David Penchansky: Studying the Qur'an as a Biblical Scholar
In this video I have a discussion with Professor Emeritus David Penchansky about his journey from Biblical studies into Qur'anic studies, what to do with scriptural inconsistencies, and his research on the Solomon stories in the Qur'an. We discuss a wide range of topics having to do with comparative study of the Qur'an and the Bible as well as scriptural hermeneutics generally.
David Penchansky is Professor Emeritus at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota. He obtained his Ph.D. in Hebrew Bible from Vanderbilt University in 1988. His expertise is in Hebrew Bible, Wisdom Literature of the Bible, Literary Criticism of the Bible, Ideological Criticism of the Bible, Narrative analysis, narratives in the Qur'an, and Inter-religious dialogue. He has recently written Solomon and the Ant: Qur'an and Bible in Dialogue, Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 2021.
I hope that you enjoy this discussion! Please remember to like the video and subscribe to the channel to see more content like this!
more episodes with prof. david, i love his perspectives
19:45 Gabriel saying Astagfiralla is so cute
yeah, also I really want to know why he said it
Subhanallah what an interesting discussion. Tabarakallah to you both for such an engaging conversation!
Lol
هولاء المستشرقون لا يبحثون عن الحقيقة و لكن هم لهم اعتقادات مسبقة معادية للاسلام و يستخدمون لغة البحث العلمي و التزييف و التحريف لاثبات تلك المعتقدات, و هم لا يختلفون في شئ عن الاسلوب الذي اتبعته الفرق الباطنية عبر التاريخ الاسلامي بتفسيراتها المنحرفة للنصوص لتأكيد معتقداتهم, ولذا تجد هولاء المستشرقون يستشهدون باقوال الفرق المنحرفة الباطنية او غلاء الشيعة و لا يهتمون كثيراً من مصادر الاسلام الاصلية, فالمسلمون يتبعون الدليل و هولاء المستشرقون يتبعون الهوي, و لا يعملون بالقاعدة التي بني عليها علماء الاسلام العلم الاسلامي و هي "اذا كنت مدعياً فالدليل, و ان كنت ناقلاً فالصحة" اي اذا كنت تدعي شيئاً فعليك اثباته بالدليل المناسب له سواء كان دليل عقلي او تجريبي او احصائي مرصود, و ان كنت تنقل خبر عن النبي عليه الصلاة و السلام او شئ عن اخبار الغيب او الاسلام فعليك اثبات صحة النقل بتقديم سلسلة الاسانيد و عرض الكلام علي اصول المسلمين العقدية والفقهية و استخدم علوم الحديث في بحثها اما لقبولها او دحضها, هولاء المستشرقون يستخدمون الاساليب الادبية و تحليل النصوص غيرها التي استخدموها في دراسة الاناجيل ثم يجمعونها مع شذرات من مخطوطات مشكوك فيها و يفترضون قصة او رواية ثم ينسجون احداث خيالية و بناء حبكة قصصية و تغليفها بلغة البحث العلمي للتلبيس علي عقول الناس, و من اراد فهم نصوص الاسلام فعليه دراسة و استخدام علوم اصول الفقه و الدين و من اراد دراسة صحة مصادر الاسلام فعليه دراسة علوم الحديث, وغير ذلك من الاساليب فهي علوم زائفة لا طائل منها
What a unique book. Very much appreciated.
Great video
Very interesting And the most interesting is his view of the gaps
Please invite Prof David to talk more about his work and perspectives
I see that Gabriel posted new video. I hit "like" and watch it later, when I am free and Noone's disturbing
Dr. Raynolds - Thank you very much for such a wonderfully refreshing and stimulating interview. After Dr. Shoemaker- I was starting to expect that your next interview might be with Robert Spencer. I know you believe in letting the other side be heard, and that all sides should be heard. Still…thanks for maintaining your high academic standards as always.
That Surah is one of my favorites, it is about good governance.
What goes against the idea that it is a mocking laugh, to me, is that it is joined with the word تبسم, "he smiled, laughing." There are other instances in the Qur'an where the laugh is mocking and not joined with "smiling". That is an inconsistency (in the sense that "smiling" is not in the other places). Therefore, according to the speaker's own idea that contradiction is where meaning is found, we should interpret this instance of laughing differently than the instances of mocking laughter.
I like the methodology, but 12:50 seems wrong to me? "Eavesdrop is in another text", it isn't though. The Arabic word سمع, which means listening (or eavesdrop if you'd like it in the case), is said twice in the ayat referenced? "We used to take up positions there for eavesdropping, but whoever dares eavesdrop now will find a flare lying in wait for them." Q72:9
Despite the frequent stereotype that only the Nestorian church was a threatening enemy to the Sasanids, the Manicheans were also a very dangerous religious rival to the Zoroastrian upper class, especially because of the great influence of Manicheanism on the eastern borders of Sasanian Iran. Manichaeans were therefore subject to persecution by Sasanian authorities, who saw them as heretics and a threat to their political power. One unique test used by Sasanian authorities to identify Manichaeans was the test by the ant. According to the Nestorian Chronicle Karka dBet Slok, this test involved the judge asking the suspect to kill an ant. Killing the ant was considered a great sin in Manichaeism, as it violated the principle of non-violence. If the suspect refused to kill the ant, they were considered to be a Manichaean and were executed. While the story of Solomon and the ant in the Quran does not involve a test of faith like the test by ant used by Sasanian authorities, it may portray Solomon as an archetype of the tyrannical rule of the Sasanids. Like Solomon, the Sassanian kings were powerful rulers who saw themselves as divinely ordained and had little regard for the rights and autonomy of their subjects. The plea of the ant can be seen as a symbol of cry against such kind of tyranny, where the ruler imposes their will on the weak and vulnerable, using their power to enforce conformity and punish dissent. I do not insist on a direct link, but such an anti-Sasanid atmosphere may have influenced the choice of this portrait of Solomon by the author of the Qur'an.
