Support Blogging Theology on Patreon: / bloggingtheology My Paypal Link: www.paypal.com...
Пікірлер: 479
@axis2312 Жыл бұрын
I can only imagine how many people Allah guided to this channel who are now muslim through Paul's erudite and deeply intellectual study of theology. May Allah protect you brother
@sergeyastov6353 Жыл бұрын
@@davidchedzoy7587 🤣
@MuhammadFrazAslam Жыл бұрын
@@davidchedzoy7587 Hey! What are you talking about?
@snakejuce Жыл бұрын
And one can argue Paul was guided to Islam by Pickthall and Eaton. Truly fascinating how the domino effect of life unfolds.
@MuhammadFrazAslam Жыл бұрын
@@snakejuce Truth of Islam is everywhere.... No one can deny it ...Only ones that have blind heart ...
@snakejuce Жыл бұрын
@@MuhammadFrazAslam 100% Why do you think they can't keep it out of their vile mouths?
@miichannel891 Жыл бұрын
Assalamualaikum Brother Paul. I think it’s time for you to write a book perhaps along the lines of “The Bible vs the Quran for dummies.” I can see no one else who can do this and cover the different angles on the different issues with the required expertise and knowledge for the layman. That InShaAllah could cement your contribution to Islam, if you haven’t already, and your legacy. Jazakumullahu Khair
@bilkees8151 Жыл бұрын
I was thinking what a wonderful columnist Brother Paul would be! And in the same vein of thought, that it could all be compiled into a book after. 😂 Any publishers in the comments section?
@mosaadalabdullatif Жыл бұрын
A great question from masterly historians. Keep up surprising us with marvelous questions Paul 👏🏻
@eljumaidilbinahmad2464 Жыл бұрын
No historical criticism of the Qur'an can be summarized with two words: Perfection and obedience!
@EricAlHarb Жыл бұрын
Only if you consider the world was created in 6 days and other absurd ideas like djinn.
@eljumaidilbinahmad2464 Жыл бұрын
@@EricAlHarb Only if your heart is blind!
@keyzzz9798 Жыл бұрын
@@EricAlHarb it isn't absurd at all, god is all powerful, if you believe in a creator then you imagine him to be strong and capable of anything
@alminafirman5168 Жыл бұрын
@@EricAlHarb try to understand definition on kun faya kun in islam, my god is beyond your imagination.
@stefang.9763 Жыл бұрын
no historical criticism of Quran because it cannot be taken seriously from a historical point of view
@shahryar326 Жыл бұрын
Thank you so much for putting out content that is worth spending time on. You have my duas and thanks. ❤
@abu-bakr4917 Жыл бұрын
Missed these videos, the newer ones are amazing too, but it’s a nice throwback to the 7k subscriber days 💯
@ighfirlee Жыл бұрын
Im from the 7k days, and it isnt too long ago!
@ashikelahie6035 Жыл бұрын
What a phenomenal lecture, sir. A much needed one. Anything by sir Paul is captivating. May Allah bless you.
@MoonLightTR25 Жыл бұрын
i love the question..really imean being a muslim never thought on this but it is a fantastic thought and solution to what it is in my daily life actually! :) thank you for opening thos closed curtains ;) ps love your bookshelfs on the back..keep us also in your duas 😊
@ckotty Жыл бұрын
Much appreciated information. Till now I must confess I never thought of this matter.
@disuser-lp3qv1tm8f Жыл бұрын
Because the Bible was so corrupt that people noticed and started questioning it. It's so full of contradictions that it needed a whole new literary field to untangle it. The Qur'an has no such problems. Question answered.
@rantarorant Жыл бұрын
@@philipcoriolis6614 To the people that asked to see a miracle happen, yes Why was The Eucharist copied from pagan beliefs?
@disuser-lp3qv1tm8f Жыл бұрын
The moon splitting miracle does not entail any contractions. The problem with the Bible was not the miracles, but the inner contradictions, the factual historical errors, the many changes over the centuries, its patchwork constitution, its vague origins, etc, etc...
@disuser-lp3qv1tm8f Жыл бұрын
@@philipcoriolis6614 No, it doesn't. You can't prove it didn't happen. And we can't scientifically prove it did happen. But that goes for all "miracles". We do have strong anecdotal and circumstantial evidence, the latter being the truth of the prophethood of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), among other things, and the many other miracles of the Qur'an itself. But the point at hand is not the truth of miracles, but the raison d'être of literary criticism when it comes to the bible, and the lack of such "raison" when it comes to the Qur'an.
@disuser-lp3qv1tm8f Жыл бұрын
@@philipcoriolis6614 Well, you say nobody saw it. We say at least those concerned saw it. And those that saw it were enemies of the prophet who confessed to this after they came to Islam. There was no need for them to lie. Indeed, it would have been much easier for them to deny Islam exactly on this basis. They could have proven Islam wrong and ridicule the prophet for such an outrageous claim. They did at first, but when they saw what they saw, they had no choice but to submit. Again, the question at hand is not the truth of miracles, it is the need for literary criticism of the Bible versus the absence of such need for the Qur'an.
@disuser-lp3qv1tm8f Жыл бұрын
@@philipcoriolis6614 Not necessarily. If Allah wanted only those people to see it, then only they would see it. Again, not the point.
@yasinali6223 Жыл бұрын
Great review and opinion regarding this issue of HCM . You have enlightened many as to the basis and Origin of the notion of Critical review and where it can or cannot be applied. Great talk.
@sultanbin2170 Жыл бұрын
The answer is given in the Quran (Sultan Bin Translation): Quran Chp 6 Verse 91: And they [Jews] did not show Allah His due respect when they said [in defence of Torah corruption that], "Allah did not reveal to any human being anything [of light and guidance to be preserved]." Say, "Who revealed the Scripture that Moses brought as light and guidance to the people? You [Jews] were used to break it into pages, disclosing somewhat and suppressing much [that ends up you in worshiping uzair, angels etc]. And you have been taught [through this Quran] that neither you nor your forefathers knew before." Say [O Prophet], "Allah [reveals with full of (things) light, guidance]." Then leave them in their discourse, amusing themselves. Quran Chp 6 Verse 92: And this is a Book We have revealed consecrating itself, evidencing itself everything out here in between its two hands [as blessed and firm, respectively] so that you may warn the Mother of Cities [Mecca, the Mother of all civilizations in the globe] and those [other civilizations that span] around it [with fervor and certainty]. Those who believe in the Hereafter [as per Quran] believe in it [Mecca to be the centre of Pangaea], and they are maintaining their prayers [spiritual connections with its first inhabitants: Eve and Adam].
