The Kathisma Church and Late Antique Material in the Qur'an | Prof. Stephen Shoemaker
2023 ж. 20 Там.
4 412 Рет қаралды
This is a clip about how some scholars approach the Late Antique material in the Qur'an. The video discusses the case of the Kathisma Church in particular and how its discovery has shaped scholarly discourse around the origin of Late Antique material in the Qur'an. This clip is taken from my interview with Professor Stephen Shoemaker. If you enjoyed this video please subscribe to the channel and like the video! Please be sure to check out the full interview, here: • Stephen Shoemaker: Iss...
I do realise that this wasnt the intent of this segment, but Id like to mention my Iman got a boost from this. To discover that one of the biggest polemics against the Quran, is actually an overlooked attestation of its extraordinary precision and sophistication, really made my day. I hope secular academics can still appreciate it, when us average Muslims derive something spiritual from their rational worldly work
Alhamdulillah and Allahu Akbar Kuffar are coping so hard
For anyone interested Shoemaker's original paper on the Kathisma church connection is "Christmas in the Quran: the Quranic account of Jesus’s nativity and Palestinian local tradition" from 2003. EDIT: Shoemaker also mentioned in this video that Guillaume Dye has built on his work in a further publication. That paper is "Lieux saints communs, partagés ou confisqués : aux sources de quelques péricopes coraniques (Q 19 : 16-33)" (2012). Both papers are on Shoemaker's and Dye's Academia pages.
Thank you!!
Thanks for sharing this info.
Shoemaker is a hack, just like Patrician Krone!
The jews said to Maryam "Aarons sister" not because she literally was his sister but they said it to adress that Mary comes from a priest lineage (from Aaron the high priest of the israelites), to refer to her alledged adultery. I've read somwhere that jewish tradition calls someone 'sister' or 'brother' if the lineage comes from that person or if they are related.
The Virgin Mary is not only called "Aaron's sister" but also "Imran's daughter" in the Quran. 😊
@@charlesmartel5495 Interesting. Never noticed that. Thanks
amazing
It might be difficult to experience oral culture, but indispensable for the mentioned purposes.
The work of Loic Lequellec will help you to understand the reconstruction of the myth by shorter myth ( miteme). Different jigsaw in one puzzle. Thank you.
@ 5:18 The host even quotes the Quran wrongly saying baby Jesus lowered down plam tree branches...haha he even wanted to put words in mouth of speaker that Quran coppied from bible... speaker was atleast honest..he refused
Baby Jesus did nothing in the Bible but be born, only in gnostic heretical text does Jesus do anything as a child
The question to ask is that if Quran was written by a man, why would a man copy an extremely specific christian notion about Marry and and palm tree which was only available at this specific church instead of writing widely popular notions? Why would Muhammad (peace be upon him) be making his life difficult by putting something which is not acknowledged by majority and can potentially open criticism? Indeed its not his words but the word of God itself in its preserved form.
Amazing. Thank you.
Furthermore this approach does not explain certain things about the Quran. How did they incorporate things no one knew ? Just asking... One more thought: If I want to inquire about you...what do I do ? Do I ask people who are against you, with you or do I make my own picture ? Just asking...thought we live in rational times
4:08 how do you know the original Quran was in Arabic? If you remove all the vowel and have just the rasam can you prove if a text is Syriac or Arabic?
One of the most interesting story in the Quran is in Surah Al-feel which narrates the elephant army intended to destroy the Kaaba, during the revelation the event was still in the memory of Meccan people and none of them dispute the story. Also remember that Muslims were smart, logical, and critical, what you are questioning now must have been questioned among them so why not approach from their perspective?
Looks like before elephant didn't need much water to drink and put with on their body. To travel in a desert
I think what is more interesting that Allah saw fit to help the pagans but didn't do anything to help when Al Hajjaj and the Qaramatians attacked. Maybe Allah only protected the idols
@@jagdishmadgaonkar Clearly you have never seen elephants in the desert
How do you know this event was still in the memory of the Meccans? Do you know this because of hadiths that came hundreds of years afterwards?
You are right. Muhammad's own tribes quickly realised that he was just repeating stuff hed heard from others around him at the time in Arabia. That is why they mocked him and called him All Ears. 😁
Which version of the 26 in official circulation are you referring to as they ALL have varistions andtherefore errors, especially as there is NO ONE COMPLETE ORIGINAL!!!???
What are you trying to say kid? Try being less vague
Bible was not arabic but aramic maybe? Mother of Arabic language. Also al hirah city has so many christians churches monks … they must know some arabic or aramic …. How do you explain christian arabic tribes then if there is no arabic or aramic bible?