Awesome and very informative post.However Zoroastranism had an imposing influence on Islam in very many ways too.Would love to know your references if possible.
It's difficult how yourself and the guest speaker somehow concluded that Solomon's laugh is tyrannical and boastful!! The very next verse, solom laughs and asks God to help him (Solomon) to bestow this gift. Below is abdulraham translation "Solomon smiled broadly at her words and said, ‘Lord, inspire me to be thankful for the blessings You have granted me and my parents, and to do good deeds that please You; admit me by Your grace *mercy) into the ranks of Your righteous servants.’" So again, the image of Solomon being a tyrrant is a remnant of biblical biases to the character of of Solomon. Solomon mentioned mercy after this encounter, to contrast a tyrannical merciless bum as tou and the speaker viewed him. Capich??
Wonder if the story of Solomon and executing horses supports the guest’s reading of Solomon’s character.
In his response to the Queen of Sheba, Solomon was humble because he attributed the credit to God and not to himself. This is a significant difference from the arrogant Pharaoh, who claimed credit for himself. Additionally, Solomon has a connection to the heavens as he is a prophet
The stories in Quran falls into two types. (1) mesel, a story narrated using fictional characters to teach a lesson, (2) theological stories of old prophets, to explain finer points of belief, and to delineate the lines between Islam and Judaism and Christianity. The story of Solomon and the green man fall into the first category.
Never have I listened to someone making an art of something as trivial as the Abu Lahab surah; such is the case of those people who see in white all kinds of colorful shades.
A very fruitful and convincing discussion. The only thing I found unsatisfactory was the rather hasty conclusion to Surah Abi Lahab. In my opinion, in interpreting this sura as the story of Solomon and the ant, verse 26 of Sura Baqarah of the Quran should be kept in mind. "God does not hesitate to tell parables about anything, even a midge. Believers know this to be the truth from their Lord, but those who deny the truth say, "What does God mean by such parables?" In fact, by such parables, God misleads and guides many. However, He only misleads the wrongdoers" Surah Abi Lahab should be understood as an abstract parable of historical events and interpretations. What kind of punishment should be deserved by wealthy businessmen who kindle the fire of hypocrisy and enmity and those who help them?
The question I have for you Gabriel, as well as for your guest is this: Why is the koran riddled with stories about people we know nothing about [like Dhul Qarnain, and Abu Lahab], and stories about talking insects and animals, when allah could have used the extremely limited space of the koran to set the record straight on the Crucifixion, and correct Orthodox Christian dogma which was well established at the time?
Because Qur'an had bigger fish to fry. Christians were not the primary concern for the Quran as Christianity eventually melted away wherever Islam went. In 'the very limited space', Quran codified most of overarching principles necessary for a human being to live a God-conscious life- successful in this life and the next. The Quran was trying to build a society based on certain values and principles that was completely different to paganism that was prevalent in Arabia, preparing that people to convey that to the other parts of the world. Since, Rome had already absorbed Christianity along with its paganism, Christianity did almost nothing to change the oppressive social and political structures of the Roman empire, (later on, played a crucial role in abetting more oppressive structures in Feudal Europe). About stories: Each story in the Quran is accompanied by the lesson to derive from those stories. You just need to read the context of the stories and the anchoring points of that particular chapter. Unlike Bible, Qur'an is meant to be read daily and still the common practice among large numbers of Muslims is to complete one reading every month. Quran is recited in the five daily prayers as well. So most of the time, it's topics are meant as divine guidance in every day life. Around 80% of it is about God, faith, piety, gratitude, afterlife, and attributes of God- His mercy, His justice, His compassion. Rulings and Laws, Christianity, Judaism- are all secondary issues for the Quran.
@@aismail8321 "Because Qur'an had bigger fish to fry." It is obvious that you have never read the koran. Get lost. 😁
@@aismail8321 Christianity melted away? That is a big claim!
@@aismail8321the Quran reads like the frustrated rant of someone who is so furious that everyone doesn't just believe him, that he can't control his temper or get the right words out at the right time, and that makes him even more frustrated, so he ends up repeating and contradicting himself.
frustrated rant? you haven't understood the Quran@@brianclark528
40:50 Gabriel nods and thinks please don't get me in trouble with the Saudi government. But in all seriousness, this was fascinating. I am getting Dr. Penchansky's book and bringing it to the top of my book backlog. The war in heaven theme is definitely an interesting way to read surah jinn. Though surah lahab names specifically a relative of the prophet (going with the tradition) and the Quran is reticent to name people by name. I think it is powerful to name someone that could be considered holy or special because of their relation to the prophet and say even this person can be damned. It is similar to how Noah's son is singled out as an evil person. Other examples are Noah's and Lot's wives.
