Make sure you get a pdf of his book, the great secret of Islam, it is brilliant. It is only about 130 pages long but there is more in it than most books you'll ever read on the subject. It is free to download from his website.
@@mhorram hi …. I didn’t understand some of the terms because my Arabic is not that great. Wish there is a dictionary so I can understand some of academic terms or the Big words . A well such is life 😁
@@anoushnewman1247 Actually, that is an interesting observation. Why isn't there a dictionary along these lines? A Canadian academic (John Ralston Saul) once pointed out that specialty fields tend to use a vocabulary that intentionally leaves out the ordinary person. In fact, they have a tendency of creating an all new vocabulary that only applies to their particular field of interest. He thought it was to keep bozos like you and me from learning the 'secrets' of their field. Out of curiosity, did you try entering the phrases that stumped you into Google translate to see if it could come up with an English translation that might be useful? Laborious, I'm sure, but sometimes such things do turn out to be useful for what you learn. Actually, Google Translate is a good example of why it might be useful to get digital version (e.g. PDF) of the book. When you read the book, in Arabic, in your case, and hit upon something obscure you can copy the obscure passage to the clipboard and paste the clipboard contents to Google Translate and a translation pops out in whatever language you have chosen for the translation. Google does some cool stuff.
Odon has very academic approach not saying or denying but pointing on facts. Origin of Islam are many and Nazarins, who were Jews but like Adrian didn't believe in Jesus as a God. But there are also Manichism and Zaradostrian ideas in Islam.
@@maxschon7709 Manicheism invented the idea that the "Paraclet" announced by Jesus would be a prophet to come (namely Mani). Hence, when we find the very same idea in the islamic tradition and in the Quran, one is compelled to deduct another late islamic manipulation... And even more, another quranic tampering.
Hallelujah!!!! Odon is on!!! This is so good. At last, at long last. Odon might not be as centered on Abd Malik and his career (in relation to the content of the Quran) as I would like, but he hits the nail on the head with his "failed apocalypse/rebuilding of the Temple"-thesis as to the historical core of proto-Islam. Thanks Jay, so fantastic of you to bring him on to your channel!
The earlier Jay videos have shown what historic Islam isn't... Now, theories of what it is (or might have been) and especially, its emergence. Fascinating!
I love it how Odon casually says that the existence of Muhammad is irrelevant… because the “non-existence” of Med is such a touchy and irritating subject to the Muslim audience, it is such an unthinkable idea - and there you are … Odon …. “Muhammad or any prophets not important to the Quran…..” hhhhh … refreshing… refreshing that there can be people so causal to the subject
It’s a bit like saying “why argue about Jesus if Jerusalem didn’t exist”... It’s easier to uncover the origins of writings, cities, history etc than prove or disprove the existence of a person to whom those writings, cities and history supposedly comes from.
Thank you Jay for puting the light on the outstanding work of Odon @odon So glad to have heard you talking with Jay. Le grand secret de l’Islam deserves the english speaking audience ! Un grand bravo pour votre prestation.
First time I came upon this thesis I was awestruck! I read the French version back then and more recently the revised and enriched version (see coin history...). The Arab and Farsi (?) versions are online. The 🏴 version is soon to be released! Do not miss it!
> This is the most excellent in Dr. Jay's guest series as of September 4, 2021. Odon Lafontaine comes from a humble standing, and has poured a great part of his life to this research. This is at par with the immense efforts of Dan Gibson and Patricia Crone. > For hopefully of English translation availability. 1. The Great Secret of Islam by Odon Lafontaine 2. The Messiah and His Prophet by Fr. Edouard-Marie Gallez (Inspiration) > Significant Takeaways: (paraphrased) - Starting at 34:27. 1. "The thing is to have a global view. A sort of grand scheme of what has happened, and not get lost to details. Details such as who is the real Muhammad. What did exactly did he do? Because this is not... We are not learning about Islam origins this way." 2. "To look at the bigger picture, what happened in the 7th century. There are several Muhammads. (Abd al-Malik emphasized) Islam comes from a long process. It comes from religious context. Historical context. Geopolitical context." 3. "Quran was "compiled" by the Arab leaders." - Starting at 47:47 4. Significant date, 630 A.D./C.E. - Starting at 48:00 5. "Arab leaders led to assume "Jesus power" instead of Jesus... Arab leaders became the caliphs... God('s)-kings" Edit: - Corrected the spelling of Patricia's name.
@@michaels4255 Indeed it is more logical to have it compiled, as even to a 1st time reader the Quran really looks a bit disorganized. And the character would change in mood drastically at times.
@IIOO We agree! A scientifically sound historical theory can be brought up by the dedicated historians such as Odon and Dan. The narrative Odon could certaintly help, while the geo-spatial-structural part Dan could contribute. Notice that they have different interpretations but a consolidation of intertwining data can be fused to form a certain theory. We pray for God to grant Odon and Dan enough time for this.
@@OdonLafontaine What would be another hypothesis for the lack of diacritical marks in early fragments? Could it be that diacritical marks were not introduced in the region where the Quran was put together? Or the scribe that compiled the original was not familiar with them? Or the fragments that were used for the Quran (already translated into Arabic script from Garshuni) were from before 640?
This is a pretty cool idea! I would be great to see a roundtable of all the theorist with Al Fadi and sister Hatun discussing this lead by Jay. This stuff is going to change the face of Islamic studies.
This was great and good that Dr J asked rather challenging questions. I encourage Dr J to challenge the guests more by bringing up opposing theories and evidence. Indeed it is good to have a debate be Joe and Odon.
I did notice that diacritical marks existed as far back as the 7th century and much earlier for Hebrew, and was puzzled by their choice of not using them, but I believe it was either due to lack of popularity in their use, or perhaps the region where the Quran was put together did not adopt diacriticals yet (there are plenty of rock inscriptions that lack them). Stating that it was on purpose was something I dismissed due to the unnecessary complication they cause, but thinking of it as someone copying in a hurry was something that didn't cross my mind. The Quran does seem hurried, but why? It's also clear from the Quran in Arabic that whoever put it together didn't understand what was written.
@@simonhengle8316 Those are just the same stale copy-paste questions from the standard daawah-script narrative. They have been debunked so many hundreds of times and it is not even funny anymore to see these keyboard warriors keep asking the same thing while having no interest in the answers given. I've seen this @Forgiving Fragrance around being a waste of time & energy, copy-pasting away on many channels.
He's saying at 32:00 that the scribes were copying from shorthand that did not have dots, therefore they did not put diacritical marks in their manuscripts. He said in Egypt diacritical marks were already in use by 640 so there is no other strong reasons why they wouldn't have used diacritical marks. I felt that Jay was misunderstanding him.
Hebrew has diacritics since the 5th century, it's odd Arabic didn't have them when they developed their script. It's also odd that they would not use them when they were available.
@@paultarsus5844 The Masoretes of Tiberias introduced diacritics in the 5th century, the first canonical Quran only came to be between the end of the 7th century and the middle of the 8th century. Arabs copied diacritics from the Jewish (and everything else).
Great job! Islam is built on sinking sand and wouldn't stand heavy rain and storm. Merci odon.!! C'est géniale et hyper intéressant.! Islam est très mal barré !!!
All you idiots will say 'GREAT JOB'...HA HA HA...anything that is against Islam. Islam stood the test of time and is the fastest growing and breeding religion - DEAL WITH IT!!!
I'm pretty confident that Odon knows what he's talking about (so is Odon and that helps a lot in making me confident in almost everything he discussed); but I'm not so sure he's right in his assertions about the diacritical marks existing early on. That, to my way of thinking, requires far more evidence than was provided here. Perhaps, Jay, in a future episode you could have Odon provide his proof of this because it definitely goes against everything I've read about the development of Arabic writing. It would be important to show that those diacritical marks were used exactly as they were in later Arabic writings. If they weren't that would suggest (but wouldn't prove) that the early diacritical marks only have an apparent relationship with the later usage of diacritical marks. In fact, if they aren't identical in usage it might mean that the early marks are not diacritical marks at all but serve another purpose. A truly great episode would be one in which you have Dan Brubaker and Odon discuss this diacritical mark issue. Anyway, this was a great episode; but that is no surprise. Pfander Films has been blowing my mind for over a year now. I finally feel confident that real scholarship in this area is alive and well. Perhaps, over time, this episode will be considered a classic. You are the best Jay and so is Odon and Mel and Murad and . . .
What does Odin think about the 4 groups of varying qibla directions? They must have some place in his thesis as these are archeological realities, and so must be explicated in one way or other. The Kaaba/pilgramage is also an important fact of Islam and so must also be explained in any competent Islamic history thesis. I think Gibson has contributed the most to the search for the 'real' Islam as he has discovered archeological proofs, as compared to mere literary and cultural theories.
Several of these 4 are heavily dependent on unproven conjecture. The parallel and in between qiblas are very doubtful. There is not a shred of evidence for the interpretation. (What I thought about it, sorry I just realised it was directed to Odon.)
@@Speakers154 Gibson visited all those early mosques and measured their qiblas. Rather than dismiss his evidence that does not match theory, better that another researcher measure those qiblas again.
@Pfander Films Are you aware Dr. Smith that the Ibadi muslims of Oman have a somewhat different Hadith? These variants should contain many more clues as to early islamic history.