@unhingedconnoisseur164 Жыл бұрын
I love the idea that reading works of political/philosophical key contributors such as Hobbes and Locke can give us a better, more wise and informed understanding of the approaches done today such as the HCM
@BloggingTheology Жыл бұрын
Absolutely
@blindspot9097 Жыл бұрын
Mashaallah Paul, thank you for the concise explanation. Just brilliant. Jazakallah khairan.
@unhingedconnoisseur164 Жыл бұрын
we are eaton good tonight with this one 🥁🥁
@candymuncher8155 Жыл бұрын
How can you critique perfection???
@Theresia66 Жыл бұрын
Why is mary, mother of jesus, called the sister of Aaron in the quran?
@fozolmiah1524 Жыл бұрын
Because the Bible is corrupted and the Quran remains unchanged
@Lindaeditz8 Жыл бұрын
@@Theresia66 what makes you think that it has to a biological sister,the prophet pbuh answered this,by saying many that people were often named after pious predecessors,so she could had a brother by that name,
@ighfirlee Жыл бұрын
@@Lindaeditz8 This question arises when they read from translations instead of mastering Arabic and reading the Al Quran directly.
@somprag928210 ай бұрын
@@ighfirleeMajority of these people who come to argue dont want to honestly learn about Islam. They want to win discussions, its extremely childish.
@s3youtubevids156 Жыл бұрын
This kind of content is the best on the channel jzk. I may be wrong but it seems many of these discussions relate to differences between mutazila and ashari world views? If so please bring in SAHM or another qualified man to further elaborate
@kyoungd2 ай бұрын
Historical criticism of the Qur'an has been a significant field of study, and several well-known critiques have emerged over the years. Here are some of the most prominent ones: John Wansbrough: In his works "Quranic Studies" and "The Sectarian Milieu," Wansbrough argued that the Qur'an emerged over a long period of time and reflected the sectarian conflicts within early Islam. He suggested that the Qur'an was not fully compiled until the 8th or 9th century, much later than traditionally believed. Patricia Crone and Michael Cook: In their book "Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World," Crone and Cook challenged traditional Islamic narratives, arguing that early Islamic history, including the origins of the Qur'an, was largely constructed retrospectively. They suggested that the Qur'an might have been influenced by Jewish and Christian texts. Christoph Luxenberg: In "The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran," Luxenberg posited that many unclear or ambiguous passages in the Qur'an could be better understood if read as translations from a Syriac Christian text. His work has been controversial and widely debated. Fred Donner: In "Narratives of Islamic Origins," Donner explored the context in which the Qur'an was written, suggesting that early Islam was more a monotheistic reform movement within the broader Abrahamic tradition than a distinct new religion from the outset. Gerd R. Puin: Puin analyzed ancient Qur'anic manuscripts, including the Sana'a palimpsest, one of the oldest Qur'anic manuscripts discovered in Yemen. His findings suggested variations in the early text, leading to questions about the Qur'an's compilation and transmission. Angelika Neuwirth: Neuwirth's work has focused on the Qur'an in its historical context, emphasizing its connection to late antiquity and suggesting that it was part of a broader religious and cultural milieu rather than a completely unique revelation. Toby Lester: In "What Is the Koran?" an article published in The Atlantic, Lester discussed the implications of the Sana'a manuscripts, exploring how textual variations could affect the understanding of the Qur'an's history and compilation. These critiques have sparked significant debate within academic and religious circles, leading to a deeper exploration of the Qur'an's historical context and its development over time.
@ibrahim.1606 Жыл бұрын
I was drawn by the title. I don’t know what I expected but I’m not disappointed.
@abdurrazzak2970 Жыл бұрын
May Almighty Allah Bless and Reward you Best in this Life and in the Hereafter.
@elmirbrdar10459 ай бұрын
Paul is single handedly responsible for my wife questioning why so many book orders keep arriving and when will I get to read them all 😂
@EiChing123 Жыл бұрын
Assalamu Alaikum, Brother Paul. I am curious which Jonathan Brown book would you recommend for a new revert to Islam. By the way, my educational background is in history.
@BloggingTheology Жыл бұрын
Wa alaykumu s-salam I recommend this excellent book: www.amazon.co.uk/Misquoting-Muhammad-Challenge-Interpreting-Prophets/dp/1780747829
@EiChing123 Жыл бұрын
@خالد European and Asian. My main research is on the partition of the Ottoman Empire and British Imperialism in Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, and Palestine.
@EiChing123 Жыл бұрын
@@BloggingTheologyThank you for your response. 💚
@user-bq4vh2hv8k Жыл бұрын
Jonathan brown is Muslim Liberal. Him and he's clowns are tyring to change Islam. I Suggest you to fallow Islamic scholars.
@brightginger2386 Жыл бұрын
You've addressed this beautifully. A purely rationalist approach to scripture, which is founded on the idea of belief in the unseen - that is, in part, belief in that which cannot be actually witnessed by us, or things that resist objective/literal descriptions - is stupid. A "revelation from God" is only a revelation from God because it, by nature of who revealed it and the circumstances of its revelation, contains something that makes it impossible to be produced by man. Rejecting prophecies, miraculous historical events, and scientific miracles, etc, as totally untrue and then going on to examine it "objectively" is no longer objective; truly, an objective approach would be to study the "text" (and the language in the case of the Qur'an) in its entirety instead. The Qur'an was not revealed in order, and the parts such an approach ignores cannot be left out because it would be unfair to the Book - context of revelation, the way different events led to the revelation of certain verses, and the (style of) language is so important because the Arabs, finding it powerful, would call it "magic". The Qur'an is self-referencing, so can you study such verses fairly? It seems more problematic, more biased (and definitely a very Western approach), the more I think about it. Also, how do you apply this (ha!) "objectivity" (that is limited to the physical/tangible) when you try to interpret verses on the soul or the immaterial world? There is so much that can be said about it - like Western scholars dismissing Ahadith entirely. In fact, a study of the Qur'an would never be complete if ahadith were not considered because they are such a significant part of the history of the Qur'an - the way it was explained, understood, applied, revealed, all of it (the (sound of) buzzing of bees when it was being revealed, and when the thigh of the Prophet, Allah's peace and blessings be upon him, fell upon Zayd Ibn Thabit's thigh, may Allah be pleased with him, and he thought it would break as it grew in heaviness, etc). A Muhaddith like Sheikh Awwama, may Allah bless him, would refute such scholars easily - but no doubt they've got better things to do. Thank you for making this video because such criticism of "elite" scholarship on Islam, the Qur'an, etc, is necessary (and rare). May Allah forgive you, increase you in beneficial knowledge, and raise you among the scholars and the heirs of the prophets, His peace be upon all of them.