Atleast the guest has some honesty....
Quite incredible learning about the man-made origins of the quran and how it evolved over the years
Clearly you don’t understand the video. If you understood you would understand that this proves the Quran is right, and not “man made” as you ignorantly claimed
@@willsimp1273 can you highlight where in the video, evidence is brought to demonstrate that the Quran could not be man made? We don't even need a video tbh we just need to read the Quran and see very clearly how human and flawed it is
@@thenun1846 all your meaningless drivel, and throwing childish temper tantrum’s. making silly childish claims without even realising that adults need to prove the claims they make.
@@thenun1846 “can you prove Quran is not man made” Clearly no one taught you kid that you can’t prove a negative . It’s like saying can we prove you have a brain
@@willsimp1273 I asked you to substantiate your claim and you throw a tantrum like your name is aisha and I took your lollipop away from you. You said "this video makes the Quran right and not man made", I asked you to substantiate this claim and point to the part of the video where this claim is made You muhammadans and your emotional responses are hilarious Try again son
Khadiza had a uncle who was Christian.
This guy,Arabs had trsditions about Abraham hence kaaba,zam z,sacrifice of child
Thanks for some more tidbits about the real background of islam. It's ever more obvious that the legend is nothing but, and that the real story is much more convoluted and interesting.
What legend and what do you think is obvious?
@@willsimp1273 The SIN, Standard Islamic Narrative about how islam came about. The last 40 or 50 years has seen a bout of new research that makes the usual islamic legend questionable. It's obvious for anybody that has paid even a minimum of attention to the topic.
@@bonnarlunda Clearly your tiny brain is making silly connections and thinking it has uncovered something. You probably don’t even understand what the people in video are talking about. If you understood you would know that this proves the Quran is right about the birth of Jesus. and that the New Testament is wrong for claiming Jesus was born in the winter on 25 of December
@@bonnarlundaAnd plenty of evidence to counter the revisionist positions.
What in dont understand is that people say that prophet Musa who was a Jew,used to be the nephew of Mohammed.If that is true,are Muslims from the Jewish bloodline and they used to be Jews back then?
I have spoken with Dr.Dye before and I will say his research regarding nascent Islam is very interesting and convincing.
If Muhammad was copying stories, its a shame he mentioned Jesus and Moses significantly more times than himself! Why would a guy be putting so much effort into a work and not even making himself important enough to mention? Jesus is mentioned 500% more times than Muhammad in Quran. Most mentioned name in Quran is of Moses. (Peace be upon them all)
Also the story of Caedmon's Hymn by Bede is the story of Muhammad in the cave Hira. And the story of the fall of Iblis is taken from the Apocalypse of Moses [The Penitence of our Forefather Adam]. The Alexander Legend also predates the quran by several decades. We know this for a fact. Putting that aside, it's not possible for the quran to affect non-muslim texts. Not only it wouldn't make any sense logically, but it would outright be blasphemy and an anathema for Christians to copy from the quran. Maximus the Confessor is one of the most prolific and celebrated Orthodox Church Fathers, and he was Muhammad's contemporary. At the same time Maximus the Confessor was writing commentaries on Plotinus and Proclus, Muhammad was struggling to form childlike arguments like allah could no have a son because he didn't have a consort, and Isa could not be divine because he ate food. Mahometans are under the false impression the koran was completed before the 8th century. Even worse, they are under the false impression the koran is not an amalgamation of myths and legends already been told by others, only in a much more eloquent way. The koran lacks the wisdom and originality of the Bible. It is clearly the work of ignorant people, and no non-muslim would ever copy from it. We have dozens of examples of the koran plagiarizing other books. We have absolutely no example of anyone stealing a story from the koran and passing it as his own.
Tell me word by word what Quranic verses was plagiarised from other books
@@anaskpalmalaki8804 You want me to write a book? 😁 The story of the 7 sleepers was plagiarized from Christian Tradition [7 Sleepers of Ephesus]. The story of the fall of iblis was plagiarized from the "Apocalypse of Moses". The story of isa talking as an infant was plagiarized from the "Infancy Gospel of Thomas" aka "Syriac Infancy Gospel". The story of the Crucifixion was plagiarized from the "Second Treatise of the Great Seth" [another Gnostic text]. Name another koranic story that relates to pre-islamic characters and events, and I'll give you its source.
