People are never puritans long before, only after their religion get institutionalized and with a strong kingdom and forceful application of rules added with schools they become puritans, so there should been people believing cross religious historical stories, customs and figures even among early Jews, Muslims, Christians and soother pagans. Puritanism is a very later age development still in progress and i think only people are going to suffer because of that.
This is a nonsense presentation for the scripts he talks about were clear and sufficient to attest to Al-Jazm ( current ) script. This imposter of a scholar follows his dictating orientalist who were determined to seed doubt on all aspects of Arabic and when they failed they turned to question old Arabic roots claiming they have little to do with Arabic and are based on Aramaic and Hebrew arguing that these are before Arabic. When discoveries showed that Thamuadic Arabic is at least a millennium before Aramaic they turned to misreading the ancient Arabic text distorting its phonology without any proof of their distorted reading. Jailed is but a specimen of such sick pseudo scholarship.
this can have a wide range of meanings: "yazid" could be understood as a name, which would make it "yazid the king remembered the god", or you could read it as a verb, and "ذكر" as a noun which makes it "remembering the god increases kingship/wealth"
Dr Jallad, these inscriptions last millenia. Why don't we find the Quran, on any mountain face or boulders? Should it not have been the first job after compiling Quran? Are we missing something here?
No, we are not missing anything here. Quran is already proven to exist in the same time of Muhammed or immediatly after him. We have the quran of birnmigham that proven this. Couple of centuries ago, we didnt have these artifacts so the west was asking questions like that which was fine but now we are beyond this point. Anyone who question these proven historic things should be caregorized with conspiracy theorist who is motivated by anti islam ideologies
@@SyrianEagle851 Depends on how you interpret Mohammad. It might actually be an adjective and not a name as Mohammad means praised or something like that
@@jebuskmiest but even then in the Arabic language the adjective could come before but also after, an example is Musaylama Al-Kathab, Musaylama the lair.
The rock inscription of Hammat Gader in greek text for Muawiya also has Christian symbology. So do the coins all the way to Abdul Malik. This is just one of many bits of clues indicating that proto Islam was probably indistinguishable from the Eastern Church practices.
The problem is that the inscription mentions "Al-Ilah" instead of "Allah", which was more used by pure Christians in the peninsula, and not followers of Muhammad.
No, both Islamic tradition stories and artifacts prove that arabs didnt have there own currency in arabia. They used persian dirham or byzantine dinar. Islamic tradition clearly says that Umayyed continues to use the byzantine currency for a while after conquering the levant before they started making their own currency and remove the cross. Which is a normal belivable story with a normal rajectory for history. Why do you guys keep jumping to conspiracy theories 😂😂😂
Or the word yazeed can be a verb not a name then the sentence becomes remembrance of God increases ownership "wealth". By the way the man here is speaking of Arabic script that is related to modern script not older Arabic scripts. Also Ahmad thinks in another clip that the word bar to mean son was an aramiac only use but actually it is used in Arabic until today in southern Arabia. That is the problem with western scholars that are doing their work based on ignorance of the actual Arab tribes and how they speak.
The idea that bar only exists in Aramaic is an arbitrary convention of western scholars. Ahmad al Jallad (also a western scholar) seems to be one of the first that argues against this vehemently and he does this because he is studying inscriptions and finding examples of Arabic speakers using bar.
"Remembering the God increases the wealth".
It is clear but you like to drift away.
ذكر الاله يزيدوالملكـ
It means: Increase wealth, not the name Yazeed.
People are never puritans long before, only after their religion get institutionalized and with a strong kingdom and forceful application of rules added with schools they become puritans, so there should been people believing cross religious historical stories, customs and figures even among early Jews, Muslims, Christians and soother pagans. Puritanism is a very later age development still in progress and i think only people are going to suffer because of that.
This is a nonsense presentation for the scripts he talks about were clear and sufficient to attest to Al-Jazm ( current ) script. This imposter of a scholar follows his dictating orientalist who were determined to seed doubt on all aspects of Arabic and when they failed they turned to question old Arabic roots claiming they have little to do with Arabic and are based on Aramaic and Hebrew arguing that these are before Arabic. When discoveries showed that Thamuadic Arabic is at least a millennium before Aramaic they turned to misreading the ancient Arabic text distorting its phonology without any proof of their distorted reading. Jailed is but a specimen of such sick pseudo scholarship.
this can have a wide range of meanings: "yazid" could be understood as a name, which would make it "yazid the king remembered the god", or you could read it as a verb, and "ذكر" as a noun which makes it "remembering the god increases kingship/wealth"
Very interesting. It's so exciting that inscriptions keep on being found.
Dr Jallad, these inscriptions last millenia. Why don't we find the Quran, on any mountain face or boulders? Should it not have been the first job after compiling Quran? Are we missing something here?
No, we are not missing anything here. Quran is already proven to exist in the same time of Muhammed or immediatly after him. We have the quran of birnmigham that proven this. Couple of centuries ago, we didnt have these artifacts so the west was asking questions like that which was fine but now we are beyond this point. Anyone who question these proven historic things should be caregorized with conspiracy theorist who is motivated by anti islam ideologies
Well, we do find Quran written on boulders in Arabia. Where did you get the idea that it's not the case ?
Wouldn't the king come before the name in Arabic? Al malik yazeed and not yazeed al malik?
Not necessary, In the Quran at times it says Muhammad Rasuul Allah, not Rasuul Allah Muhammad. Both are possible
@@SyrianEagle851 Depends on how you interpret Mohammad. It might actually be an adjective and not a name as Mohammad means praised or something like that
@@jebuskmiest but even then in the Arabic language the adjective could come before but also after, an example is Musaylama Al-Kathab, Musaylama the lair.
@@SyrianEagle851 yes i guess that's a good point
no both are correct
The rock inscription of Hammat Gader in greek text for Muawiya also has Christian symbology. So do the coins all the way to Abdul Malik.
This is just one of many bits of clues indicating that proto Islam was probably indistinguishable from the Eastern Church practices.
The problem is that the inscription mentions "Al-Ilah" instead of "Allah", which was more used by pure Christians in the peninsula, and not followers of Muhammad.
No, both Islamic tradition stories and artifacts prove that arabs didnt have there own currency in arabia. They used persian dirham or byzantine dinar. Islamic tradition clearly says that Umayyed continues to use the byzantine currency for a while after conquering the levant before they started making their own currency and remove the cross. Which is a normal belivable story with a normal rajectory for history. Why do you guys keep jumping to conspiracy theories 😂😂😂
You do realise Hannah gader is a bath for the Christians under the caliphate
@@adamyahya4734 allah an illah are both used by muslims in quran
Or the word yazeed can be a verb not a name then the sentence becomes remembrance of God increases ownership "wealth". By the way the man here is speaking of Arabic script that is related to modern script not older Arabic scripts. Also Ahmad thinks in another clip that the word bar to mean son was an aramiac only use but actually it is used in Arabic until today in southern Arabia. That is the problem with western scholars that are doing their work based on ignorance of the actual Arab tribes and how they speak.
So how do you explain away the "waw" found in Yazid, especially since those are exclusively associated with personal names?
@@tabushanan Simple, he has no explanation.
The idea that bar only exists in Aramaic is an arbitrary convention of western scholars. Ahmad al Jallad (also a western scholar) seems to be one of the first that argues against this vehemently and he does this because he is studying inscriptions and finding examples of Arabic speakers using bar.
@@tabushanan no they are not
@@bowiethedog6285 they are not