The Year of the Arabs Part 3: Mu'awiah's inscription & Evaluating sources with Prof. Robert Kerr
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 лют 2025
- Was Mu'awiah a Christian? He looked at least sympathetic.
Can we trust the sources as listed in Prof. Robert Hoyland's Seeing Islam As Others Saw It? We need to critically evaluate each source if we are going to disocver how Islam began.
To learn more, go to Prof. Robert Kerr's Academia page, where you can access his papers and examine his citations: iuni-saarland....
When can we expect a Book or books, consolidated with all these information, this would be revolutionary...
Hello anti hindu Indian 😂😂
Professor Kerr's emphasis on critical appraisal here is frankly a relief and is more important than presentational perfection.
@Professor Dr. Rudolf Martin Kerr
Für den Fall dass Sie die Kommentare unter den Videos mit Ihrer Teilnahme lesen, möchte ich mich für all ihre hochkompetenten und historisch fundierten Erklärungen zum Islam des 7. Jahrhunderts und der Zeit danach von ganzem Herzen bedanken, wobei ich überzeugt bin, im Namen der allermeisten hier zu sprechen.
Leider konnte ich Sie und andere der INARA school während meiner Jahre in Deutschland nicht kennenlernen; umso wertvoller waren Ihre Beiträge hier für mich. Ich bin überzeugt, dass die Zahl derjenigen, die Ihre Videos mit Mel schauen werden, noch sehr viel weiter anwachsen werden, und dass damit der legitimen Möglichkeit konstruktiver Kritik eine wirkliche Chance gegeben wird.
Wie wir wissen, ist dies einem Ihrer hochgeschätzten Kollegen zum (glaube ich) Ende der 1970er Jahre zum Verhängnis geworden, dem wegen seiner Textkritiken die Lehrbefugnis entzogen wurde. Was die Identität des arabischen Propheten Muhammad betrifft, folge ich den Ansichten Ihrer Kollegen Puin und Ohlig.
Obwohl es sicher noch sehr viel zu sagen gäbe, möchte ich verbleiben mit nochmaligem Dank und meinen herzlichen Grüssen aus Südost Asien in Ihr Saarland.
Alles Gute Professor Kerr, Gott schütze Sie.
That mention of Maronite sources, where Mu'awiah was doing devotions of a sort certainly not adversarial to Christianity was an interesting one, never heard that before. The excellent Prof Kerr is very careful in his study, and looking at evidence carefully, but not jumping to conclusions, as can be possible from religious or ideological biases.
Another fabulous video the amount of information Prof. R. Kerr has circling around in his brain is phenomenal, thank you Mel for getting Prof. Kerr to do these videos with you. I am glad my question from before about the battle of the Trench being based on an actual battle (Nineveh ) was covered in this video. It may seem a silly question, but was Muawiya actually a Christian?
I'm not 100% convinced he was a Christian, but evidence certainly leans that way.
@@IslamicOrigins thank you Mel 👍
This is fantastic. I just wish, Prof. Kerr would smoke a little less.. Alle the best and great work!
Mel, something that I caught on this from Dr. Kerr. He stated that Mu'iwiya was a Syriac name that was Arabized. In AJ Deus paper on the Serpent Kibg and the Dome of the Rock, he stated that the name Ummayad mean Sons of Arameans. That woulf make sense and in reality we are looking at least until Abdl Malik, a Syriac Christian Empire and not an Arabic Muslim Empire.
Lol
Great work❤
What is the etmology of the quranic name for Jesus Viz. Isa/Iesa ? Is it from Greek Iesous or Syriac Isho? Which Arab group in 7th century used that name for Jesus?
Al Jallad answered that question on a video not so long ago. Essentially, if I remember correctly it was a pre-Christian Arab name/word whose etymology meant something on the lines of redemption or payback (as in a loan). He says it was just co-opted for Jesus.
My church i.e Marthoma church which has its roots to Syrian orthodox church in Antioch, still uses the word "Isho" to refer to Jesus....we still call Jesus as Isho in our language
Our church liturgical language 100 years back was syriac, it was changed only in 1890s to vernacular language of our area.
We call Jesus Christ as "Isho Mshicha"
I have heard it means some nasty offensive things in arabic...
