This is utterly brilliant! I wonder can Muslims watching see that the Standard Islamic Narrative isn't true? The artifacts are telling the truth of what occurred back then. They trump any later narrative that is prone to error or willful distortion. Not only did they keep the monetary system in that period, they also continued the civil service, which was typically based around the Christian parishes and run by Christians. St John of Damascus' father and grandfather worked as civil servants in that system.
THE Big Question is why did the Muslims (those that created SIN) decide to create this fantasy, fanciful origin of Islam. And why has no one till today come forward to state the actual beginnings. And if the origin is make-believe then perhaps these people are just pagans who believe that the means justify the end and for them, and the end result is praying to Allah - all the Abrahamic notions do not matter and were simply used to attract the ignorant or those easily swayed. Or perhaps, even Allah doesn't even matter. All that matters to these pagans or even atheists is their subjugation and their adherence to the ways of the Arabs.
@@irishheritage893 I think Odon meant it in a sarcastic way. Saying "yea these coins are fake because I made it to fool the world" actually meaning, "I cannot make fake coins because experts can point out its fake".
When christianity came about the first converts on mass were arabs. The nabateans and sabateans are prime examples. Petra was the capital of the nabatean empire. They were christians and minted christian coins. I would believe all the coins you have and showed are from northern arabia around the levante and iraq areas.
Your problem is you do not read with open mind, but read with closed eyes and one aim. As it is known in the history of Islamic coins, Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan removed the cross from the coin and deleted the image of Heraclius and added another image that is said to be his image, and wrote on the dinars and dirhams verses of Surat Al-Ikhlas, and on the money the phrase Muhammad is the Messenger of God. All of this is recorded in the history of Islam as narrated by Muslim historians - and we will stay away from it - but, did any foreign non-Islamic sources talk about this conversion? Is it really rumored that these coins prove the Christian roots of Islam? Professor Kaegi mentioned three multiple testimonies, which he reckons are strong evidence of the Christians' response to this change of currency. The First Testimony is a book called Adversus judaeos Disputatio, originally written in Greek. The manuscripts of this book attribute it to Father Anastasius the Abbot, who was born in the era of Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan, but in the beginning, some scholars attributed this book to Saint Anastasius the Sinaite who lived in the second half of the seventh century and who died in the year 700, but most scholars do not They consider it his work. Kaegi cites another source in support of this saying, from the book (The Maronite chronicle) written in the year 664-665 AD, where he indicates that Muawiyah had an unsuccessful attempt to issue a coin without the Byzantine features of the cross and the image of their king in the year 661 AD . Where he says about him [3]: “He also minted gold and silver coins, but the people did not accept it because there was no cross on it.” He also minted gold and silver, but the populace did not accept it because there was no cross on it. The two dates may not refer to the same coin issue, but they do indicate the same reluctance of the Caliphate's population to accept Byzantine coins as shown in the two passages above. The two sources complement and reinforce each other. And they stress the existence of popular resistance to adjusting money [4]. - that nation will destroy the gold on which there is the image of the cross of Our Lord, Our God, in order to make all the countries under its rule mint their own gold with the name of a beast written on it, the number of whose name is six hundred and sixty-six 666.»
Astonishing findings and plausible explanations. Maybe difficult to swallow in one gulp. Thanks for the website, will lookup. Best regards to Dr Jay and Prof Lafontaine
Sometimes it is better to let the expert speak and you listen until he finished making his point. I don’t know how anyone could be left confused by the guy stating the coins which are evidently Christian by design would not have been used by the guys who the SIN claim were in total control? These coins totally demolish that narrative. Yet more evidence that the story or narrative was written long after the event and that mistakes were made as those who wrote the narrative never realised that these coins which are hard evidence would still be in existence long after the book was written. Same as they would never have imagined technology like Satelite Navigation would uncover the truth about the Origins of Mecca as the oldest long forgotten Mosque’s positions and direction of prayer would become apparent. The whole narrative is falling apart.
The discussion is coming together nicely now with the identification of groups that Odon described in his chart from a previous episode and their place on this timeline described by the coins. Super job. I can hardly wait until the next episode.
I'm very much looking forward to the next videos. I think we're now at a stage where we can say for sure that the Standard Islamic Narrative doesn't work historically and is a later construction but we're still on our way to put all the evidence together to create a historically consistent new narrative.
@@azedinebenammar4339 The Vatican librarians say it's going to take them about 100 years to finish scanning all the documents (40M pages) at the current pace. They scan less than a 1,000 manuscripts a year with 5 scanners and it should cost about US$25M in total. After scanning, the documents have to be translated from a variety of languages and many are illegible or very hard to read.
@@justaminute3111 Regardless, I do agree with his viewpoint that the Vatican library must have relevant documents on the subject, completely forgotten in its vaults.
Great job Odon and Jay. The more these kinds of evidences are produced it will change the standard Islamic narratives. The good thing about all these evidences are that they will change the narratives which could lead to deconstruction of the standard supremist ideology in the Qura'n and destruct the foundation of Islamic Jihadism. Great job guys.
Odon in many ways backs up what you were saying in your previous videos on the coins Jay, but with a slightly different perspective, which makes complete sense, fabulous power point, many thanks to both Odon and yourself Jay
This is very interesting. It supports the thesis of Yehuda Nevo in Crossroads to Islam that there were no conquests rather filling in the emptiness after the withdrawal of the troops of Byzantium. Nevo's explanation is that there was a shift in the Byzantium elite from conquests to trading.
According to Nevo Byzamtium used religious differences to isolate themselves from other Christian groups so that they wouldn't be obliged to defend them. And that policy contributed to the arabs developing a religious movement against the divinity of Christ which was a well spread opinion at that time among the diversified Christianity.
The Greek historian Theophanus refers to Mu'awiya and Umar as "Primus inter pares" (Gr. Protosymboulos), instead of kings, which means they were seen as representatives of a group or confederation. In the case of Mu'awiya that would most likely be the confederation of the Quraysh in Syria.
This is what Tunisian author Héla Ouardi discovered and wrote in her last book about Umar. She found the story of his baptism in Ibn al-Jawzi's Manaqib Umar
@@OdonLafontaine You started to spread lies. I have the book you are talking about: Virtues of Umar ibn al-Khattab toIbn Jawziyyah. There is nothing in it that Prophet Muhammad poured water on Umar. There is a story that says Umar asked his sister to give him a scroll written in it Surah Taha and his sister said to him: you are not clean you have to go and take a bath nothing more. Taking a bath is a ritual one has to go through if he wants to enter Islam and has nothing to do with baptism.
@@OdonLafontaine By the way what do you think about the following. As it is known in the history of Islamic coins, Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan removed the cross from the coin and deleted the image of Heraclius and added another image that is said to be his image, and wrote on the dinars and dirhams on one side verses of Surat Al-Ikhlas, and on the other side the phrase Muhammad is the Messenger of God. All of this is recorded in the history of Islam as narrated by Muslim historians - for the sake of argument let us stay away from it - but, did any foreign non-Islamic sources talk about this conversion? Is it really rumored that these coins prove the Christian roots of Islam? Professor Kaegi mentioned three multiple testimonies, which he reckons are strong evidence of the Christians' response to this change of currency. The First Testimony is a book called Adversus judaeos Disputatio, originally written in Greek. The manuscripts of this book attribute it to Father Anastasius the Abbot, who was born in the era of Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan, but in the beginning, some scholars attributed this book to Saint Anastasius the Sinaite who lived in the second half of the seventh century and who died in the year 700, but most scholars do not consider it his work. Kaegi cites another source in support of this saying, from the book (The Maronite chronicle) written in the year 664-665 AD, where he indicates that Muawiyah had an unsuccessful attempt to issue a coin without the Byzantine features of the cross and the image of their king in the year 661 AD . Where he says about him [3]: “He also minted gold and silver coins, but the people did not accept it because there was no cross on it.” He also minted gold and silver, but the populace did not accept it because there was no cross on it. The two dates may not refer to the same coin issue, but they do indicate the same reluctance of the Caliphate's population to accept Byzantine coins as shown in the two passages above. The two sources complement and reinforce each other. And they stress the existence of popular resistance to adjusting money [4]. - that nation will destroy the gold on which there is the image of the cross of Our Lord, Our God, in order to make all the countries under its rule mint their own gold with the name of a beast written on it, the number of whose name is six hundred and sixty-six 666.» Adversus judaeos Disputatio offers, returning to the main topic, at least a glimpse into the late seventh century. It reveals the need for Christians to explain Arab victories and Byzantine setbacks. It shows that at least one orthodox Christian was still able to feel comfort from recent historical experiences and find reason to trust the Byzantine Empire and the survival of Christian societies under Islamic control. It attests to the persistence of Byzantine prestige within the Muslim-controlled lands and the problems that early Islamic authorities faced in trying to remove familiar Christian symbols from their coins, and thus provides an additional background to the coinage struggle between Emperor Justinian II and Caliph Abd al-Malik [6]. For further references please see the following: [1] WALTER E. KAEGI GI, BYZANTIUM AND THE EARLY ISLAMIC CONQUESTS, CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, p.221-222 [2] ibid, p.224 [3] ibid [4] ibid, p.225 [5] Pseudo-Athanasius, in edition and translation by Francisco Javier Martinez, "Eastern Christian Apologetic in the Early Muslim Period " 529-30 ( same refernce). [6] ibid, p.227
At least it is clear that the Arab rulers who minted the Byzantine look alike coins had never heard of Muhammad when he was supposed to have lived. Which only means that the "prophet" Muhammad of the Qur'an that we know today through the SIN never really existed.