In your words the ignorance of what Qur'an and what Islam is, is quite evident. İslamic theoretical point of view is that mushaf (the codes) uses the religious terminology from other close traditions as these traditions aren't totally wrong, but became misaligned from true Monotheism over time. Qur'an is the key to calibrate these misalignments as well as to bring all the best and beneficial doxis and praxis of other traditions into one pure unified form of spiritual and ethical human condition. That's why Muslims revert, not convert, to Islam. That's why Muhammad is the Seal of Prophets (the confirmer of the correct elements). You need to understand that Eurocentrism, although beneficial in deconstruction and compartmentation of knowledge, often fails in holistic and systematic approach to understanding human condition. Learn how to challenge your own perspective bias, and you'll see.
@@irbis_rosh People constantly belittled muhammad for re-telling old stories and myths. The koran has ten or so verses where it rebukes muhammad's opponents, and states the quran offers ONLY ORIGINAL stories that no one has ever told or heard before. So, we have surah six, sixteen, twenty three, twenty five, twenty seven, forty six, sixty eight, and eighty three - in ALL these, allah attacks those who claim the koran regurgitates old myths and legends. Then surah eighteen regurgitates old myths and legends from the Orthodox Christian tradition [see Seven Sleepers of Ephesus and Syriac Alexander Romance].
This guy arent informed. There were jews whom mohamed even asked bring torah and swore by it Secondly mohamed swore henwould extermunate all jews and xtians from peninsula. What is he talking about We also have Ishmael descendants who mixed with arabs Mohamed was a trader His uncle was xtian
Clearly like a typical chrstian hypocrite, you are cherry picking Hadith that you like and ignore what you don’t like. The same way you cherry pick what you like from the bible, and ignore verses in the bible where Yahweh commands genocide against all the different nations in the Middle East. Yahweh commanded the killing of men women children and even babies
As a close follower of your channel, I would like to state that I disagree with you on two issues. You were very sure that Dhul-Qarnayn in the Qur'an was Alexander the Great, and that the seven sleepers were young people in Ephesus and that they slept for 300-odd years. However, the results of my research on this subject are a pretty different. 1-The general opinion is that dhul-qarnayn was Alexander the Great.But I don't think so.Basically, I have two reasons; 1-Alexander did not make an expedition to the west.Dhul-Qarnayn did it according to Qur'an. 2-Alexander is not a person like dhul-qarnayn, who is praised in the Qur'an, In short,According to me Dhul-Qarnayn is Persian king Cyrus II (600 BC - 530 BC).It is often mentioned that Cyrus was a very good king, as there were expeditions to the west and east in his life.When you look at the pictures of Cyrus , you can easily see that he is wearing a double horned helmet.(Dhul-Qarnayn means two horned in Arabic) In Babylonian cuneiform tablets, Old Testament texts, and ancient sources, Cyrus' A positive portrait is drawn. On the Sippar Cylinder: He is depicted as a mighty king who will overthrow the kingdom of Medes and bring many principalities to heel from the mouth of the god Marduk. One of the places where Cyrus made an expedition is the Caucasus region.There is a T'ieh-men (Iron Gate) Passageway in this area.This pass is bordered by mountains on the right and left sides. These mountains are extraordinarily steep and] high. Their paths are also narrow, which increases the difficulty and danger. On both sides there are iron-colored rock walls. Wooden doors have been installed here, reinforced with double iron, equipped with hanging bells. Because it is very difficult to get through these doors when they are closed [and protected], this passage has been given the name of the iron gate.” T'ieh-men, or Iron Gate, is located 90 km south of today's Shahrishebz (Green City), in the Baysun mountain range, 10-18 meters wide and 3 km long. (Wilhelm Barthold, “Iron Gate”…, p. 553.) According to accepted views, this place was a rocky passage (or mountain gorge) on the road connecting the city of Belh to Samarkand. 2-The Qur'an does not give the exact number of seven sleepers, nor does it confirm that they slept for 300+9 years, it just states that people say so. To put it briefly, I believe that these people may have something to do with what happened to the Maccabees and the people of Qumran, their struggles and the place where they live. All my best
Your comment doesn't make sense, as you're trying to compare the historical Alexander the Great to Dhu'l Qarnayn. What you have to compare is the legends about Alexander the Great in late antiquity, which is what would have been familiar in the time the Qur'an came to be, to the depiction of Dhu'l Qarnayn. And when you do that, it's more or less a very straight forward match. There are depictions of many figures wearing two horns, by the way, including Alexander the Great. What's more though, we have an imperial Byzantine statue of Alexander the Great depicted with two horns dating to Muhammad's lifetime! So obviously this is by far a match to Alexander. The Cyrus connection makes no sense. It's basically an apologetic, because Muslims think Cyrus was a monotheist ... but Cyrus was a pagan, so it doesn't really solve their problem. You seem to have almost entirely made up the rest of your comment, like Cyrus having an expedition in a region with an iron gateway lol. No not at all, there isn't a single piece of pre-Islamic literature in existence that depicts Cyrus with an iron gateway. As for Alexander, he was depicted as having helped built an iron gate between two mountains as early as in the writings of Josephus in the 1st century. So, all the connections you mention are real, but *only* for Alexander.