King Muayiua established Ummeyed Empire in Arabia and Parsia during 640-749 AD.
King Muayiua established Ummeyed Empire in 7th century in Arabia and Parsia with the help of local Warlords of Arabia and Parsia.
Is it plausible that Umar Ibn “Khattab” comes from the word “kattaaraba” in muawiah scripture ?
“Kata’araba” to “khattab” ?
The West part of the Empire was less christianized as the East.
For that reason Islam extended in the western provinces; North Africa, Hispania and Southern France.
Probably in that time people in the West did not know too much about Nicean christianity and at least it was filled and mixed with a lot of gnostics interpretations.
The Muhagarene reached far as southern France and Spain due to that lack of trinitarian christianity, but in counterpart the East was in reality true Head of the Christian Faith.
The fully conversion to nicean christianity in the West in a factial term did not happen until the Fall of Granada in 1492, and then it started the Western Countries as global powers until today, defeating the manichean-gnostic Islamic sects.
It's like to say that the East resisted the beast in the first centuries (Umayads, Abbasids, Turks...) and the West defeated it in Spain and Portugal until today with mass inmigration into the West.
That's a very big claim but I doubt evidence would support it.
That's ours conspiracy you wrote. Spain and North Africa were Orthodox Christian before the Arab invasion
@@IslamicOrigins
He is full of crap.
@@RedWolf75 no in fact even the Pope said that the central base of the manicheans it was North Africa.
Well thats a good observation, but it is not true to say that West was not trinitarian majority...well it was, france converted to catholicism in 498 ad, britian in 7th century...spain from visigothic arian church to trinitarian christianity in 586 ad...so triniitarian christians were well established in west by 5th century ad
Standards Islamic narrative could not have been possible without the help of Christian church and Jews Rabbis.
Old wine in new bottles.
Prof. Kerr has found the relevant proof for the 'year according to the Arabs'. Whatever happened in the foundational year, we cannot know for certain, because the early chronicles were politically inconvenient and perhaps even embarrassing and so the Abbasids destroyed them. What we have here on the Sea of Galilee is carved in stone in koiné Greek: "the year according to (κατά) the Arabs" which would have been expressed in Arabic as 'sanaa qada MHGRYN' ... the year according to the HAGARENES. The marginal comment in Syriac the year of 'shultanat d'mahgraye' is the proof that 'HEGIRA' is wrong and a misreading of 'MHGRY' ... literally Hagarenes.
Do you think the Battle of Yarmouk actually happened, or is it a misremembered battle between Sassanid King Khosrow and the Romans?
It definitely did happen, and the battle was 100% between the Muslim Arabs and the Byzantines, the fragment on the Arab conquest which is a contemporary account to the battle of Yarmouk makes it clear. “and in January, they took the word for their lives (did) [the sons of] Emesa [i.e., Ḥimṣ)], and many villages were ruined with killing by [the Arabs of] Muḥammad and a great number of people were killed and captives [were taken] from Galilee as far as Bēth [...] and those Arabs pitched camp beside [Damascus?] [...] and we saw everywhe[re...] and o[l]ive oil which they brought and them. And on the t[wenty six]th of May went S[ac[ella]rius]... cattle [...] [...] from the vicinity of Emesa and the Romans chased them [...] and on the tenth [of August] the Romans fled from the vicinity of Damascus [...] many [people] some 10,000. And at the turn [of the ye]ar the Romans came; and on the twentieth of August in the year n[ine hundred and forty-]seven there gathered in Gabitha [...] the Romans and great many people were ki[lled of] [the R]omans, [s]ome fifty thousand [...]”