@dionysianapollomarx Жыл бұрын
I think some folks commenting don’t actually understand what was said about HCM in this video. To this video’s treatment of HCM, it’s “methods,” not one single method. At least not anymore. While the philosophers the scholar you’ve cited are seen generally as historical precursors to various facets of HCM, they’re not themselves the direct inspiration of many scholars using HCMs. Some don’t even have the political realist assumptions of Hobbes and Spinoza at all. Some would even repudiate a connection, or distinguish their theoretical background completely, denying any deist or even atheist background assumptions. Perhaps the HCM scholars are yet to be capable of studying the Qur’an using a kind of HCM. But I doubt HCMs will get good representation here. Just damn all historiography. Not all HCMs inherently doubt miracles or resurrection or attribute the rise of monotheistic religions to cognitive dissonance theory. This is only a recent consensus when the paradigm shift of Biblical scholars went from slightly evangelical to more secular and even classicist and sometimes cognitive-linguistic or even philosophical. But this was never quite the starting point for HCMs in general, except historically, as you mentioned Spinoza. It is not inherently toxic, and not always Orientalist, for example, Dr. Dan McClellan in his video content combatting Biblical misinformation frequently refers to cultural regions where the Abrahamic texts originate as West Asia instead of “Middle East.” This is not indicative of biased presumptions by HCM Biblical scholars. These are not all “skeptics.” It merely denies that there is any pre-justificatory reason to believe that any text has an Archimedean point of divine revelation, but rather that this has to be proven by scholarly work divesting energy into historiography and history not just theology. Not all are anti-theological (and are even opposite like Dale Allison or M. David Litwa or James McGrath, among many others). Some merely seek to find a smarter scholarly means to appreciate their religion. While I doubt recent HCM applications to the study of the Qur’an has been fruitful, I don’t think HCM has been given a fairer understanding in your critique or in the texts you cite positively. The scholar, credible as he is, you chose to represent HCM would have opponents in other HCM or post-HCM schools, judging by where he gets his main philosophical presumptions, as some scholars don’t even do that or even outright reject direct philosophical influence from philosophical precursors of HCM in their work. Methods just evolve that way. And there is a pluralism of methods between scholars due to ongoing debates. I can acknowledge that current HCMs have limitations, namely their being inherently either empirical or hermeneutical or both, in insufficient measure sometimes, and without fitting well the subject matter they are studying (e.g., the Qur’an), but that does not make it right to say that HCMs guarantee that one such scholar in this mould espouses that no miracles exist at all, or that they would be led to that position because of adherence to professional standards of historical scholarship. That’s not always the case, and was not the case, until scholarly community shifted from being of a mostly broadly Protestant or evangelical mindset to a secular one. I also acknowledge that a broadly politically realist and humanist historiography for the Qur’an can be theorized first within or with consideration for the mature scholarly traditions of the religious community. I’ve been watching this channel for a long time. Only this time, this video has rubbed me the wrong way a bit. Your broader point, however, is correct. If an HCM for studying the Qur’an is to be developed, it ought to develop with consideration for the long traditions of Hadith studies and Islamic studies in general. Not solely retaining the methods as they were evolved and originated from the Biblical criticism of Spinoza and the Protestant Reformation. Anyway, I only say this as a student of area studies (history and sociology, mainly). I am a bit concerned that one scholar using HCM has the whole method marred because he’s the only example you’ve given.
@mcosu1 Жыл бұрын
You asked a great question! But you should have looked at the existing historical critical scholarship on the Quran. It may not be as extensive as in Christianity but I think its more dynamic
@thetriumphsprint Жыл бұрын
I think there has always been healthy discussion about the meaning in the ayat of the Qur'an. Some verses are more comprehensible now than in the past, and scholars of the past made the point, that if they are unable to understand and ayat, then it is incumbant on them to remain silent (ie their opinion doesn't matter, unless based in knowledge). With respect to textual criticism regarding the authenticity of the text, that seem to mainly be a focus of orientalists and Christian scholars (or non scholars). Really, as Gai Eaton mentioned.
@minalsalam2426 Жыл бұрын
Assalamu alaikum , very insightful brother Paul ! As always .
@BloggingTheology Жыл бұрын
Wa alaykumu s-salam
@muhamliarmad9013 Жыл бұрын
@@BloggingTheology Are you lost? I challenge you to answer me. Why did Uthman burn complete copies and fragments of Quran while the Quran was uncorrupted and same among Muslims'? Where's the Quran standardized by Uthman? Why do we have different Qir'aats of Quran today after Uthman standardized the Quran in the Quraish dialect? *Why *Surah 37: 12* of Hafs is different in other Qir'aats?* Where can we get the Qir'aat revealed to Muhammad himself? *In Surah 14: 4, allah said he always sent his prophet with the language of their people so they would clearly understand....* If JESUS spoke Aramaic, how you believe he's sent by allah to Hebrews? How you are Muslims if you are not Arabs?
@markzabilla8281 Жыл бұрын
You say the Quran is beyond historical criticism because you believe what the Quran says about itself, and what Islamic tradition says about the Quran, quite uncritically it appears. And then propose the Bible is a library of books written or forged by different authors, implying of course that it is hodgepodge and untrustworthy. The irony here, is that those Christians who take the Bible at face value, and believe the Bible was written by who it claims to be, and to whom tradition ascribes authorship and authenticity, also reject historical criticism, as you appear to for the Quran. “My book is beyond the brutal honest searching of academic criticism because I believe in it.” Academics aren’t always objective either, to be fair. Some of the most intellectually obedient (read that as unquestioning) people I know have PhDs. Their religious fanaticism just looks a bit more erudite and modernized than ours. Perhaps it is the American in me, but anything that is beyond questioning is automatically suspect, because all things that are actually true will survive scrutiny. Just my two cents here, love your channel.