I think, on the explanation about Sulaiman got angry, or furious about the absence of hud hud in the assembly, the context is about assembly or his ARMY. Please take note, until today, we have different laws for armies, they have different court, and in my country our army has a different identification system. Why? Because they are not civillians, they are train to fight. In the case of hud hud, it was a spy in the army, one of his job is to go in other territories and report to the king. I think it is more about the dicipline of the army. They are NOT civillians. You must look into the context of what assembly it was.
41:23 They entered a village, not for mere passage, but for entering into conflict, and it is quite natural that the vanquished becomes subservient, as they do not desire war.
@attila0073 What on earth makes Solomon a "prophet"? These are just regional patriarchs who are casted in stories and legends. Of course, the power of their stories matter, but to regard individuals in history as "prophets" is twisted and demented.
The reading of Solomon is interesting and makes me think of the episode with women slicing their hands in the Joseph story. According to Mieke Bal in her narratological analysis Loving Yusuf, she argues that the scene makes no sense from a purely theological point of view because the point about adultery and betrayal has been made quite forcefully. What happens in this scene is that the woman is also vindicated by God. In other words, it is as if God says He made Joseph irresistible and her desire is understandable if not justified.
The good doctor did not even mention that Ibliss known as Satan is himself from the Jinns. 18:50 Behold! We said to the angels, "Bow down to Adam": They bowed down except Iblis. He was one of the Jinns, and he broke the Command of his Lord. Will ye then take him and his progeny as protectors rather than Me? And they are enemies to you! Evil would be the exchange for the wrong-doers. 7:10 We have indeed established you on earth and provided you with a means of livelihood. ˹Yet˺ you seldom give any thanks. 7:11 Surely We created you, then shaped you, then said to the angels, “Prostrate before Adam,” so they all did-but not Iblîs, who refused to prostrate with the others. 7:12 Allah asked, “What prevented you from prostrating when I commanded you?” He replied, “I am better than he is: You created me from fire and him from clay.” 7:13 Allah said, “Then get down from Paradise! It is not for you to be arrogant here. So get out! You are truly one of the disgraced.” 7:14 He appealed, “Then delay my end until the Day of their resurrection.” 7:15 Allah said, “You are delayed ˹until the appointed Day˺.” 7:16 He said, “For leaving me to stray I will lie in ambush for them on Your Straight Path. 7:17 I will approach them from their front, their back, their right, their left, and then You will find most of them ungrateful.” 7:18 Allah said, “Get out of Paradise! You are disgraced and rejected! I will certainly fill up Hell with you and your followers all together.”
"We said to the angels, "Bow down to Adam": They bowed down except Iblis." This implies that Iblis is an angel, given he was commanded to prostrate along with the angels.
@@ConsideringPhlebas Nope. It's clearly mentioned in 18:50 And [mention] when We said to the angels, "Prostrate to Adam," and they prostrated, except for Iblees. He was of the jinn and departed from [i.e., disobeyed] the command of his Lord. Then will you take him and his descendants as allies other than Me while they are enemies to you? Wretched it is for the wrongdoers as an exchange.
@@aismail8321 Yeah, but 'jinn' could just be those angels who rebelled against God and were therefore kicked out of heaven.
Yes, Jinn in my view are quanta, electrons, light.
@@almazchati4178 in order to be consistent you should’ve said photons instead of light.
Verse 74:19 does not refer to the Jinns at all. The subject of the Jinns is mentioned from Verse 1 through mid 14. Then the attention is turned to the Meccans. In verse 16 the term deniers refers to the pagans of Mecca not the Jinns who do not need any rain. The subject matter about the Jinn was over and now God is addressing those Meccans directly about their misdeeds. 72:14 'Amongst us are some that submit their wills (to Allah), and some that swerve from justice. *Now* those who submit their wills - they have sought out (the path) of right conduct 72:15 'But those who swerve,- they are (but) fuel for Hell-fire' 72:16 (And Allah's Message is): "If they (the Pagans) had (only) remained on the (right) Way, We should certainly have bestowed on them Rain in abundance 72:17 "That We might try them by that (means). But if any turns away from the remembrance of his Lord, He will cause him to undergo a severe Penalty 72:18 "And the places of worship are for Allah (alone): So invoke not any one along with Allah 72:19 "Yet when the Devotee of Allah stands forth to invoke Him, they just make round him a dense crowd." 72:20 Say: "I do no more than invoke my Lord, and I join not with Him any (false god)." 72:21 Say: "It is not in my power to cause you harm, or to bring you to right conduct." 72:22 Say: "No one can deliver me from Allah (If I were to disobey Him), nor should I find refuge except in Him 72:23 "Unless I proclaim what I receive from Allah and His Messages: for any that disobey Allah and His Messenger,- for them is Hell: they shall dwell therein for ever." 72:24 At length, when they see (with their own eyes) that which they are promised,- then will they know who it is that is weakest in (his) helper and least important in point of numbers 72:25 Say: "I know not whether the (Punishment) which ye are promised is near, or whether my Lord will appoint for it a distant term 72:26 "He (alone) knows the Unseen, nor does He make any one acquainted with His Mysteries, 72:27 "Except a messenger whom He has chosen: and then He makes a band of watchers march before him and behind him 72:28 "That He may know that they have (truly) brought and delivered the Messages of their Lord: and He surrounds (all the mysteries) that are with them, and takes account of every single thing."
