I can only imagine how many people Allah guided to this channel who are now muslim through Paul's erudite and deeply intellectual study of theology. May Allah protect you brother
Assalamualaikum Brother Paul. I think it’s time for you to write a book perhaps along the lines of “The Bible vs the Quran for dummies.” I can see no one else who can do this and cover the different angles on the different issues with the required expertise and knowledge for the layman. That InShaAllah could cement your contribution to Islam, if you haven’t already, and your legacy. Jazakumullahu Khair
I was thinking what a wonderful columnist Brother Paul would be! And in the same vein of thought, that it could all be compiled into a book after. 😂 Any publishers in the comments section?
Great review and opinion regarding this issue of HCM . You have enlightened many as to the basis and Origin of the notion of Critical review and where it can or cannot be applied. Great talk.
i love the question..really imean being a muslim never thought on this but it is a fantastic thought and solution to what it is in my daily life actually! :) thank you for opening thos closed curtains ;) ps love your bookshelfs on the back..keep us also in your duas 😊
This kind of content is the best on the channel jzk. I may be wrong but it seems many of these discussions relate to differences between mutazila and ashari world views? If so please bring in SAHM or another qualified man to further elaborate
@@Theresia66 what makes you think that it has to a biological sister,the prophet pbuh answered this,by saying many that people were often named after pious predecessors,so she could had a brother by that name,
Assalamu Alaikum, Brother Paul. I am curious which Jonathan Brown book would you recommend for a new revert to Islam. By the way, my educational background is in history.
I love the idea that reading works of political/philosophical key contributors such as Hobbes and Locke can give us a better, more wise and informed understanding of the approaches done today such as the HCM
Because the Bible was so corrupt that people noticed and started questioning it. It's so full of contradictions that it needed a whole new literary field to untangle it. The Qur'an has no such problems. Question answered.
The moon splitting miracle does not entail any contractions. The problem with the Bible was not the miracles, but the inner contradictions, the factual historical errors, the many changes over the centuries, its patchwork constitution, its vague origins, etc, etc...
@@philipcoriolis6614 No, it doesn't. You can't prove it didn't happen. And we can't scientifically prove it did happen. But that goes for all "miracles". We do have strong anecdotal and circumstantial evidence, the latter being the truth of the prophethood of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), among other things, and the many other miracles of the Qur'an itself. But the point at hand is not the truth of miracles, but the raison d'être of literary criticism when it comes to the bible, and the lack of such "raison" when it comes to the Qur'an.
@@philipcoriolis6614 Well, you say nobody saw it. We say at least those concerned saw it. And those that saw it were enemies of the prophet who confessed to this after they came to Islam. There was no need for them to lie. Indeed, it would have been much easier for them to deny Islam exactly on this basis. They could have proven Islam wrong and ridicule the prophet for such an outrageous claim. They did at first, but when they saw what they saw, they had no choice but to submit. Again, the question at hand is not the truth of miracles, it is the need for literary criticism of the Bible versus the absence of such need for the Qur'an.
Also there are still divisions on the letters of Paul and their authenticity, and some of the arguments for this are based upon writing style, which isn’t the most substantial argument.
@@johnbrzykcy3076 Acts 15:36-21:16 - It was not a theological debate. Paul and Barnabas had decided to take a small group and revisit some towns they had previously shared Christ with. One of the individuals had proven themselves unreliable in the past and so Paul was against taking him while Barnabas wanted to. The argued about it. Ultimately, the group split up with Paul taking Silas and Barnabas taking the other guy. Luke was writing his account with Paul, so the story continues with Paul and Silas while Barnabas largely exits the story. If @ahmedirfansamad means something else, then it is non-canonical. There is a Gnostic text attribute to Barnabas, but I haven't gotten around to reading it. Perhaps there is something in it. 36 And after some days Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us return and visit the brothers in every city where we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are.” 37 Now Barnabas wanted to take with them John called Mark. 38 But Paul thought best not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work. 39 And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other. Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus, 40 but Paul chose Silas and departed, having been commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. 41 And he went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.