@BloggingTheology Жыл бұрын
thanks Mark
@Kuuzie1 Жыл бұрын
He simply engages in some kind of self-evidential arguments 😂. There are so many logical fallacies, denial of textual problems of the Quran. Why should Allah allow for different qira'ats and ahrufs? This definitely is a textual problem and not acceptable (a proof of poor textual preservation) as it is usually taken for granted by the Muslim community. I have a Quran translation by E. M Wherry with all these variant readings. Dr Yasir Qadhi acknowledges this problem Mr. Williams down plays.
@Lindaeditz8 Жыл бұрын
if your understanding is suspect than that is your problem not the quran,the ahrufs where from the outset to reach people of different dialects,a boon and a credit rather than an issue,again nothing has to conform to your whims,
@ogatatsumi8594 Жыл бұрын
@@Kuuzie1the hearts are blind
@Sundar...10 ай бұрын
Ah, what a relief to find your comment in this rubble of self-indulgent nonsense! It all boils down to this: "My book is the best because it says so." How is this even logical thinking, let alone an academic exercise! 🤦♂️
@mooshei8165 Жыл бұрын
Because Christianity has been romanized! Gentiles paganism from the Roman era till this day.🎉
@Kinderlieder-Kindergeschichte Жыл бұрын
another masterpiece to watch :)
@JamesRichardWiley Жыл бұрын
You tube is full of criticism of the Quran and the Bible. This is current history in the making.
@TheMuslimParadigm Жыл бұрын
Assala mu alaikum 😊
@BloggingTheology Жыл бұрын
Wa alaykumu s-salam
@mdtalhaansari1096 Жыл бұрын
Christian: You should have a separation of church and state just like we did.🤡 Christian: You should reform your religion just like we did.🤡 Christian: All the criticisms of our book apply lock, stock and barrel to yours too.🤡 Muslim: Here. These medicines helped a lot of people. Therefore, you should have them too. Christian:🏃♂
@padraicbrown67185 ай бұрын
Fortunately, we now have Robert Spencer's "The Critical Qur'an". Very enlightening!
@mohammeds3114 Жыл бұрын
I cannot reconcile what people say about Gai Eaton’s perennialist ‘aqeedah’ and his staunch sunnism and affirmation of Islam being the only true path to Allah in these writings. 🤷♂️
@BloggingTheology Жыл бұрын
it is a problem, I agree
@karimb972 Жыл бұрын
This is the first time I hear of this. I will take it as being false or a misunderstanding or something from his younger years. I cannot believe that he died on nothing but a sunni aqeeda.
@qulearning8811 Жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@BloggingTheology Жыл бұрын
Many thanks!
@voltaire29 Жыл бұрын
The Messenger of God, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, advised us in the “wars” and said: “Do not cut down a tree.. and do not kill a woman, a boy, a newborn, an old man, or a sick person.. do not mutilate corpses.. do not kill extravagantly.. do not destroy a temple, and do not vandalize a building.” Amer.. Even camels and cows are not slaughtered except for eating.” He also recommended us to do good to the captive, to honor him and feed him.. and to fulfill the covenant.. and finally, not to force anyone to convert to Islam.. After him came the reign of our master Umar ibn al-Khattab al-Faruq, who distinguished between the truth and the truth. And falsehood, may God be pleased with him.. (Their churches shall not be inhabited, nor demolished, nor be diminished from them, nor from their good, nor from their cross, nor from anything of their wealth, and they shall not be forced against their religion, and none of them shall be harmed).. He has given security to the people of Jerusalem and granted them their religious freedom and safety for their churches
@hassanmirza2392 Жыл бұрын
Bible is a canon of 66 books (excluding 18 books of Apocrypha) and has time span of 1400 years (1300 BC - 100 AD) and was written in Hebrew and Greek. Quran is one single book and has a time-span of only 23 years (610 - 632 AD) and was written in classical Arabic. Quran will never lend itself to these modern critical methods though.
@MuhammadFrazAslam Жыл бұрын
So many mistakes in Bible, But you still blindly belief in it ...
@MuhammadFrazAslam Жыл бұрын
And Even you don't know a Historical Book can't be better than the Pure Words of God ... God Almighty can create anything with any lines with any time ... But whatever God Almighty creates has a purpose...
@Kuuzie1 Жыл бұрын
What exactly is your argument? 😅
@MuhammadFrazAslam Жыл бұрын
@@Kuuzie1 He is saying 2+2=3 😜😜😜
@Kuuzie1 Жыл бұрын
@Muhammad Fraz Aslam exactly 2+2=3! I can't imagine how Muslims living can continue to resist Western scholarship. Well, the Christians failed to prevent this approach to the bible. Already, Muslims youth are struggling to retain their faith in these lands 😀.
@SamuelGreen-AU Жыл бұрын
The claim at 5:00 that the "Hebrew and Christian scriptures came to acquire belatedly the status of scripture" is simply false according to historical criticism. The academics you quote are out-of-date with the latest research.
@khmerghost Жыл бұрын
I think records nearer to the time of Christ is much more accurate rather than research that has been done "latest"
@truthmatter9972 Жыл бұрын
Hi Mr. Green ...... i love to hear your shada one day my friend .... may Allah guides you
@Yuki.2022 Жыл бұрын
"Refusal to believe until proof is given is a rational position; denial of all outside of our own limited experience is absurd."
@enlightenedvagabond3556 Жыл бұрын
@@khmerghost hence why the Quran is inaccurate about Jesus.
@khmerghost Жыл бұрын
@@enlightenedvagabond3556 Wait wuut, where?
@snakejuce Жыл бұрын
Quran Surah al Nasr (110): "(O Prophet,) When there comes Allah’s help and the Victory, and you see people entering Allah’s (approved) religion in multitudes, then glorify the praises of your Lord and seek His forgiveness, for certainly He is ever Accepting of Repentance." We do not know who will be agents of justice who will keep the purity of this deen alive. If you told someone in Arabia that a White English man would come one day and be the sole cause behind the conversion of thousands upon thousands of non-Muslims, it would be difficult to believe you. In this is a lesson to never judge, for we truly cannot ever grasp the whole picture and we tend to be short-sighted humans.