by the way , the main topic was built on wrong understanding for arabic. Djinn had never an access to heavens. they had some kind of close positions that they can get some information about the future through it. this is the real meaning.
The penchant for misreading the Quran by compartmentalisation of its themes has now somehow become a qualifying trait of a Western academic who are seeking groundbreaking findings from the Quran. Someone may ask whether this is simply a silly pursuit of novelty rather than the truth... But hey, whatever gets me funding would do😂
Muslims are so soft. You always make things personal.
Near laymen can often debunk a lot of the novel ideas brought by academics which sometimes almost perfectly ignore Quranic context or Hadith context with its explanation of the Quran
David Penchansky writes beautifully. Especially Surah Jinn and the story of Story of Jibril and Prophets Miraj. However his interpretation of story of Solomon and Moses is not convincing.
We`re all dying to know what happened when you said "astaghfirullah" in minute 19. :)
So the fate of Abu Alhab upsets you. 111:1 Perish the hands of the Father of Flame! Perish he 111:2 No profit to him from all his wealth, and all his gains 111:3 *Burnt soon will he be in a Fire of Blazing Flame* This is his fate in the life to come. For what he did read about his misdeeds. 111:4 His wife shall carry the (crackling) wood - As fuel! 111:5 A twisted rope of palm-leaf fibre round her (own) neck
It’s tawhid not tahwid.
Author of the Quran is the creator of the heavens and the Earth....
"Could you write something this good?" Is that a joke? Are there really people who believe the Quran is well written or interesting...or even not completely unreadable?
You are like someone who looks at the stars and doesn't see the constellations.
When dr David talks and imprints his own whims and desires on interepreting Quranic verses sounds just like a mad man. Entertaining but thats about it!! 😂
not sure why we muslims have to take any part of the biblical narrative as authoritative. Our tradition clearly says we are to stay quite on it
it maybe a serious engagement but it doesnt come with the right presuppositions and frame of mind for a muslim. I guess its valuable for non-muslims?
هولاء المستشرقون لا يبحثون عن الحقيقة و لكن هم لهم اعتقادات مسبقة معادية للاسلام و يستخدمون لغة البحث العلمي و التزييف و التحريف لاثبات تلك المعتقدات, و هم لا يختلفون في شئ عن الاسلوب الذي اتبعته الفرق الباطنية عبر التاريخ الاسلامي بتفسيراتها المنحرفة للنصوص لتأكيد معتقداتهم, ولذا تجد هولاء المستشرقون يستشهدون باقوال الفرق المنحرفة الباطنية او غلاء الشيعة و لا يهتمون كثيراً من مصادر الاسلام الاصلية, فالمسلمون يتبعون الدليل و هولاء المستشرقون يتبعون الهوي, و لا يعملون بالقاعدة التي بني عليها علماء الاسلام العلم الاسلامي و هي "اذا كنت مدعياً فالدليل, و ان كنت ناقلاً فالصحة" اي اذا كنت تدعي شيئاً فعليك اثباته بالدليل المناسب له سواء كان دليل عقلي او تجريبي او احصائي مرصود, و ان كنت تنقل خبر عن النبي عليه الصلاة و السلام او شئ عن اخبار الغيب او الاسلام فعليك اثبات صحة النقل بتقديم سلسلة الاسانيد و عرض الكلام علي اصول المسلمين العقدية والفقهية و استخدم علوم الحديث في بحثها اما لقبولها او دحضها, هولاء المستشرقون يستخدمون الاساليب الادبية و تحليل النصوص غيرها التي استخدموها في دراسة الاناجيل ثم يجمعونها مع شذرات من مخطوطات مشكوك فيها و يفترضون قصة او رواية ثم ينسجون احداث خيالية و بناء حبكة قصصية و تغليفها بلغة البحث العلمي للتلبيس علي عقول الناس, و من اراد فهم نصوص الاسلام فعليه دراسة و استخدام علوم اصول الفقه و الدين و من اراد دراسة صحة مصادر الاسلام فعليه دراسة علوم الحديث, وغير ذلك من الاساليب فهي علوم زائفة لا طائل منها
Again im shocked to find out as i keep listening to Dr here. He said why did jinns get driven out if heaven. It does say in thebQuran that he disobeyd Allah by not giving respect to Adam. He challenged God that he will make disobey you so please give me chance to proove that to you. Im paraphrasing but thats thebreason why jinn were casted out. Tye answer isnthere whyndoes the dr have to searchbthe bible to answer this question?
