I have to say I felt Hoyland looked like he was holding things back for fear of offending people and that there was much more he could have said. But when challenged on having questioned Islam being a religion of peace he did give a quite brilliant answer.
He said it in new York, not Saudi Arabia or Pakistan and said it to mostly Christians audiences in a n american public university , so what was he afraid of? Holyland is just is purely academic man, honest and balancing man. He is not interested in christian polemics and apologetic.
And Christianity is a religion of peace? And no, he was not holding back. You just wanted him to say the same as an opinion that you may hold! *Which is the most violent religion in history* ? ruclips.net/video/Ojv1_m6-PEY/видео.html
@@terezin199 As the professor confirmed the existence of these contemporary and near contemporary sources here: 2:54, I shall name a few in a chronological order. First some written texts, which mention the prophet, dated on the grounds of internal evidence: 1. Doctrina Iacobi Nuper Baptizati (634 CE) [Describes the prophet being alive] 2. folio 1 of BL Add. 14,461 (637 CE) [A Record Of The Arab Conquest Of Syria] 3. BL Add. 14,643 (640 CE) [According to Hoyland, "its precise dating inspires confidence that it ultimately derives from first-hand knowledge"] 4. Khuzistan Chronicler (650s CE) [Mentions Arab conquest of Khuzistan and Arabian geography, including the mention of the Kaaba] 5. History attributed to Sebeos (661 CE) [Mentions the prophet and the rise of Islam in greater details] 6. John bar Penkaye (687 CE) [Though not very early, still an interesting source] Jewish religious texts: 1. The Apocalypse of Pseudo-Ezra (early 7th century) 2. Secrets of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai (640s CE? no later than 690s CE) 3. Ten Kings Midrash (mid 7th century CE) Now some Documentary evidence, (i.e. information which has not been handed down from one generation to the next, but rather been inscribed on stone or metal or dug up from the ground and thus preserved in its original form): Some of several early Quranic manuscripts: 1. Codex Arabe 328c [radio carbon dated to 568-645 CE with 95.4% probability] 2. Codex Parisino-Petropolitanus [early 7th century] 3. Codex B. L. Or. 2165 [7th century] 4. DAM 01-25.1[Radio carbon Dated to 543-643 CE, 95.4% confidence level] 5. DAM 01-27.1[Radio carbon Dated to 578 - 669 CE, 95% confidence level] 6. Ms. Or. Fol. 4313[Radio carbon Dated to 606-652 CE, 95.4% confidence level] 7. DAM 01-29.1[Radio carbon Dated to 603-662 CE with 68% confidence level] Arabic Papyri: 1. P. Nessana 77 (680s CE) Some Rock inscriptions mentioning the Prophet Muhammad: 1.Early inscription from Jordan In supplication for forgiveness to Muhammad bin Abdullah the unlettered Prophet. (approx. 630s CE) 2. Inscription of al-Fadl bin al-Abbas and his brother Tamam bin al-Abbas (before 640 CE) [written by prophet's cousins] 3. An early inscription mentions the Prophet Muhammad and his wives. (640s CE? no later than 680s CE) 4. An early inscription mentions 'Aisha the wife of the prophet' (late 670s CE) 5. Tombstone Of ʿAbāssa Bint Juraij (691 CE) [Mentions the prophet's death] Coinage: 1. The so called 'standing Caliph' coin series of Jerusalem [mid to late 630s CE] 2. Drachm Of ʿAbd al-Malik Ibn ʿAbd Allāh (685-686 CE) (this coin and every other that was to follow named the prophet for religious and political propaganda, plus this is the earliest date bearing documentary evidence for Muhammad) There are many other sources apart from the aforementioned 24 sources. You can search for them, or read the Book, 'Seeing Islam as others Saw It' By Robert G Hoyland. You may also read the opinion of Patricia Crone, who was leading figure in this subject: www.opendemocracy.net/en/mohammed_3866jsp/ Thanks!
The endless struggles between free nations and the invading Turkic Mongolian bandits since the Akkadians and Pashtun in 2400 BC are still going on and the Godly messages will emerge ultimately.
Not all religions are religions of "revelation". The nature of the "revealed" necessitates that some will believe it authentically revealed and some false. The so called Abrahamic religions are in a double bind that only wars and conflict (temporarily) resolves. I agree with the post that says Hoyland is "holding back," what else could he do as a guest in an Islamic culture?
