Iran's Poisoned Arrows [5]: St John of Damascus -"from that time to the present"
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ม.ค. 2025
- Islamic Origins seeks to find out how Islam truly began.
To contact Mel, comment below video with question or comment. (Otherwise, email Mel at sneakerscorner3@gmail.com but do so sparingly please.)
Ways to support this channel:
Subscribe, comment on and like videos
Pray for the Channel. God bless you!
/ sneakerscorner
Support me at "Buy me a coffee" www.buymeacoff...
Visit the store probiotic.ie/s... Get 10% of nutrition products with discount code: Origins
![Iran's Poisoned Arrows [6]: Mariamne, the Herodian link](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3wxJNih11LI/mqdefault.jpg)
![Iran's Poisoned Arrows [6]: Mariamne, the Herodian link](/img/tr.png)
St John of Damascus is too under appreciated. He fought the iconoclasts. He fought heresies. He’s a true hero of the faith.
Such a shame that mainstream academia is so afraid to get their hands dirty and dig deeper into this subject.
For example when I point out that it is weird that the Quran would claim that Muhammad and Ahmad are mentioned in the Gospel and in the Torah without having read the Gospel and the Torah they brush this question off by saying it is a religious and not a historic question. I mean it seems weird to me that a somebody claiming to be a prophet in the ancient world would take the risk of claiming that something is in books so widely read in his region while never having read those books.
I have downloaded the paper and it will be an exiting read.
Another banger!
I don't know if you've came across this Mel but it's a funny coincidence, a guy called Hafs made a translation of the Psalms into Arabic in 889.
Powerful ❤
It's coming together!
Also, the iconoclasts are in a new, worse, light.
Mel, you did a video on the Abrahamists. They were Arabs who were Jewish adjacent. I think that's where the Tayyeye fit in. They were Abrahamists who allied with the Iraqi Exilarchs
Indeed, this fits in very well.
Feeling Deja vous
deja *vu*, ie, "already seen"
From AJ Deus….. haha!!
I would question his interpretations. For instance, despite old Jewish law discussing the death penalty, Israel does not have capital punishment in their civil law. Their theology also discusses moving towards mercy in actions, which means not dping that kind of violence. Its a common thing to misrepresent or smear anything Jewish
Had or have?
@@IslamicOriginslol keeo try
I do not see the Book of Jubilees stating that the Holy Land included all of India. That section while poorly transcribed, is talking about the sons of Noah assigning lands to their sons. The southern half of Asia including India is supposed to be a part of Shem's inheritance, whereas Ham's children were to get Africa, and Japeth's children Northern Asia and Europe.
Now this does not mean that the cult decided they were to control all of Shem's inheritance, just that I do not see it being named as a part of the Holy Land, which is described from the brook of Egypt to the Euphrates in the Old Testament prophets.
World domination is the point, not what is the holy land..
This is not talking about any kind of domination. Those were the sons of Noah who was the father of all mankind after the flood. His sons and their wives were to repopulate the Earth. They were not Jewish.
I find it interesting that you describe Deus as a bit over enthusiastic. I am working through his Serpent King paper and the introduction was a little bit, “the Jews done it.” His work is adding to a clear picture that Islam did not emerge from the 7th century but was a work-in-progress for a number of centuries but it is still only one part, focussing on the Jews ignores a number of other threads that are clear in Islam. The choice of a clearly Christian book in the Koran, the Gnosticism, the pagan and Abyssinian influences, etc.
I have one question, he is indicating that the individuals who were in the ruling group were Sadducees. Can we assume that these were descendants of the Sadducees who controlled the Second Temple in Jerusalem? If this is correct, some of this makes sense. From what I understand, the original Sadducees were virtually completely focussed on the ritual of Temple worship, almost to the exclusion of actual religious belief. After the destruction of the Second Temple, this sect would have no raison d’etre, unless they were able to regain Jerusalem and rebuild the temple.