@hefzibahgayatriwedotami Жыл бұрын
Mun'im Sirry and Abad Badaruzzaman two great Muslim professors from Indonesia are among the ones whose work related to this. There was even done course in Indonesian by this amazing Madurese Muslim Prof Munim Sirry. Yeees, hail Madurese😅!! This theme is not unfamiliar among some Muslims in Indonesia though not without attacks. But as Sheikh Ali Hydar Thomas McElwain if one wants to study the best diverse topics of Islam, One must find it in the Indonesians studies. Salam from Indonesia
@ahassen1236 Жыл бұрын
Paul, indeed another overwhelming truth of it being the Word of God when God Himself says in the Quran this book will be protected (unlike the earlier scriptures). Quran 85:21-22.
@letmespeakthetruth1601 Жыл бұрын
YASIR QADHI and his post modernist mates should watch this. A master class in refuting those shubuhaats which these people preach in a subtle, non-overt manner.
@Kuuzie1 Жыл бұрын
I think Paul Williams should bring him to his channel to answer questions on higher criticism and textual criticism application in Quranic/Hadith studies.
@toleen553 Жыл бұрын
Sir paul would love really if u can recommend us some books to read i feel lost when it comes to those topics
@HussainFahmy Жыл бұрын
*_Masha'Allah, a good summary._*
@NeuroLot Жыл бұрын
Great question and answers. Thanks Paul
@Dr.D.R. Жыл бұрын
Also there are still divisions on the letters of Paul and their authenticity, and some of the arguments for this are based upon writing style, which isn’t the most substantial argument.
@nasapi Жыл бұрын
Visiting London. Inshallah will go see and pray at tge Cambridge mosque!
@idolwrecker Жыл бұрын
Quran was intact Quran is intact and In Sha Allah Quran will remain intact till the last day. Allah O Akbar
@aamirahaseeb2604 Жыл бұрын
Gai Eaton was posted in Madras India during the II world war! A triavia for us Indians !
@Monothiest247 Жыл бұрын
Only Allah is perfect and the Quran itself says “today I have perfected your way of life.” (Dean).
@shoaibmem10 ай бұрын
Salam alaikum. Keep up the good work. May Allah grant you Jannah.
@homer1273 Жыл бұрын
There is not even criticism of the hadith or the clergy that made hadith "sahih".
@contemplatively Жыл бұрын
Very informative and well said. Thank you!
@rgtv5759 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for your Information, May Allah, Allaha, God Almighty always bless you brother. Ameen🤲🏼🤲🏼
@gothyunicorn5459 Жыл бұрын
Ameen
@samueld.webster2438 Жыл бұрын
The Quran is the True Word of God
@fauziahpawan6605 Жыл бұрын
I am wondering if you have had a chance to read the book by Syed Muhammad Naquib al- Attas titled Islam and Secularism? It's a must read if one wants to understand ....among others....the question of critising the Quran....a long standing question of secular circles. Hope you get to read it.
@economician Жыл бұрын
Salaam Brother Paul! Schoolarly criticism was always there in the arab and the muslim world from the onset but it has always been suppresed and hidden by the sunny dogmats who have always had the support of the oppressive rulers. Why do you always invite only sunny dogmats to your channel and not muslims who are not afraid to use historical and analytical methods? How about inviting the quranist sheikh Hasan Farhan Al Maliki to your program who has Done extensive research on the hadith literature using the historical critical metod? Many of his videos have been subtititled in English. Why do you not invite Christoph Luxenberg or Thomas Alexander from the Inara school of thought to see for your Self why Angelica Neuwirth thinks that the questions they pose are legitimate? Thomas Alexander in comparison to the islamofobe Jay Smith is a respectful and Open minded person who truly tries to approach the early history of the Quran in a scholarly fashion and a dialogue between him and you would be of outmost intrest to many viewers. Best regards from a quranist and a follower of the Inara school of thought!
@Hussle247 Жыл бұрын
Big question 😎🍿
@ConsideringPhlebas Жыл бұрын
The Muslim authors quoted just present the received narrative of the Quran's origins and then insist that therefore there is no need for historical criticism of the Quran, when the critical assessment of such narratives is precisely what historical criticism is useful for. But for one thing, even classical Islamic scholars, like al-Suyuti, engaged in textual criticism of the Quran, and of the consonantal text itself, not merely the different recitations.
@carliemorales204 Жыл бұрын
Just stick your Bible, your hypocrisy is not gonna help your afterlife, whatsoever.
@karimb972 Жыл бұрын
The geneaology and archeology of the revelation has been done and it confirms what the Qu'ran states about itself. An inquiry about the content has been done and it will never be over but one sure thing is that the miraculous, otherwordly nature of the book has been proven countless times. What you are looking for here is confirmation of what your heart desires: for the Quran to be from other than God. People like yourself are hostile to Islam and/or God and postulate the Quran's non miraculous nature and then work hard to try to prove and you make up things based on conjecture and flawed premises. You can make up all kind of silly ideas and notions and believe them. It will lead you nowhere good.
@ConsideringPhlebas Жыл бұрын
@@karimb972 These "proofs" of the Quran are nothing more than Muslims 'looking for confirmation of what their hearts desire.' But the popular memes about the Quran being "preserved letter for letter, word for word," and the recitations going back to Muhammad via "mutawatir chains of transmission" have been thoroughly debunked.
@johnbrzykcy3076 Жыл бұрын
@@karimb972 I don't consider myself as "hostile" to Islam or Muslims but I honestly do not see the Quran as inspired by God Himself. I could be wrong. I'm just a simple Christian believer. Respectfully..
@imranbasit8276 Жыл бұрын
Kindly interview Angelika Neuwirth of Corpus Coranicum project.
@transcendentpsych1244 ай бұрын
This is all well and good about secular assumptions but the discussion doesn't really address whether the Qur'an and hadith can be looked at and established as accurate and consistent. Too many assumptions that it's just inspired. It's not simply about being 'western ' or 'secular' it's about simply enquiring if the claims are actually reliable, consistent and coherent.