A good part of Quran talks about how it's better than Judaism and Christianity. Then they say all ayaths in Quran was written long back and god revelead it to pbuh. So god had the ayats written between 1st century ad and 7th ad and was waiting for Mohammed to be born in. Either you are crazy or you don't have a brain. Either of it is true.
@@sanjithkmemon8525 "ayats written between 1st century ad and 7th ad" that is totally wrong in islam an d no one said that and your perspective in verry narrow about islam
your reason will "OPEN" when you die and see the angel of death there will be no dawkins,harris whatever or science formula who will reason in that moment hope you come to your senses until is to late ....
The host and fundamentalist audience maintain a peevish and identitarian standoffishness throughout, looking even for simultaneously baroque conservative and woke one-upmanship through the questions. Such professional self-pitying narcissism and confessionalism must be exhausting.
This is a traditional society. It seems that you never learned to critic your "axiomatically neutral" liberal mythology of your native country. The host was relay good and asked the right questions for her time and space.
@@truebomba Why would you assume I haven't 'critic' (sic) my home society? I do not live in it, and spend plenty of time criticizing it. 'Traditional' just won't do, not for this century, and not for the needs of humanity. All that cannot stand the rigours of astringent criticism deserves the cultural grave. Pakistan is in a particularly painful situation in this regard, and all solidarity to all its activists combatting this supreme stupidity and fundamentalist foolishness.
@@mtc2054 I am not fundamentally in disagreement with you on certain points in your second comment but this political combat categorization on which left and right organize their thinking process is really a crisis of modern times. The "enlightened" metanarrative spread among the left in these countries, which sees development conditioned by the rejection of religious traditions and imagine that rationality is not possible in a traditional organization is not only factually, philosophically, and historically questionable but also, unfortunately, helps in breeding more fundamentalist as a reaction. Fundamentalists have all the circumstantial legitimacy in calling that western assimilation to a global (capitalistic) influence. Speaking about the video: what you see in front of you is an openness that is rare to see among the young generation in the USA who endorse Cancel culture on the left side, for example. These young men and women are entertaining revisionist orientalist claims that touch on their "existential myth," another deconstructionist narrative that doesn't provide any remotely competitive alternative to the traditional one. It could be argued that it is motivated by animosity and eurocentrism in its historical development. Even with that, you see them ready to entertain and think and discuss. I am not saying that similar setups are not happening in the west or that there is no problem in these societies, but let us distingue intelligence and scientific facts from ideology; it is the former that creates civilization. Other political ideologies that are singlehandedly imported and not organically developed locally becomes another burden for these countries. These counties should focus on fighting corruption and fascism on the power that uses their faith and not fighting their faith and their "myth" and reason to exist for a long time. Guess what?! The power in the west is usually very found of these fascists. Edit: correcting typos and expressions and added a paragraph to explain some elements of my reflection.
@@TheUnique69able Thank you, it is my pleasure that you have found my input valuable. To respond to your question, I grow up in Morocco and have been living in France for three years. I work as a mathematician but am also interested in philosophy and some related topics.
Islam has two different definitions; the correct one describes Islam as the single original religion existed even before creation. The common and wrong definition considers Islam as a new religion on its own and started with prophet Mohamed only. The teachings of Mohamed was supposed to put law/code for his people and his region only; but also it is a part of the bigger single universal religion. The original teachings of prophet and messenger Mohamed were hijacked by Turkic Mongolians soon after his death, in the same way they hijacked those of Moses and Jesus (Yeshua). So, the Turkic Islam of today is neither genuine Islam nor the teachings of Mohamed. To distinguish between the original and the present versions I personally call them "Mosesianity", "Jesusianity", and "Mohamedianity".
You made a statement that is not a fact but your belief. Islam is not ''the single original religion existed even before creation''. It is one of the later religions. The Quran is a book written by men in the 7th and 8th century and not until the 1980's was there one Quran accepted. It borrows the Jewish god and beliefs, adds parts of Christianity and other pagan religions to make Islam. Worshipping towards a a few stones away from Jerualem would not be tolerated by the Jewish god - if he had existed.