@@libnlr75tech6Very good question. So was that Muhammad the same as the "prophet" Muhammad of the Qur'an? Or was a legend constructed around this man so that he was elevated to a "prophet"? Perhaps even he wouldn't have expected to end up as a "prophet" of a brand new religion a few centuries down the line. In all likelihood, the Qur'an was already in existence even if in some rudimentary form before this person was even born. It's doubtful if even this person would recognise any of today's Qur'ans. He would probably ask today's Muslims "I revealed this to you and these hadiths are about me?" He would say "I worshipped the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and also consider Jesus as the Messiah. I never married a 6 year old kid, rather like everybody else I married a woman with her consent. I never hated the Jews and the Christians, rather I treated them as my brothers".As for the colorful character in the hadiths, I am deeply offended if that is what I am being portrayed as. I don't even recognise that person. Infact I wonder which third rate low life scum could have written this tripe about me".
37:53 "lead the army of the believers" = "commander of the faithful" The latter term was used by Abd al Malik (Servant of the King) on the Dome of the Rock. But we can see the parallel title here, used by The Angel of the LORD: Joshua 5:14 “Neither,” He replied. “I have now come as *Commander of the LORD’s army.”* Then Joshua fell facedown in reverence and asked Him, “What does my Lord have to say to His servant?” 15 The Commander of the LORD’s army replied, “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy.” And Joshua did so.
This episode provokes so many questions. The reexamination of MHMD, HMD, Ahmed and the issue of the paraclet was good and does deserve a video on its own. The name Farooq adds to the mystery. And we know that all the names we read in the Quran have some significance beyond what one imagines. This alone points to a complete fabrication with the intention of telling a story to the uninitiated in a way they can understand. Novelists do it all the time in fiction to describe their characters.
It is a lie invented by this Odon. I have the Book Odon referred to Managib Umer by Imam Ibn Jawziyyah there is nothing in it about umer baptism. If you know Arabic type Virtues of Umar ibn al-Khattab to Ibn Jawziyyah. Fortunately the book is free and online.
@@blackpalacemusic Honestly if you did not study the hadith science and with the ideas that you have I do not think that there is a benefit of talking to you about this subject. But, in hadith there are 500,000 men and women involved in the narration of hadith, so it is almost impossible to subscribe to the conspiracy theory that 500,000 men and women gathered together in the under world and plotted , the haidth, Islamic beliefs, laws, sharia, rules history and invented prophet Muhammad.
@@mahmoodali1533 yeah unless a few individuals created the Hadith and attributed them to 500,000 people. If the Qur'an is the miracle of Allah, it alone should suffice. Reliance on the Hadith suggest that Allah's Qur'an is so confusing and vague, it needs the specificity of books created by man.
@@blackpalacemusic Let me just give you a simple example and I repeat a simple example that explains howwe consider hadith is reliable or not reliable. Suppose that there is someone his name is Hassan said I have hadith, he says I heard this hadith from Ali and Ali heard from Umer and Umer heard from Uttoman. Then we study hassan and first we see what century he lived in , we return to see if he is known man, meaning are there some people wrote about him or wrote a biography about him? If we do not find his biography then that is easy thing we consider hadith is unreliable. But if we find his biography then we study his biography and see how many men wrote about him. If only one man wrote about him, then that is called one chain. We consider it neither reliable nor unreliable. Now if we find at least two different people wrote about him, then that biography will be reliable. Then we start to study Hassan biography1- what century he lived in, 2-was he young when he said this hadith, 3-was he old, 4-did he have a good memory, 5-did he have any political affiliation he wanted to strength it that made him lie, 6- did he commit any crime, 7- did he ever lie even one lie, 8- Did he hear from Ali directly , 9-did he live in the same time and place as Ali? Those 9 conditions must met before even we hear the hadith. After those 9 conditions met, then we go to Ali and repeat the study about him and see from whom Ali heard the hadith and then we go to Umer and repeat the study and then we go to Uttoman and repeat the study. 500,000 men and women Muslims scholars studied them like this and knew everything about their lives. So, now you are telling me a few men wrote the hadith and invented the name and biography of 500,000 men and women? I hope just one day you try to sudty the since of hadith and I'm sure you will come back and laugh and your naivety and simplicity.
J'ai telllllllement rigolé quand vous avez dit "Pardon my French". Aussi, les analogies de l'utilisation aujourd'hui par plusieurs pays, du dollar américain, m'ont aidée à comprendre les nuances que nous devons voir dans les divers représentations sur les pièces de monnaie. Merci encore!
In Tauste, two types of burial have been located: a first group dating from the 8th century, with the graves oriented towards Córdoba (the capital of the emirate), and a second group dating between the 9th and 10th centuries, with the burials already oriented towards Mecca.
@Islamic pi You've effectively made Clive Foss' argument, which is what I would agree with. But the fact that there was an evolution of coinage, keeping with past imagery to keep the coins "reputable," and that a wholly Islamic coin was rejected (which even caused a war) means that there was no Islamic empire. It means his following during his ministry 20 years before death and 40 years after (when they conquered Jerusalem) wasn't enough to persuade people to use Islamic coinage, ie, his support or belief in his words was not as strong as Islam claims. The Jerusalem conquest was mostly bloodless (much like how the Taliban retook Afghanistan). But the Christians and Jews were not equipped to fight them, and were satisfied living under the secular Byzantine Empire for hundreds of years, little did they know a group would come in and create a new religion by slowly changing the imagery of their coins and by building structures that denounced, in at least the Christian sense, their very existence. (Inscriptions on the Dome of the Rock.)
@Islamic pi The problem is the Islamic nature of conversion is hardly voluntary. The teachings are extreme even from a purely Quranic perspective. And because we are missing almost a century of real development, no evidence of a large following, no written acknowledgements until 150-200 years afterward. It was all *being created* out of thin air at the time. That's the point. The coins tell this "transition" story. And they struck at the heart of the Christian/Jewish lands to ingratiate themselves in an otherwise secular society.
@Islamic pi Jay has been struggling with an "argument of silence" when it comes to early Islam, because lacking evidence doesn't mean proof of something. So when the coin observation came out, that gave them more to go on. The thing that gets me is the Petra/Mecca evidence, so looking elsewhere is good. I don't think anyone would argue against Islam being a new/starting religion (except for hardliners I guess). But the geographical problems with Mecca make it difficult. I've gone down a deep rabbit hole for this and I think Smith and Gibson are on to something. As an ignostic it is just an interesting thing to read about. I'm finding Mecca likely doesn't fit any of the Quran in any reasonable way and the paganistic practices that happen there are truly remarkable for an ancient religion that somehow grew up during the rise of Christianity.
@@joshcryer I agree, Mecca is a disaster for is lam. It cannot possibly be the city that is told in the standard islamic narrative. It is the most obvious lie among all the other lies.
43:16 If Umar was described as a lumberjack, does this mean he was a carpenter too? Seems to me that there are a lot of people running around the early Islamic narratives carrying what appear to be titles that belong to Jesus the Messiah but that somehow have been erroneously(?) interpreted as different men. Keep in mind too that "building a temple" does not simply mean building a physical temple but could also mean a community of believers i.e. a temple made of living stones.
Fantastic presentation. Thank you very much. But can you please give some references to 1. Muhammad baptising Umar 2. Umar being a lumberjack in Syria 3. Ali is from Kufa / Hira. Ali was the son of Abu Talib who was Mohamed's uncle. Does that mean Abu Talib and Mohamed also came from Kufa / Hira? You must share the references from that Tunisian author's book which you quoted. Thank you.
From minute 28 I can see the things Peter Von Sivers had lectured about, the coming of Arabs how they filled the Buffer space between the Persians and Byzantines. Mr Odon and Dr Jay hope you are familiar with his works
27:59 Pre-independent commonwealth countries usually had their own currency, but would have the image of the current British Monarch incorporated into the design. After independence, their image would be removed and replaced by their own coat of arms or other design element. If there are images, then perhaps of historically important persons to that country. I do not know if any immediately transitioned to replacing the image of the British Monarch with their own sitting president or prime minister. If this holds true for the arabs, then perhaps it was not the case that the missing images in later coins are as a result of iconoclasm, but simply a sign that these nations are no longer under byzantine hegemony.
Now that is interesting. coins with Christian motives coined by Arab Muslims. That turns the whole SIN upside down. I would like to know what Islamic source tells us that Muhammad baptised 'Umar? What do we need coins for, if the Islamic sources undermine their own teaching?
It's from Héla Ouardi. Title : Les califes maudits, meurtre à la mosquée (the doomed caliphs: murder at the mosque). It has just been published in French (Albin Michel editions), so no English translation yet
People get used to certain coinage and it’s worth, and once a new power takes over, they can’t just change everything at once (especially if the economy is to continue) so they replicate what ordinary people know and trust and then after a while they start introducing changes that continue the economy, the Indian government withdraw certain notes recently and there was an uproar, so you have to graduate changes to keep stability
In Tauste, two types of burial have been located: a first group dating from the 8th century, with the graves oriented towards Córdoba (the capital of the emirate), and a second group dating between the 9th and 10th centuries, with the burials already oriented towards Mecca.
The Mongols could enforce the acceptance of paper currency under the pain of death. A regime that isn't completely in power may have to keep an existing currency that was generally accepted until power was firmly established or the processes could be assimilated. An intermediary form might be used. It's happened before. It makes sense.
@@OdonLafontaine quite possibly, but until the scholarship is laid before us, we are working on trust. Can you put up his reasoning for the dating at some stage?
Arab coins after 656 are usually dated, coins before that period are normally dated by comparison with Byzantine coins, as they were close copies of the Byzantine motif, hence the date for the coin is usually the period in which a specific Byzantine ruler was in power or the period a Byzantine motif was known to be in circulation. For instance, Heraclius (610-641), Constantine III (613-641), Heraklonas (638-642) and Constans II (641-668) are contemporaries of Umar (d.644), thus any coins copying the motifs used by those emperors would be dated to the same period. The coin presented by Odon is dated 640-660 for this reason and, if you take the Islamic tradition into account, it could be attributed to either Umar (634-644), Uthman (644-656) or Ali (656-661).