This guy is very negative in his views. Solomon in the Quran was not a bad person like the Hebrew bible portrays him to be. 27:18 And when they came across a valley of ants, an ant warned, “O ants! Go quickly into your homes so Solomon and his armies do not crush you, unknowingly.” 27:19 So Solomon smiled in amusement at her words, and prayed, “My Lord! Inspire me to ˹always˺ be thankful for Your favours which You have blessed me and my parents with, and to do good deeds that please you. Admit me, by Your mercy, into ˹the company of˺ Your righteous servants.” Does that sound like mockery? Far from it.
I think it is important for us to hear from everyone. Similarly, I dont agree with him but its good to hear from him so that we can counter his argument with stronger argument, more logical.. like what you just did. 😁
Can you please shed some light on both there religious background, or are they atheist. Because we as humans tend to have some bias.
I disagree with Dr's jinn theory. Why foes the Quran need to give a full explination about why jinn would know Allah deniedbthem axis? I don't get it. Allah doesn't give an answer maybe he doesn't want humans or jinn's to know. Whats make this a big deal?
This is what happens when you give “angry atheist” a platform. Good job of grinning and bearing it, Gabriel and biting your lip etc etc 😅
What a twisted and silly reading of those verses! 🤦 Solomon acts like a King in front of his subjects. And humble in front of the King of all Kings- Allah. What's so bad about it? The whole point of the Surah is that Solomon, even after receiving that unparalleled kingdom, still was a grateful slave who observed the commands of God, like his father David. It's a clear negation of the fabricated Biblical stories that tarnish the image of Solomon, who Muslims believe was a prophet.
In the bible everyone is a sinner even the prophets himself need to be save from sins and wrath of God because they are human
@@DusTman761 including Jesus Christ?
@@DusTman761 everyone needs the grace of God to be saved because every human makes mistakes. But intentional sins are different from mere mistakes of judgement. The prophets are vehicles of God's revelation in this world. If they themselves are corrupt, how would others know what's right and what's wrong? It can't be. So the Qur'an clears the false attributions made up by people to the prophets in order to justify their crimes.
@@2Sage-7Poets Jesus came to save humankind from sins. Its fulfill the old Testament
So from an Islamic perspective Judaism was never polytheistic the “gods” council being referred to is similar to Allah holding council with superior beings that are able to influence man but are not Gods as in creator gods. YHWH or Allah is still the almost superior god of them all. Those beings are the Malaika and Jinns including Lucifer/Iblis
Bro ... I mean ... bruh ... we don't have marxists comment on our books in Islam. Take it easy bruh.
Well with all due respect the wife is wrong. Surat Alnaml is read at least once a year in Traweeh prayer in part 19 on the 19th night of Ramadan in all Taraweeh holding mosques Starting in The Holy Mosque in Makkah and ending with the last as humble one. Another polemic for viewing Gods justice of eternal damnation. One could take a limited view by not accepting eternal damnation of a mortal. Yet one needs to measure the gravity of the mortals crime towards humanity by waging a violent war of greed in forwarding the culprit’s material interest vis a vis the colossal detriment to a part humanity.
The Quran is understood with a Western spirit ! causing the absence of many meanings. For example, Solomon's statement, "I will surely punish him with a severe punishment or slaughter him unless he brings me clear authorization," is understood by us merely as a threat to make the hoopoe appear, not as a genuine desire for revenge from Solomon. It is perceived that he is not serious about it. The text must be understood with the spirit of the native language.
He loves the honest depictions of the flaws of the main Characters in the bible? That may be but what if those 'flaws' are just plain lies and polemics by the authors of the bible? Isn't the involvement of Aaron in making the calf a polemics work by the Elohists of Northern Israel against the Aaronites of Judah? How about Solomon and worshiping the pagan gods? that's a lie also. And there are many more.
There seems to be an underlying assumption to your comment that the Quran would have a more accurate depiction of the character of Solomon. As far as I know Scholars are skeptical of the existence of Solomon and from an academic perspective the Quran would be relying on biblical tradition in its depiction of the character.
@@jojones4685 The Quran has more accurate information about Solomon than the Hebrew Bible because it is from God himself. I am partial to the Quran because it is more reasonable; and consistent. sue me. The scholars don’t think anyone existed until they have something to corroborate it outside of the Bible or the Quran. That for me is not convincing enough because a lot of things could have happened without leaving any trace of evidence. The Quran is not relying on anything from the Bible. Yes, the Quran assumes the people to be familiar with certain things but not like what you seem to insinuate. Take the story of Adam found in the doublets in Genesis. The details in the Quran are totally different. There are no talking snakes for instance. So why is the story in the Quran totally different from the one found In Genesis if the Quran is relying on the Hebrew Bible? Satan in the Hebrew Bible is just god’s helper but in the Quran he is antagonist to Adam. Why is that? Also, in the Hebrew Bible there is no heaven and hell. The subject is mentioned in the Christian Bible but not to the extent found in the Quran. The same goes for the story about Noah’s flood. The Quran makes more sense than the world was destroyed by a flood because the sons of god had sex with the daughters of man. The reason sounds so stupid. The flood in the Hebrew Bible covers the whole earth but the one in the Quran is local. The Quran makes more sense than the Hebrew Bible. Read the Quran for yourself and tell me if you disagree.