Same parrot like narrative. What is the source upon which you base your belief that Islam had been there before creation. I hope it's quran. The same quran that talks about Ishmael and that muslims are children of Ishmael. Ishma'el means god(el) has heard. Now according to book of genesis and archaeological studies "el" was a canaanite god that's why abraham named his child Ishmael. "el" had wives, children and lesser dieties. So you mean to say that Abraham worshipped allah but named his child Ishmael after a pagan god. Also among the 99 names mentioned in Islamic scriptures nowhere Allah says that one of his names was "el". Gabri'el the angel who would come to Muhammad to reveal quran is also named after "el" because Gabriel means strength of god(el). So why allah didn't care about that. It's because allah was a tribal moon god. It's al-lah. Lah is the name of egyptian moon god. That's why muslims have crescent moon on their mosques. Eid is celebrated after seeing moon. And muslims have a lunar calender.
@@shashanktripathi3398 Religion was created before Time. This Religion and God have many names. One God, The Religion was created before Time. Nations have different origins, they sprout out from their local soil then multiply sexually. Each and every nation received their own message in their own language, in their own language, by their own messenger. Messages, nations, and living plants are uncountable. Messages/teachings are not religions, but suitable ways and remedies for national problems and sicknesses. Religion is simple and Universal, but messages are elaborate and national. Messages are not for importing or exporting; once messages trespass their national borders they become corrupt colonial tools and wicked means. Moses, Jesus, Mohamed are messengers for Punt Land peoples only.
@@mqa1297 at least Matthew mentions it. Give me a source outside of the ispamic sources. Even tough islamic sources states that his genealogy can be traced to only some guy named "Adnan" beyond that it's guessing.
@@mqa1297 you don't get it. At least we have a Christian source. You don't even have a muslim spurce conforming the genealogy from ishmael to mohamed. You see the difference?
@@MU-we8hz beg u pardon , no Muslim source to tell us the list from Ismail pbuh to Mohamed pbuh ?! «biography mosques ط المعارف» (p2): (نسب رسول الله صلى الله ) عليه وسلم هو أبو القاسم محمد بن عبد الله بن عبد المطلب واسمه شيبة الحمد بن هاشم، - واسمه عمرو بن عبد مناف واسمه المغيرة ابن قصي - واسمه زيد بن كلاب بن مرة بن كعب بن لؤي بن غالب بن فهر بن مالك بن النضر بن كنانة بن خزيمة بن مدركه بن الياس بن مصر بن نزار بن معد بن عدنان. ههنا انتهى النسب الصحيح الذي لا شك فيه) translation : (The lineage of the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace peace be upon him His name is Abu al-Qasim Muhammad ibn Abdullah ibn Abd al-Muttalib, and his name is Shaybah al-Hamad ibn Hashim, and his name is Amr ibn Abd Manaf, and his name is al-Mughirah ibn Qusay. Realized bin Elias bin Misr bin Nizar bin Maad (( bin Adnan)). This is where the undoubted correct lineage ends . ) « History of al-Tabari (2/ 271): (ابن عدنان ولعدنان أخوان لأبيه، يدعى أحدهما نبتا والآخر منهما عمرا فنسب نبينا محمد ص لا يختلف النسابون فيه إلى معد بن عدنان، وأنه على ما بينت من نسبه. حَدَّثَنِي يُونُسُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الأَعْلَى، قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا ابْنُ وَهْبٍ، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنِي ابْنُ لَهِيعَةَ عَنْ أَبِي الأَسْوَدِ وَغَيْرِهِ، عَنْ نِسْبَةِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص: محمد ابن عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عَبْدِ الْمُطَّلِبِ بْنِ هَاشِمِ بْنِ عَبْدِ مَنَافِ بْنِ قُصَيِّ بْنِ كِلابِ بْنِ مُرَّةَ بْنِ كَعْبِ بْنِ لُؤَيِّ بْنِ غالب بن فهر بن مالك بن النضر بْنِ كِنَانَةَ بْنِ خُزَيْمَةَ بْنِ مُدْرِكَةَ بْنِ إِلْيَاسَ بْنِ مُضَرَ بْنِ نِزَارِ بْنِ مَعَدِّ بْنِ عَدْنَانَ بْنِ أُدَدَ. ثُمَّ يَخْتَلِفُونَ فِيمَا بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ. وَقَالَ الزُّبَيْرُ بْنُ بَكَّارٍ: حَدَّثَنِي يَحْيَى بْنُ الْمِقْدَادِ الزَّمْعِيُّ، عَنْ عَمِّهِ مُوسَى ابن يَعْقُوبَ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ وَهْبِ بْنِ زَمْعَةَ، عَنْ عَمَّتِهِ أُمِّ سَلَمَةَ زَوْجِ النَّبِيِّ ص، قالت: [سمعت رسول الله ص يقول: معد ابن عَدْنَانَ بْنِ أُدَدَ بْنِ زَنْدِ بْنِ يَرَى بْنِ أَعْرَاقِ الثَّرَى،] قَالَتْ أُمُّ سَلَمَةَ: فَزَنْدٌ هُوَ الْهَمَيْسَعُ، وَيَرَى وَهُوَ نَبْتٌ، وَأَعْرَاقُ الثَّرَى هُوَ إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ) translation : (Ibn Adnan Adnan has two brothers to his father, one of them is called Nabta and the other is Omar, so the lineage of our Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, does not differ from the lineage of Maad bin Adnan, and it is according to what I have shown of his lineage. Yunus told me bin Abdul higher, he said: Tell us the son of the donation, he said: Tell me son Hiep from black dad and others, the ratio of the Messenger of Allah r: Muhammad ibn Abdullah ibn Abdul Muttalib ibn Hashim ibn Abd Manaf ibn Qusai bin dogs bin once bin Ka'b bin Louay Bin Ghalib Bin Fahr Bin Malik Bin Al Nadr Bin Kinanah Bin Khuzaimah Bin Madrakah Bin Elias Bin Mudar Bin Nizar Bin Madad Bin Ad , Then they differ after that. Said Zubair bin Bakar: Yahya related to me bin Mekdad Elzimaa, from his uncle Moses, the son of Jacob bin Abdullah bin Wahab bin Zama, about his aunt Umm Salamah, wife of the Prophet r, said: I heard the Messenger of Allah r says: contagious son Adnan bin Adad bin Zand Ben sees Ibn Iraq al-Thurra,] Umm Salamah said: So Zand is Al-Hamisa', and he sees, and he is growing, and the seed of the earth is Ishmael bin Ibrahim ) «The Light of Certainty in the Biography of the Messenger» (p8): هذا هو النسب المتّفق على صحته من علماء التاريخ والمحدّثين، أمّا النسب فوق ذلك فلا يصحّ فيه) طريق، غاية الأمر أنّهم أجمعوا على أن نسب الرسول صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ينتهي إلى اسماعيل بن إبراهيم أب العرب المستعربة) translation : ( This is the lineage whose validity is agreed upon by historians and hadith scholars. As for the lineage above that, there is no correct path in it. The point of the matter is that they are ((unanimously agreed that the lineage of the Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace, ends with Ismail bin Ibrahim , the father of the Arabs)). ) these are basics bro , so no doubt he was an Arab pbuh that is a fact .
I have to say I felt Hoyland looked like he was holding things back for fear of offending people and that there was much more he could have said. But when challenged on having questioned Islam being a religion of peace he did give a quite brilliant answer.
He said it in new York, not Saudi Arabia or Pakistan and said it to mostly Christians audiences in a n american public university , so what was he afraid of? Holyland is just is purely academic man, honest and balancing man. He is not interested in christian polemics and apologetic.
@@mahmoodali1533 They are in Pakistan, they say so in the video.
You can see the manuscripts of these non-Muslim sources here ruclips.net/video/_jOAhI6oP80/видео.html
And Christianity is a religion of peace? And no, he was not holding back. You just wanted him to say the same as an opinion that you may hold!
*Which is the most violent religion in history* ?
ruclips.net/video/Ojv1_m6-PEY/видео.html
🤣🤣🤣
Thanks for uploading.
You can see the manuscripts of these non-Muslim sources here ruclips.net/video/_jOAhI6oP80/видео.html
what is more reliable, sources from the time of Mohammad, or sources from 210 years later. not from Arabia but central Asia.
The older sources either contemporary, or at least written by contemporaries of the prophet are more authentic.
@@TahaWasiq can you name one?
@@terezin199 As the professor confirmed the existence of these contemporary and near contemporary sources here: 2:54, I shall name a few in a chronological order.