Nice video; still, Muslims will simply say that successive Islamic governments were modern, and they did not want to spread panic among people as a kind of politics, and this is a normal thing that many countries did when they occupied other countries, and they may come up with examples of that. In your opinion, Mr. Odon, how can this claim be answered? I agree with them tacitly as Muslims living in the West claim that Islamic law is fully compatible with human rights laws, even some presidents like Obama, Justin Trudeau and even former British Prime Minister Theresa May claim the same nonsense
Then why did Abd al-Malik change the coinage? What was so different with Abd al-Malik than the previous Arab rulers? The anwser: should the previous ones have wanted to get rid of crosses and establish an Islam that did not exist during their time, they could not have. They had no such power over the populations, over the Byzantine Empire. Which means they were not the mighty caliphs that the SIN said they were, which means Islam was not not established during their time. It is only from Abd al-Malik's time that such a power was established. Not before.
I wrote an extensive answer to this question in a comment here. But a good question to ask a Muslim who raises such a claim is this: can you imagine Umar in Medina or Ali in Kufa being the Khalifa or Imam of Muslims using a Sassanian coin with Zoroastrian fire alters on them to buy food? :) At least they could have minted Islamic coins in Medina their early capital. Their argument would have hold only if Arabs were not Muslims or not religiously motivated, which was indeed the case. So this argument only proves that early Arab state was a secular totally political establishment, contrary to what the standard narrative claims.
36:32 The Jews were naturally very happy that the Arabs take Jerusalem and expelled the Christian Roman power. But the Arabs expelled the Jews (an not Odon's Judeo Nazarenes who have never existed) from the Temple Mount and built there a house of prayer for themselves.
There is external evidence from Jewish sources that supports at least that the Arabs entered Jerusalem with a messianic Jewish sect. So though he theorising using the quran his conclusions seem at this point not unfounded.
@@leedza The Jews does not need an exterior 'messianic' sect (the Gallez one) as they are intrinsically 'messianic'. The Messiah in Judaism free Israel from its ennemies and will help to free Jerusalem. Messianic hopes runs from Greek and Roman occupations until the Arab one.
Beer appears to make Jay Smith overly chatty - it also makes him not listen very well and go off on silly tangents (like the currency of Liberia). Overly long introductions, constant interruptions because Jay does not fully understand what is being said or he feels the needs to repeat it. over and over again The substance in the videos is great, but this video could have been 8-10 minutes tops.
So who are the Umar and Ali you are talking about here? The arab leader at the time was named Umar and was a lumberjack? I’m confused about these northern figures with the same names that claimed these titles any reference videos that delve more into this? Or sources?
In conclusion: The only Messianic stuff in the 7th c. is the Jewish one: rebuilt the TEMPLE as the Christians were wiped out from the power in Palestine. All of this is sourced.
Umar was cut / stabbed in Jerusalem according to Mel, the story of the night journey Islam changed to fit Muhammad was all about Umar and the rock which is why in 685 they started to build a Dome / temple over it, Mel believes Umar is in that cave under the Dome today as he was devoted to this spot, Umar told his followers he will come back to life after 3 days he never did and started to stink, this is why they say Momo flew on a donkey and ascended into heaven but in fact it was Umar that ascended into heaven from this spot when he died which his body / bones remain still this day. After Umar died they then took the religion down in the desert and created a whole new narrative, this fabricated Momo never existed... Only reason they chose a baron land as no one claimed it so no clash with other religions. Petra was probably the first stop off till the earthquake then they moved to this new town Mecca and renamed Yathrib to Medina to fit the S.I.N. One thing is sure they gone to a lot of effort to keep its secret... Do you think the Islamic Empire has all the answers on what went on hidden in their vault, sure they would not truly destroy history its not like they burn Qurans or drown them (lol)!!! If according to Lloyd the Templers are a early sect off of Islam they may unlock some key points, also the Free Masons and KKK all sects of this evil twisted cult... What I find strange the Templers used crosses, very confusing ideology.
THE Big Question is why did the Muslims (those that created SIN) decide to create this fantasy, fanciful origin of Islam. And why has no one till today come forward to state the actual beginnings. And if the origin is make-believe then perhaps these people are just pagans who believe that the means justify the end and for them, and the end result is praying to Allah - all the Abrahamic notions do not matter and were simply used to attract the ignorant or those easily swayed. Or perhaps, even Allah doesn't even matter. All that matters to these pagans or even atheists is their subjugation and their adherence to the ways of the Arabs.
during these time, many arabs are already christianized. Most likely these are arabs who copies jewish practice but at the same time see Jesus as their messiah basically a kind of Messianic jewish religion but arabized. Then they moved their Holy city from Jerusalem to Mecca for some reason.
@@Speakers154 My point is that the Quran and hence those that created mainstream Islam as we know it today imbued Arab religious ideas and practices into this so-called Christian/Jewish/Abrahamic religion that the early group of Arabs adopted. The Quran and mainstream islam are intrinsically pagan Arab in ideas and practices. I propose another group came into power and this group are not the same as the group that inherited Abrahamic with honest intentions.
This people crack me up, especially js. He does this for most of his life, but nobody takes him serious 😂 In the Islamic currency system, the first coin that bore an Arabic inscription was called a dinar and was similar, in both size and weight, to the Byzantine solidus. ... The conquering Muslims at first mimicked the coinage of their predecessors
Daniel was not the “ precursor” of any M’essaya ! All the Prophets of Israel talked avait the MASHIAH who will come to save ISRAEL. It’s the Jewish faith. The expression MAHMAD from the root in Hebrew חמד has nothing to do with any person or idea other than a description of a character of a person. The Hebrew Academy says that in the book of “Song of Songs” it’s written as an hymn of love.
@@OdonLafontaine bonsoir, bien entendu. J’apprécie beaucoup votre travail et merci pour votre réponse. J’habite à Toulouse. Je connais vraiment bien l’hébreu et l’araméen car je suis hébraïsant. J’ai fais mes études en Israël tout en hébreu. Des musulmans ont essayés de le parler du mot Hamoud. Ils cherchent désespérément tout indice qui leur permettra de trouver ce pseudo Muhammad. Mais tous leurs efforts sont vains. Cela n’existe pas. Il faut démonter l’Islam que je connais bien, pour le bien de l’humanité. Après le nazisme et les différents communismes, l’Islam est l’ultime idéologie meurtrière qui menace le genre humain. Pour moi, le Coran, ou les Corans, est pire que le Mein Kampf d’Hitler. Bon week-end, amicalement Votre, Ephraïm
@@ephraimteitelbaum7696 C'est d'ailleurs quelqu'un qui a étudié l'hébreu et le judaïsme à Jérusalem, dans les écoles juives, qui a trouvé cette correspondance entre le surnom de Daniel et le titre "muhammad" : Kurt Hruby
@@OdonLafontaine Sans doute, mais j’aimerais connaître la référence. Une confrontation amicale est nécessaire. En lisant le nom il me semble que cette personne n’est pas israélienne comme moi. Vous savez, chez nous on dit que ceux qui ont écrits le TANAH avaient les lunettes BLUEUS. Ceux qui lisent ces mêmes textes ont des lunettes des couleurs différentes.
@@orunabho I suggest you read Chapter 1 of "An Introduction to Arab-Byzantine Coinage" by Goodwin and Gyselen. But in general, coins after 657 are usually dated in Hijri and/or the Byzantine Emperor reign year, and coins before that period can only be identified by comparison with the Byzantine coins they represent, which would have the same design.
Odin, Are you able to put together a successive line of men with the title of Mohammed. It appears that when Abdul Malik ended the line when he called himself the Praised One. Today Muslims think that Mohammed was a single person not realising that it is only a title
I see at least : 1) the historical Muhammad(s), before 640 2) Maybe a Ghassanid ruler 3) Abd Allah ibn al Zubayr 4) Abd al Malik As for Abd al Malik's Ummayyad successors, I cannot say wether they ruled as "muhammad" or as "successors of the muhammad" (meaning "successors of Abd al Malik")
I had a' dream' last night, in paragraph form, saying that the Arab empire was only possible if they had a wide-spread currency, a money supply making buying and selling, trading possible. Then I reasoned that it could not be paper money, it had to be coins, with the emperor's image on them. and I remembered this show stating there were no coins in Mecca/Medina, only mints 1,000 miles north in Iraq and Syria. so for the 'SIN' to be valid, there would have to be coins with the 'rasid' caliph's image on them, which there is no evidence of.
I want to get a couple examples of these coins get them mounted on a bezal so I can wear them and show them to Muslims if we ever get to talking about religion.
@@foreignstarz The Khuzestan Chronicle (Guidi's Chronicle) tells of a certain Arab raging war in Khuzestan and claiming to be the Messiah around 638 to 642, I strongly believe this is Umar.
@@_John_P interesting but I think it would be interesting to know what their religious views were. They couldn’t have claimed to be Messiah in the way we think because Jesus is clearly the Messiah that they believed in. Perhaps they claimed that they have certain Messianic powers or a sort of Messianic divine political claim.
@@foreignstarz Umar's sect seemed to believe that Jesus was just a prophet and that the Messiah was yet to come. Then Umar was already a prominent figure among his people when his tribe was contacted by a sect that was expelled from Jerusalem and asked for help. They then "taught" them they had the right to live in the Promised Land, as the basis to motivate them to take over Jerusalem. At a given point in 638 to 642 and possibly earlier, Umar was already proclaiming to be the Messiah, perhaps the sect that contacted them convinced him he could be that special if he fulfilled the requirements, which included taking over Jerusalem.
Saya pernah berdebat tentang tanda salib pada coin Arabic Byzantium ini, beberapa sanggahan yang mereka ajukan adalah: 1. Arab belum bisa membuat cetakan koin, sehingga memakai cetakan yg sudah ada.. hahaha lucu sekali, masa memakai cetakan yg sudah ada dan itu sampai puluhan tahun dari tahun 640-685.. 2. Arab pada waktu itu terburu2 membutuhkan duit segera sehingga menggunakan cetakan yg sudah ada.. hahahaha lucu terburu2 kok bisa sampai 30 tahunan 3. Itu adalah merupakan gradasi pemindahan kekuasaan secara bertahap.. lah katanya jamannya Umar sd Abdul Malik adalah jaman keemasan islam? yg area kekuasaannya dari Spanyol sampai Afganistan kenapa harus bergradasi.. mereka islam dan mereka berkuasa adalah sangat mustahil menggunakan tanda salib pada koin yg disebar2kan di wilayah kekuasannya..