You've addressed this beautifully. A purely rationalist approach to scripture, which is founded on the idea of belief in the unseen - that is, in part, belief in that which cannot be actually witnessed by us, or things that resist objective/literal descriptions - is stupid. A "revelation from God" is only a revelation from God because it, by nature of who revealed it and the circumstances of its revelation, contains something that makes it impossible to be produced by man. Rejecting prophecies, miraculous historical events, and scientific miracles, etc, as totally untrue and then going on to examine it "objectively" is no longer objective; truly, an objective approach would be to study the "text" (and the language in the case of the Qur'an) in its entirety instead. The Qur'an was not revealed in order, and the parts such an approach ignores cannot be left out because it would be unfair to the Book - context of revelation, the way different events led to the revelation of certain verses, and the (style of) language is so important because the Arabs, finding it powerful, would call it "magic". The Qur'an is self-referencing, so can you study such verses fairly? It seems more problematic, more biased (and definitely a very Western approach), the more I think about it. Also, how do you apply this (ha!) "objectivity" (that is limited to the physical/tangible) when you try to interpret verses on the soul or the immaterial world? There is so much that can be said about it - like Western scholars dismissing Ahadith entirely. In fact, a study of the Qur'an would never be complete if ahadith were not considered because they are such a significant part of the history of the Qur'an - the way it was explained, understood, applied, revealed, all of it (the (sound of) buzzing of bees when it was being revealed, and when the thigh of the Prophet, Allah's peace and blessings be upon him, fell upon Zayd Ibn Thabit's thigh, may Allah be pleased with him, and he thought it would break as it grew in heaviness, etc). A Muhaddith like Sheikh Awwama, may Allah bless him, would refute such scholars easily - but no doubt they've got better things to do. Thank you for making this video because such criticism of "elite" scholarship on Islam, the Qur'an, etc, is necessary (and rare). May Allah forgive you, increase you in beneficial knowledge, and raise you among the scholars and the heirs of the prophets, His peace be upon all of them.
Historical criticism of the Qur'an has been a significant field of study, and several well-known critiques have emerged over the years. Here are some of the most prominent ones: John Wansbrough: In his works "Quranic Studies" and "The Sectarian Milieu," Wansbrough argued that the Qur'an emerged over a long period of time and reflected the sectarian conflicts within early Islam. He suggested that the Qur'an was not fully compiled until the 8th or 9th century, much later than traditionally believed. Patricia Crone and Michael Cook: In their book "Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World," Crone and Cook challenged traditional Islamic narratives, arguing that early Islamic history, including the origins of the Qur'an, was largely constructed retrospectively. They suggested that the Qur'an might have been influenced by Jewish and Christian texts. Christoph Luxenberg: In "The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran," Luxenberg posited that many unclear or ambiguous passages in the Qur'an could be better understood if read as translations from a Syriac Christian text. His work has been controversial and widely debated. Fred Donner: In "Narratives of Islamic Origins," Donner explored the context in which the Qur'an was written, suggesting that early Islam was more a monotheistic reform movement within the broader Abrahamic tradition than a distinct new religion from the outset. Gerd R. Puin: Puin analyzed ancient Qur'anic manuscripts, including the Sana'a palimpsest, one of the oldest Qur'anic manuscripts discovered in Yemen. His findings suggested variations in the early text, leading to questions about the Qur'an's compilation and transmission. Angelika Neuwirth: Neuwirth's work has focused on the Qur'an in its historical context, emphasizing its connection to late antiquity and suggesting that it was part of a broader religious and cultural milieu rather than a completely unique revelation. Toby Lester: In "What Is the Koran?" an article published in The Atlantic, Lester discussed the implications of the Sana'a manuscripts, exploring how textual variations could affect the understanding of the Qur'an's history and compilation. These critiques have sparked significant debate within academic and religious circles, leading to a deeper exploration of the Qur'an's historical context and its development over time.