@@everyzylrian While I was trying to determine the identity of Dhul-Qarnayn, I based on the information given in the Qur'an. According to the Qur'an, Dhul-Qarnayn; -He made expeditions both to the East and to the West. -He has a deep devotion to God. -Although he has the opportunity to use cruel force while solving problems, he is a person who prefers to be merciful to the oppressed and punishing to the oppressors. -He is an important personality for those asking questions (Jews). -He is someone who expects the reward of his good deeds not from the people he helps, but from God. However, according to historical sources, Alexander the Great; - He did not organize a expeditions to the west. -He is known for his cruelty, not mercy. -He is famous not for his devotion to God, but for his hedonistic and racist desires. -There is nothing to be praised in terms of Jews or Abrahamic religions. - There is no double-horned depiction of Alexander from his own period. The double-horned depictions are from 400-500 years later. On the coins of his own period, he is depicted with a hornless helmet. - In almost all sources, Cyrus is described as a monotheistic, Alexander Pagan. In the Old Testament, Cyrus was described as the caliph and messiah of Lord Yahweh (Isaiah 44/28; 45/1) He was rewarded by Yahweh in this world and many promises in the hereafter due to his good, beautiful and auspicious deeds (Isaiah 45). /1-6.). After ending the Babylonian state, he prepared the opportunity for the Jews living in captivity to return to Jerusalem and practice their religion freely there (II Chronicles 36/22, 23; Ezra 1/1-4; 6/3-5.). He is regarded by the Jews as a savior, a righteous person, or a messiah. Again, in the commentaries of the holy book, the birth of Cyrus and his existence are considered as a blessing from Yahweh. Dhul-Qarnayn is equated with the prophets and kings of Israel in Jewish literature; He was accepted as a distinguished person with his justice, knowledge and heroism. There are signs of Dhul-Qarnayn in some narratives about Daniel in Jewish literature. A depiction of a two-horned ram in the vision of Daniel (Daniel 8/1-4). It points to a king who united the Median and Persian states, which is Cyrus. On the Cylinder of Cyrus: Marduk chose Cyrus as king of Babylon because of his piety, fairness, and honesty; who went on an expedition to Babylon with the grace and encouragement of God; captured the city without fighting and bloodshed; He is portrayed as a peaceful ruler who provides the welfare of the city with his renovations and arrangements. In the Old Testament texts, in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, he is introduced as a savior who is expected to come with hope, who restores the Jerusalem Temple and brings back the Jewish exiles. Among the Persian kings, only Cyrus was one of the Persian kings, who was called "father" by his people with his humility, foresight and heroism, with his military, political-administrative strategy, skill and magnanimity, who showed friendship, generosity, fairness and compassion to his enemies such as Astyages and Kroisos. they describe as(Babylonian Kuneiform Tablets and Media, Lydia and Asia Minor Conqueror in the Light of Ancient Sources, Kyros the Great, Sevgi SARIKAYA, Mediterranean Journal of Humanities mjh.akdeniz.edu.tr, I/2, 2011, 195-211) In Greek sources (Herodotus, Xenophon, Antisthenes), Cyrus is often mentioned positively, he is a brave and just king. His Inscription is considered the oldest 'human rights treaty'. According to the Tanakh, Cyrus is an ideal king;(2. Chronicles: 36:23).)He ended the Exile when he captured Babylon There are the following expressions for Cyrus in the Torah; My servant” (Torah, Isaiah: 42:1) “My Shepherd of Cyrus” (Torah, Isaiah: 44:28) Cyrus anointed by Jehovah” (Torah, Isaiah, 45:1) Bel and the Dragon, dated to the Persian period, depicts Cyrus as "Monotheistic",“The king said, “O Lord, God of Daniel, what a nation you are. “There is no god but you,” he cried. ((The Bel and the Dragon: 1:41). According to the story, Dhul-Qarnayn made his first expedition to a coastal state in the west.Aegean coasts and Adriatic coasts are very suitable for such a meaning. There are such places in France. In fact, these regions attract tourists because of the views of the sunset in the mud. Although the name Anadolu/Anatolia means “the place where the sun rises” (Main/sun; tolia/east) according to the relativity of the directions, it means “the place where the sun sets” for those living further east. The expression "When Dhul-Qarnayn finally reaches the place where the sun sets" refers to Anatolia, especially to Western Anatolia. Persian king Cyrus puts an end to the Lydian state after conquering all of Anatolia.When Cyrus captured Lydia, the reasons/opportunities given to him increased even more as stated in the verse. Because, after Cyrus, Med, Babylon and Egypt, he added Anatolia, which is famous for its wealth, to his lands. The Arabic word “ayn, Turkish Ceşme” in the continuation of the relevant verse reminds us of the Ceşme district of İzmir in Turkey.The shores of Ceşme are famous for their springs and hot and cold springs flowing towards the sea. In addition, these springs formed a small and loamy plain with the alluviums they dragged along. When mud, cold water, hot water, steam, and finally an evening sun on the horizon are added as it sets, the view becomes as follows, as the relevant verse in the Qur'an expresses it: “When he finally reached the place where the sun was setting, he found the sun setting in a black mud or setting in a hot spring.” Despite all these informations, I am not claiming that Cyrus is 100 percent Zulkarneyn, I am just saying that he may be.However, based on the available informations, I can say one hundred percent that Alexander the Great was not Dhul-Qarnayn.