37:21 No contemporary Arabic sources ( scribal or epigraphic) attests of a 'third Temple' or messianic hopes: same with identified Christian chroniclers: none observes messianic hopes of their Muslims interlocutors.
Hello Odon, your interpretation of the expression in Hebrew from the book of Daniel is wrong. “Daniel, Ish Hamudot” is not a name. Daniel is a name, “Ish Hamudot” is A man (Ish) is Hamudot, means CUTE. It’s a description of his character, not a name at all. דניאל, איש חמודות״.
I never said _Ish Hamudot_ was a name. I said it was the title given by Gabriel to Daniel As in 10:11, and also in 9:23 & 10:19 And it means a lot more thant "cutie pie"
It is possible that the jews and muslim in there alliance what to fullfill the word in Mal 3:1 ? "Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts. Malachi 3:1 KJV" And then the mulim ruler/kalif came into the temple and say i am the messiah?
"I will send my messenger( I.e. John the Baptist)... ..." and the Lord (I.e. Jesus Christ) whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple ( I.e.temple made by Herod the Great).The Muslim ruler is already too late 😎.
According to history, King Herod, whose existence is fictionalized in the New Testament, died in the 4th Century BC. But he never made or minted any coins. If we will go by the logic of Jay Smith, King Herod did not exist. No coins, no King Herod. Therefore, coins can unmake the existing kingdom like that of King Herod. Coins can rewrite history. Coins can the existence of one person into non-existent. What kind of logical reasoning are you inventing, Jay Smith? -06-04-23
Early Muslims adopted the doctrine if Arius, who taught that Jesus was a prophet and not part of the Godhead. As time progressed they refined their doctrine and deliberately differentiated themselves from Christian's in every possible.
@mysotiras 02 Ancient sources also talk about "the Arabs of MHMT", or "the Tayyaye of MHMT" (or MHMD). MHMD could then refer to one or several Arab leaders. It could also qualify for the whole group. In this case, I think MHMT (or MHMD) would refer to Jesus himself
Surely, the desert Arabs had nothing to offer the ourside world except a distinctive religious outlook? They therefore had no mints or coins of their own to bring out of Arabia, so it seems perfectly natural that they initially used those of the civilizations they conquered.
Of course it is natural But why then mint crosses? You will see that at a time, at the end of the 7th cent, the Arab rulers will stop minting crosses on their coins. Why then and not before?
@@OdonLafontaine Indeed! But the dating of the coin remain obscure, as I ask of John P on another thread. It appears to be most closely a copy of a coin from the reign of Justinian (527-565), so I am still wondering why it is attributed to 620-640, a century later? This segment seems to heavily dependent on accurately dating the coin, so I think it worth pursuing this as far as possible.
@mysotiras 02 Muslims may not mint them themselves, but they pragmatically use coins with crosses on them all the time abroad. As for the Nazi reference, leaving aside that occupied Europe did not use Reichsmarks, how could Reichsmarks be conveniernt in any way after Germany's defeat?
@mysotiras 02 So, we have now established several things, (1) you like to be insulting ("stupid". "brainless", "uneducated") rather than argue a rational case. (2) your Reichsmark analogy had no value whatsoever because it was not grounded in any reality and (3) you blithely ignore the fact that Muslims are pragmatic and have always used whatever coinage is convenient because it has material value. The issue here is their minting of coins, not their use of them.
Lumberjack = حطاب = hattab where as Omar bin el Khattab = خطاب with a dot on the letter changes the meaning to "the person who gives speaches" Omar son of the person who gives speaches and not son of the Lumberjack.
@@kamranshadkhast5035 true if it was only in written form, the Caliphate's names were passed on verbally as well, in our language the two names would have been obviously different although it is seen as a simple dot of difference here.
@@jadaz it does not make any big difference if he is the son of حطاب or خطاب . the issue is there is no trace of Omar in history up until 750 and after when the Standard Islamic Narrative being created and those name being built along with their kinships. so if in your language it is called the way you mentioned it all come from SIN when the dots were in use by the time so it does not imply if such person existed at 600 was called the same way.
@@kamranshadkhast5035 I like things to be accurate in order to build a solid argument, I am only pointing out the difference between the variations, it is called constructive criticism... If he did not exist and was later created do you think the name lumberjack would be attractive as a Caliphate?
@@jadaz Yes you are right it was not attractive to be son of a lumberjack because as Omar and his family were from Mecca no one can justify in place without any vegetation someone has a job as lumberjack so it is better to be son of speaker!!
I know PfanderFilms is your creation Jay but as in so many of these important presentations the guest speaker is left floundering in the background as you talk and talk and talk. It is almost 10 minutes into the programme before Odon gets the chance to speak and even then you interject. Let your guests speak!
@@OdonLafontaine The hole presentation is perfect - and more important than we could imagine - you and Jay, together with Mel, Al Fadi, Dan Gibson and others are the long term death to Islam.
With all respect, but I think you guys get a bit taken away with your interpretation of the usage of coins. Most important for the people is that they have a currency that is trusted and can be used to exchange goods. That also means in change goods if you have trade with your neighbours so consequently they either used Byzantine coins, or they printed their own ones. To use the structure they were used to the widely spread Byzantine coin design at this time is not unusual. It is normal that you just develop from the things you knew before and you’re used to. The only relevant question is if the people in power at the time produce, the coins is their own coins, and if so, then they were most likely Christian. As we assume that the early Islam was more or less a Christian offspring, this would fit into the same logic
This is utterly brilliant! I wonder can Muslims watching see that the Standard Islamic Narrative isn't true? The artifacts are telling the truth of what occurred back then. They trump any later narrative that is prone to error or willful distortion. Not only did they keep the monetary system in that period, they also continued the civil service, which was typically based around the Christian parishes and run by Christians. St John of Damascus' father and grandfather worked as civil servants in that system.
THE Big Question is why did the Muslims (those that created SIN) decide to create this fantasy, fanciful origin of Islam. And why has no one till today come forward to state the actual beginnings. And if the origin is make-believe then perhaps these people are just pagans who believe that the means justify the end and for them, and the end result is praying to Allah - all the Abrahamic notions do not matter and were simply used to attract the ignorant or those easily swayed. Or perhaps, even Allah doesn't even matter. All that matters to these pagans or even atheists is their subjugation and their adherence to the ways of the Arabs.
@@irishheritage893 I minted the coins myself to trick the whole world
@@irishheritage893 I think Odon meant it in a sarcastic way. Saying "yea these coins are fake because I made it to fool the world" actually meaning, "I cannot make fake coins because experts can point out its fake".
When christianity came about the first converts on mass were arabs. The nabateans and sabateans are prime examples. Petra was the capital of the nabatean empire. They were christians and minted christian coins. I would believe all the coins you have and showed are from northern arabia around the levante and iraq areas.
Your problem is you do not read with open mind, but read with closed eyes and one aim.
As it is known in the history of Islamic coins, Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan removed the cross from the coin and deleted the image of Heraclius and added another image that is said to be his image, and wrote on the dinars and dirhams verses of Surat Al-Ikhlas, and on the money the phrase Muhammad is the Messenger of God. All of this is recorded in the history of Islam as narrated by Muslim historians - and we will stay away from it - but, did any foreign non-Islamic sources talk about this conversion?
Is it really rumored that these coins prove the Christian roots of Islam?
Professor Kaegi mentioned three multiple testimonies, which he reckons are strong evidence of the Christians' response to this change of currency. The First Testimony is a book called Adversus judaeos Disputatio, originally written in Greek. The manuscripts of this book attribute it to Father Anastasius the Abbot, who was born in the era of Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan, but in the beginning, some scholars attributed this book to Saint Anastasius the Sinaite who lived in the second half of the seventh century and who died in the year 700, but most scholars do not They consider it his work. Kaegi cites another source in support of this saying, from the book (The Maronite chronicle) written in the year 664-665 AD, where he indicates that Muawiyah had an unsuccessful attempt to issue a coin without the Byzantine features of the cross and the image of their king in the year 661 AD . Where he says about him [3]: “He also minted gold and silver coins, but the people did not accept it because there was no cross on it.” He also minted gold and silver, but the populace did not accept it because there was no cross on it. The two dates may not refer to the same coin issue, but they do indicate the same reluctance of the Caliphate's population to accept Byzantine coins as shown in the two passages above. The two sources complement and reinforce each other. And they stress the existence of popular resistance to adjusting money [4]. - that nation will destroy the gold on which there is the image of the cross of Our Lord, Our God, in order to make all the countries under its rule mint their own gold with the name of a beast written on it, the number of whose name is six hundred and sixty-six 666.»
Astonishing findings and plausible explanations. Maybe difficult to swallow in one gulp. Thanks for the website, will lookup. Best regards to Dr Jay and Prof Lafontaine
Sometimes it is better to let the expert speak and you listen until he finished making his point.
I don’t know how anyone could be left confused by the guy stating the coins which are evidently Christian by design would not have been used by the guys who the SIN claim were in total control?
These coins totally demolish that narrative.
Yet more evidence that the story or narrative was written long after the event and that mistakes were made as those who wrote the narrative never realised that these coins which are hard evidence would still be in existence long after the book was written.
Same as they would never have imagined technology like Satelite Navigation would uncover the truth about the Origins of Mecca as the oldest long forgotten Mosque’s positions and direction of prayer would become apparent.
The whole narrative is falling apart.
The discussion is coming together nicely now with the identification of groups that Odon described in his chart from a previous episode and their place on this timeline described by the coins. Super job. I can hardly wait until the next episode.