@Dr.D.R. Жыл бұрын
The first Quran was destroyed or scattered, I feel like it is difficult to criticise the Bible for not having a canonised NT, when the first NT manuscript came at the turn of the 3rd Century, which was a century after all the NT books have been written. Especially considering the early Church’s persecution.
@BloggingTheology Жыл бұрын
The first Qur'an was memorised by literally thousands of companions of the prophet. It was primarily an oral recitation. Today millions know it by heart. It has been faithfully preserved to this day.
@stefang.9763 Жыл бұрын
@@BloggingTheology Memorization of Quran worked so fine that they had first to burn all other parts that did not conform the politically agreed Quran :). For the same reason they also needed write it down in the end (huh, huh) after going to several phases of " standardization". Opposite to the Islamic state that had all the power and forced a certain version of Quran and burned the rest(you will never have the "original"), Christianity developed in a hostile environment under persecution in the first approx. 300 years. But, as always, in our weakness the power of our God is manifested. The Bible is true miracle of preservation, done by God, not forced by men! Not imposed by the power of a regime, like in Islam.
@BloggingTheology Жыл бұрын
@@stefang.9763 Compared to all other scriptures, the Qur’an is the best preserved in both the hearts of Muslims and the written copies of the codex - a manifestation of Allah’s promise to protect Divine revelation from distortion: yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/how-the-quran-was-preserved-during-the-prophets-time-mechanisms-of-oral-and-written-transmission
@stefang.9763 Жыл бұрын
@@BloggingTheology So, Allah can only preserve some of his revelation, but not all his "divine" revelation ? :) And, the new formula is not "perfect preservation" anymore, but the just "best preserved" ? :) Although presenting itself as a clear and comprehensive guidance, the Quran is almost always in need of additional sources and later interpretations for clarification. Among others also in great dependency of the "corrupted" Bible. By itself alone it hardly ever states something explicitly or clearly. That's why you are not Quran-only Muslims. Quran sloppiness is perfect for building whatever narrative around it. Be it fundamentalist or moderate muslim. Does not seem that, this claim of "best preservation" is good for anything.
@ogatatsumi8594 Жыл бұрын
@@stefang.9763Quran is preserved by God himself because it is the last revelation,who do you think God is ,is He responsible for the corruption of the scriptures that came before,no human are
@zahidsha433 Жыл бұрын
It's interesting how critical thought has evolved within the Western and Muslim worlds. Where Muslim thought encompasses both seen and unseen and are open to the divine, western thought has taken a 180 degree approach and rejected anything that can not be made tangible. I do believe that western thought was allowed to be lead astray and not given the ability to see the greater picture by God, due to their arrogance and their willingness to follow men and not God. I often see it in their arguments, and as you have stated, in their pre-suppositions that filter anything that comes to them.
@johnbrzykcy3076 Жыл бұрын
I'm not Muslim nor do I live in the Muslim worlds. I live in Florida in the United States. And I do find your observations about the way "critical thought has evolved" very interesting. I myself do not reject the unseen but I accept the reality of the Creator God. Respectfully...
@ighfirlee Жыл бұрын
interestingly, they came out with their own filter to blind them from the truth(of course in reality, it is Allah ta'ala that blinds them. He guides whom He wills). They did not even get a chance to think about it.
@ighfirlee Жыл бұрын
@Blogging Theology , Paul, could you share with use why you did not apply this Historical Critical Method whej u read the Quran, before you reverted?
@ZZ-ls5hv Жыл бұрын
Alhamdulillah... Tq Paul
@Redtornado615 күн бұрын
how is it remarkable to say that every living thing is made of water, when literally every living thing always drinks water and needs it to survive. water is what gives life. its like the same thing as people saying humans are made from the earth. technically we are made up of different elements which come from the earth.
@rashaadprice4998 Жыл бұрын
When I consider that the prophet Muhammad could not read nor write...and I add to it that he was the most impeccably mannered human being ...I cannot help. thinking that he may not have understood all that he was asked to reveal.... Secondly despite his reputation for truth ,justice and honesty,he never hesitated to attach himself to the messege he revealed.... Any human being would indeed find him 31:16 self in conflict between his reputation and his messege....and he never was... To me that is a testament to his character.... Over and over again ,he revealed things to humanity that no human of his age or before knew.... Or tonly the wrong doers who chose to hide God's previous revelation...or chose to change it.... Muhamad pbuh layed bare the truth and lies that previous religions had tried to cover up. Judaism fell because of scribes and pharisees,while Christianity fell into merging snippets of Judaism with Paganistic Roman Catholic teaching ... Neither of which has recovered from these dilemmas to this day... While Islam has always remained in the ascendancy,,despite the 1258 ransacking of Baghdad ,the fall of The Ottoman Empire and centuries of attempts to maligne it's Quran and it's prophet...of history is a good teacher then I'd venture to say ,that Islam is set to spread all across the Americas in the next century and beyond... .
@davcan18 Жыл бұрын
And consumating his marriage with a 9 y.o girl. Yes, stand up fellow.
@aminaaden2921 Жыл бұрын
@@davcan18 Like Mary and Joseph or Isaac and Rebekah. Yes, stand up fellow.
@aminaaden2921 Жыл бұрын
@@davcan18 Aisha was engaged to another man before him and broke off her engagement. That's not a girl. She lived 50 years after him, lead armies, taught men and women much older than her, never remarried again and chose to spend the rest of her life in propagating her religion. She never said anything bad about her beloved husband or their union. If she was happy with her marriage and so were her parents, family, relatives and not a single person objected in their entire society friends, foes and enemies alike. Who are the new haters pretending to care about her now all of sudden after 1400 years? While having same marriages in their own books and traditions but never see them trash talking those marriages like that of the Prophet of Islam. Double standards and hypocrisy.
@davcan18 Жыл бұрын
@@aminaaden2921 Amd your point is? No idea what you're talking about.
@davcan18 Жыл бұрын
@@aminaaden2921 So you are denying he married a 6 y.o and had sex with her when she was 9?
@cosminsuciu1889 Жыл бұрын
As always, great work! You are one of the best comparative religion channels on the internet, keep up the good work and may Allah preserve you and grant you the best reward for your efforts!
@stefang.9763 Жыл бұрын
cred ca le-ai picat in plasa. asta e canal propagandistic toata ziua. invoca respingerea miracolelor ca sa evite discutia despre critica Quran-ului dpv istoric.