@@everyzylrian your comment doesnt make sense! You don’t look at legends as you claimed, but you look at historical facts. Most legends have been copied from previous stories that were about other people, like we see in the stories about Jesus. where chrstians copied stories and legends from previous mangods and applied it to Jesus. like the chrstian legend that Jesus was born in the winter, on the 25 of December. which we know was copied from previous dying and rising godmen like Mithras, Romulus, Horus etc. The legendary stories about Alexander that you are drooling over came after the Quran. So the Alexander Romance stories were copied from the Quran, and not the other way around as you presume.
you’re making silly arguments! you assume story of Dhul Qarnayn is wrong because it was applied to Alexander in the 7th century ‘Alexander Romance legends.’ Whether according to legend Alexander build an iron or stone gate doesn’t matter. Just like with the Jesus example that I gave. you can’t assume a story is false just because it was later applied to people like alexander or Jesus. Yes late 7 century legends that were written after the Quran, applied these stories to Alexander. but that doesn’t mean these stories were not originally about Cyrus or someone else from the east not west. Any middleastern at that time would have known that Alexander came from the west, but Dhul qarnayn came from the east. Since the Quran doesn’t mention a name we can’t be sure. But what we do know for sure is that the late Alexander Romance legends are worthless as a source
@@willsimp1273 I think,You misunderstood me about that I assume story of Dhul Qarnayn is wrong because of it was applied to Alexander in the 7th century ‘Alexander Romance legends.I made no such claim. I claimed that the information given in the Qur'an about Dhul-Qarnayn is not compatible with what we know about Alexander the Great.and .Then I expressed my arguments and I tried to explain why Dhul Qarnayn could be Cyrus II. Of course, the fact that historical events are compatible with legends does not mean that it does not reflect the truth. I state it again. I'm not claiming that definitely Cyrus II. is Dhul-Qarnayn. I'm just saying He could be.My objection was that the claim that Alexander the Great was Dhul-Qarnayn was not compatible with the narrative of the Qur'an. So I am definitely not in the opinion that this claim and my reasons are silly either.
It would be a great idea for dr shoemaker to read authentic Islamic sources and knowledgeable Jewish and Christian scholars and not try to manufacture historical narrative that is distorted
Agreed. There is ample proof from Ibn Ishaq's Life of Muhammad and the Quran itself that Muhammad was illiterate and merely repeating stuff hed heard from others around him at the time in Arabia. 😁
it would be great for everyone including yourself to do so as well.
The trinity is three gods.
Ohhh look a puppet reciting from another puppet! How Cute🤪
And the biography of Muhammad is an Abbasid invention.