The house of the Prophet’s first wife, Khadijah has made way for public toilets. A Hilton hotel stands on the site of the house of Islam’s first caliph, Abu Bakr. Famously, the Kaaba now stands in the shade of one of the world’s tallest buildings, the Mecca Royal Clock Tower, part of a complex built by the Bin Laden Group, boasting a 5-story shopping mall, luxury hotels and a parking garage.
The conclusion is my current thinking, the legend of Mohammad was necessary to give Islam and Qur'an similar standing to the Old and New Testaments for purposes of kingdom building. The Byzantines had the bible and Jesus, The Persians had the Avesta and Zoroastra makes sense that Caliphate needed its equivalent.
Good video, greetings to both of you I personally think that Islam and its true history is closely related to the history of the Arabic language and the Arab identity, which now defines itself as an ethnicity (of course this is not true, for example, countries such as Sudan, Mauritania and Somalia cannot have the same ethnicity as the Moroccan, Egyptian, Syrian or Iraqi...etc. Therefore, the issue is primarily political) According to well-known accounts, the Arabic writing “the letters of the alphabet” was invented in Anbar and Kufa “in Iraq”, while historical sources tell us that the rules of the Arabic language were formulated in Kufa and Basra “also in Iraq as we know it today.” It is interesting to note here that these The regions, even after the advent of Islam, were culturally and socially subject to the Persians. A quick note: the absolute majority of linguists who formulated the grammar of the Arabic language are Persians (I don't think it is at all a matter of course). Unfortunately, until now, I have not found any real research or studies on this topic
@@OdonLafontaine I agree with you, but the question is is there a human race called the Arab race?? This is important because this whole religion is based on this idea.Because the confusion between the Saracens and the Arabs is so simple, I cannot accept it. And then (2) comes the importance of the Arabic language that we know and how it began.. Then we will know if any Quranic manuscript has any importance and when it was written in an appreciative manner.. etc.´ let me share with you a simple example.. The word below has the same form in Arabic and Sabean, but it is pronounced in two different ways and has two different meanings. سد "sad" = in Arabic = dam سد "ho" = Mandaean = who , he This is one of the most important problems of the early "Arab" coins
@@ASHORSHEMAYA No, i don't think there was an "Arab race". Arabs belong to the Semites. They were nomads (at the beginning), spread in the middle East. What defined Arabs was not ethnicity but "class", or social status. The word Arabs was not commonly used for them. They were called Saracens (those who live in tents) or Ishmaelites. And they were christians at the beginning of the 7th cent. Islam changed everything: it needed a new people with a divine election (to replace the Jews), and it created it with islam and the Arabic language, to the point of making every Arabic speaking person an "Arab". But Lebaneses, or Palestinians, or Syrians, or Egyptians were not (and are not) Arabs.
Good to see that you have an interest in the historical context of the faith. As a Christian I had to go through a similar journey with bible and biblical narrative.
@@leedza I have now technically left Islam since large chunks of it seem copied or invented. I still believe in God, I just don't think he has communicated with us.
Hi Jay, thanks for all video that published on your channel. But something to mention please. I see you invite people that has Islamic background and converted to Christianity or ex Muslims that become atheist. But I rarely seeing that you invite an Christian from the Middle East to talk about his experience and may be provide information how Christian community could survive the emergence of Islam from the beginning until now . Because as the New Testament mentioned the Christian called first time in Syria. Let us not forget if we want understand how the Islam spread and formed , the Middle East Christian is the key. I recommend the book of Wilhelm Baum and his book the church of the East and The book of Kenneth Cragg the Arab Christian. Thanks.
Edouard-Marie Gallez studied islam and the quran with Middle East Christian scholars. Not only do some of them have a deep knowledge of islam, but they also have the best understanding of Arabic (especially those who also speak Aramaic). This is because their understanding is not bound by islam, locked up by the islamic concepts, the islamic senses that the ideology forces upon the language. They can have a critical reading of the Quran that is impossible to muslims
I would love to see a conversation between Odon and Joe from Red Judaism. I'm sure they would be able to arrive at a clearer picture of who these "Qur'anic Nazarene" were and how they came to be.
J'espère pouvoir faire suffisamment passer mes idées et découvertes en anglais pour que de vrais anglophones s'en emparent, les diffusent, les travaillent, les introduisent dans l'agora.
@@OdonLafontaine oui, des idées, des théories, des hypothèses. C'est quand même dingue que le Coran avec les dérivés religieux qui en découlent ont eu autant d'impact jusqu'à de nos jours. L' Auteur ou les auteurs devaient être sacrément intelligents pour capturer le cerveau des hommes. Enfin si le Coran a été écrit par plusieurs auteurs, alors pourquoi personne n'arrive à reproduire quelque chose qui ressemble à une sourate du Coran. Car c'est un défi lancé à deux reprises dans le Coran. Si le Coran lance un défi, il faudrait peut-être songer à le relever et à se concentrer sur ce but concret plutôt que des idées. 2:23 Si vous avez un doute sur ce que Nous avons révélé à Notre Serviteur, tâchez donc de produire une sourate semblable et appelez vos témoins, (les idoles) que vous adorez en dehors d'Allah, si vous êtes véridiques. Quant à Jésus ou Jean Baptiste, le problème réside dans le nom arabe Issa et Yahya. Et si le Coran ne parlait pas de ce Jésus crucifié ? Mais d'un autre Messie ?
@@zouzoupaslapouretreconplai780 ce qui a été "envoyé" sur le prédicateur n'est pas le texte coranique, mais une traduction en arabe des textes sacrés (Torah, évangiles). C'est pour cela que l'instructeur explique que c'est inimitable
Does Odon think that the Quranic Nazarenes are some later off-shoot of the earlier Jevvish-Christian sect of Nazarenes? It would make sense as they too held to beliefs such as Jesus being a man and the virgin birth. It would also make sense that as time goes on things change and evolve so differences between this later off-shoot and the earlier sect can be accounted for.
I think Odon is on the right track. I share much of his approach, but I somewhat differ in my interpretation of the facts. Maybe it’s just terminology that we differ on. E.g. I wouldn’t classify the Nazarenes as messianic Jews, but as pre-Nicene Syrian Christians. I‘m not sure whether I would underwrite the idea that the Nazarenes wanted to bring forth the Apocalypse. That’s certainly plausible, but I haven’t seen any evidence for that. They certainly believed that the Apocalypse was near, but that’s something different. But other than that, I’m on board so far.
Pre-Nicene Christians? The Council of Nicene didn't invent doctrine but articulated what was already believed in more precise language. If you mean gnostics, say it, but they are not Christians but heretics.
@@Speakers154 I don’t mean Gnostics. I mean what’s commonly referred to as ”Adoptionists“ or “Dynamic Monarchianists“. They certainly rejected the idea of the trinity. You may call them heretics, but before Nicaea, that belief was relatively common in the church, particularly in Syria. After Nicaea, it had to go a separate way and was cut off from the church. But it survived among the Arabs.
Nazarene is the standard word that observant Jews prefer to use for all followers of Jesus (even today) to avoid implying that we Christians are actually following the Christ (Messiah). It is widely used in modern Israel for example. There is no need to make guesses about this or to invent elaborate distinctions. Early Islam probably took the word over from the Jews without necessarily grasping the theological dispute behind it.
@@thalamay The adoptionist idea recurs from time to time in various persons or groups. Nestorianism has traditionally held a view very close to adoptionism. I think they claimed it was not the same, but many observers did not see any meaningful difference.
In thinking about Christian scripture we often ask the question of "what was Christianity before the scripture?' and come to consider the communal life and early memories and preaching which preceded the writing of the Gospels and the Epistles. I think Lafontaine is proposing the same situation in which there is a long development of community, belief, preaching, and practice which is finally collected and used to develop the Koran. The Koran is not the source of Islam but rather a product of the historical development of Islam.
Jay is there any possibility to put oden and Joe at the same time that might perfectise some of the thoughts between the two on the spot and at the same time because I think jewdism have been again source of islam but the problem there are so many types of jewdiasm and only Joe can dissect them and oden can help in this on the spot
A question I have in regards to the "Muhammed-Myth": How do you account for the Sunni-Shiite-split that is said to have happened right after the death of Mohammed? How can you explain that nowaday two groups exist, that share the same book (relatively), but they are split nearly from the start? How would you describe the historical developements in that regard?
I’m curious if there is any connection between the biography of Muhammad and early stories which became part of the Arabian Nights. If I remember correctly, one of the biographies mentions trees bowing to a young Muhammad and clouds following him to protect him from the sun. This appears like the author(s) we’re trying to make him appear larger than life to support their idea that he was a prophet.
jay at 32:30 , i think what odon, is trying to tell you is that the very very original quran is a collection of notes & teachings, then later someone has taken them as exact words of god, so therefore they just copied it exactly as it was.
Mecca and Medina have the advantage of unifying the SIN. It could be a motivation to create the story of one place for the revelation, where one man got it and wrote one book. That is a way to assert the legitimacy of Islam. The temptation to write a convenient story must have been compelling. They had an empire to run.
One funny thing is the connection between God and Muslims has been broken. It had to be re-established. That is the entire idea of millenarism the way I get it. It is also a way to double down on the idea of rebuilding the Temple to make Jesus come back. Instead of the Temple, the world has to be rebuilt. When Muslims have won, the world will become a paradise. It makes Islam a belief into a new golden age if some conditions are fulfilled.