Dr Jay is shaking Mohammed’s bones in his grave day and night😆
Thank you 🙏
There is only one Mahmad and his tomb has been empty for about 2000 years.
@@Bei-Abedan Red😊😊😊
There is no Muhammad, pay attention.
@@angrygirl7083 you are the one who needs to be paying attention.
@jamalkhan3708
Are you an ex-Muslim?
I'm very much looking forward to the next videos. I think we're now at a stage where we can say for sure that the Standard Islamic Narrative doesn't work historically and is a later construction but we're still on our way to put all the evidence together to create a historically consistent new narrative.
No need to wait too long to find the whole truth. Just go to the Vatican library and archives, the answer is there.
@@azedinebenammar4339 The Vatican librarians say it's going to take them about 100 years to finish scanning all the documents (40M pages) at the current pace. They scan less than a 1,000 manuscripts a year with 5 scanners and it should cost about US$25M in total. After scanning, the documents have to be translated from a variety of languages and many are illegible or very hard to read.
John P I think that Azedine Benammar is a Vatican Conspiracy Theorist, or a troll. Either way.
@@justaminute3111 Regardless, I do agree with his viewpoint that the Vatican library must have relevant documents on the subject, completely forgotten in its vaults.
Here watching from Nigeria,appreciate .
@Gaslow Ringfa, are you from Plateau?
@Mi 😀 ...Dr. Alban is from my side of the country.
Yes I am
@@gaslowringfa6951 That's cool.
Praying for Plateau. May the Lord bless you and keep you safe.
God bless Dr. Jay and Odon. Thanks for the knowledge and please keep taking bricks from the foundation of Islam.
Great job Odon and Jay. The more these kinds of evidences are produced it will change the standard Islamic narratives. The good thing about all these evidences are that they will change the narratives which could lead to deconstruction of the standard supremist ideology in the Qura'n and destruct the foundation of Islamic Jihadism. Great job guys.
Odon in many ways backs up what you were saying in your previous videos on the coins Jay, but with a slightly different perspective, which makes complete sense, fabulous power point, many thanks to both Odon and yourself Jay
This is very interesting. It supports the thesis of Yehuda Nevo in Crossroads to Islam that there were no conquests rather filling in the emptiness after the withdrawal of the troops of Byzantium. Nevo's explanation is that there was a shift in the Byzantium elite from conquests to trading.
Then after that Arabs wanted a split so they created a new Religion.
According to Nevo Byzamtium used religious differences to isolate themselves from other Christian groups so that they wouldn't be obliged to defend them. And that policy contributed to the arabs developing a religious movement against the divinity of Christ which was a well spread opinion at that time among the diversified Christianity.
The Greek historian Theophanus refers to Mu'awiya and Umar as "Primus inter pares" (Gr. Protosymboulos), instead of kings, which means they were seen as representatives of a group or confederation. In the case of Mu'awiya that would most likely be the confederation of the Quraysh in Syria.
@@_John_P Bot who the heck were the 'Quraysh'....? ( the Koresh? The People of Cyrus..? Actual Arabic tribe with a non-arabic name....?)
@@jacoubal_cestriani6745 The Quraysh were a confederation of tribes in Syria and supposedly the "tribe" of Muhammad.
45:00 muhammed baptized Umar??? What?? That reference should be widely published so we can all use it.
This is what Tunisian author Héla Ouardi discovered and wrote in her last book about Umar. She found the story of his baptism in Ibn al-Jawzi's Manaqib Umar
@Islamic pi it's about Muhammad pouring water on Umar’s head
@Islamic pi I'll ask for it
@@OdonLafontaine
You started to spread lies. I have the book you are talking about: Virtues of Umar ibn al-Khattab toIbn Jawziyyah. There is nothing in it that Prophet Muhammad poured water on Umar. There is a story that says Umar asked his sister to give him a scroll written in it Surah Taha and his sister said to him: you are not clean you have to go and take a bath nothing more. Taking a bath is a ritual one has to go through if he wants to enter Islam and has nothing to do with baptism.
@@OdonLafontaine
By the way what do you think about the following.
As it is known in the history of Islamic coins, Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan removed the cross from the coin and deleted the image of Heraclius and added another image that is said to be his image, and wrote on the dinars and dirhams on one side verses of Surat Al-Ikhlas, and on the other side the phrase Muhammad is the Messenger of God. All of this is recorded in the history of Islam as narrated by Muslim historians - for the sake of argument let us stay away from it - but, did any foreign non-Islamic sources talk about this conversion?
Is it really rumored that these coins prove the Christian roots of Islam?
Professor Kaegi mentioned three multiple testimonies, which he reckons are strong evidence of the Christians' response to this change of currency. The First Testimony is a book called Adversus judaeos Disputatio, originally written in Greek. The manuscripts of this book attribute it to Father Anastasius the Abbot, who was born in the era of Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan, but in the beginning, some scholars attributed this book to Saint Anastasius the Sinaite who lived in the second half of the seventh century and who died in the year 700, but most scholars do not consider it his work. Kaegi cites another source in support of this saying, from the book (The Maronite chronicle) written in the year 664-665 AD, where he indicates that Muawiyah had an unsuccessful attempt to issue a coin without the Byzantine features of the cross and the image of their king in the year 661 AD . Where he says about him [3]: “He also minted gold and silver coins, but the people did not accept it because there was no cross on it.” He also minted gold and silver, but the populace did not accept it because there was no cross on it. The two dates may not refer to the same coin issue, but they do indicate the same reluctance of the Caliphate's population to accept Byzantine coins as shown in the two passages above. The two sources complement and reinforce each other. And they stress the existence of popular resistance to adjusting money [4]. - that nation will destroy the gold on which there is the image of the cross of Our Lord, Our God, in order to make all the countries under its rule mint their own gold with the name of a beast written on it, the number of whose name is six hundred and sixty-six 666.»
Adversus judaeos Disputatio offers, returning to the main topic, at least a glimpse into the late seventh century. It reveals the need for Christians to explain Arab victories and Byzantine setbacks. It shows that at least one orthodox Christian was still able to feel comfort from recent historical experiences and find reason to trust the Byzantine Empire and the survival of Christian societies under Islamic control. It attests to the persistence of Byzantine prestige within the Muslim-controlled lands and the problems that early Islamic authorities faced in trying to remove familiar Christian symbols from their coins, and thus provides an additional background to the coinage struggle between Emperor Justinian II and Caliph Abd al-Malik [6].
For further references please see the following:
[1] WALTER E. KAEGI
GI, BYZANTIUM AND THE EARLY ISLAMIC CONQUESTS, CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, p.221-222
[2] ibid, p.224
[3] ibid
[4] ibid, p.225
[5] Pseudo-Athanasius, in edition and translation by Francisco Javier Martinez, "Eastern Christian Apologetic in the Early Muslim Period " 529-30 ( same refernce).
[6] ibid, p.227
At least it is clear that the Arab rulers who minted the Byzantine look alike coins had never heard of Muhammad when he was supposed to have lived. Which only means that the "prophet" Muhammad of the Qur'an that we know today through the SIN never really existed.
Huh? What a boutique historical reference to him? Sebeos etc?
@@libnlr75tech6Very good question. So was that Muhammad the same as the "prophet" Muhammad of the Qur'an? Or was a legend constructed around this man so that he was elevated to a "prophet"? Perhaps even he wouldn't have expected to end up as a "prophet" of a brand new religion a few centuries down the line. In all likelihood, the Qur'an was already in existence even if in some rudimentary form before this person was even born. It's doubtful if even this person would recognise any of today's Qur'ans. He would probably ask today's Muslims "I revealed this to you and these hadiths are about me?" He would say "I worshipped the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and also consider Jesus as the Messiah. I never married a 6 year old kid, rather like everybody else I married a woman with her consent. I never hated the Jews and the Christians, rather I treated them as my brothers".As for the colorful character in the hadiths, I am deeply offended if that is what I am being portrayed as. I don't even recognise that person. Infact I wonder which third rate low life scum could have written this tripe about me".
The man and the book, the man and the book.
Up in the north, up in the north.
37:53 "lead the army of the believers" = "commander of the faithful"
The latter term was used by Abd al Malik (Servant of the King) on the Dome of the Rock. But we can see the parallel title here, used by The Angel of the LORD:
Joshua 5:14 “Neither,” He replied. “I have now come as *Commander of the LORD’s army.”* Then Joshua fell facedown in reverence and asked Him, “What does my Lord have to say to His servant?” 15 The Commander of the LORD’s army replied, “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy.” And Joshua did so.
Interesting. Tx for this point
This episode provokes so many questions. The reexamination of MHMD, HMD, Ahmed and the issue of the paraclet was good and does deserve a video on its own. The name Farooq adds to the mystery. And we know that all the names we read in the Quran have some significance beyond what one imagines. This alone points to a complete fabrication with the intention of telling a story to the uninitiated in a way they can understand. Novelists do it all the time in fiction to describe their characters.
I love finding new creators/ debunkers of Islam ….spitting facts brother keep up the good guys ✌🏼😉
Yes, hello again,Jay.. yes the coin’s from afew years ago,, still vary interesting. Can’t wait to hear more, in this video.
Umar was baptised by MHMD in the tradition. Wowee wow. How much we haven't heard.
It is a lie invented by this Odon. I have the Book Odon referred to Managib Umer by Imam Ibn Jawziyyah there is nothing in it about umer baptism. If you know Arabic type Virtues of Umar ibn al-Khattab to Ibn Jawziyyah. Fortunately the book is free and online.
@@mahmoodali1533 speaking about invented lies, what do you think the Hadith are??
@@blackpalacemusic
Honestly if you did not study the hadith science and with the ideas that you have I do not think that there is a benefit of talking to you about this subject. But, in hadith there are 500,000 men and women involved in the narration of hadith, so it is almost impossible to subscribe to the conspiracy theory that 500,000 men and women gathered together in the under world and plotted , the haidth, Islamic beliefs, laws, sharia, rules history and invented prophet Muhammad.