Out of 115 videos on this chunnel 111 are about Quran. Not a single video about who wrote last 5 books of Moses or who changed Jermaih.... ?? And then he said Alexander is "Zlqernain"... pseudo intellectual
Really? 111? I didn’t realise there was so much BS to cover! Lucky we had allah and his partners write the quran! Sahih International: Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian. There is no god but WE according to WE…
@@gritsteel3225 this "We" is pllurall of royalty i.e.King
@@asattar973 Ohhh, plurality of respect? So your allah equates himself at the same level or has respect for humans? The contradiction is allah has NO PARTNERS! Plurality of respect, is a political term. Example, a political party acknowledges it is nothing without the people. A king without his people has no kingdom. Are you saying, allah is not allah without humanity? The term humanises allah. God Is above all! We respect kings and politicians 😖 WE WORSHIP GOD! So for you allah is at the same level as a high ranking human. Ok 👍🏼
@@gritsteel3225 May Allah give us guidance . Take care
Alexander is Dhul Qarnain. This is the academic consensus. The Surah Al Kahf story and late antique legends about Alexander are nearly identical, Alexander was titled the two horned one and was depicted with two horns in coins and statues contemporary to Muhammad
Please diversify your sources of knowledge and listen to real scholars
Was there even a Muhammad... such important figure with little biography that is contemporary to his time. And what we have is disputed. Most of what we have is in 700s and 800s even 900s
zulqarnain is Cyrus the great and not alexander from any stretch.
So you are saying that the story of Dhul-Qarnayn and Gog and Magog is NOT the same as the legend of Alexander the Great and Gog and Magog? 😂
So you are saying that the story of Dhul-Qarnayn and Gog and Magog is not the legend of Alexander and Gog and Magog? 😂
@@davidzack8735Yes if you read the how Quran states the incident of zulqarnain and his military expeditions, its quite clear that Quran is not mentioning alexander rather the expeditions of Cyrus fit the descriptions. Read the Quran and find the hints it gives and see which character fit them. pbs.twimg.com/media/F4nqZVHWIAA80cw?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
the syriac legends of alexander the great predating islam are identical to the story of dhu al qarnayn
the first 20 written tafsir all identified him as alexander the great. only after we discovered he was pagan did you muslims duct tape the stupidity of muhammed
This is basically the weakest approach I have seen yet...unbelievable. Assumptions built on suggestions while deliberately negating anything that has been told by the people who lived at that time and those who actually know the history. I read the books by Stephen Shoemaker and I do not consider him to be a serious researcher. Best example...he discredits the radiocarbon method to then use to justify his claim. This is the definition of ignorance...disguised as science. 😂😂😂
Historical-critical method is not a weak approach, unless you are a fundamentalist apologist or something. "People who lived at that time and those who actually know the history" cannot be taken fully: they had their own biases, and they used to fabricate history more than we do. It doesn't matter if you consider Shoemaker an academic or not: he is one. Most of the scholarship doesn't see him to be a Richard Carrier or a Joseph Atwill. C-14 dating is viewed to be pretty much useless for dating much of the 1st-century AH manuscripts of the Qur'an by most scholars and textual critics, not just Shoemaker. I guess you don't know that.
@@davidgeorge6410 The historical-crititcal method clearly leads to false results in this particular case. If people who lived at that time are discredited by people who live a thousand plus years later we again fulfill a certain aspect of the definition of being ignorant. We clearly fabricate history and on basis of a lack of knowledge. Mr Shoemaker can only be considered an academic by paper...clearly his approach is highly lacking and his results pre-determined I think you did not get my point...in Creating the Quran (even the name of the book sounds like an academic piece...not !) he refutes the radiocarbon method and THEN uses it by himself to make his point...great work ! Listen, we live in times where the quality has been lowered to a grade that it is embarrassing. We have, e.g. in Germany, scholars who do lack quality, politicians who lack the vita to be fit for the job, schools that dont deliver on their purpose...Mr Shoemaker is a good example of that lack of quality. Furthermore saying he is less biased than the people who lived on the last is, again, very ignorant...what proof do you have? But regarding his books...just a question: Assuming he is right: What exactly changes the essence and message of Islam if Shoemaker is right ? Thank you for answering! I appreciate a little debate here and there
@@majdishaladi7854 If you find his methodologies to be lacking or weak (which, to be honest, is perfectly fine and is encouraged in academia), you should point the weak links out. Simply saying that he discredits ancient sources is not enough, since he does cite ample reasons (maybe not in this video, but in his monographs and articles) why certain sources are not credible. I wouldn't claim that Shoemaker is more or less biased. However, it is pretty much common knowledge that ancient Christian and Muslim sources would have their own biases more than, say, a Christian or Muslim academic would have, using historical-critical methodologies. I have read Shoemaker, and I disagree with him in a lot of things: including Abd al-Malikite compilation. If his conclusions are right, then it means that the Qur'an was written by multiple authors, has several textual versions (which is already somewhat non-controversial in academia), and was compiled multiple times unsuccessfully and the last time (under Abd al-Malik) successfully. Most Muslims would indeed have issues with most of these conclusions. Regardless, this is scholarship: one uses a set of methodologies to analyze an issue, to be scrutinized and critiqued by other scholars, resulting in the cultivation of more information and ideas. Regarding whether it changes the core message of Islam, it depends. For example, it is beyond dispute that Muhammad existed, that he claimed to be a Prophet, and recited certain texts which was supposedly from God. We also know that he was quite successful in this. But it is pretty much consensus in scholarship that the Uthmanic Qur'an (which has been completely preserved) is not exactly the same as Muhammad's Kitab. One last thing. Multiple authorship of the Qur'an is not the consensus. The consensus opinion among researchers is that the text was written or recited by a single person, with some interpolations here and there by himself later or other people (like Q19:34-40). Shoemaker holds a somewhat minority opinion, though things might change soon. I do myself think that multiple authorship helps us clear a lot of confusion, but it still doesn't match much with the Uthmanic compilation model. Thanks, and have a nice day.