Exactly. The empire created the religion it needed, and not the other way around. Have you seen Tom Holland's documentary, "Islam, the untold story" ? He has a great way of making us understand this : th-cam.com/video/K2JdTrZO1To/w-d-xo.html
The term Arab originally means a desert dweller, it wasn't an ethnos. Proper Arabic is a Quranic admixture of languages that didn't exist prior to the Quran. You sometimes misuse terms like "Arab" and "Arabic" when it's clearly not properly defined.
Yes, I agree. I use the term "Arab" because it's easier for me, especially since my English is not that good. I sould be using more terms lik "saracens" or "ishmaelites". I fully agree with you : Arab is not an ethnos. The ethnos is the Semites. Arabs were the "desert dweller" among the Semites, who developped their own semitic language
@@OdonLafontaine Semite is not really an ethnos either though, it's a broad term underwhich several ethnicities supposedly fall under. Since Semite and Ishmaelite are terms based on biblical characters rather than proven well known ethnicties I don't think these are valid terms either. The truth is reality is often quite complex and the various groups of arabs (desert dwellers) that were involved belonged to more than one ethnos and various tribes in their respective regions.
I have heard in some podcast that there are parts of the Quran that presuppose the hearers or readers are familiar with certain stories from the Talmud. I suspect the Talmud also influenced Shariah. We should be looking for a city with a substantial Jewish as well as Christian population.
@@michaels4255 ancient jewish tradition influenced both the Quranic Nazarenes and the Talmudic Jews. Mel also found that the "hadith" schools were located in the vicinity of "talmud" schools, during the Abbasid era. He has a video about it on his channel.
The reason why there no later marks in the text might have with respecting the sense of text they had and they didn't wanna change it or alter the ideas. Odon might right the frist were short hand notes but maybe later readers didn't know that or didn't know where to set the dots.
This is pure conjecture on my part, Dr. Smith, but could it be possible that there are variant hadith collections just like there are variant Arabic Qur’ans? I know that Shias and Sunnis use different collections of hadith, but I mean variant copies of something like, say, Sahih al-Bukhari or Muslim. Just wondering. God bless you and your ministry.
@@aaabrams1889 Kinda. I know it's a matter of authetnticating narrative chains, but I'm bought into Dr. Smith's theory that the ninth- and tenth-century traditions don't tell at least all of the true story of Islam's origins. Are you a Muslim?
@@blindvision4703 Jay smith is a compulsive liar and deceiver who practices the C1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 DECEPTION on Muslims and gullible xtians like you...Do you know what the C5 & C6 is...? I guess not - as for the hadiths, Do you know why it was recovered after Mohammad (saw) death and NOT while he was alive? These Evil missionaries knows but fail to tell Non-Muslims because then they can make-up stories you tend to believe.
@@aaabrams1889 OK, tell me why they were recovered over 200 years after he died. But that doesn’t change the fact that, for example, the Caraun says that your profit is only “a plane warner, “and not a miracle worker, whereas he is a miracle worker in the hottest collection. That doesn’t change the fact that 200 years is a long time for Legins to develop. And just the fact that they can show variant carotic texts at speakers corner makes it seem perfectly reasonable for me to wonder whether or not the hadith collections may not have similar Arabic variations, especially if they are supposedly oral traditions passed on over the centuries, and if the Quran is so often copied (at least 37 different ways). Also, don’t say Xtians. I know what kind of -ian I am: a Christian. You don’t need to blow it out with an ex. I honestly don’t know why people do that.
It very logical that the Quran was very similiar a process like the bible - esspecially the old testament. A collection of different summons, pre-islamic stories and parallel stories and on a later date it formed into one book.
Wow, what a fresh trove of new information about the use of uncommented quran. Odon seems to confirm Dan Gibson’s solid theses. Jay ought to exchange data with Israeli and German researchers.
Odon are you saying there are know dye critical marks on the early manuscripts or there were and later were not included by the transcribers because they did not know the language?
He said it very clearly: these were draft notes, without DC marks. He also said that it wasn't lack of language ability that prevented later scribes from knowing where the DC marks ought to be put but distance in time from the original authors and their intentions. It was like doing a diacritical marks crossword but without any clues as to the intended meaning.
I think he meant by the quraanic Nazarins the Nasara that the quraan constantly refer to. The traditional narrative (and even now) the Islamic understanding is that Nasara are the Christians (the quraan always says "the Jews and Nasara"). However, our eastern church history has very little reference to Christians anywhere in pre 7th c. Arabia outside of several sects that were preaching heresies contrary to the orthodox apostolic faith, and Jews that fled Judea and Syria after imperial crackdown first in the 1st and then the 6th centuries. Ironically the "arabs" who were actually Christian were the tribes around syria who were allied to the Romans and were actually doing the trade between the Persian east and Roman west. So regardless of how you think of it, the only area where you have this fusion of trade + heretical Christianity + jewish sects and interesting geopolitics has to be around Syria and Jordan. south in arabia would be way too far for anything in the Quraan to make any sense.
I will comment on some of your points in a sequence different from the one in your comment: First, non-Christians did not distinguish between heretical vs. orthodox Christians. That is an distinction that is internal to Christians themselves, not generally to outsiders. Just like most Christians do not view any particular sect of Islam or Buddhism as more "orthodox" or "true" than another. Second, trade+heretical Christianities+Jewish sects were also present in Iraq, as were Arabs. Third, "Arabia" has for a very long time included not just the big peninsula, but the fertile crescent to its north. Indeed, today's "standard" Arabic appears to have evolved, according to linguists, among immigrants in Nabatea, which is approximately ancient Edom. (It is unclear what happened to the original Edomites/Idumeans, but I suspect many of them intermarried with the Arabs/Nabateans.) The Arabic language migrated south from Nabatea into the Hijaz and nearby areas according to linguists. Dialects of Arabic were also spoken in Tachkastan which includes a large swathe of Mesopotamia. So Roman Orthodox, Nestorian, Monophysite, and even Gnostic Christians were all present in "Arabia." Fourth, yes, Nazarenes by whatever spelling are Christians. This usage is clearly borrowed from the Jews who still, if they are observant, prefer to describe "Christians" (literally, followers "of the Messiah") as Nazarenes since they do not wish to sound as if they are acknowledging that Jesus is the Messiah.
@@michaels4255 @michael s ok not quite sure if you understood my point on the location, but you literally just repeated what I said. The whole crescent area between the Euphrates in Iraq and Syria and Petra in Jordan is indeed the homeland of the most notable Arab tribes and kingdoms. Indeed "Arabia" as a name was first mentioned to describe the region around Petra. Me saying "around Syria" is to emphasise the point that the Arabs, who went on to conquer an empire, couldn't possibly have originated from as south as Mekka, especially considering the Quraan itself which describes areas closer to the roman provinces in Syria (and let's be real, Iraq is literally next to Syria XD). The interesting thing about the name "Nazarenes" was that, as you've mentioned, it emphasises a greater link between Islam and some form of Judaism. Because the word "Christian" was being used even by non-Christians ever since the 1st century. Moreover, it did exist in Aramaic and Arabic too. So the only reason why it's not used in Islam is that they specifically chose not to. A point about whether non-Christians understood the different sects of Christianity or not; the Persians and many Germanic and Stepp tribes at least had an understanding that refugees and missionaries fleeing from the empire during crackdowns were practising a form of Christianity that the church disapproved of. The Persians even sometimes tried to use that as political pressure. Considering the amount of theological confrontations that the Quraan eludes to, it stands to reason that the people who wrote the Quraan were at least aware of the differences. For example, many passages in the Quraan speak of Jesus doing things and being called names that are only reserved for God, while also insisting that he was never killed nor was God. It definitely reads like certain heretical judao-christian sects were preaching, and far from Orthodox Judaism. I'm not saying the writers of the Quraan were aware of all the details (they clearly weren't), but they surely understood that there were differences.
_our eastern church history has very little reference to Christians anywhere in pre 7th c. Arabia_ There are many references on the contrary. The Christianisation of the Arabs of the Middle East began at Pentecost (Acts 2:11), continued and renewed from century to century, marked by figures such as Saint Euthyme (5th century) or Peter Aspebetos, an Arab himself, chief of the tribe he baptised and who became "the bishop of the Arabs" (he was at the Council of Ephesus in 431). It was the work of Aramaic-speaking Christians, particularly from the Assyrian-Chaldean Church (known as "Nestorian") and even more so from the Jacobites (Syriacs) who had systematically set up nomadic parishes (the Church of the Parabolas). Ancient Christian traditions even indicate that the apostles Matthias and Simon were respectively evangelising Jordan and Arabia (cf. Pierre Perrier, Évangiles de l'Oral à l'Ecrit, Fayard - Le Sarment, Paris, 2000). This Christianisation was completed at the end of the 6th century: Al-Nu'man III ibn al-Mundhir, the "king of all the Arabs of the empires of Persia and Byzantium", was baptised in 594. He was the leader of the Lakhmids, who had extended his authority to "all Arabs" (including Ghassanides) before being assassinated shortly after his baptism by the Persians, thus provoking the "revolt and dispersion of all Arabs" (according to the Chronicle of Serts, also known as Nestorian History - cf. Robert Hoyland, In God's Path: The Arab Conquests and the Creation of an Islamic Empire, Oxford University Press, 2015). Many archaeological traces of this ancient Christianisation can be found throughout the Arabian Peninsula. For example, see the work of Christian Robin: the polytheism described by Muslim traditions is, according to him, "totally contradictory to what can be observed from archaeological sources", as he states in this interview; he does not, however, comment on Mecca, sticking to the accounts of tradition (see also his study "L'Arabie préislamique" in Le Coran des Historiens, Le Cerf, Paris, 2019).