I think some folks commenting don’t actually understand what was said about HCM in this video. To this video’s treatment of HCM, it’s “methods,” not one single method. At least not anymore. While the philosophers the scholar you’ve cited are seen generally as historical precursors to various facets of HCM, they’re not themselves the direct inspiration of many scholars using HCMs. Some don’t even have the political realist assumptions of Hobbes and Spinoza at all. Some would even repudiate a connection, or distinguish their theoretical background completely, denying any deist or even atheist background assumptions. Perhaps the HCM scholars are yet to be capable of studying the Qur’an using a kind of HCM. But I doubt HCMs will get good representation here. Just damn all historiography. Not all HCMs inherently doubt miracles or resurrection or attribute the rise of monotheistic religions to cognitive dissonance theory. This is only a recent consensus when the paradigm shift of Biblical scholars went from slightly evangelical to more secular and even classicist and sometimes cognitive-linguistic or even philosophical. But this was never quite the starting point for HCMs in general, except historically, as you mentioned Spinoza. It is not inherently toxic, and not always Orientalist, for example, Dr. Dan McClellan in his video content combatting Biblical misinformation frequently refers to cultural regions where the Abrahamic texts originate as West Asia instead of “Middle East.” This is not indicative of biased presumptions by HCM Biblical scholars. These are not all “skeptics.” It merely denies that there is any pre-justificatory reason to believe that any text has an Archimedean point of divine revelation, but rather that this has to be proven by scholarly work divesting energy into historiography and history not just theology. Not all are anti-theological (and are even opposite like Dale Allison or M. David Litwa or James McGrath, among many others). Some merely seek to find a smarter scholarly means to appreciate their religion. While I doubt recent HCM applications to the study of the Qur’an has been fruitful, I don’t think HCM has been given a fairer understanding in your critique or in the texts you cite positively. The scholar, credible as he is, you chose to represent HCM would have opponents in other HCM or post-HCM schools, judging by where he gets his main philosophical presumptions, as some scholars don’t even do that or even outright reject direct philosophical influence from philosophical precursors of HCM in their work. Methods just evolve that way. And there is a pluralism of methods between scholars due to ongoing debates. I can acknowledge that current HCMs have limitations, namely their being inherently either empirical or hermeneutical or both, in insufficient measure sometimes, and without fitting well the subject matter they are studying (e.g., the Qur’an), but that does not make it right to say that HCMs guarantee that one such scholar in this mould espouses that no miracles exist at all, or that they would be led to that position because of adherence to professional standards of historical scholarship. That’s not always the case, and was not the case, until scholarly community shifted from being of a mostly broadly Protestant or evangelical mindset to a secular one. I also acknowledge that a broadly politically realist and humanist historiography for the Qur’an can be theorized first within or with consideration for the mature scholarly traditions of the religious community. I’ve been watching this channel for a long time. Only this time, this video has rubbed me the wrong way a bit. Your broader point, however, is correct. If an HCM for studying the Qur’an is to be developed, it ought to develop with consideration for the long traditions of Hadith studies and Islamic studies in general. Not solely retaining the methods as they were evolved and originated from the Biblical criticism of Spinoza and the Protestant Reformation. Anyway, I only say this as a student of area studies (history and sociology, mainly). I am a bit concerned that one scholar using HCM has the whole method marred because he’s the only example you’ve given.
You asked a great question! But you should have looked at the existing historical critical scholarship on the Quran. It may not be as extensive as in Christianity but I think its more dynamic
I think there has always been healthy discussion about the meaning in the ayat of the Qur'an. Some verses are more comprehensible now than in the past, and scholars of the past made the point, that if they are unable to understand and ayat, then it is incumbant on them to remain silent (ie their opinion doesn't matter, unless based in knowledge). With respect to textual criticism regarding the authenticity of the text, that seem to mainly be a focus of orientalists and Christian scholars (or non scholars). Really, as Gai Eaton mentioned.
@@BloggingTheology Are you lost? I challenge you to answer me. Why did Uthman burn complete copies and fragments of Quran while the Quran was uncorrupted and same among Muslims'? Where's the Quran standardized by Uthman? Why do we have different Qir'aats of Quran today after Uthman standardized the Quran in the Quraish dialect? *Why *Surah 37: 12* of Hafs is different in other Qir'aats?* Where can we get the Qir'aat revealed to Muhammad himself? *In Surah 14: 4, allah said he always sent his prophet with the language of their people so they would clearly understand....* If JESUS spoke Aramaic, how you believe he's sent by allah to Hebrews? How you are Muslims if you are not Arabs?
Christian: You should have a separation of church and state just like we did.🤡 Christian: You should reform your religion just like we did.🤡 Christian: All the criticisms of our book apply lock, stock and barrel to yours too.🤡 Muslim: Here. These medicines helped a lot of people. Therefore, you should have them too. Christian:