@@mahmoodali1533 yeah unless a few individuals created the Hadith and attributed them to 500,000 people. If the Qur'an is the miracle of Allah, it alone should suffice. Reliance on the Hadith suggest that Allah's Qur'an is so confusing and vague, it needs the specificity of books created by man.
@@blackpalacemusic
Let me just give you a simple example and I repeat a simple example that explains howwe consider hadith is reliable or not reliable. Suppose that there is someone his name is Hassan said I have hadith, he says I heard this hadith from Ali and Ali heard from Umer and Umer heard from Uttoman. Then we study hassan and first we see what century he lived in , we return to see if he is known man, meaning are there some people wrote about him or wrote a biography about him? If we do not find his biography then that is easy thing we consider hadith is unreliable. But if we find his biography then we study his biography and see how many men wrote about him. If only one man wrote about him, then that is called one chain. We consider it neither reliable nor unreliable. Now if we find at least two different people wrote about him, then that biography will be reliable. Then we start to study Hassan biography1- what century he lived in, 2-was he young when he said this hadith, 3-was he old, 4-did he have a good memory, 5-did he have any political affiliation he wanted to strength it that made him lie, 6- did he commit any crime, 7- did he ever lie even one lie, 8- Did he hear from Ali directly , 9-did he live in the same time and place as Ali? Those 9 conditions must met before even we hear the hadith. After those 9 conditions met, then we go to Ali and repeat the study about him and see from whom Ali heard the hadith and then we go to Umer and repeat the study and then we go to Uttoman and repeat the study. 500,000 men and women Muslims scholars studied them like this and knew everything about their lives. So, now you are telling me a few men wrote the hadith and invented the name and biography of 500,000 men and women? I hope just one day you try to sudty the since of hadith and I'm sure you will come back and laugh and your naivety and simplicity.
J'ai telllllllement rigolé quand vous avez dit "Pardon my French". Aussi, les analogies de l'utilisation aujourd'hui par plusieurs pays, du dollar américain, m'ont aidée à comprendre les nuances que nous devons voir dans les divers représentations sur les pièces de monnaie. Merci encore!
😀
Jay's occasional summaries and clarifications are very welcome. But a bit shorter, maybe?
Great stuff Odon! God Bless!!!
In Tauste, two types of burial have been located: a first group dating from the 8th century, with the graves oriented towards Córdoba (the capital of the emirate), and a second group dating between the 9th and 10th centuries, with the burials already oriented towards Mecca.
Follow the narrow path!! Islam makes the path wide and welcoming with perks for men who convert and torment to those who resist.
Coins are very good evidence. This is lethal for the SIN.
@Islamic pi You've effectively made Clive Foss' argument, which is what I would agree with. But the fact that there was an evolution of coinage, keeping with past imagery to keep the coins "reputable," and that a wholly Islamic coin was rejected (which even caused a war) means that there was no Islamic empire. It means his following during his ministry 20 years before death and 40 years after (when they conquered Jerusalem) wasn't enough to persuade people to use Islamic coinage, ie, his support or belief in his words was not as strong as Islam claims. The Jerusalem conquest was mostly bloodless (much like how the Taliban retook Afghanistan). But the Christians and Jews were not equipped to fight them, and were satisfied living under the secular Byzantine Empire for hundreds of years, little did they know a group would come in and create a new religion by slowly changing the imagery of their coins and by building structures that denounced, in at least the Christian sense, their very existence. (Inscriptions on the Dome of the Rock.)
@Islamic pi The problem is the Islamic nature of conversion is hardly voluntary. The teachings are extreme even from a purely Quranic perspective. And because we are missing almost a century of real development, no evidence of a large following, no written acknowledgements until 150-200 years afterward. It was all *being created* out of thin air at the time. That's the point. The coins tell this "transition" story. And they struck at the heart of the Christian/Jewish lands to ingratiate themselves in an otherwise secular society.
@Islamic pi Jay has been struggling with an "argument of silence" when it comes to early Islam, because lacking evidence doesn't mean proof of something. So when the coin observation came out, that gave them more to go on. The thing that gets me is the Petra/Mecca evidence, so looking elsewhere is good. I don't think anyone would argue against Islam being a new/starting religion (except for hardliners I guess). But the geographical problems with Mecca make it difficult. I've gone down a deep rabbit hole for this and I think Smith and Gibson are on to something. As an ignostic it is just an interesting thing to read about. I'm finding Mecca likely doesn't fit any of the Quran in any reasonable way and the paganistic practices that happen there are truly remarkable for an ancient religion that somehow grew up during the rise of Christianity.
@@joshcryer I agree, Mecca is a disaster for is lam. It cannot possibly be the city that is told in the standard islamic narrative. It is the most obvious lie among all the other lies.
@@toddbeamer6131 Mecca is a total falsehood, thus throwing the validity of the entire religion into question.
The actual new information begins at 12:30.
Soon the Islamic Tradition will say that Santa Claus came from Mecca too!!
43:16 If Umar was described as a lumberjack, does this mean he was a carpenter too? Seems to me that there are a lot of people running around the early Islamic narratives carrying what appear to be titles that belong to Jesus the Messiah but that somehow have been erroneously(?) interpreted as different men. Keep in mind too that "building a temple" does not simply mean building a physical temple but could also mean a community of believers i.e. a temple made of living stones.
Fantastic presentation. Thank you very much. But can you please give some references to 1. Muhammad baptising Umar 2. Umar being a lumberjack in Syria 3. Ali is from Kufa / Hira. Ali was the son of Abu Talib who was Mohamed's uncle. Does that mean Abu Talib and Mohamed also came from Kufa / Hira? You must share the references from that Tunisian author's book which you quoted. Thank you.
The plot thickens.
Sin leads to SIN leads to sin leads to SIN leads to sin leads to SIN....
Really good, but no music please
From minute 28 I can see the things Peter Von Sivers had lectured about, the coming of Arabs how they filled the Buffer space between the Persians and Byzantines. Mr Odon and Dr Jay hope you are familiar with his works
I am not that familiar, but I know a bit. I met him once, read some articles and attended his 2019 conference at Inarah.
@@OdonLafontaine Thanks for the reply☺
Historical.. Textual... and Source Criticisms are the greatest enemies of Islam..
Thank you gentlemen, Odon and Jay🙏✝️🕊
Yuhuu..i'm so excited to see this update presentation brought by Mr. Lafontaine.
Lol @ when he says pardon my French.
27:59 Pre-independent commonwealth countries usually had their own currency, but would have the image of the current British Monarch incorporated into the design. After independence, their image would be removed and replaced by their own coat of arms or other design element. If there are images, then perhaps of historically important persons to that country. I do not know if any immediately transitioned to replacing the image of the British Monarch with their own sitting president or prime minister. If this holds true for the arabs, then perhaps it was not the case that the missing images in later coins are as a result of iconoclasm, but simply a sign that these nations are no longer under byzantine hegemony.
Now that is interesting. coins with Christian motives coined by Arab Muslims. That turns the whole SIN upside down. I would like to know what Islamic source tells us that Muhammad baptised 'Umar? What do we need coins for, if the Islamic sources undermine their own teaching?
Fantastics.analysis, Odon. Could you provide the title of the book on Umar and whether it is available in English? Is it written by a Tunisian lady?
It's from Héla Ouardi. Title :
Les califes maudits, meurtre à la mosquée (the doomed caliphs: murder at the mosque). It has just been published in French (Albin Michel editions), so no English translation yet
Odon, how can we buy your book in English? Amazon has its French version
Brilliant guys. This is the reality.
The early quranic manuscripts have problems, what is the provenance of the Hadith and similar books?6
What are the earliest copies?
earliest copies of some Hadiths are 16th century
@@fantasia55 Ha ha , great, that makes them really believable. I'm sure no text in them has been changed in ~600 years.
People get used to certain coinage and it’s worth, and once a new power takes over, they can’t just change everything at once (especially if the economy is to continue) so they replicate what ordinary people know and trust and then after a while they start introducing changes that continue the economy, the Indian government withdraw certain notes recently and there was an uproar, so you have to graduate changes to keep stability
Great! But then who minted the Persian themed coins?
I will never hear the Lumberjack song by Monty Python the same way after this. 😁
The thing with wearing women's clothes ?
@@OdonLafontaine Haha, yes. This is just a spoof. Nothing serious. 😁👍
@@OdonLafontaine LOL
There are a lot of questions that the Ullma needs to answer and l Don't think they are anywhere close to doing so.
Here in Spain some supposedly Muslim tombs were found but the bodies were not oriented towards Mecca
In Tauste, two types of burial have been located: a first group dating from the 8th century, with the graves oriented towards Córdoba (the capital of the emirate), and a second group dating between the 9th and 10th centuries, with the burials already oriented towards Mecca.
Jay Smith: you seems very very nervous out there huhooo 🤣🤣 👈
The Mongols could enforce the acceptance of paper currency under the pain of death. A regime that isn't completely in power may have to keep an existing currency that was generally accepted until power was firmly established or the processes could be assimilated. An intermediary form might be used. It's happened before. It makes sense.
That's the whole point: the Arab leaders from this time did not have full power. They were not that firmly established. They were no "caliphs".
How was the date of the coin established as between 640 and 660?
This is Clive Foss' field of expertise.
@@OdonLafontaine So we are taking the dating on trust?
@@markaxworthy2508 No. On scholarship.
@@OdonLafontaine quite possibly, but until the scholarship is laid before us, we are working on trust. Can you put up his reasoning for the dating at some stage?
Arab coins after 656 are usually dated, coins before that period are normally dated by comparison with Byzantine coins, as they were close copies of the Byzantine motif, hence the date for the coin is usually the period in which a specific Byzantine ruler was in power or the period a Byzantine motif was known to be in circulation. For instance, Heraclius (610-641), Constantine III (613-641), Heraklonas (638-642) and Constans II (641-668) are contemporaries of Umar (d.644), thus any coins copying the motifs used by those emperors would be dated to the same period. The coin presented by Odon is dated 640-660 for this reason and, if you take the Islamic tradition into account, it could be attributed to either Umar (634-644), Uthman (644-656) or Ali (656-661).