@@davidgeorge6410 Hey, I see your points, but dissecting a book in the YT Section and expecting me to give you a detailed analysis of everything I say is a bit little much, isn't it? Short: the (biggest) weak link is the non- incorporation of the text itself into the discussion and merely looking for the outside-in. If the text would have been chosen as the subject of research rather than the circumstances in which the prophet pbuh lived the outcome would have been, no matter what the outcome is, more respectable. As I said above, basically he is going to people who don't like you to inquire about you. And if he inquired with people who like you he discredits their opinion as biased. This is not academic. Even he is considered an academic this is simply high level BS disguised under the word "research"
@@majdishaladi7854 Just because this discussion doesn't include the text itself being the subject of research doesn't mean that Shoemaker never did it. If you've read the Coran des Historiens by Guillaume Dye and M. A. A. Moezzi, You will find a comprehenseive monograph that focuses on the text itself surah by surah, in the second part of the work that includes 2 tomes. Shoemaker himself is a contributor to this work. Furthermore, if we use your own claimed methodology of taking "the people who lived at that time and those who actually know the history" seriously, then you have to throw out the entire Islamic tradition out the window precisely because they did not live at that time and are very far away geographically and temporally. The historical-Critical method that considers contemporary sources even if they are "external" to islamic tradition is therefore more rigorous by your own definition.
Dhulkarnain is NOT Alexander . According to Islam he is a king from the east , alexander was from west of Arabia . Dhulkarnain is probably Cyrus of persia
5 short points: 1. Alexander the great is the only person in history to bear the title the two horned one. 2. Syriac legend predating islam has alexander traveling to the setting place of the sun where it sets in a pool of murky water, building iron walls for gog and magog etc. the entire story is an identical copy. See: romance of alexander. 3. Saudia arabia, pre-islam, had coins depicting alexander the great with 2 horns. search "saudia arabia alexander the great coins" 4. The first 20 written tafsir all identify dhu al qarnayn as alexander the great. Only after we discover hes pagan do you muslims reject what is obvious and attribute it to mystery. 5. Muhammed is accused 6 times by the arabs of simply repeating legends and fairy tales and they laughed at the quran saying we can say the same.
The traditional Islamic narrative itself explains where Muhammad got his stories from. Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah has details of the 'four hanif' who sought the true faith, one of whom bore the name Zayd. Others ended up as 'Christians". Ibn Ishaq also mentions that Muhammad learned much from these men and was at least 40 years old when he had his first major revelation while meditating in a cave, and that his wife's cousin Waraqa (thought to be an Ebionite Christian) who 'knew the Torah and the Gospel' was the first to acknowledge his prophethood. The Nazarene and Ebionite Christians around him at the time are thought to have used an early version of St Matthew's Gospel which we know from Irenaeus was the first gospel to be written and the only one in Aramaic. And Muhammad's descriptions of the Day of Judgement are taken in part almost word for word from the Gospel of St Matthew - the angels and the trumpet and the fiery furnace and the Second Coming of Christ. The traditional narrative corroborated by the Quran also reveals that the Meccans realised that he was just repeating stuff he'd heard from others around him at the time, that they mocked him and called him 'All Ears', and that they said he was just repeating 'legends of the ancients' and accused him of having 'men recite to him day and night.' There are also hadith about a Christian who claimed that there was 'nothing in the Quran that he had not taught Muhammad.' The hadith say ominously that he left Islam and 'died'. We also know that Salman the Persian (former Zoroastrian and Christian) became a 'member of Muhammad's household. Salman life story is given in great detail in Ibn Ishaq. We know that Salman was highly literate, outlived Muhammad, and would have been capable of helping to compile and edit the Quran under Uthman. We know that Leo the Isaurian claimed that the Quran had been composed 'by Salman the Persian and Abu Taurub (Father of Dust) Ali. Etc.