@@BenM61 , " The Quran has more accurate information", Really ❓ 1, Is the SUN set in a muddy pool ❓ 2, How many Allahs are there ❓ 3, Was Noah's family killed during the Floods ❓ 4, Which was created first, EARTH or HEAVEN ❓ 5, What is the meaning of A.L.M ❓ 6, Is Jesus Dead or Alive ❓ 7, Do women have Sperm ❓ 8, How many EARTHS Are there ❓ 9, What is the Arabic word for Gospel ❓ 10, Who was the first Muslim ❓ Those are the First few Questions I have for you at the moment. Thanks 🙏
@@BenM61 "The reason sounds so stupid. The flood in the Hebrew Bible covers the whole earth but the one in the Quran is local." The reason for God destroying life on earth was because of its moral corruption, not the Nephilim. Also, this 'Quranic local flood' narrative is a modern invention. The Quran, and it's classical Islamic commentators, affirm a global flood. Also, it's pretty doubtful that the Levitical priests who transmitted the Bible also transmitted an anti-Aaronic, and therefore anti-Levitical, priesthood polemic against Aaron.
@Ben M, sometimes you don't need to respond to some comments but just😂😂😂😂
1. If this is Quranic scholarship by western academics Im really dissapointed 2. He says the mufasirun the guys that know the text better then him (I show it) make interpretative insertions in the text, and the genius in the 21 century that probably doesnt speak arabic properly, does the same thing just moments late Jinn havig maqaid lisema´ are counsils of yahweh hahahaha I mean its amazing, 3. Maqaid lisema have to mean counsils with yahwehs permission because god allows it, well god allowed Adam to eat , doesnt mean Adam was in gods council What kind of logic is that ?! 4. Theodicy is not a problem for islam, its problem with u, God does what he wants, thats islamic answer ulimately in quran, its not suppose to be utopia within an explosive universe !!! duuuh 5. Shlomo is suppose to be some kind of a unctorollable furious person, where in the quran says that ?! ooo its ur INTERPRETATION OF IT, yeah right! 6. Shlomos argument to Balkis wasnt tricking her, but with the jinn taking her throne to shlomo in seconds, of course the genius scholar doesnt mention it 7. Shlomo didnt saz bismila rahman rahim, just bismilah And his kitab doesnt have anzthing to do with quran, who makes that connection ? the genius invited in this vid A person in day of judgement will say Umuqrau kitabiyah ! well according to him it will mean its quran in an imaginative way Im surprised at this level of ignorance of quranic texts, he quotes his saudi wife on a classical quranic arabic as evidence, wow
Pslam 82 has nothing to do with Jinns. It is about the council of god whatever that means. It seems Yahweh was taking over from El the supreme god. It is in effect a coup d'état. At least that's what the author seems to insinuate : 1 Elohim stands in the assembly of El / Amidst the deities he indicts: 2 “How long will you judge perversely / and to the wicked will you show favor!? 3 ‘Champion wretched and orphan! / Lowly and poor vindicate! Rescue wretched and needy! From the hand of criminals extricate!’ They never knew and do not see in darkness do they go about all the foundations of the earth are being shaken!” “I had declared: ‘You are divine beings!’ and: ‘You all are sons of Elyon!’ But (now), like humanity shall you die and like any of the rulers shall you fall. Arise, O Elohim! Judge the earth! For you shall make your estate among all the nations.” Michael Heiser put it succinctly: The polytheistic nature of pre-exilic Israelite religion and Israel’s gradual evolution toward monotheism are taken as axiomatic in current biblical scholarship. This evolution, according to the consensus view, was achieved through the zealous commitment of Israelite scribes who edited and reworked the Hebrew Bible to reflect emerging monotheism and to compel the laity to embrace the idea. One specific feature of Israelite religion offered as proof of this development is the divine council. Before the exile, Israelite religion affirmed a council of gods which may or may not have been headed by Yahweh. During and after the exile, the gods of the council became angels, mere messengers of Yahweh, who by the end of the exilic period was conceived of as the lone council head over the gods of all nations. Deuteronomy 32:8-9 and Psalm 82 are put forth as rhetorical evidence of this redactional strategy and assumed religious evolution. The argument is put forth that these texts suggest Yahweh was at one time a junior member of the pantheon under El the Most High, but that he has now taken control as king of the gods. Mark S. Smith’s comments are representative: The author of Psalm 82 deposes the older theology, as Israel's deity is called to assume a new role as judge of all the world. Yet at the same time, Psalm 82, like Deut 32:8-9, preserves the outlines of the older theology it is rejecting. From the perspective of this older theology, Yahweh did not belong to the top tier of the pantheon. Instead, in early Israel the god of Israel apparently belonged to the second tier of the pantheon; he was not the presider god, but one of his sons. Deuteronomy 32:8 "When Elyon gave the nations as an inheritance, when he separated the sons of man, he set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God (bny 'l[hym]). For Yahweh's portion was his people; Jacob was the lot of his inheritance". There is nothing about Jinnns here. Yahweh was a junior god then. El was the supreme deity.