First some written texts, which mention the prophet, dated on the grounds of internal evidence:
1. Doctrina Iacobi Nuper Baptizati (634 CE) [Describes the prophet being alive]
2. folio 1 of BL Add. 14,461 (637 CE) [A Record Of The Arab Conquest Of Syria]
3. BL Add. 14,643 (640 CE) [According to Hoyland, "its precise dating inspires confidence that it ultimately derives from first-hand knowledge"]
4. Khuzistan Chronicler (650s CE) [Mentions Arab conquest of Khuzistan and Arabian geography, including the mention of the Kaaba]
5. History attributed to Sebeos (661 CE) [Mentions the prophet and the rise of Islam in greater details]
6. John bar Penkaye (687 CE) [Though not very early, still an interesting source]
Jewish religious texts:
1. The Apocalypse of Pseudo-Ezra
(early 7th century)
2. Secrets of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai (640s CE? no later than 690s CE)
3. Ten Kings Midrash (mid 7th century CE)
Now some Documentary evidence, (i.e. information which has not been handed down from one generation to the next, but rather been inscribed on stone or metal or dug up from the ground and thus preserved in its original form):
Some of several early Quranic manuscripts:
1. Codex Arabe 328c [radio carbon dated to 568-645 CE with 95.4% probability]
2. Codex Parisino-Petropolitanus [early 7th century]
3. Codex B. L. Or. 2165 [7th century]
4. DAM 01-25.1[Radio carbon Dated to 543-643 CE, 95.4% confidence level]
5. DAM 01-27.1[Radio carbon Dated to 578 - 669 CE, 95% confidence level]
6. Ms. Or. Fol. 4313[Radio carbon Dated to 606-652 CE, 95.4% confidence level]
7. DAM 01-29.1[Radio carbon Dated to 603-662 CE with 68% confidence level]
Arabic Papyri:
1. P. Nessana 77 (680s CE)
Some Rock inscriptions mentioning the Prophet Muhammad:
1.Early inscription from Jordan In supplication for forgiveness
to Muhammad bin Abdullah the unlettered Prophet. (approx. 630s CE)
2. Inscription of al-Fadl bin al-Abbas and his brother Tamam bin al-Abbas (before 640 CE) [written by prophet's cousins]
3. An early inscription mentions the Prophet Muhammad and his wives. (640s CE? no later than 680s CE)
4. An early inscription mentions 'Aisha the wife of the prophet' (late 670s CE)
5. Tombstone Of ʿAbāssa Bint Juraij (691 CE) [Mentions the prophet's death]
Coinage:
1. The so called 'standing Caliph' coin series of Jerusalem [mid to late 630s CE]
2. Drachm Of ʿAbd al-Malik Ibn ʿAbd Allāh (685-686 CE) (this coin and every other that was to follow named the prophet for religious and political propaganda, plus this is the earliest date bearing documentary evidence for Muhammad)
There are many other sources apart from the aforementioned 24 sources. You can search for them, or read the Book, 'Seeing Islam as others Saw It' By Robert G Hoyland. You may also read the opinion of Patricia Crone, who was leading figure in this subject: www.opendemocracy.net/en/mohammed_3866jsp/
Thanks!
@@TahaWasiq thanks for replying, i was familiar with Sebeos, and do not dispute that mohammed existed.
@@terezin199 Good to know that you have read Sebeos. I am grateful to have been of some help:)
The endless struggles between free nations and the invading Turkic Mongolian bandits since the Akkadians and Pashtun in 2400 BC are still going on and the Godly messages will emerge ultimately.
You can see the manuscripts of these non-Muslim sources here ruclips.net/video/_jOAhI6oP80/видео.html
unapologetic questions. Thumb's up for the host.
You can see the manuscripts here ruclips.net/video/_jOAhI6oP80/видео.html
"Tell me about Hussein! Why does his wife wear niqab?"
Not all religions are religions of "revelation". The nature of the "revealed" necessitates that some will believe it authentically revealed and some false. The so called Abrahamic religions are in a double bind that only wars and conflict (temporarily)
resolves. I agree with the post that says Hoyland is "holding back," what else could he do as a guest in an Islamic culture?
You can see the manuscripts of these non-Muslim sources here ruclips.net/video/_jOAhI6oP80/видео.html
it's not easy to talk surrounded with murderers..
I often wondered why was it that Islam is deeply political...now I have the answers.
A good part of Quran talks about how it's better than Judaism and Christianity. Then they say all ayaths in Quran was written long back and god revelead it to pbuh. So god had the ayats written between 1st century ad and 7th ad and was waiting for Mohammed to be born in. Either you are crazy or you don't have a brain. Either of it is true.