I think Robert Kerr think Trinitarian doctrine was a late Latin invention. I stop listening after that. I mean Eastern and Western Church are united on that Truth before heretical priest such as Arius and Nestor (Bishop of Constantinople) came to the lime light. It seems that Robert Kerr thinks Arianism is the Orthodoxy and Roman Church was the one has heterodox belief of Trinity. There is a major reason why Jesus divinity is always questioned in the east. It is because their is a huge population of Jews and other Jewish influenced religion are in the middle east. In the west, it was not an issue until heresies came from the east and converted many souls to Arianism and Adoptionism. In regards with the language, Latin was the lingua franca of roman Church. But still I contend that the Councils of west is very much valid as the council of the East. Even with Language barrier, Roman Church still has the Authority over the eastern Churches till the great schism. The issue with Greek Church is that Eastern Roman Churches have been so connected to the Government of the Byzantine to the point when a Byzantine king with a heterodox belief it affects the Regional Church. Orthodox bishops gets replaced by heterodox. As we've talk about during the time of 600 AD,There were Byzantine kings who deny Jesus divinity. And when Byzantine had a Orthodox king, Arabs rebel and fought Byzantines. In addition, when Byzantines had an issue with Iconoclasm, they got corrected by the Roman church. So even if eastern Church spoken Greek, it does not mean that theyll understand the Theology better. Same with Syriac churches and Egyptians. Interpretation of the Bible should be based from Tradition.
In the interest of charity, it is important that we make sure we have really got what he meant here. I doubt he meant to say that Christians invented the trinity, it might be the dispute in relation to the filio he is referring to. I will be talking to him tomorrow and I will get clarification from him. Despite our best efforts we can misspeak especially over the course of several hours of discussion.
@@IslamicOrigins Noted. Either he is talking about Trinity. Or he is talking about the Original sin.
Indeed. The basics of the theology was already there in the 1st Century. Sometimes I think that islam is just a schism that was banished, had time to ferment in isolation and got severely perverted by politics and resentment.
@@Ekim1740 In the same video he said byzantines when he meant to say Persians. Tiredness can lead to errors.
@@IslamicOrigins thanks for taking the time to clear this out. I am sure none of us is chastising. But we are all acutely aware or the enemy, always watching, waiting to pounce on a little slip of the tongue, to use for his own deception, out of context. (So less wagging the finger and more looking out for one another.) Thanks again for all your work.
I remember that in some hadith I've read that muawiyah did die with the cross in his neck
There is no evidence or authentic hadith that states that muawiyah died with a cross in his neck, this claim is not supported by historical or reliable sources either.
Interestingly Emperor Titus who created the character of Jesus , and Christianity has parallels to Mohammad achievements and land marks that of Roman and Persian wars, when Emperor Titus achievements on battlefields were attributed to Jesus in creating life of Jesus.
I think Paul created Jesus from the true life story of Judas the Galilean, founder of the zealots. Paul had been a zealot as a young man, likely a fund raiser among ex-pat Jewish communities abroad, and that is why he knew the story. After the war, Paul remembered how easy it was to collect donations from preaching so he changed the story to be Rome-friendly and kept the money for himself.
@@carolgebert7833
I think which I agree with you that anything goes in creating Abrahamic religions. People were desperate to accept anything which can alleviate their lives in that miserable living conditions, worse than animals , and with the hope of a peaceful and luxurious life after death.
@@carolgebert7833 Doesn't Jacob the Just and the Ebionites contradict the thesis that "Paul made up Jesus"?
@@furkancimen3145James and Simon-Peter were sons of Judas the Galilean according to Josephus. Real people, but terrorists, not peaceniks. The ebionites remembered the real Jesus/ Judas. I think the Jews of Baghdad did too, when they joined the Arab wars in the early 7th C.
Does the professor think that Muawiah was from Merv?
There’s no evidence to suggest that, all the evidence we have clearly points out to muawiyah being from Mecca.
@Paxia Mecca did not exist in the 7th century. It was created by the Abbasids.
@@fantasia55 your claim has no evidence backing it up, Mecca definitely did exist in the 7th century, and there’s no historical document that proves that Mecca was created by the Abbasids, that’s a fringe theory made by Dan gibson who’s not reliable at all, and is not experienced.
@@fantasia55 do you have proof of muawiyah being from merv
Hoyland still goes by the Islamic narrative. The Tayyeye were the tribe who united the Arabs and established the Arab state.
The question is, were the Ummayads Tayyeye or did they overthrew them?
The Umayyads weren’t apart of the tayy tribe, they were apart of the quraysh tribe, but “tayyaye”basically turned into an umbrella term that referred to Arabs in general later on, so to answer question, yes and no