@@darthcalanil5333 Okay, I thought you were understanding Arabia as modern peninsular Arabia when you wrote: "our eastern church history has very little reference to Christians anywhere in pre 7th c. Arabia outside of several sects that were preaching heresies contrary to the orthodox apostolic faith," But since you understand Arabia to include the fertile crescent, they then your other point is wrong. Even after the rise of Netorianism and Monophysitism, there were still thriving and perfectly Orthodox communities along the coastal areas of Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Egypt. "understood the different sects of Christianity or not" -- Some did and some did not. The point I intended here was that it was just not salient to them. In the same way, I somewhat understand the differences between the Sunnis and the Shiites, or the Mahayana vs. Theravada Buddhists or SLC versus fundamentalist Mormons, but these differences have no significance for me. I don't have a dog in their fights.
@@OdonLafontaine Well, when Darth wrote "outside of several sects that were preaching heresies," I thought he was excluding Nestorian and Monophysite Christians by that clause (although he may have been referring only to extremely marginal sects), but even by that narrower definition of Orthodoxy which I was assuming, he is still not correct, unless by "Arabia" he meant the peninsula only, so that is what I assumed he meant in an effort to make as much sense as possible out of the comment. People today often don't realize the large Christian presence that existed in the ME and NA before the rise of Islam.
Even now, signs in four languages warn visitors that there is no proof that the Prophet Muhammad was born there, “so it is forbidden to make this place specific for praying, supplicating or get [sic] blessing.”
Odon makes a lot of sense, I also believe the Arabs got disillusioned with Jesus as after they built a new temple and the apocalypse still didn’t happen so they had to go in a different direction (hence Jesus not the son of god motif)
PFANDER it's obvious now that Muhammd was a just a latter creation but why do you think that he in particular was choosen to be the prophet of this new religion...why not choose someone who was not a war lord?
They did not "chose someone to be their prophet". They created their prophet out of the blue, like a fiction character, and linked him to the vague memory of one or several Muhammads from the 7th cent. But most of the "prophet character" is a creation based on : - the need to give an "islamic" explanation to the many obscurities and odnesses of the Quran (hence the invention of the Sira) - the need to justify the behavior, the demeanors and misdemeanors of the caliphs by creating a prophetic role model
@@OdonLafontaine I see...so basically all the Hadiths are made up? Its strange when you make something up, just for your creation to seen as a muderer, rapist and even liar to people around him. It would have been better to make him ore like a Jesus for example...this was an error
@@pentz1 for 1400 year's satan has had his footprint in these books and human's after self gain,only now with the internet that the truth of izram would be known to all around the world by these scholars,thank you Odon and Jay and Murad and Sneakers corner and many others, be prepared for Jesus Christ is on his return flight!
All Western scholars confirm that the first written text of Alexander the Great was composed between 629 and 630 in Syria. The legend of Dhul Qarnayn the bi-horned (Alexander the Great) is found in the Kuran at the end of surah 18. The similarities between the two texts are very disturbing. It’s like the original text has been copied in the Kuran. But the sura 18 was revealed at the end of the second Meccan period according to the standard islamic narrative. How is this possible if the original text was composed between 629 and 630 and Muhammad left Mecca in 622? Should we reject the chronology of the Meccan and Medinan surahs? Is it possible that the Kuran continued to be composed after the supposed death of Mahomet in 632?
Many others have done this already for the last 100+ years, and often far more speculatively and aggressively. We are just applying the same techniques to the Quran.
@mysotiras16 sp no, it hasn't. Without mentioning the contradictions, texts like the apocryphs were not incorporated. And anything in the Bible is not of that quality that humans couldn't have thought it up.
The thing with the French is that these guys know the middle est region well. The know the Muslims because they colonized North Africa and were there for centuries. "Levant" is a french word by the way! :-) Also most North Africa French speak Arabic.
I think it is make sense that the scribes copied the manuscript without knowing the meaning of what they wrote, many people today claim to be able to memorize and recite the whole quran (even kids & toddlers) without knowing the meaning of the words ! They just acted/acting as machines, as printers & recorders
I am not sure that the audience fully understood why the drafts of the proto Quran were written without the diacritics marks. If those who wrote these drafts knew the diacritics marks then they would have written these drafts with the diacritics marks. I thought that these drafts were written in Syro Aramaic or by Arabs with the Syro Aramaic language in mind but directly written in Arabic. Could you enlighten us because I believe this is an essential point?
The diacritics marks (vowels) came because Islam expanded to Arabic nations with a different dialect and further expanded to Non-Arabic nations. Those people could not read the Arabic with its proper pronunciation, so diacritics marks were added, so you could spell the word instead of just knowing what is says.
It is because those drafts and notes were not be published. They were for the personnal use of the preachers. Their personnal notes. Hence the absence of diacriticism. Every student does the same
So....the Jewish/Christian Messianic movement expectation/ who hoped for then Nazarene Arabic that made it.....an interesting creation for a new religion.
What happened to those texts which were later on inducted in a book called Quran? Those texts should have existed in their original form, because these texts were holy too.
Thanks a lot for having me Jay.
Thank you for your dedicated scholarship and sharing it, Odon.
Merci!
"There Is something wrong with this narrative"lol,yes so much hole's!
Great session Odon and Jay,👏🙏✝️🕊
Très bon anglais Olaf! Bravo pour tes recherches. Merci.
Very educational presentation .
Make sure you get a pdf of his book, the great secret of Islam, it is brilliant. It is only about 130 pages long but there is more in it than most books you'll ever read on the subject. It is free to download from his website.
No English copy yet. I read the Arabic version and understood about 80% only …😢
@@anoushnewman1247 Maybe he should release his draft translation, which is perfectly good in my opinion.
@@anoushnewman1247 What language was the other 20% in?
@@mhorram hi …. I didn’t understand some of the terms because my Arabic is not that great. Wish there is a dictionary so I can understand some of academic terms or the Big words . A well such is life 😁
@@anoushnewman1247 Actually, that is an interesting observation. Why isn't there a dictionary along these lines? A Canadian academic (John Ralston Saul) once pointed out that specialty fields tend to use a vocabulary that intentionally leaves out the ordinary person. In fact, they have a tendency of creating an all new vocabulary that only applies to their particular field of interest. He thought it was to keep bozos like you and me from learning the 'secrets' of their field.
Out of curiosity, did you try entering the phrases that stumped you into Google translate to see if it could come up with an English translation that might be useful?
Laborious, I'm sure, but sometimes such things do turn out to be useful for what you learn. Actually, Google Translate is a good example of why it might be useful to get digital version (e.g. PDF) of the book. When you read the book, in Arabic, in your case, and hit upon something obscure you can copy the obscure passage to the clipboard and paste the clipboard contents to Google Translate and a translation pops out in whatever language you have chosen for the translation. Google does some cool stuff.
I'm learning so much from this video. Odon thank you so much for sharing your knowledge!
Odon has very academic approach not saying or denying but pointing on facts. Origin of Islam are many and Nazarins, who were Jews but like Adrian didn't believe in Jesus as a God. But there are also Manichism and Zaradostrian ideas in Islam.
@@maxschon7709 he did say there were many layers, and certainly this is part of that development.
@@Speakers154 And that proofs it was not a divine text given by a angel at all !
@@maxschon7709 Manicheism invented the idea that the "Paraclet" announced by Jesus would be a prophet to come (namely Mani). Hence, when we find the very same idea in the islamic tradition and in the Quran, one is compelled to deduct another late islamic manipulation... And even more, another quranic tampering.
Hallelujah!!!! Odon is on!!! This is so good. At last, at long last. Odon might not be as centered on Abd Malik and his career (in relation to the content of the Quran) as I would like, but he hits the nail on the head with his "failed apocalypse/rebuilding of the Temple"-thesis as to the historical core of proto-Islam. Thanks Jay, so fantastic of you to bring him on to your channel!
The earlier Jay videos have shown what historic Islam isn't...
Now, theories of what it is (or might have been) and especially, its emergence.
Fascinating!
I love it how Odon casually says that the existence of Muhammad is irrelevant… because the “non-existence” of Med is such a touchy and irritating subject to the Muslim audience, it is such an unthinkable idea - and there you are … Odon …. “Muhammad or any prophets not important to the Quran…..” hhhhh … refreshing… refreshing that there can be people so causal to the subject
Yes, I loved that. I enjoyed Odon's sense of humour throughout the presentation.
It’s a bit like saying “why argue about Jesus if Jerusalem didn’t exist”... It’s easier to uncover the origins of writings, cities, history etc than prove or disprove the existence of a person to whom those writings, cities and history supposedly comes from.
Thank you Jay for puting the light on the outstanding work of Odon
@odon So glad to have heard you talking with Jay.
Le grand secret de l’Islam deserves the english speaking audience !
Un grand bravo pour votre prestation.
Dr. Jay Smith, I am just wondering when will all these research findings make it up to the mainstream media and education.
Was just praying for that to happen earlier today
@@ProfYaffle it has to happen asap.
It should do!.. but can't see it happening, there would be a big up roar by the Muslims.
This is really exciting.
Can't wait for more of it, Odon.
Thankyou Jay and Ordon
GREAT work
GOD bless you
This was a really interesting episode, M.Odon is really interesting and must have on again to be part of the Team.