Nice video; still, Muslims will simply say that successive Islamic governments were modern, and they did not want to spread panic among people as a kind of politics, and this is a normal thing that many countries did when they occupied other countries, and they may come up with examples of that. In your opinion, Mr. Odon, how can this claim be answered?
I agree with them tacitly as Muslims living in the West claim that Islamic law is fully compatible with human rights laws, even some presidents like Obama, Justin Trudeau and even former British Prime Minister Theresa May claim the same nonsense
Then why did Abd al-Malik change the coinage? What was so different with Abd al-Malik than the previous Arab rulers?
The anwser: should the previous ones have wanted to get rid of crosses and establish an Islam that did not exist during their time, they could not have. They had no such power over the populations, over the Byzantine Empire. Which means they were not the mighty caliphs that the SIN said they were, which means Islam was not not established during their time. It is only from Abd al-Malik's time that such a power was established. Not before.
I wrote an extensive answer to this question in a comment here. But a good question to ask a Muslim who raises such a claim is this: can you imagine Umar in Medina or Ali in Kufa being the Khalifa or Imam of Muslims using a Sassanian coin with Zoroastrian fire alters on them to buy food? :) At least they could have minted Islamic coins in Medina their early capital. Their argument would have hold only if Arabs were not Muslims or not religiously motivated, which was indeed the case. So this argument only proves that early Arab state was a secular totally political establishment, contrary to what the standard narrative claims.
Thank you Odon. Is it possible the Muslims forged the Byzantine coins? The coins’ metal might show where the coins were manufactured.
Hi Jay Smith keep searching and telling the truth and exposed the lies of islam
What is your interpretation of the Battle of Yarmouk? Do we have Roman sources attesting to the battle?
Glasses ringbeard and pipe screams authority!
Did odon give his talk in the end?
He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.◄ Revelation 22:20
Early Muslims were Ebonite Christians and here we have muslims preaching everywhere that Jesus Christ is a muslim...what an irony.
How do we know that Muawya had to pay a tribute to the Byzantines? And that he had to melt all the thousands of coins and mint them again, properly.?
36:32 The Jews were naturally very happy that the Arabs take Jerusalem and expelled the Christian Roman power. But the Arabs expelled the Jews (an not Odon's Judeo Nazarenes who have never existed) from the Temple Mount and built there a house of prayer for themselves.
There is external evidence from Jewish sources that supports at least that the Arabs entered Jerusalem with a messianic Jewish sect. So though he theorising using the quran his conclusions seem at this point not unfounded.
@@leedza The Jews does not need an exterior 'messianic' sect (the Gallez one) as they are intrinsically 'messianic'. The Messiah in Judaism free Israel from its ennemies and will help to free Jerusalem. Messianic hopes runs from Greek and Roman occupations until the Arab one.
Is this possible the M on these coins pointing to Muhammad M?
The music is incredibly distracting.
Beer appears to make Jay Smith overly chatty - it also makes him not listen very well and go off on silly tangents (like the currency of Liberia). Overly long introductions, constant interruptions because Jay does not fully understand what is being said or he feels the needs to repeat it. over and over again The substance in the videos is great, but this video could have been 8-10 minutes tops.
Hi brothers Odon, Jay, is there any where I can get, buy the book or read the reference to mhmd baptising Umar.
Yours is a good question here
As I could have asked as much
So who are the Umar and Ali you are talking about here? The arab leader at the time was named Umar and was a lumberjack? I’m confused about these northern figures with the same names that claimed these titles any reference videos that delve more into this? Or sources?
Modernisation finding slowly exfoliating islam colour..
In conclusion: The only Messianic stuff in the 7th c. is the Jewish one: rebuilt the TEMPLE as the Christians were wiped out from the power in Palestine. All of this is sourced.
Umar was cut / stabbed in Jerusalem according to Mel, the story of the night journey Islam changed to fit Muhammad was all about Umar and the rock which is why in 685 they started to build a Dome / temple over it, Mel believes Umar is in that cave under the Dome today as he was devoted to this spot, Umar told his followers he will come back to life after 3 days he never did and started to stink, this is why they say Momo flew on a donkey and ascended into heaven but in fact it was Umar that ascended into heaven from this spot when he died which his body / bones remain still this day. After Umar died they then took the religion down in the desert and created a whole new narrative, this fabricated Momo never existed... Only reason they chose a baron land as no one claimed it so no clash with other religions. Petra was probably the first stop off till the earthquake then they moved to this new town Mecca and renamed Yathrib to Medina to fit the S.I.N. One thing is sure they gone to a lot of effort to keep its secret... Do you think the Islamic Empire has all the answers on what went on hidden in their vault, sure they would not truly destroy history its not like they burn Qurans or drown them (lol)!!!
If according to Lloyd the Templers are a early sect off of Islam they may unlock some key points, also the Free Masons and KKK all sects of this evil twisted cult... What I find strange the Templers used crosses, very confusing ideology.
What WILL muslims do now,
challenged by
a SIN-less 'islam' ?...
Hopefully they'll turn to the only option, Jesus Christ is Lord and Saviour of all mankind!!!
THE Big Question is why did the Muslims (those that created SIN) decide to create this fantasy, fanciful origin of Islam. And why has no one till today come forward to state the actual beginnings. And if the origin is make-believe then perhaps these people are just pagans who believe that the means justify the end and for them, and the end result is praying to Allah - all the Abrahamic notions do not matter and were simply used to attract the ignorant or those easily swayed. Or perhaps, even Allah doesn't even matter. All that matters to these pagans or even atheists is their subjugation and their adherence to the ways of the Arabs.
during these time, many arabs are already christianized. Most likely these are arabs who copies jewish practice but at the same time see Jesus as their messiah basically a kind of Messianic jewish religion but arabized. Then they moved their Holy city from Jerusalem to Mecca for some reason.
If you ever witnessed someone change their story to get out of trouble you will recognise it as the same, just on a larger scale.
@@Speakers154 My point is that the Quran and hence those that created mainstream Islam as we know it today imbued Arab religious ideas and practices into this so-called Christian/Jewish/Abrahamic religion that the early group of Arabs adopted. The Quran and mainstream islam are intrinsically pagan Arab in ideas and practices. I propose another group came into power and this group are not the same as the group that inherited Abrahamic with honest intentions.
Pure Gold
This people crack me up, especially js. He does this for most of his life, but nobody takes him serious 😂
In the Islamic currency system, the first coin that bore an Arabic inscription was called a dinar and was similar, in both size and weight, to the Byzantine solidus. ... The conquering Muslims at first mimicked the coinage of their predecessors
You are like all those copies of the divergent Korans when Egypt standardised everything to the Hafs version: in de Nile. Miraculously preserved.
@@justaminute3111 hahaha
Love Odon
Umar the lumberjack. Funny. There's not a whole lot of forest in Syria, but there is some.
Well, Lebanon is famous for its cedars: perhaps Umar cut down all those in Syria?
Daniel was not the “ precursor” of any M’essaya ! All the Prophets of Israel talked avait the MASHIAH who will come to save ISRAEL. It’s the Jewish faith. The expression MAHMAD from the root in Hebrew חמד has nothing to do with any person or idea other than a description of a character of a person.
The Hebrew Academy says that in the book of “Song of Songs” it’s written as an hymn of love.
Well, Daniel gave a calendar for the first and the second comings of the messiah. This makes Daniel a very special prophet.
@@OdonLafontaine bonsoir, bien entendu. J’apprécie beaucoup votre travail et merci pour votre réponse. J’habite à Toulouse. Je connais vraiment bien l’hébreu et l’araméen car je suis hébraïsant. J’ai fais mes études en Israël tout en hébreu. Des musulmans ont essayés de le parler du mot Hamoud. Ils cherchent désespérément tout indice qui leur permettra de trouver ce pseudo Muhammad. Mais tous leurs efforts sont vains. Cela n’existe pas.
Il faut démonter l’Islam que je connais bien, pour le bien de l’humanité. Après le nazisme et les différents communismes, l’Islam est l’ultime idéologie meurtrière qui menace le genre humain. Pour moi, le Coran, ou les Corans, est pire que le Mein Kampf d’Hitler.
Bon week-end, amicalement Votre, Ephraïm
@@ephraimteitelbaum7696 C'est d'ailleurs quelqu'un qui a étudié l'hébreu et le judaïsme à Jérusalem, dans les écoles juives, qui a trouvé cette correspondance entre le surnom de Daniel et le titre "muhammad" : Kurt Hruby
@@OdonLafontaine Sans doute, mais j’aimerais connaître la référence. Une confrontation amicale est nécessaire. En lisant le nom il me semble que cette personne n’est pas israélienne comme moi.
Vous savez, chez nous on dit que ceux qui ont écrits le TANAH avaient les lunettes BLUEUS. Ceux qui lisent ces mêmes textes ont des lunettes des couleurs différentes.
You cannot Deny Historical evidence.
How do we know that these coins were minted by Arabs and minted between 640-660 CE
@mysotiras 02 how. Any name on the coins, date, year, calendar? Which calendar?
@@orunabho I suggest you read Chapter 1 of "An Introduction to Arab-Byzantine Coinage" by Goodwin and Gyselen. But in general, coins after 657 are usually dated in Hijri and/or the Byzantine Emperor reign year, and coins before that period can only be identified by comparison with the Byzantine coins they represent, which would have the same design.
@@_John_P thanks John. I will read it.
Odin, Are you able to put together a successive line of men with the title of Mohammed. It appears that when Abdul Malik ended the line when he called himself the Praised One. Today Muslims think that Mohammed was a single person not realising that it is only a title
I see at least :
1) the historical Muhammad(s), before 640
2) Maybe a Ghassanid ruler
3) Abd Allah ibn al Zubayr
4) Abd al Malik
As for Abd al Malik's Ummayyad successors, I cannot say wether they ruled as "muhammad" or as "successors of the muhammad" (meaning "successors of Abd al Malik")
Much as Jesus Christos is not a name - It’s Jesus “the Christ”, the last part being a title, or a cognomen, perhaps.