The gowrong is simply that...Jesus Christ is God our Lord and Savior 🙏 ✝️ 🕊
8 - حَدَّثَنا عَبْدِ اللَّه بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَبْد الوَهَّابالقُرَشِي قالَ: حَدَّثَنا مَنْصُورِ بْنِ الأصبهانِي الصُّوفيّ قالَ: حَدَّثَني عَلِىِّ بْنِ مهرويه القَزوِيني قالَ: حَدَّثَنا داوُدِ بْنِ سُلَيْمان الغازي قالَ: سَمِعْتُ عَلِىِّ بْنِ مُوسَى الرِّضا عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ يَقُولُ عَنْ أَبيهِ مُوسَى بْنِ جَعْفَر عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ، عَن أَبيهِ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ مُحَمَّد عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ فِي قَوْلِهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ فَتَبَسَّمَ ضاحِكاً مِنْ قَوْلِها قَالَ لَمَّا قَالَتِ الَّنمْلَةُ يا أَيُّهَا الَّنمْلُ ادْخُلُوا مَساكِنَكُمْ لا يَحْطِمَنَّكُمْ سُلَيْمانُ وَجُنُودُهُ حَمَلَتِ الرِّيحُ صَوْتَ الَّنمْلَةِ إِلَى سُلَيَْمانَ وَهُوَمَارٌّ فِي الْهَوَاءِ وَالرِّيحُ قَدْ حَمَلَتْهُ فَوَقَفَ وَقَالَ عَلَيَّ بِالَّنمْلَةِ فَلَمَّا أُتِيَ بِهَا قَالَ سُلَيَْمانُ يَا أَيَّتُهَا الَّنمْلَةُ أَمَا عَلِمْتِ أَنِّي نَبِيُّ اللَّهِ وَأَنِّي لا أَظْلِمُ أَحَداً قَالَتِ الَّنمْلَةُ بَلَى قَالَ سُلَيَْمانُ فَلِمَ حَذَّرْتِنِيهِمْ ظُلْمِي وَقُلْتِ يا أَيُّهَا الَّنمْلُ ادْخُلُوا مَساكِنَكُمْ قَالَتِ الَّنمْلَةُ خَشِيتُ أَنْ يَنْظُرُوا إِلَى زِينَتِكَ فَيُفْتَتَنُوا بِهَا فَيَبْعُدُوا عَنِ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى ذِكْرُهُ. ثُمَّ قَالَتِ الَّنمْلَةُ: أَنْتَ أَكْبَرُ أَمْ أَبُوكَ دَاوُدُ؟ قَالَ سُلَيَْمانُ عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ: بَلْ أَبِي دَاوُدُ. قَالَتِ الَّنمْلَةُ: فَلِمَ زِيدَ فِي حُرُوفِ اسْمِكَ حَرْفٌ عَلَى حُرُوفِ اسْمِ أَبِيكَ دَاوُدَ؟ قَالَ سُلَيَْمانُ: مَا لِي بِهَذَا عِلْمٌ. قَـالَتِ الَّنمْلَةُ: لأنَّ أَبَـاكَ دَاوُدَ دَاوَى جُرْحَهُ بِوُدٍّ فَسُمِّيَ دَاوُدَ، وَأَنْتَ يَـا سُلَيَْمانُ أَرْجُو أَنْتَلْحَقَ بِأَبِيكَ. ثُمَّ قَالَتِ الَّنمْلَةُ هَلْ تَدْرِي لِمَ سُخِّرَتْ لَكَ الرِّيحُ مِنْ بَيْنِ سَائِرِ الْمَمْلَكَةِ قَالَ سُلَيَْمانُ مَا لِي بِهَذَا عِلْمٌ قَالَتِ الَّنمْلَةُ يَعْنِي عَزَّ وَجَلَّ بِذَلِكَ لَوْ سَخَّرْتُ لَكَ جَمِيعَ الْمَمْلَكَةِ كَمَا سَخَّرْتُ لَكَ هَذِهِ الرِّيحَ لَكَانَ زَوَالُهَا مِنْ يَدِكَ كَزَوَالِ الرِّيحِ فَحِينَئِذٍ تَبَسَّمَ ضاحِكاً مِنْ قَوْلِها! 32-8 Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab al-Qurashi narrated that Mansoor ibn Abdullah al-Isbahani al-Sufi quoted on the authority of Ali ibn Mehrayat al-Qazvini, on the authority of Dawood ibn Soleiman al-Qadhi, “I heard Ali ibn Musa Ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) narrate the following on the authority of his father Musa ibn Ja’far (a.s.), on the authority of his father Ja’far ibn Muhammad (a.s.) regarding the Honorable the Exalted God’s words, ‘So he smiled, amused at her speech….’ God was referring to the ant’s words when it said, ‘O ye ants, get into your habitations, lest Solomon and his hosts crush you (under foot) without knowing it.’ The wind that was blowing in the air brought the ant’s voice to Solomon. Solomon stopped and called in that ant and asked it, ‘Don’t you know that I am God’s Prophet and I will not oppress anyone?’ The ant said, ‘Yes.’ Solomon (a.s.) said, ‘Then why did you make them afraid of me oppressing them?’ The ant said, ‘I feared that they might see Your Majesty and get so attracted to you that they forget the Sublime God’s remembrance.’ Then the ant asked, ‘Is your rank higher or that of your father David?’ Solomon (a.s.) said, ‘My father David!’ The ant said, ‘However, your name has one more letter than your father’s name David. Doesn’t it?’ Solomon said, ‘I have no knowledge of this.’ The ant said, ‘No. Your father David’s name was actually ‘Davi jorha (meaning that David heals). Then he was called David. I hope you canreach the rank of your father.’ Then the ant added, ‘Do you know why God did not make things other than the wind subservient to you in His Kingdom?’ Solomon said, ‘I do not know.’ The ant said, ‘The Honorable the Exalted God wanted to teach you that if He had made everything else subservient to you, they would also end as fast as the wind does, and you would lose them as fast as the wind.’ Solomon (a.s.) laughed at this.” ʿUyūn akhbār al-Riḍā - Volume 2, Content, On Ar-Ridha’s Words on the Reasons for Various Things, Hadith #81
المصدر شيعي لا يعتد به
Notes 1 kings, isaiah 14 Heavenly gathering of "divine beings" beni elohim Are robbed of their power -- cant listen anymore Jinn are made insignificant in Muslim theology, no power, can be Muslim Q72 jinns threaten Mhmd Solomon is bullying not compassionate laugh Solomon representative of God Sheba submits to destiny. Identifies with this response to theodicy Solomon infallible acc isl theol