@@sanjithkmemon8525 "ayats written between 1st century ad and 7th ad"
that is totally wrong in islam an d no one said that
and your perspective in verry narrow about islam
@@deebos980 he sees what he want to see bro
@@sanjithkmemon8525 True. Blind believers will only accept all this nonsense.
Listening to religious people try to reason is a mind trip. my brain started hurting.
I mean you certainly do not need to hurt your brain if you only care about consumption and entertainment.
your reason will "OPEN" when you die and see the angel of death there will be no dawkins,harris whatever or science formula who will reason in that moment hope you come to your senses until is to late ....
@@jurgeni7545 Name one single dead person who has come back to tell the story of what actually happens ?😂... Or so you were told?
You can see the manuscripts of these non-Muslim sources here ruclips.net/video/_jOAhI6oP80/видео.html
Why dont he just tell the muslims that the current mecca doesnt exist during mohammad.
Simple: He was never asked.
There is a great interview by Stephen Shoemaker on the early non-Muslim sources ruclips.net/video/_jOAhI6oP80/видео.html
na? normal places
The host and fundamentalist audience maintain a peevish and identitarian standoffishness throughout, looking even for simultaneously baroque conservative and woke one-upmanship through the questions. Such professional self-pitying narcissism and confessionalism must be exhausting.
This is a traditional society. It seems that you never learned to critic your "axiomatically neutral" liberal mythology of your native country. The host was relay good and asked the right questions for her time and space.
@@truebomba Why would you assume I haven't 'critic' (sic) my home society? I do not live in it, and spend plenty of time criticizing it. 'Traditional' just won't do, not for this century, and not for the needs of humanity. All that cannot stand the rigours of astringent criticism deserves the cultural grave. Pakistan is in a particularly painful situation in this regard, and all solidarity to all its activists combatting this supreme stupidity and fundamentalist foolishness.
@@mtc2054 I am not fundamentally in disagreement with you on certain points in your second comment but this political combat categorization on which left and right organize their thinking process is really a crisis of modern times. The "enlightened" metanarrative spread among the left in these countries, which sees development conditioned by the rejection of religious traditions and imagine that rationality is not possible in a traditional organization is not only factually, philosophically, and historically questionable but also, unfortunately, helps in breeding more fundamentalist as a reaction. Fundamentalists have all the circumstantial legitimacy in calling that western assimilation to a global (capitalistic) influence.
Speaking about the video: what you see in front of you is an openness that is rare to see among the young generation in the USA who endorse Cancel culture on the left side, for example. These young men and women are entertaining revisionist orientalist claims that touch on their "existential myth," another deconstructionist narrative that doesn't provide any remotely competitive alternative to the traditional one. It could be argued that it is motivated by animosity and eurocentrism in its historical development. Even with that, you see them ready to entertain and think and discuss. I am not saying that similar setups are not happening in the west or that there is no problem in these societies, but let us distingue intelligence and scientific facts from ideology; it is the former that creates civilization. Other political ideologies that are singlehandedly imported and not organically developed locally becomes another burden for these countries. These counties should focus on fighting corruption and fascism on the power that uses their faith and not fighting their faith and their "myth" and reason to exist for a long time. Guess what?! The power in the west is usually very found of these fascists.
Edit: correcting typos and expressions and added a paragraph to explain some elements of my reflection.
@@truebomba excellent and well thought out view points. Can I ask what is your cultural background?
@@TheUnique69able Thank you, it is my pleasure that you have found my input valuable. To respond to your question, I grow up in Morocco and have been living in France for three years. I work as a mathematician but am also interested in philosophy and some related topics.
Dude say something offensive to Islam and Muslims.. wtf
Here is the Stephen Shoemaker interview on the early Non-Muslim sources ruclips.net/video/_jOAhI6oP80/видео.html
Host looks like a wannabe Arabic Persian 😂😂😂😂
God Doesnt exist. I love you all still.
Quite a presumptuous statement. The faith required to hold such a view though is certainly admirable and analogous to that of the faithful.
Great subject but his political correctness is making it boring.. he should offend the Muslims.. truth will offend.. he’s shouldn’t be caring
Dr HoyelandLooks like imran khan
Voice is also same😂
@@soumyadeepdas6613 he needs a gf in Pakistan so he can visit more often
Islam has two different definitions; the correct one describes Islam as the single original religion existed even before creation. The common and wrong definition considers Islam as a new religion on its own and started with prophet Mohamed only.