Great introduction. We really need to hear more from Odon. 🙏
First time I came upon this thesis I was awestruck! I read the French version back then and more recently the revised and enriched version (see coin history...).
The Arab and Farsi (?) versions are online. The 🏴 version is soon to be released! Do not miss it!
What version? Is that a black flag?
@@michaels4255 English flag
Thank you Jay, great job!
Epic talk! Can't wait for the next one.
> This is the most excellent in Dr. Jay's guest series as of September 4, 2021.
Odon Lafontaine comes from a humble standing, and has poured a great part of his life to this research. This is at par with the immense efforts of Dan Gibson and Patricia Crone.
> For hopefully of English translation availability.
1. The Great Secret of Islam by Odon Lafontaine
2. The Messiah and His Prophet by Fr. Edouard-Marie Gallez (Inspiration)
> Significant Takeaways: (paraphrased)
- Starting at 34:27.
1. "The thing is to have a global view. A sort of grand scheme of what has happened, and not get lost to details. Details such as who is the real Muhammad. What did exactly did he do? Because this is not... We are not learning about Islam origins this way."
2. "To look at the bigger picture, what happened in the 7th century. There are several Muhammads. (Abd al-Malik emphasized) Islam comes from a long process. It comes from religious context. Historical context. Geopolitical context."
3. "Quran was "compiled" by the Arab leaders."
- Starting at 47:47
4. Significant date, 630 A.D./C.E.
- Starting at 48:00
5. "Arab leaders led to assume "Jesus power" instead of Jesus... Arab leaders became the caliphs... God('s)-kings"
Edit:
- Corrected the spelling of Patricia's name.
Yes, compiled! I have suspected this ever since I read the first edition of Robert Spencer's book.
@@michaels4255 Indeed it is more logical to have it compiled, as even to a 1st time reader the Quran really looks a bit disorganized. And the character would change in mood drastically at times.
@IIOO We agree! A scientifically sound historical theory can be brought up by the dedicated historians such as Odon and Dan.
The narrative Odon could certaintly help, while the geo-spatial-structural part Dan could contribute. Notice that they have different interpretations but a consolidation of intertwining data can be fused to form a certain theory.
We pray for God to grant Odon and Dan enough time for this.
Odon's theses is very logical! The Quran often says "say..." or "say not...." and then follows what to say. It is like teaching apologetics. :-)
Yeah. God told muslims to "say" that worshipping man-god is a dumb idea.
@@nazeemsultan123 Quran also teaches that Mary(mother of Jesus) is the sister of Aaron/Moses.
Talking about dumb
@@nazeemsultan123 Jewish preachers told this. Not God. Read the Quran, and try to understand what you read.
@@MU-we8hz bible also said david son of god..
@@OdonLafontaine quran is againts judaism too. Did those Jewish preachers tell this too?
Great to see you here Odon!
Thanks a lot to Jay !
@@OdonLafontaine What would be another hypothesis for the lack of diacritical marks in early fragments? Could it be that diacritical marks were not introduced in the region where the Quran was put together? Or the scribe that compiled the original was not familiar with them? Or the fragments that were used for the Quran (already translated into Arabic script from Garshuni) were from before 640?
Jit.
Dr Jay Smith.Long life man of God.
Amazing, the most interesting video Pfander has done since I've started watching. Too bad Luxenberg is so old, he'd be a perfect next guest.
I wish someone provide it with English subtitle.
th-cam.com/video/lo_MRiO5pg8/w-d-xo.html
*kazi nzuri 👍 ubarikiwe sana 🙏, here from EAST AFRICA TANZANIA*
Kazi gani nzuri hapa ndugu
Very enlightening I loved every minute of it and I also love your French accent.
This is a pretty cool idea! I would be great to see a roundtable of all the theorist with Al Fadi and sister Hatun discussing this lead by Jay. This stuff is going to change the face of Islamic studies.
Fascinating, just awesome
Merveilleuse nouvelle connaisance :Odon Lafontaine Bienvenue.
Fascinating! I read French and will try to track Odon’s writings.
C'est facile is a un site Web :-)
This was great and good that Dr J asked rather challenging questions. I encourage Dr J to challenge the guests more by bringing up opposing theories and evidence. Indeed it is good to have a debate be Joe and Odon.
I like this new music you're using on your video.
This is very interesting. I hope you can eventually prove your point. We all need the truth about Islam. People’s lives are in the balance.
It makes a lot of sense what Odon explained
Great program! Very information.
Fantastic. I request you to kindly link the books referred.
I did notice that diacritical marks existed as far back as the 7th century and much earlier for Hebrew, and was puzzled by their choice of not using them, but I believe it was either due to lack of popularity in their use, or perhaps the region where the Quran was put together did not adopt diacriticals yet (there are plenty of rock inscriptions that lack them). Stating that it was on purpose was something I dismissed due to the unnecessary complication they cause, but thinking of it as someone copying in a hurry was something that didn't cross my mind. The Quran does seem hurried, but why? It's also clear from the Quran in Arabic that whoever put it together didn't understand what was written.
Great stuff, Odon sounds like a French Christian Prince!
Wow, I'm certainly looking forward to the next episodes
@Forgiving Fragrance What questions have you asked?
@@simonhengle8316 Those are just the same stale copy-paste questions from the standard daawah-script narrative. They have been debunked so many hundreds of times and it is not even funny anymore to see these keyboard warriors keep asking the same thing while having no interest in the answers given. I've seen this @Forgiving Fragrance around being a waste of time & energy, copy-pasting away on many channels.
Thank you, Odon...Merci pour votre sagesse!.
He's saying at 32:00 that the scribes were copying from shorthand that did not have dots, therefore they did not put diacritical marks in their manuscripts. He said in Egypt diacritical marks were already in use by 640 so there is no other strong reasons why they wouldn't have used diacritical marks. I felt that Jay was misunderstanding him.
Yes, there was a slight misunderstanding. But Jay got it nonetheless.
Hebrew has diacritics since the 5th century, it's odd Arabic didn't have them when they developed their script. It's also odd that they would not use them when they were available.
@@_John_P Yes, that's interesting.
@@_John_P
The diacritical marks in the Tanakh were more than 200 years after the quran. Do your homework.
They were copied from the Arabic script.
@@paultarsus5844 The Masoretes of Tiberias introduced diacritics in the 5th century, the first canonical Quran only came to be between the end of the 7th century and the middle of the 8th century. Arabs copied diacritics from the Jewish (and everything else).
Odon and jay great guys
Great job!
Islam is built on sinking sand and wouldn't stand heavy rain and storm.
Merci odon.!!
C'est géniale et hyper intéressant.!
Islam est très mal barré !!!
All you idiots will say 'GREAT JOB'...HA HA HA...anything that is against Islam.
Islam stood the test of time and is the fastest growing and breeding religion - DEAL WITH IT!!!
@@aaabrams1889
BABY MACHINE.
WOMAN IS ONLY AN OBJECT FOR YOU!!!
ISLAM IS FALSE FROM A TO Z.
YOUR ARE SHAMELESS!!?
Hinduism stood the time as well!!!!
@@satmat6566
What kind of Hindu are you - a Untouchable?
I'm pretty confident that Odon knows what he's talking about (so is Odon and that helps a lot in making me confident in almost everything he discussed); but I'm not so sure he's right in his assertions about the diacritical marks existing early on. That, to my way of thinking, requires far more evidence than was provided here. Perhaps, Jay, in a future episode you could have Odon provide his proof of this because it definitely goes against everything I've read about the development of Arabic writing. It would be important to show that those diacritical marks were used exactly as they were in later Arabic writings. If they weren't that would suggest (but wouldn't prove) that the early diacritical marks only have an apparent relationship with the later usage of diacritical marks. In fact, if they aren't identical in usage it might mean that the early marks are not diacritical marks at all but serve another purpose. A truly great episode would be one in which you have Dan Brubaker and Odon discuss this diacritical mark issue.
Anyway, this was a great episode; but that is no surprise. Pfander Films has been blowing my mind for over a year now. I finally feel confident that real scholarship in this area is alive and well. Perhaps, over time, this episode will be considered a classic. You are the best Jay and so is Odon and Mel and Murad and . . .
Amazing research! I bet Tom Holland would be fascinated to hear this
Dr. Smith could you do a review of Stephen Shoemaker's new book, "A Prophet Has Appeared"? Thank you.
Jay this is the best.few can challenge billion people going great
Love you Jay.
Thank you so much Jay
What does Odin think about the 4 groups of varying qibla directions? They must have some place in his thesis as these are archeological realities, and so must be explicated in one way or other. The Kaaba/pilgramage is also an important fact of Islam and so must also be explained in any competent Islamic history thesis. I think Gibson has contributed the most to the search for the 'real' Islam as he has discovered archeological proofs, as compared to mere literary and cultural theories.
Several of these 4 are heavily dependent on unproven conjecture. The parallel and in between qiblas are very doubtful. There is not a shred of evidence for the interpretation. (What I thought about it, sorry I just realised it was directed to Odon.)
What I think about it, I have already explained in a video with Mel. See here around 35:11 : th-cam.com/video/qFWhgBoBPr4/w-d-xo.html
@@Speakers154 Gibson visited all those early mosques and measured their qiblas. Rather than dismiss his evidence that does not match theory, better that another researcher measure those qiblas again.