The Qur'an contains tidbits of verses which can be re arrange whatever you like and the quran remains understandable and it's meaning remain the same.
It seems to me that much of the Qur'an may have been more coherent and more cohensive at some early point in its genesis, but it appears that much of the text has been diced and spliced into the composition we read today. In any case, there is still some cohesive structure to various chapters, such as nested narratives, mirrored texts, complementary themes connecting successive chapters, and so much more. But lastly, although the Qur'an reads like a patchwork of texts, the verses cannot simply be rearranged _and_ still maintain context; for example chapter twelve ( _Joseph_ ), which is probably the longest narrative text in the whole Qur'an and simply cannot be rearranged.
I would challenge that. It is far from clear in its existing rendition.
@@Oxygen11115 The author of Sura 18 is actually quite ignorant of the details found in the story of _The Seven Sleepers of Ephesus_ , but is aware of there being more than than one telling of the story: Muhammad is being challenged to answer three questions, one of which is about the sleepers in the cave - how many people were there, and how long had they been there? It takes Muhammad some time to reply (because he didn't have an answer) but failed to respond with a revelation. All he could say is: "God knows!" So much for prophecy!
@@Oxygen11115 Ah! Thank you! I have just responded to three others in a different thread and thought that this was related. My apologies!
@@Oxygen11115 This parable reminds me of _Luke_ 18:10, where two men go up to the Temple to make offerings: one thinks he is better than the other, but the one who repents is justified.
The sins and faults of the Prophets are not spoken of in the Quran, in my opinion, is because the Author of the Quran is God. God forgives sins and overlooks our faults
Grade: D minus.
why are you interviewiing jews about islam? unsub
Thank you for video. Regarding the Quran, I can't really see any divinity in its content. Qur'an copied from old scriptures and old religious beliefs, like zoroastrianism and the Sabians. If someone can show me some interesting verses I would be quite happy.
Every religions copied, borrowed, and adapted material from previous religions or belief systems. This is the nature of all religions.
@@GaaraNous Absolutely.
The authors of the Qur'an certainly borrowed many Biblical and extra-Biblical stories, but they were not simply copied: the Qur'an retells stories and reflects themes. For example, the last verse in the _Diatesseron_ (as found at the end of 'John's' gospel - 21:25) reads: "Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written." Which the Qur'an reflects at the end of Chapter 18:109: "Say, 'If the whole ocean were ink for writing the words of my Lord, it would run dry before those words were exhausted,' even if we were to add another ocean to it." Of course, if one were to write a world full of books, then one would indeed need an ocean full of ink! Furthermore, these passages prove the Qur'an's dependence on Biblical texts, rather than being solely a revelation from Allah.
the divine authorship of the Quran is a theological question that doesn't really have anything to do with the goal of this channel, which is to give insight into the works of leading academics in the field of Biblical and Quranic studies to a general audience. any inquiry into possible influences on the text is for mere historical merit that prescinds from what later muslim faith or theologies say about the text, without either affirming or denying such claims. So if you have a interest in the proclaimed divinity of the Quranic text, go to the works of muslims theologians on this issue and see whether or not their arguments make sense to you. Also you mentioned that the Quran was influenced by the beliefs or scriptures of the "Sabians". As far as I know, there haven't been any reference to them in history besides their brief mention in the Quran and by later muslim exegesis. Most modern scholars of the Quran aren't sure about their identity let alone what their exact beliefs or practices were. So if you have any insight in Sabians beliefs that have survived into the islamic faith, I would gladly hear you out.
@@ZEC020 The Qur'an is a text, so questions pertaining to its authorship and intertextuality are literary in nature.