The teachings of Mohamed was supposed to put law/code for his people and his region only; but also it is a part of the bigger single universal religion. The original teachings of prophet and messenger Mohamed were hijacked by Turkic Mongolians soon after his death, in the same way they hijacked those of Moses and Jesus (Yeshua).
So, the Turkic Islam of today is neither genuine Islam nor the teachings of Mohamed. To distinguish between the original and the present versions I personally call them "Mosesianity", "Jesusianity", and "Mohamedianity".
@Tarig Anter What if "muhammad" never existed?
You made a statement that is not a fact but your belief. Islam is not ''the single original religion existed even before creation''. It is one of the later religions. The Quran is a book written by men in the 7th and 8th century and not until the 1980's was there one Quran accepted. It borrows the Jewish god and beliefs, adds parts of Christianity and other pagan religions to make Islam. Worshipping towards a a few stones away from Jerualem would not be tolerated by the Jewish god - if he had existed.
Same parrot like narrative. What is the source upon which you base your belief that Islam had been there before creation. I hope it's quran. The same quran that talks about Ishmael and that muslims are children of Ishmael. Ishma'el means god(el) has heard. Now according to book of genesis and archaeological studies "el" was a canaanite god that's why abraham named his child Ishmael. "el" had wives, children and lesser dieties. So you mean to say that Abraham worshipped allah but named his child Ishmael after a pagan god. Also among the 99 names mentioned in Islamic scriptures nowhere Allah says that one of his names was "el". Gabri'el the angel who would come to Muhammad to reveal quran is also named after "el" because Gabriel means strength of god(el). So why allah didn't care about that. It's because allah was a tribal moon god. It's al-lah. Lah is the name of egyptian moon god. That's why muslims have crescent moon on their mosques. Eid is celebrated after seeing moon. And muslims have a lunar calender.
@@shashanktripathi3398 Religion was created before Time. This Religion and God have many names.
One God, The Religion was created before Time. Nations have different origins, they sprout out from their local soil then multiply sexually. Each and every nation received their own message in their own language, in their own language, by their own messenger. Messages, nations, and living plants are uncountable. Messages/teachings are not religions, but suitable ways and remedies for national problems and sicknesses. Religion is simple and Universal, but messages are elaborate and national. Messages are not for importing or exporting; once messages trespass their national borders they become corrupt colonial tools and wicked means. Moses, Jesus, Mohamed are messengers for Punt Land peoples only.
@@tariganter6238 again no reference like all apologists.
Muslim disrespected Non Muslims systematically. Remember that
Mohammad the Jew ? What is wrong , he coming down from Abraham via Hager.?
There is zero evidence that mohamed is from the line of ishmael.
@@mqa1297 show me historical evidence or evidence from the quran that mohamed is from the line of ishmael.
@@mqa1297 at least Matthew mentions it. Give me a source outside of the ispamic sources. Even tough islamic sources states that his genealogy can be traced to only some guy named "Adnan" beyond that it's guessing.
@@mqa1297 you don't get it. At least we have a Christian source. You don't even have a muslim spurce conforming the genealogy from ishmael to mohamed. You see the difference?
@@MU-we8hz beg u pardon , no Muslim source to tell us the list from Ismail pbuh to Mohamed pbuh ?!
«biography mosques ط المعارف» (p2):
(نسب رسول الله صلى الله )
عليه وسلم
هو أبو القاسم محمد بن عبد الله بن عبد المطلب واسمه شيبة الحمد بن هاشم، - واسمه عمرو بن عبد مناف واسمه المغيرة ابن قصي - واسمه زيد بن كلاب بن مرة بن كعب بن لؤي بن غالب بن فهر بن مالك بن النضر بن كنانة بن خزيمة بن مدركه بن الياس بن مصر بن نزار بن معد بن عدنان.
ههنا انتهى النسب الصحيح الذي لا شك فيه)
translation :
(The lineage of the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace
peace be upon him
His name is Abu al-Qasim Muhammad ibn Abdullah ibn Abd al-Muttalib, and his name is Shaybah al-Hamad ibn Hashim, and his name is Amr ibn Abd Manaf, and his name is al-Mughirah ibn Qusay. Realized bin Elias bin Misr bin Nizar bin Maad (( bin Adnan)).