How do we know that these coins were minted at by Arabs? What is dating based on?
I had a' dream' last night, in paragraph form, saying that the Arab empire was only possible if they had a wide-spread currency, a money supply making buying and selling, trading possible. Then I reasoned that it could not be paper money, it had to be coins, with the emperor's image on them. and I remembered this show stating there were no coins in Mecca/Medina, only mints 1,000 miles north in Iraq and Syria. so for the 'SIN' to be valid, there would have to be coins with the 'rasid' caliph's image on them, which there is no evidence of.
"i had a dream last night, in a form of excell"
one's a carpenter, the other a lumberjack. Maybe the Messiah's real name is Woody?
I want to get a couple examples of these coins get them mounted on a bezal so I can wear them and show them to Muslims if we ever get to talking about religion.
So, Umar pretended to be Messiah? And Ali as well? The reincarnation of Jesus?
Just like is lame pretends to be from God
More like a representative of the Messiah on Earth.
@@foreignstarz The Khuzestan Chronicle (Guidi's Chronicle) tells of a certain Arab raging war in Khuzestan and claiming to be the Messiah around 638 to 642, I strongly believe this is Umar.
@@_John_P interesting but I think it would be interesting to know what their religious views were. They couldn’t have claimed to be Messiah in the way we think because Jesus is clearly the Messiah that they believed in. Perhaps they claimed that they have certain Messianic powers or a sort of Messianic divine political claim.
@@foreignstarz Umar's sect seemed to believe that Jesus was just a prophet and that the Messiah was yet to come. Then Umar was already a prominent figure among his people when his tribe was contacted by a sect that was expelled from Jerusalem and asked for help. They then "taught" them they had the right to live in the Promised Land, as the basis to motivate them to take over Jerusalem. At a given point in 638 to 642 and possibly earlier, Umar was already proclaiming to be the Messiah, perhaps the sect that contacted them convinced him he could be that special if he fulfilled the requirements, which included taking over Jerusalem.
Jay should let his guests speak.
Saya pernah berdebat tentang tanda salib pada coin Arabic Byzantium ini, beberapa sanggahan yang mereka ajukan adalah:
1. Arab belum bisa membuat cetakan koin, sehingga memakai cetakan yg sudah ada.. hahaha lucu sekali, masa memakai cetakan yg sudah ada dan itu sampai puluhan tahun dari tahun 640-685..
2. Arab pada waktu itu terburu2 membutuhkan duit segera sehingga menggunakan cetakan yg sudah ada.. hahahaha lucu terburu2 kok bisa sampai 30 tahunan
3. Itu adalah merupakan gradasi pemindahan kekuasaan secara bertahap.. lah katanya jamannya Umar sd Abdul Malik adalah jaman keemasan islam? yg area kekuasaannya dari Spanyol sampai Afganistan kenapa harus bergradasi.. mereka islam dan mereka berkuasa adalah sangat mustahil menggunakan tanda salib pada koin yg disebar2kan di wilayah kekuasannya..
37:21 No contemporary Arabic sources ( scribal or epigraphic) attests of a 'third Temple' or messianic hopes: same with identified Christian chroniclers: none observes messianic hopes of their Muslims interlocutors.
Hello Odon, your interpretation of the expression in Hebrew from the book of Daniel is wrong. “Daniel, Ish Hamudot” is not a name. Daniel is a name, “Ish Hamudot” is A man (Ish) is Hamudot, means CUTE. It’s a description of his character, not a name at all.
דניאל, איש חמודות״.
I never said _Ish Hamudot_ was a name.
I said it was the title given by Gabriel to Daniel
As in 10:11, and also in 9:23 & 10:19
And it means a lot more thant "cutie pie"
Is Odon considered "the smoking gun"? 😀
He is Popeye's friend that surfing the histories not ocean😄
It is possible that the jews and muslim in there alliance what to fullfill the word in Mal 3:1 ?
"Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts.
Malachi 3:1 KJV"
And then the mulim ruler/kalif came into the temple and say i am the messiah?
No.
"I will send my messenger( I.e. John the Baptist)... ..." and the Lord (I.e. Jesus Christ) whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple ( I.e.temple made by Herod the Great).The Muslim ruler is already too late 😎.
@@cesarpintes3213 yeah this is clear but i mean the want to force it, even if it woas too late
According to history, King Herod, whose existence is fictionalized in the New Testament, died in the 4th Century BC. But he never made or minted any coins. If we will go by the logic of Jay Smith, King Herod did not exist. No coins, no King Herod. Therefore, coins can unmake the existing kingdom like that of King Herod. Coins can rewrite history. Coins can the existence of one person into non-existent. What kind of logical reasoning are you inventing, Jay Smith? -06-04-23
Gold content
So basically, Mohamed Umar Ali were christians with different believe on Christ?
Early Muslims adopted the doctrine if Arius, who taught that Jesus was a prophet and not part of the Godhead. As time progressed they refined their doctrine and deliberately differentiated themselves from Christian's in every possible.
A lot of the Arab Nations know it started off in Yemen Arabian Felix very fertile
So your saying me Muhammad umar Ali never existed? What about sebeos? So why should I believe jesus existed huh?
I never said that. Listen again...
@mysotiras 02 Ancient sources also talk about "the Arabs of MHMT", or "the Tayyaye of MHMT" (or MHMD). MHMD could then refer to one or several Arab leaders. It could also qualify for the whole group. In this case, I think MHMT (or MHMD) would refer to Jesus himself
@mysotiras 02 Yes, an old conjecture: MHD (the praised one) could always be meant as a title not a name
@@OdonLafontaine ok what about Jesus are you saying he is Mhmt
@mysotiras 02 really do historians even know jesus real name? Some say it's isho some say it's yeshua
It might be easier to keep each segment to 20-30 minutes if Jay didn't take 11 minutes and 49 seconds on his introduction!
I think he is putting Odon at ease because of his limited English!
@@judeabraham5139 We did the recording of this presentation in one long 2hours take...
Surely, the desert Arabs had nothing to offer the ourside world except a distinctive religious outlook? They therefore had no mints or coins of their own to bring out of Arabia, so it seems perfectly natural that they initially used those of the civilizations they conquered.
Of course it is natural
But why then mint crosses? You will see that at a time, at the end of the 7th cent, the Arab rulers will stop minting crosses on their coins. Why then and not before?
@@OdonLafontaine Indeed! But the dating of the coin remain obscure, as I ask of John P on another thread. It appears to be most closely a copy of a coin from the reign of Justinian (527-565), so I am still wondering why it is attributed to 620-640, a century later? This segment seems to heavily dependent on accurately dating the coin, so I think it worth pursuing this as far as possible.
@@markaxworthy2508 I hope my explanation there clarified that it's actually linked to Constans II, not Justinian.
@mysotiras 02 Muslims may not mint them themselves, but they pragmatically use coins with crosses on them all the time abroad. As for the Nazi reference, leaving aside that occupied Europe did not use Reichsmarks, how could Reichsmarks be conveniernt in any way after Germany's defeat?
@mysotiras 02 So, we have now established several things, (1) you like to be insulting ("stupid". "brainless", "uneducated") rather than argue a rational case. (2) your Reichsmark analogy had no value whatsoever because it was not grounded in any reality and (3) you blithely ignore the fact that Muslims are pragmatic and have always used whatever coinage is convenient because it has material value. The issue here is their minting of coins, not their use of them.
Lumberjack = حطاب = hattab where as Omar bin el Khattab = خطاب with a dot on the letter changes the meaning to "the person who gives speaches" Omar son of the person who gives speaches and not son of the Lumberjack.
Either could be correct as at the time we are talking there wasn't any dots in Arabic script .
@@kamranshadkhast5035 true if it was only in written form, the Caliphate's names were passed on verbally as well, in our language the two names would have been obviously different although it is seen as a simple dot of difference here.
@@jadaz it does not make any big difference if he is the son of حطاب or خطاب . the issue is there is no trace of Omar in history up until 750 and after when the Standard Islamic Narrative being created and those name being built along with their kinships. so if in your language it is called the way you mentioned it all come from SIN when the dots were in use by the time so it does not imply if such person existed at 600 was called the same way.
@@kamranshadkhast5035 I like things to be accurate in order to build a solid argument, I am only pointing out the difference between the variations, it is called constructive criticism... If he did not exist and was later created do you think the name lumberjack would be attractive as a Caliphate?
@@jadaz Yes you are right it was not attractive to be son of a lumberjack because as Omar and his family were from Mecca no one can justify in place without any vegetation someone has a job as lumberjack so it is better to be son of speaker!!
I know PfanderFilms is your creation Jay but as in so many of these important presentations the guest speaker is left floundering in the background as you talk and talk and talk. It is almost 10 minutes into the programme before Odon gets the chance to speak and even then you interject. Let your guests speak!
What's wrong with Jay's introduction? I found it useful and relevant.
@@OdonLafontaine The hole presentation is perfect - and more important than we could imagine - you and Jay, together with Mel, Al Fadi, Dan Gibson and others are the long term death to Islam.
With all respect, but I think you guys get a bit taken away with your interpretation of the usage of coins. Most important for the people is that they have a currency that is trusted and can be used to exchange goods. That also means in change goods if you have trade with your neighbours so consequently they either used Byzantine coins, or they printed their own ones. To use the structure they were used to the widely spread Byzantine coin design at this time is not unusual. It is normal that you just develop from the things you knew before and you’re used to. The only relevant question is if the people in power at the time produce, the coins is their own coins, and if so, then they were most likely Christian. As we assume that the early Islam was more or less a Christian offspring, this would fit into the same logic
Who is this Robert Care/Ker? Could you pleas spell out his name, article and where it is found. 🤔
Robert Kerr.
Dö you also know the name of the book/article?