Alekxander is not "zulkernain" atleast do some research. Bible was in latin... how an illetrate Prophet (saw) didnot copied bible but corrected bible ..e.g. bible say Prophet(as) commited adultory (may Allah forgive me) like David (as) and Lute(as).... this is blasphemyap......Quran is from God..... so deal with that....
The man with the two horns found where the sun was setting and rising too.
Borrowed from the Quran. Dhal Qarnayn is a decade or more older than Syriac Legend that reflects it@@jagdishmadgaonkar
This is just apologetics. Alexander the Great is, in fact, Dhu'l Qarnayn. See the works of van Bladel, Tesei, Zishan Ghaffar, etc. It's basically academic consensus. There is no "correcting the Bible" in the Qur'an. And no, the Bible does not say a prophet committed adultery, because David was not a prophet.
In Quran you read have you not heard from people of the book about Abraham? Meaning these stories were circulating at the tome
@@everyzylrianyeah, the Bible says prophet committed incest and Jesus comes from that family line 👍
And Mohammad used to go to Syria hotbed of christianity for business for Khatija his wife before he married her..Nasir
But, he was not there to attend school because non is available during that time, for him to came up with a sophisticated book like the Quran. Still this book continued to surprise the scientist and learned men from all fields of different displines. An illiterate camel driver in the 6th century AD could never produce such a book with level of knowledge. It is just impossible, no paper no written books in his time to study and produce such a book challenging the world to come up with a book like it.
@@mukhtaridanbatta3777 why do you refer to “illiterate camel driver” ???? you sound like what Malcolm X calls the colonised mind. You use the language of the enemies of Islam. It’s like if we refer to your father as an illiterate camel driver
@@mukhtaridanbatta3777 At least from an academic perspective, Qur'an is not sophisticated. It is not precisely written like the homilies of Jacob of Serugh or Ephrem the Syrian, and is not structured like that either. Of course, you will find Islamic apologists and scholars claiming that Qur'an is sophisticated, but no, it is not a credible academic conclusion. Also, you are over-simplifying things a lot. Muhammad was probably literate: hadiths tell us that he knew to write letters and treatises. And he was not a mere camel driver, but probably a merchant or a shepherd. The knowledge contained in Qur'an is not unique or unparalled: it was known in the Late Antique world. No paper or written books at his time to study? Are you kidding me?? We know that there were at least a thousand books written in the early centuries BCE itself. Origen himself wrote around 6000. We have literally thousands of works and treatises and homilies in Syriac, Greek, and Latin.
@@davidgeorge6410 from academic perspective no book ever written in the history of men is sophisticated. None! When it comes to Muhammad, based on evidences, professor Shoemaker believes that Muhammad could've never written such a book. It's too sophisticated for an Arab living in Hijaz area. That's why he says Qurans was composed in the 8th century somewhere in Syria etc etc He thinks that author of the Quran knows quite a lot about the Eastern branch of Christianity and especially so called apocryphal Christian writings. And Muhammad just couldn't do it. Muslims offer an easier explanation for that , agreeing that Muhammad could not have written the Quran by himself and it was inspired by Allah. Professor Shoemaker doesn't believe in God thus looking for other ways to explain this dilemma.
@@MCXM111 You are missing a lot of points. Qur'an is not sophisticated: from the academic perspective, we know that many books are indeed sophisticated. I believe you have never read the Syriac memra and other homilies, which all historians and linguists accept as sophisticated. Shoemaker believes that Muhammad couldn't have written the book: Qur'an IS sophisticated if it is placed in a certain context, but it is not if we take out that context. Meaning, if the Qur'an was written in Syro-Palestine, it is no longer sophisticated or unique or anything. It is not so with the complex literature of ancient times like, say, the memra. Regardless of where you place them, it is sophisticated. And if you don't know, Shoemaker does believe in God. AFAIK, he is either Orthodox or Catholic (or less possibly, a high-church Protestant). Scholarship does not deal with inspiration or divine dictation. But it is true that with modern research we have found that the Qur'an is a text written by humans in the Levant. It is too human to be divine. Christians don't have the same issue since they already accept and formulate from the beginning that their Scriptures are products of divine-human synergy. Qur'an reflects the redactional activities of someone who was against the Christo-centricism of particularly Syriac Christianity. Not of God who supposedly intends to send another new revelation. But this itself is entering too much into the theological arena, and thus moving outside of research. Thanks, and have a nice day.