologetics …’
@@I9s7lam5is-S3tu1pid In light of this, he would have struggled to join his political beliefs with Christianity. (One can not serve two gods...)
I have Lulings book but not read it yet.
It is a tough read. I got stuck at the introduction, and never got back to it.
@@IslamicOrigins right. With Dr Jays classes we were assigned a reading, I found it very dense.
I read a synopsis- can anyone confirm if this is true? Luling believed Muhammad was also an archangel messenger? "
The author projects his own vision (Protestant Christian) and thinks that Muhammad was an archangel-messenger, disguised on earth in the shape of a human being. He affirms: "First of all there can be no doubt that the Prophet considered himself to be, like Jesus Christ, an archangel having been pre-existent.... The archangel-messengers Jesus and Muhammad are disguised on earth in the shape of human beings as a trial to the unbelievers and believers" (pp. 28-29). Even Shi'i Muslims, who criticize the Sunni interpretation, as well as Sufis and Islamic philosophers, do not share this understanding."
Let’s see how long the deeply cherished virtues that come with the academic principle of peer-reviews will not eventually be subsumed by other more unlofty interests like power, influence and wealth.
Did somebody dig into Lulings academic fight and dismissal in the past? It might just be due to fully rehabilitate him posthoum
I just read that part in Shoemakers book on the plane trip home. I was appalled about Smith, it’s $$ for certain and he’s got to be a close associate of Karen Armstrong!
A. J. Deus is also denounced for critiquing all religions!
But at least he is allowed. This doesn't come without risk, hence why he writes under a pseudonym. The normal state of affairs is academics can make their case and get peer reviewed, so it is not a free for all.
I looked at the Islamic revisionist page on Wikipedia the other day, for the section on those who counter the revisionists’ work, they resort to name calling. You’re called revisionist extremists and ultra revisionists. I was just waiting to read next that you’re MAGA revisionists as well 😅
It is such a funny thing to me that by pointing out where Islam has revised history and looking for more solid evidence a person can be labelled a revisionist. 😂
@@IslamicOrigins- it isn’t going to be amusing when we, again, slowly but painfully realize that there is indeed an organized and strategic design to silence truth that’s inconvenient, unpleasant, uncomfortable, embarrassing or disturbing.
Religious studies tends to give this type of deference to every religion except Christianity. I think the drop in Critical Islamic scholarship is more about this tendency than some hidden Islamic influence. The resultant errors are the same, but the motivations are not.
If the person running this channel or any other christian or atheist or orientalist wants to debate the reliability of Islamic historical records and Quran and Hadith Preservation I would be more than happy to debate this topic
Your religion is a farcical herecy conceived as an ethno-political expansionist system of oppresion and no matter what academia and its echo chamber might convince you of, the reality of your false prophet and his debauchery and example are made evident to all with half a brain. Enjoy screaming into the void.
Want to come on this channel and make your best case for the "reliability of historical records" next week? I suggest you can either do 10-15 minutes chunks of your case, followed by a few minutes response from me, or you can make your case and I respond to points as they come up slide by slide. Whichever format you prefer. If you need more time to prepare, we can move it back to a later date.
@@IslamicOrigins I would prefer a debate format. We can have 10 or 15 minutes opening statements each. then about an hour of open discussion. That seems a better format so that I can make my own arguments and also address your claims
@@gravewalkerjones935 your opinion is worthless like your religion. A simple reality is that biblical scholars like Bart Ehrman can shred christianity yet orientalists are too scared to debate muslims. Not just orientalists I have been challenging christians for a year to debate me on Hadith Preservation yet no christian is willing to debate this topic. Why are christians and orientalists so scared
Debate structure is great for theatre and sophistry but if you are serious that you can make a case that those sources are reliable, then let's just address what your case is. Historical criticism is just about asking questions. I have no idea what I'd be defending, a valid question? This will still allow plenty of space for debate. Your suggestion for an hour of free for all sounds like an exercise in rhetoric, which is not good for establishing the truth of claims. If you can make a valid case for the Islamic sources being reliable, that ought to be the focus.@@RefutingOrientalists