This is where the undoubted correct lineage ends . )
« History of al-Tabari (2/ 271):
(ابن عدنان
ولعدنان أخوان لأبيه، يدعى أحدهما نبتا والآخر منهما عمرا فنسب نبينا محمد ص لا يختلف النسابون فيه إلى معد بن عدنان، وأنه على ما بينت من نسبه.
حَدَّثَنِي يُونُسُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الأَعْلَى، قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا ابْنُ وَهْبٍ، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنِي ابْنُ لَهِيعَةَ عَنْ أَبِي الأَسْوَدِ وَغَيْرِهِ، عَنْ نِسْبَةِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص: محمد ابن عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عَبْدِ الْمُطَّلِبِ بْنِ هَاشِمِ بْنِ عَبْدِ مَنَافِ بْنِ قُصَيِّ بْنِ كِلابِ بْنِ مُرَّةَ بْنِ كَعْبِ بْنِ لُؤَيِّ بْنِ غالب بن فهر بن مالك بن النضر بْنِ كِنَانَةَ بْنِ خُزَيْمَةَ بْنِ مُدْرِكَةَ بْنِ إِلْيَاسَ بْنِ مُضَرَ بْنِ نِزَارِ بْنِ مَعَدِّ بْنِ عَدْنَانَ بْنِ أُدَدَ.
ثُمَّ يَخْتَلِفُونَ فِيمَا بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ.
وَقَالَ الزُّبَيْرُ بْنُ بَكَّارٍ: حَدَّثَنِي يَحْيَى بْنُ الْمِقْدَادِ الزَّمْعِيُّ، عَنْ عَمِّهِ مُوسَى ابن يَعْقُوبَ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ وَهْبِ بْنِ زَمْعَةَ، عَنْ عَمَّتِهِ أُمِّ سَلَمَةَ زَوْجِ النَّبِيِّ ص، قالت: [سمعت رسول الله ص يقول: معد ابن عَدْنَانَ بْنِ أُدَدَ بْنِ زَنْدِ بْنِ يَرَى بْنِ أَعْرَاقِ الثَّرَى،] قَالَتْ أُمُّ سَلَمَةَ:
فَزَنْدٌ هُوَ الْهَمَيْسَعُ، وَيَرَى وَهُوَ نَبْتٌ، وَأَعْرَاقُ الثَّرَى هُوَ إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ)
translation : (Ibn Adnan
Adnan has two brothers to his father, one of them is called Nabta and the other is Omar, so the lineage of our Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, does not differ from the lineage of Maad bin Adnan, and it is according to what I have shown of his lineage.
Yunus told me bin Abdul higher, he said: Tell us the son of the donation, he said: Tell me son Hiep from black dad and others, the ratio of the Messenger of Allah r: Muhammad ibn Abdullah ibn Abdul Muttalib ibn Hashim ibn Abd Manaf ibn Qusai bin dogs bin once bin Ka'b bin Louay Bin Ghalib Bin Fahr Bin Malik Bin Al Nadr Bin Kinanah Bin Khuzaimah Bin Madrakah Bin Elias Bin Mudar Bin Nizar Bin Madad Bin Ad , Then they differ after that.
Said Zubair bin Bakar: Yahya related to me bin Mekdad Elzimaa, from his uncle Moses, the son of Jacob bin Abdullah bin Wahab bin Zama, about his aunt Umm Salamah, wife of the Prophet r, said: I heard the Messenger of Allah r says: contagious son Adnan bin Adad bin Zand Ben sees Ibn Iraq al-Thurra,] Umm Salamah said:
So Zand is Al-Hamisa', and he sees, and he is growing, and the seed of the earth is Ishmael bin Ibrahim )
«The Light of Certainty in the Biography of the Messenger» (p8):
هذا هو النسب المتّفق على صحته من علماء التاريخ والمحدّثين، أمّا النسب فوق ذلك فلا يصحّ فيه) طريق، غاية الأمر أنّهم أجمعوا على أن نسب الرسول صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ينتهي إلى اسماعيل بن إبراهيم أب العرب المستعربة)
translation : ( This is the lineage whose validity is agreed upon by historians and hadith scholars. As for the lineage above that, there is no correct path in it. The point of the matter is that they are ((unanimously agreed that the lineage of the Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace, ends with Ismail bin Ibrahim , the father of the Arabs)). )
these are basics bro , so no doubt he was an Arab pbuh that is a fact .