@somprag928210 ай бұрын
@@stefang.9763Miracle rejection ≠ Disproving religion. This is based upon faith and confidence in faith.
@mullichsir6568 Жыл бұрын
Why is there no "historical criticism" of the Qur'an as there is of the Bible? - Simple answer is that core of academical growth is on the West, and Bible is simply closer. Richard Dawkins not live in Qatar or in Iran. And there always was some critique inside the Islam, for example there was Abu Bakr al-Razi, which critique was quite borderline and he even laugh at idea, that we can actually learn something from one book, when there so many others. Like today, criminology textbook can explain me why Kafala system stimulate crime, and why we need to have some kind of sexual education, to make kids and especially women better protected from sexual violence. But Quran wont say that, Quran dont teach that, and even criminology textbook could teach you see things, that none else can
@l2shields Жыл бұрын
Richard Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist, he is not well respected even among secular intellectual historians
@echoalpha51329 ай бұрын
May peace be upon us all. I just wanted point out that a hadith can only be true if it parallels the Qur'an.
@mishahul Жыл бұрын
Please do a series of talks with Nouman Ali Khan on the stories of the Prophets in the Quran vs. the Bible. How the Arabic words are so accurate to describe the Prophets vs the corrupt versions in the old testament.
@althea_is_smokin_hot3 ай бұрын
Sir,nobody wants to lose his head.
@user-wx9fq8xz3n Жыл бұрын
It is, plenty of it, you guys call it "Islamophobia" if I recall, since you can't take criticism.
@Yuki.2022 Жыл бұрын
There is a big difference between criticism and hate speech.
@johnbrzykcy3076 Жыл бұрын
@@Yuki.2022 I'm not Muslim but I agree with you 100%. Peace of God to you from Florida
@H4R88N Жыл бұрын
*Like "Getting it Right, First Time"* *Can we* just *Create without* *Revision, (editing) , "Updates"* Why not? [Allah Most Wise] challenges us to try... And when *We know We were unable to* , We would be Convinced of the Claim of [The Claimant]
@MrSongib Жыл бұрын
25:00 this actually what NonMuslim believe, since In the beginning they didn't believe the Unseen so what happen is that "Rules" about Historical criticism in this book already flawed to how we Read the Quran so there is no point this person writing the book in the first place. IDK what he doing here. Since what he said is "my rules is my glasses and yours is not", there is no point we take this book seriously. xd One more thing, these type of "Critiques" this book suggest, it's already got Critiqued multiple times in Quran (I didn't remember the Verse but it's there). 27:00 I'm with you here. Salam
@its7136 Жыл бұрын
if u can add french translate in ur vidéos it would be perfect cuz you have many muslims french that follow you
@macready328910 ай бұрын
What about Dr. Stephen J. Shoemaker's latest book on the Qur'ān?
@lonecandle5786 Жыл бұрын
Weren't Muhammad's words not written down right away? Couldn't the exact words have changed by the time they were written down and codified?
@wuhoolife Жыл бұрын
Look up at the way it was taught. Oral tradition. And preservation.
@Junier-Hussein Жыл бұрын
@@wuhoolife One of the oldest pages/writings from the Qur'an found are called - Birmingham Quran manuscript. The words are uncannily 99.9% similar to the Qur'an of today in terms of content only differences it's written in earlier Hijazi text. It's fascinating 😊
@CG-zi5ku Жыл бұрын
If the Quran is uncreated, then every word and name in it is uncreated - 'Adam' is uncreated, 'Musa' is uncreated, 'Mary' is uncreated, 'Ard' (earth) is uncreated, 'dahab' (gold), 'hareer' (silk) - all UNCREATED. Who created these names and words? No-one not even God!
@ce4648 Жыл бұрын
In the true monotheistic Islam, Only the One True God, ALLAH (SWT), is the CREATOR. Everything else is His CREATION - the cosmos, living matter, non-living matter, Islamic divine revelation, and all else . . . Therefore, the Qur'an is a Creation, divinely created by the One True God, Allah (SWT) then revealed to the Prophet (PBUH) through the Angel Gabriel 🙏.
@axis2312 Жыл бұрын
that was a reach
@ahmedirfansamad Жыл бұрын
Sir, I am eager to watch your analysis and commentary on the debate between Saint Barnabas and Paul.
@johnbrzykcy3076 Жыл бұрын
What "debate" are you referring to? I'm not Muslim but I'm curious too. Thanks
@wjckc796 ай бұрын
@@johnbrzykcy3076 Acts 15:36-21:16 - It was not a theological debate. Paul and Barnabas had decided to take a small group and revisit some towns they had previously shared Christ with. One of the individuals had proven themselves unreliable in the past and so Paul was against taking him while Barnabas wanted to. The argued about it. Ultimately, the group split up with Paul taking Silas and Barnabas taking the other guy. Luke was writing his account with Paul, so the story continues with Paul and Silas while Barnabas largely exits the story. If @ahmedirfansamad means something else, then it is non-canonical. There is a Gnostic text attribute to Barnabas, but I haven't gotten around to reading it. Perhaps there is something in it. 36 And after some days Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us return and visit the brothers in every city where we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are.” 37 Now Barnabas wanted to take with them John called Mark. 38 But Paul thought best not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work. 39 And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other. Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus, 40 but Paul chose Silas and departed, having been commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. 41 And he went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.
@abdulelah9726 Жыл бұрын
Did these books translate into Arabic ?
@adekunleadedokun8483 Жыл бұрын
how can you see someone like this following a particular religion or group and still not look into it and see why someone as educated as this is supporting it. but if its ur celebrity,you follow them like chicken following there mothers
@Kuuzie1 Жыл бұрын
😂
@bassemghoneim4904 Жыл бұрын
HCM sounds vey circular in terms of its argumentation, especially when examining books that claim to be divine.