There is no mention of Sadducees in John's Gospel. If we accept the late dating circa ad90 (disputed) that would suggest they had disappeared by that time along with the temple cult.
Hey Mel, the information about Ali being Abdallah ibn al Zubayr and Husayn being his son is completely wrong. AJ Deus says that its true because Husayn was called Abu Abdallah but Abu means Father (of).
According to his logic that would mean that Husayn is the father of Abdullah ibn al Zubayr which is would make Husayn Al Zubayr and Ali would be Al Awwam.
I thought that section was confusing. I didn't know if it was reliable. It was too neat. You are probably right on this.
I know I'm an idiot,but feel the "Muslim" conquest/rebellions were more like Ghassanid and Lakhmid(or their successors) rebellions.Abu Bakr,Umar and Ali were Lakhmids.Uthman and the Umayyads were Ghassanids.
The book of Zechariah from the Hebrew Bible describes two witnesses as two olive trees - widely recognised to be Zerubbabel and Joshua, the representative of the Davidic line (king) and priestly line, respectively. They return to Jerusalem after the Babylonian and Persian captivity to rebuild the city walls and temple at Jerusalem which is well described in the books of Ezra-Nehemiah.
So … there is definitely a tradition of a king-priest dual authority linked to Jerusalem right in the Hebrew Bible.
The Abbasids were more closely related to Muhammad than were the Umayyads. So, the more Muhammad was eulogised by Caliph Abd al-Malik and his successors, the more they endangered their own dynastic legitimacy.
That is merely their assertion.
First.
So, did John of Damascus affirm that there was a historical Muhammad during his lifetime? this would throw a monkey wrench into your theory
Read carefully, and I assume you have watched the relevant part, this would simply be impossible unless Muhammad was living from the time of Heraclius 610-641 until the 730s. Muhammad was a false prophet who had appeared amongst them for over 90-120 years. This indicates it is a chain of Muhammads, a title that is picked up and carried. For further clarity, we have to suppplement it with the Chinese source that says just that there was a series of Mo-Shou, ie Messiahs during that timeframe.
Hi Mel do you have a reference to those chinese sources?
Also I believe I might have a solution to 61:6.
What if Jesus in 61:6 is not talking about another person coming after him? What if he is instead talking about himself but in an exalted state, post ressurection post ascension?
Muhammad= Jesus in his human form pre ressurection ( hence it makes sense to talk about him dying or being killed in 3:144 and not having heirs in 33:40)
Ahmad= Jesus in his heavenly form, as the life giving Spirit, the MORE praised one ( Ahmad).
Here comes the biblical reference, dumb rolls:
” 1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. 3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. 4 So he became as much superior to the angels as THE NAME he has inherited is superior to theirs.” Hebrews 1:1-4
If Muhammad referes to Jesus preressurection and Ahmad to Jesus post ressurectiion then 7:157 makes perfect sense. Thereby both muhammad and Ahmad are all over the Bible while in contrast the arabian prophet the son of Abdullah is nowhere to be found in either the bible or the apokrypha.
Here is a reference to Ahmad ( the more praised one, the life giving spirit) in litterature that is 300 years older than the Quran:
”Noah let the cattle reside at the bottom, the birds in the middle, and as one created in the image of God, he(Noah) lived at the top. At Mount Sinai the people sat at the bottom, the priests at the circumference, Aron in the middle, Moses close to the top and The PRAISED one at the top.”( Hymns of Paradise by Sankt Ephraim the Syrien Hymn 2, verse 12).
That *is* interesting.
@@IslamicOrigins I am with Spencer in the belief that “Mohammed” is a political literary invention but could it be that a “mantel” in that name was passed on between successive “messianic characters” similar to the Elijah/elisha cycle?
It wouldn't at all, because John never met Muhammad personally. In "affirming" Momo's existence, he might have been doing no more than repeating the mythological Islamic narrative, which began to grow wildly from around 700 AD onwards.