@@fantasia55 A bunch of professional architects did so at Ayla and came up with a completely different qibla, so I won't hold my breath.
Just to clarify I dismissed his Ayla measurement because of that, not because it didn't match a theory.
From Odon’s historical view everything he has said about Islam’s origin makes a lot of sense.
@Pfander Films Are you aware Dr. Smith that the Ibadi muslims of Oman have a somewhat different Hadith? These variants should contain many more clues as to early islamic history.
The house of the Prophet’s first wife, Khadijah has made way for public toilets. A Hilton hotel stands on the site of the house of Islam’s first caliph, Abu Bakr. Famously, the Kaaba now stands in the shade of one of the world’s tallest buildings, the Mecca Royal Clock Tower, part of a complex built by the Bin Laden Group, boasting a 5-story shopping mall, luxury hotels and a parking garage.
The conclusion is my current thinking, the legend of Mohammad was necessary to give Islam and Qur'an similar standing to the Old and New Testaments for purposes of kingdom building. The Byzantines had the bible and Jesus, The Persians had the Avesta and Zoroastra makes sense that Caliphate needed its equivalent.
Odon's website contains this much more detailed interview with Mel of sneakers corner:
th-cam.com/video/rSdclBdfUxwt/w-d-xo.html
Good video, greetings to both of you
I personally think that Islam and its true history is closely related to the history of the Arabic language and the Arab identity, which now defines itself as an ethnicity (of course this is not true, for example, countries such as Sudan, Mauritania and Somalia cannot have the same ethnicity as the Moroccan, Egyptian, Syrian or Iraqi...etc. Therefore, the issue is primarily political)
According to well-known accounts, the Arabic writing “the letters of the alphabet” was invented in Anbar and Kufa “in Iraq”, while historical sources tell us that the rules of the Arabic language were formulated in Kufa and Basra “also in Iraq as we know it today.” It is interesting to note here that these The regions, even after the advent of Islam, were culturally and socially subject to the Persians.
A quick note: the absolute majority of linguists who formulated the grammar of the Arabic language are Persians (I don't think it is at all a matter of course).
Unfortunately, until now, I have not found any real research or studies on this topic
There ara two Arab identities : the historical one, and the ideological one that Islam shaped
@@OdonLafontaine
I agree with you, but the question is is there a human race called the Arab race?? This is important because this whole religion is based on this idea.Because the confusion between the Saracens and the Arabs is so simple, I cannot accept it.
And then (2) comes the importance of the Arabic language that we know and how it began.. Then we will know if any Quranic manuscript has any importance and when it was written in an appreciative manner.. etc.´
let me share with you a simple example.. The word below has the same form in Arabic and Sabean, but it is pronounced in two different ways and has two different meanings.
سد "sad" = in Arabic = dam
سد "ho" = Mandaean = who , he
This is one of the most important problems of the early "Arab" coins
@@ASHORSHEMAYA No, i don't think there was an "Arab race". Arabs belong to the Semites. They were nomads (at the beginning), spread in the middle East. What defined Arabs was not ethnicity but "class", or social status. The word Arabs was not commonly used for them. They were called Saracens (those who live in tents) or Ishmaelites. And they were christians at the beginning of the 7th cent.
Islam changed everything: it needed a new people with a divine election (to replace the Jews), and it created it with islam and the Arabic language, to the point of making every Arabic speaking person an "Arab". But Lebaneses, or Palestinians, or Syrians, or Egyptians were not (and are not) Arabs.
@@OdonLafontaine great 👍
As a Muslim, my mind is blown. I really have to thank Jay and Odon for being great scholars and investigators.
Good to see that you have an interest in the historical context of the faith. As a Christian I had to go through a similar journey with bible and biblical narrative.
@@leedza I have now technically left Islam since large chunks of it seem copied or invented. I still believe in God, I just don't think he has communicated with us.
Thank you for all your excellent job Odon and Jay, all your work will help bring world peace in the future
Hi Jay, thanks for all video that published on your channel. But something to mention please. I see you invite people that has Islamic background and converted to Christianity or ex Muslims that become atheist. But I rarely seeing that you invite an Christian from the Middle East to talk about his experience and may be provide information how Christian community could survive the emergence of Islam from the beginning until now . Because as the New Testament mentioned the Christian called first time in Syria. Let us not forget if we want understand how the Islam spread and formed , the Middle East Christian is the key. I recommend the book of Wilhelm Baum and his book the church of the East and The book of Kenneth Cragg the Arab Christian. Thanks.
I think that would be very interesting!
Edouard-Marie Gallez studied islam and the quran with Middle East Christian scholars. Not only do some of them have a deep knowledge of islam, but they also have the best understanding of Arabic (especially those who also speak Aramaic). This is because their understanding is not bound by islam, locked up by the islamic concepts, the islamic senses that the ideology forces upon the language. They can have a critical reading of the Quran that is impossible to muslims
wow, nice intellectual discussion.👍
I would love to see a conversation between Odon and Joe from Red Judaism. I'm sure they would be able to arrive at a clearer picture of who these "Qur'anic Nazarene" were and how they came to be.
Fantastic
J'apprécie énormément le travail d'Odon. Son anglais est un peu plus difficile à suivre.
J'espère pouvoir faire suffisamment passer mes idées et découvertes en anglais pour que de vrais anglophones s'en emparent, les diffusent, les travaillent, les introduisent dans l'agora.
Is this french my friend?
@@OdonLafontaine oui, des idées, des théories, des hypothèses. C'est quand même dingue que le Coran avec les dérivés religieux qui en découlent ont eu autant d'impact jusqu'à de nos jours. L' Auteur ou les auteurs devaient être sacrément intelligents pour capturer le cerveau des hommes.
Enfin si le Coran a été écrit par plusieurs auteurs, alors pourquoi personne n'arrive à reproduire quelque chose qui ressemble à une sourate du Coran. Car c'est un défi lancé à deux reprises dans le Coran.
Si le Coran lance un défi, il faudrait peut-être songer à le relever et à se concentrer sur ce but concret plutôt que des idées.
2:23 Si vous avez un doute sur ce que Nous avons révélé à Notre Serviteur, tâchez donc de produire une sourate semblable et appelez vos témoins, (les idoles) que vous adorez en dehors d'Allah, si vous êtes véridiques.
Quant à Jésus ou Jean Baptiste, le problème réside dans le nom arabe Issa et Yahya. Et si le Coran ne parlait pas de ce Jésus crucifié ? Mais d'un autre Messie ?
@@zouzoupaslapouretreconplai780 ce qui a été "envoyé" sur le prédicateur n'est pas le texte coranique, mais une traduction en arabe des textes sacrés (Torah, évangiles). C'est pour cela que l'instructeur explique que c'est inimitable
Oui, c'est un domage mais ce n'est pas trop mal. :)
Does Odon think that the Quranic Nazarenes are some later off-shoot of the earlier Jevvish-Christian sect of Nazarenes? It would make sense as they too held to beliefs such as Jesus being a man and the virgin birth. It would also make sense that as time goes on things change and evolve so differences between this later off-shoot and the earlier sect can be accounted for.
Islamic history is probably the most interesting puzzle I've encountered. So many layers to consider. Its biggest whodunit mystery out there.
These Nazarenes vaguely remind me of Bala talking about the people looking up to the sky expecting Jesus to come down, but He never did. 🤔
I think Odon is on the right track. I share much of his approach, but I somewhat differ in my interpretation of the facts.
Maybe it’s just terminology that we differ on. E.g. I wouldn’t classify the Nazarenes as messianic Jews, but as pre-Nicene Syrian Christians.
I‘m not sure whether I would underwrite the idea that the Nazarenes wanted to bring forth the Apocalypse. That’s certainly plausible, but I haven’t seen any evidence for that. They certainly believed that the Apocalypse was near, but that’s something different.
But other than that, I’m on board so far.
Pre-Nicene Christians? The Council of Nicene didn't invent doctrine but articulated what was already believed in more precise language. If you mean gnostics, say it, but they are not Christians but heretics.
@@Speakers154 I don’t mean Gnostics. I mean what’s commonly referred to as ”Adoptionists“ or “Dynamic Monarchianists“. They certainly rejected the idea of the trinity.
You may call them heretics, but before Nicaea, that belief was relatively common in the church, particularly in Syria. After Nicaea, it had to go a separate way and was cut off from the church. But it survived among the Arabs.
@@thalamay thanks for clarifying that.
Nazarene is the standard word that observant Jews prefer to use for all followers of Jesus (even today) to avoid implying that we Christians are actually following the Christ (Messiah). It is widely used in modern Israel for example. There is no need to make guesses about this or to invent elaborate distinctions. Early Islam probably took the word over from the Jews without necessarily grasping the theological dispute behind it.
@@thalamay The adoptionist idea recurs from time to time in various persons or groups. Nestorianism has traditionally held a view very close to adoptionism. I think they claimed it was not the same, but many observers did not see any meaningful difference.
In thinking about Christian scripture we often ask the question of "what was Christianity before the scripture?' and come to consider the communal life and early memories and preaching which preceded the writing of the Gospels and the Epistles. I think Lafontaine is proposing the same situation in which there is a long development of community, belief, preaching, and practice which is finally collected and used to develop the Koran. The Koran is not the source of Islam but rather a product of the historical development of Islam.
Has Odon & Jay read or are familiar with "Islam: In Light of History" by Dr. Rafat Amari? It also has extensive study on the origins of Islam.
really interested in his view. it makes sense. whats his website?