@YTaahmed45 Жыл бұрын
It is not correct to suggest that Hadis are words of the Prophet PBUH. Muslims believe that there is no instructions ever from the prophet PBUH to save his words (other than Quran and the Sunnah). Muslims do not believe at all that all Hadis are the prophetic words. In fact the universal Muslim view is that these are statement of HUMANS with all attendant human weaknesses of choice of words in narrating, understanding, lack of context in which those words were spoken, and simple faking by the detractors to misguide the Muslims. The prophet PBUH never instructed to write/protect/save any Hadis. What he instructed to religiously save and protect and pass on to the generations, and taught (both in words and in actual performance of each instruction) all his life are two things: the Quran and the Sunnah (mistakenly sometimes Hadis are described as Sunnah, which is incorrect. Sunnah are deeds which are decreed to be performed by all Muslims in accordance with the teachings of all the prophets of Islam: There is definitive list of Sunnah including five daily prayers, fasting all month of Ramzan, giving of alms or Zakat, Hajj,etc etc ). The entire instruction code of deeds and belief system of Islam is encircled in the Quran and the Sunnah, anything outside the circle of Quran and the Sunnah is not part of the Deen (Islam). Given that the Hadis have been known to be words of the PEOPLE, not of the the Prophet PBUH, Hadis cannot be attributed as prophet's words, the maximum Muslims can say and believe, after lots of scrutiny of the authenticity of every word of Hadis is, that "THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE WORDS AS NARRATED IN THE HADIS COULD HAVE BEEN UTTERED BY THE PROPHET PBUH", and only Allah knows the truth. No independent religious instruction or belief can emanate from any Hadis, its basis should be in the Quran or the Sunnah. Hadis can only clarify, or explain the rules given in the Quran and the Sunnah, or the application of the instruction in given circumstances. Nothing more. In Islam it is great sin to attribute any thing or any word to Allah or Prophet PBUH which is not 100% CORRECT AND FACTUALLY spoken by the Prophet PBUH. Since we cannot say with 100% certainty about every word of the Hadis (given that they are words narrated by the humans), and hence Hadis have been scrutinized by thousands of scholars from day one, and are categorized as possibly authentic, possibly less authentic, weak and outright fake. Hadis is also the historical record of the life of the prophet PBUH, both as prophet and as human being, but are not part of the Deen.
@ogatatsumi8594 Жыл бұрын
You are certainly in the wrong , absolutely
@hussinm2985 Жыл бұрын
Have enjoyed the content and your objective approach for this channel. Although unrelated, I believe many followers of yours would like to know something about your family, wife and children. Can you share with us?
@karimb972 Жыл бұрын
that's not anyone's business. just gossip fodder which is haram. mind your own business, brother. it is better for you
@H4R88N Жыл бұрын
In the beginning *Arrogance combined* *With Reasoning* Got Satan a ticket to Hell, ( "I am better" ) Nowadays "Man is competing" in *Reasoning* , *Arrogantly* , tickets all sold out
@mustafaenriquez6457 Жыл бұрын
Alhmdulilah for is Islam 🤲🏾😊
@prestonmccoy709710 ай бұрын
Perfection and obedience may be what it is, but I have other ideas. Christianity is obviously the most followed religion, so that is part of the reason no doubt. It also makes bigger claims than most, if not all religions(admittedly I haven’t read much of it ever). Plus, its content takes place over a much longer amount of time than the Quran does. Much more to dissect.
@andrewphilip3308 Жыл бұрын
Another very interesting presentation. There was no historical Criticism of the Bible for 1600 years. There will be more and more historical criticism of the Quran whether anyone likes it or not. The Bible has been regarded as the inerrant word of God. But reasonable people will know that this can be regarded as a human belief. The same is true of the Quran. The belief that it is an inerrant may be true, but that is not going to stop people looking at it in its historical context. And that will shed some light.. However in Christian doctrine, the gift of interpretation is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit which is ordered to the edification of the hearer or reader. After all, all books are dead until they are interpreted by living souls to living souls in the present, are they not?
@miamone60799 ай бұрын
No historical criticism of the quran can be analyzed in two words, “never happened”
@sarbast99 Жыл бұрын
Great & clear thought. Thank you.
@mohamedhafizbah3672 Жыл бұрын
الحمد لله
@pakmail135 Жыл бұрын
Salam paul, i would appreciate if you could talk about the differences between protestantism and catholicism. I'v been curious for a long time. Thank you
@BloggingTheology Жыл бұрын
Salam good idea
@Riadurrohman Жыл бұрын
Agree
@a4286j Жыл бұрын
Perhaps may i also add how come there are a number or thousands of churches/denominations of Christianity, all believing in Jesus as God, part of trinity, but only one has the salvation. Its baffling
@BilimFelsefeDin7ve19Ай бұрын
When you show that a text has been changed and transmitted to the present day, you guarantee that it is the word of man, but the fact that a text is transmitted to the present without change does not show or prove that it is not the word of man. There is a deficiency at this point. There is no this deficiency in the Qur'an's claim. People who cannot understand the claim of the Quran make this deficiency and this mistake. The claim of the Quran is very clear. 15/9 It is certainly We Who have revealed the Reminder, and it is certainly We Who will preserve it. And 2/23 And if you are in doubt about what We have revealed to Our servant,1 then produce a surah like it and call your helpers other than Allah, if what you say is true. 2/24 But if you are unable to do so-and you will never be able to do so-then fear the Fire fueled with people and stones, which is prepared for the disbelievers. Please do not skip this detail. The claim of the Quran is very clear. 10/38 Do they say, "He made that up?" Say, "Bring a sura (3-5 lines of text) similar to it..." It is possible to measure the similarity of the text brought to the Quran. Please search "Kur'an-ı Kerim'in Sayısal Yapısı" on Google. The WEBSITE is written in Turkish, please use Chrome translation.
@samueld.webster2438 Жыл бұрын
I have seen in many different versions of the Quran English on one side and Arabic on the other in the Hebrew Bible English on one side and Hebrew on the other side i have never seen in different Versions of the New Testament English on one side and Aramaic the language that Jesus spoke on the other side of the New Testament
@AshokGupta-oq6hs4 ай бұрын
Sir,there is a very simple explanation for this other than semantics. Blasphemy and consequent beheading is the simple reason.
@H4R88N Жыл бұрын
*i.T.* is moving so _fast_ Everyone *is* _Losing Track_ of *Time* " Click " *How long does " i.T. " take* [These days] seem " Lighter " [Days passing] in " seconds " *To start a fire* 🔥 *these "days"*
@kalijasin Жыл бұрын
Paul, if the Bible from God then Why is it copyrighted? 🤔
@gunawanhadinegoro876311 ай бұрын
let it be criticism from christian or Pope himself to give ask in publicly