English website : thegreatsecretofislam.com/
French website : legrandsecretdelislam.com/
@@OdonLafontaine Thank you Odon for your work.
Jay is there any possibility to put oden and Joe at the same time that might perfectise some of the thoughts between the two on the spot and at the same time because I think jewdism have been again source of islam but the problem there are so many types of jewdiasm and only Joe can dissect them and oden can help in this on the spot
A question I have in regards to the "Muhammed-Myth": How do you account for the Sunni-Shiite-split that is said to have happened right after the death of Mohammed?
How can you explain that nowaday two groups exist, that share the same book (relatively), but they are split nearly from the start?
How would you describe the historical developements in that regard?
My mind is blown
I’m curious if there is any connection between the biography of Muhammad and early stories which became part of the Arabian Nights. If I remember correctly, one of the biographies mentions trees bowing to a young Muhammad and clouds following him to protect him from the sun. This appears like the author(s) we’re trying to make him appear larger than life to support their idea that he was a prophet.
jay at 32:30 , i think what odon, is trying to tell you is that the very very original quran is a collection of notes & teachings, then later someone has taken them as exact words of god, so therefore they just copied it exactly as it was.
This is a mammoth influence of Ebionites/Nazarene/Essenes eclectic idea through all this ....
The mammoth in the room...
@@OdonLafontaine Haha! Then islam is not even a living elephant. It's already extinct.
Mecca and Medina have the advantage of unifying the SIN. It could be a motivation to create the story of one place for the revelation, where one man got it and wrote one book. That is a way to assert the legitimacy of Islam. The temptation to write a convenient story must have been compelling. They had an empire to run.
One funny thing is the connection between God and Muslims has been broken. It had to be re-established. That is the entire idea of millenarism the way I get it. It is also a way to double down on the idea of rebuilding the Temple to make Jesus come back. Instead of the Temple, the world has to be rebuilt. When Muslims have won, the world will become a paradise. It makes Islam a belief into a new golden age if some conditions are fulfilled.
Putting our hands onto proto-qur’ans becomes a dream. They could teach us a lot about the origin of Islam.
Exactly. The empire created the religion it needed, and not the other way around.
Have you seen Tom Holland's documentary, "Islam, the untold story" ? He has a great way of making us understand this : th-cam.com/video/K2JdTrZO1To/w-d-xo.html
The term Arab originally means a desert dweller, it wasn't an ethnos. Proper Arabic is a Quranic admixture of languages that didn't exist prior to the Quran.
You sometimes misuse terms like "Arab" and "Arabic" when it's clearly not properly defined.
Yes, I agree.
I use the term "Arab" because it's easier for me, especially since my English is not that good. I sould be using more terms lik "saracens" or "ishmaelites".
I fully agree with you : Arab is not an ethnos. The ethnos is the Semites. Arabs were the "desert dweller" among the Semites, who developped their own semitic language
@@OdonLafontaine Semite is not really an ethnos either though, it's a broad term underwhich several ethnicities supposedly fall under. Since Semite and Ishmaelite are terms based on biblical characters rather than proven well known ethnicties I don't think these are valid terms either.
The truth is reality is often quite complex and the various groups of arabs (desert dwellers) that were involved belonged to more than one ethnos and various tribes in their respective regions.
Any connection between the Talmud and the Qur'an?
The main connection is the ancient jewish tradition
I have heard in some podcast that there are parts of the Quran that presuppose the hearers or readers are familiar with certain stories from the Talmud. I suspect the Talmud also influenced Shariah. We should be looking for a city with a substantial Jewish as well as Christian population.
@@michaels4255 ancient jewish tradition influenced both the Quranic Nazarenes and the Talmudic Jews.
Mel also found that the "hadith" schools were located in the vicinity of "talmud" schools, during the Abbasid era. He has a video about it on his channel.
The reason why there no later marks in the text might have with respecting the sense of text they had and they didn't wanna change it or alter the ideas. Odon might right the frist were short hand notes but maybe later readers didn't know that or didn't know where to set the dots.
This is pure conjecture on my part, Dr. Smith, but could it be possible that there are variant hadith collections just like there are variant Arabic Qur’ans? I know that Shias and Sunnis use different collections of hadith, but I mean variant copies of something like, say, Sahih al-Bukhari or Muslim. Just wondering. God bless you and your ministry.
Do you know what hadiths are and how Muslims read and understand it?
@@aaabrams1889 Kinda. I know it's a matter of authetnticating narrative chains, but I'm bought into Dr. Smith's theory that the ninth- and tenth-century traditions don't tell at least all of the true story of Islam's origins.
Are you a Muslim?
@@blindvision4703
Jay smith is a compulsive liar and deceiver who practices the C1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 DECEPTION on Muslims and gullible xtians like you...Do you know what the C5 & C6 is...?
I guess not - as for the hadiths, Do you know why it was recovered after Mohammad (saw) death and NOT while he was alive? These Evil missionaries knows but fail to tell Non-Muslims because then they can make-up stories you tend to believe.
@@aaabrams1889 OK, tell me why they were recovered over 200 years after he died. But that doesn’t change the fact that, for example, the Caraun says that your profit is only “a plane warner, “and not a miracle worker, whereas he is a miracle worker in the hottest collection. That doesn’t change the fact that 200 years is a long time for Legins to develop. And just the fact that they can show variant carotic texts at speakers corner makes it seem perfectly reasonable for me to wonder whether or not the hadith collections may not have similar Arabic variations, especially if they are supposedly oral traditions passed on over the centuries, and if the Quran is so often copied (at least 37 different ways). Also, don’t say Xtians. I know what kind of -ian I am: a Christian. You don’t need to blow it out with an ex. I honestly don’t know why people do that.
Jay, what did Odon mean when he said that Christians added to much to Jesus?
Dr Jay have you read Avi Lipkin's[Victor Mordecai] books like 'Return to mecca' ?
It very logical that the Quran was very similiar a process like the bible - esspecially the old testament. A collection of different summons, pre-islamic stories and parallel stories and on a later date it formed into one book.
Allah said he gave muhammad a book. Muhammad was never given a book.
Wow, what a fresh trove of new information about the use of uncommented quran. Odon seems to confirm Dan Gibson’s solid theses. Jay ought to exchange data with Israeli and German researchers.
Give us examples of these so called 'new information'.
@@aaabrams1889 The influence of a Jewish group, the rebuilding of Jerusalem Temple, the expectations of the imminent coming of Jesus, etc.
@@OdonLafontaine
That is not new,,,ha ha ha
Please let the guest talk.
Odon are you saying there are know dye critical marks on the early manuscripts or there were and later were not included by the transcribers because they did not know the language?
He said it very clearly: these were draft notes, without DC marks. He also said that it wasn't lack of language ability that prevented later scribes from knowing where the DC marks ought to be put but distance in time from the original authors and their intentions. It was like doing a diacritical marks crossword but without any clues as to the intended meaning.
@@Speakers154 okay, i was just a little confused. Thanks for clearing that up.
So the groom delayed instead of falling asleep they became the groom😄 This was interesting looking forward to more. Thank you 💖
Something like this !!!
😄
When will it all end??
I think he meant by the quraanic Nazarins the Nasara that the quraan constantly refer to. The traditional narrative (and even now) the Islamic understanding is that Nasara are the Christians (the quraan always says "the Jews and Nasara").
However, our eastern church history has very little reference to Christians anywhere in pre 7th c. Arabia outside of several sects that were preaching heresies contrary to the orthodox apostolic faith, and Jews that fled Judea and Syria after imperial crackdown first in the 1st and then the 6th centuries. Ironically the "arabs" who were actually Christian were the tribes around syria who were allied to the Romans and were actually doing the trade between the Persian east and Roman west.
So regardless of how you think of it, the only area where you have this fusion of trade + heretical Christianity + jewish sects and interesting geopolitics has to be around Syria and Jordan. south in arabia would be way too far for anything in the Quraan to make any sense.
I will comment on some of your points in a sequence different from the one in your comment:
First, non-Christians did not distinguish between heretical vs. orthodox Christians. That is an distinction that is internal to Christians themselves, not generally to outsiders. Just like most Christians do not view any particular sect of Islam or Buddhism as more "orthodox" or "true" than another.
Second, trade+heretical Christianities+Jewish sects were also present in Iraq, as were Arabs.
Third, "Arabia" has for a very long time included not just the big peninsula, but the fertile crescent to its north. Indeed, today's "standard" Arabic appears to have evolved, according to linguists, among immigrants in Nabatea, which is approximately ancient Edom. (It is unclear what happened to the original Edomites/Idumeans, but I suspect many of them intermarried with the Arabs/Nabateans.) The Arabic language migrated south from Nabatea into the Hijaz and nearby areas according to linguists. Dialects of Arabic were also spoken in Tachkastan which includes a large swathe of Mesopotamia. So Roman Orthodox, Nestorian, Monophysite, and even Gnostic Christians were all present in "Arabia."
Fourth, yes, Nazarenes by whatever spelling are Christians. This usage is clearly borrowed from the Jews who still, if they are observant, prefer to describe "Christians" (literally, followers "of the Messiah") as Nazarenes since they do not wish to sound as if they are acknowledging that Jesus is the Messiah.
@@michaels4255 @michael s ok not quite sure if you understood my point on the location, but you literally just repeated what I said. The whole crescent area between the Euphrates in Iraq and Syria and Petra in Jordan is indeed the homeland of the most notable Arab tribes and kingdoms. Indeed "Arabia" as a name was first mentioned to describe the region around Petra. Me saying "around Syria" is to emphasise the point that the Arabs, who went on to conquer an empire, couldn't possibly have originated from as south as Mekka, especially considering the Quraan itself which describes areas closer to the roman provinces in Syria (and let's be real, Iraq is literally next to Syria XD).
The interesting thing about the name "Nazarenes" was that, as you've mentioned, it emphasises a greater link between Islam and some form of Judaism. Because the word "Christian" was being used even by non-Christians ever since the 1st century. Moreover, it did exist in Aramaic and Arabic too. So the only reason why it's not used in Islam is that they specifically chose not to.
A point about whether non-Christians understood the different sects of Christianity or not; the Persians and many Germanic and Stepp tribes at least had an understanding that refugees and missionaries fleeing from the empire during crackdowns were practising a form of Christianity that the church disapproved of. The Persians even sometimes tried to use that as political pressure. Considering the amount of theological confrontations that the Quraan eludes to, it stands to reason that the people who wrote the Quraan were at least aware of the differences. For example, many passages in the Quraan speak of Jesus doing things and being called names that are only reserved for God, while also insisting that he was never killed nor was God. It definitely reads like certain heretical judao-christian sects were preaching, and far from Orthodox Judaism.
I'm not saying the writers of the Quraan were aware of all the details (they clearly weren't), but they surely understood that there were differences.
_our eastern church history has very little reference to Christians anywhere in pre 7th c. Arabia_
There are many references on the contrary.
The Christianisation of the Arabs of the Middle East began at Pentecost (Acts 2:11), continued and renewed from century to century, marked by figures such as Saint Euthyme (5th century) or Peter Aspebetos, an Arab himself, chief of the tribe he baptised and who became "the bishop of the Arabs" (he was at the Council of Ephesus in 431). It was the work of Aramaic-speaking Christians, particularly from the Assyrian-Chaldean Church (known as "Nestorian") and even more so from the Jacobites (Syriacs) who had systematically set up nomadic parishes (the Church of the Parabolas). Ancient Christian traditions even indicate that the apostles Matthias and Simon were respectively evangelising Jordan and Arabia (cf. Pierre Perrier, Évangiles de l'Oral à l'Ecrit, Fayard - Le Sarment, Paris, 2000).
This Christianisation was completed at the end of the 6th century: Al-Nu'man III ibn al-Mundhir, the "king of all the Arabs of the empires of Persia and Byzantium", was baptised in 594. He was the leader of the Lakhmids, who had extended his authority to "all Arabs" (including Ghassanides) before being assassinated shortly after his baptism by the Persians, thus provoking the "revolt and dispersion of all Arabs" (according to the Chronicle of Serts, also known as Nestorian History - cf. Robert Hoyland, In God's Path: The Arab Conquests and the Creation of an Islamic Empire, Oxford University Press, 2015).
Many archaeological traces of this ancient Christianisation can be found throughout the Arabian Peninsula. For example, see the work of Christian Robin: the polytheism described by Muslim traditions is, according to him, "totally contradictory to what can be observed from archaeological sources", as he states in this interview; he does not, however, comment on Mecca, sticking to the accounts of tradition (see also his study "L'Arabie préislamique" in Le Coran des Historiens, Le Cerf, Paris, 2019).
@@darthcalanil5333 Okay, I thought you were understanding Arabia as modern peninsular Arabia when you wrote:
"our eastern church history has very little reference to Christians anywhere in pre 7th c. Arabia outside of several sects that were preaching heresies contrary to the orthodox apostolic faith,"
But since you understand Arabia to include the fertile crescent, they then your other point is wrong. Even after the rise of Netorianism and Monophysitism, there were still thriving and perfectly Orthodox communities along the coastal areas of Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Egypt.
"understood the different sects of Christianity or not" -- Some did and some did not. The point I intended here was that it was just not salient to them. In the same way, I somewhat understand the differences between the Sunnis and the Shiites, or the Mahayana vs. Theravada Buddhists or SLC versus fundamentalist Mormons, but these differences have no significance for me. I don't have a dog in their fights.
@@OdonLafontaine Well, when Darth wrote "outside of several sects that were preaching heresies," I thought he was excluding Nestorian and Monophysite Christians by that clause (although he may have been referring only to extremely marginal sects), but even by that narrower definition of Orthodoxy which I was assuming, he is still not correct, unless by "Arabia" he meant the peninsula only, so that is what I assumed he meant in an effort to make as much sense as possible out of the comment. People today often don't realize the large Christian presence that existed in the ME and NA before the rise of Islam.
They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us.( apostle John)
Why can’t motor-mouth Jay let his guest speaker tell his own story. Hear what he has to say without constant interruption. Then have a discussion.
On the contrary, Jay's interventions are very useful. He makes sure I get understood, and helps me keeping on track
@@OdonLafontaine Jay has improved as an interviewer.
Even now, signs in four languages warn visitors that there is no proof that the Prophet Muhammad was born there, “so it is forbidden to make this place specific for praying, supplicating or get [sic] blessing.”
Everything happens at night,” she told TIME by phone from Saudi Arabia. “By the next day in the morning, the monument is gone.”
Odon makes a lot of sense, I also believe the Arabs got disillusioned with Jesus as after they built a new temple and the apocalypse still didn’t happen so they had to go in a different direction (hence Jesus not the son of god motif)
This is what Stephen Shoemaker made clear in his book "The death of a prophet"
@@OdonLafontaine Thank you, I will have to get a hold of his book
PFANDER it's obvious now that Muhammd was a just a latter creation but why do you think that he in particular was choosen to be the prophet of this new religion...why not choose someone who was not a war lord?
They did not "chose someone to be their prophet". They created their prophet out of the blue, like a fiction character, and linked him to the vague memory of one or several Muhammads from the 7th cent. But most of the "prophet character" is a creation based on :
- the need to give an "islamic" explanation to the many obscurities and odnesses of the Quran (hence the invention of the Sira)
- the need to justify the behavior, the demeanors and misdemeanors of the caliphs by creating a prophetic role model
@@OdonLafontaine I see...so basically all the Hadiths are made up? Its strange when you make something up, just for your creation to seen as a muderer, rapist and even liar to people around him. It would have been better to make him ore like a Jesus for example...this was an error
@@pentz1 for 1400 year's satan has had his footprint in these books and human's after self gain,only now with the internet that the truth of izram would be known to all around the world by these scholars,thank you Odon and Jay and Murad and Sneakers corner and many others, be prepared for Jesus Christ is on his return flight!
All Western scholars confirm that the first written text of Alexander the Great was composed between 629 and 630 in Syria. The legend of Dhul Qarnayn the bi-horned (Alexander the Great) is found in the Kuran at the end of surah 18. The similarities between the two texts are very disturbing. It’s like the original text has been copied in the Kuran. But the sura 18 was revealed at the end of the second Meccan period according to the standard islamic narrative. How is this possible if the original text was composed between 629 and 630 and Muhammad left Mecca in 622? Should we reject the chronology of the Meccan and Medinan surahs? Is it possible that the Kuran continued to be composed after the supposed death of Mahomet in 632?
Do the same for the New Testament. Or are we cherry picking?
Many others have done this already for the last 100+ years, and often far more speculatively and aggressively. We are just applying the same techniques to the Quran.
@mysotiras16 sp no, it hasn't. Without mentioning the contradictions, texts like the apocryphs were not incorporated. And anything in the Bible is not of that quality that humans couldn't have thought it up.
The thing with the French is that these guys know the middle est region well. The know the Muslims because they colonized North Africa and were there for centuries. "Levant" is a french word by the way! :-) Also most North Africa French speak Arabic.
I think it is make sense that the scribes copied the manuscript without knowing the meaning of what they wrote, many people today claim to be able to memorize and recite the whole quran (even kids & toddlers) without knowing the meaning of the words ! They just acted/acting as machines, as printers & recorders
Odon, do you think the thesis of Father Gallez was successfully refuted by Karim Hanifi when you had a debate with him?
Karim never got into the thesis... He kept on making ad personam arguments against Gallez (he even lied in order to do so)
@@OdonLafontaine So muslim apologists use the same shabby tricks one is familiar with in English language debates, in French.
@@collybever same islam‚ same way of thinking
I am not sure that the audience fully understood why the drafts of the proto Quran were written without the diacritics marks. If those who wrote these drafts knew the diacritics marks then they would have written these drafts with the diacritics marks. I thought that these drafts were written in Syro Aramaic or by Arabs with the Syro Aramaic language in mind but directly written in Arabic. Could you enlighten us because I believe this is an essential point?
The diacritics marks (vowels) came because Islam expanded to Arabic nations with a different dialect and further expanded to Non-Arabic nations. Those people could not read the Arabic with its proper pronunciation, so diacritics marks were added, so you could spell the word instead of just knowing what is says.
It is because those drafts and notes were not be published. They were for the personnal use of the preachers. Their personnal notes. Hence the absence of diacriticism. Every student does the same
@@OdonLafontaine
What are you talking about?...ha ha ha...
So....the Jewish/Christian Messianic movement expectation/ who hoped for then Nazarene Arabic that made it.....an interesting creation for a new religion.
What happened to those texts which were later on inducted in a book called Quran?
Those texts should have existed in their original form, because these texts were holy too.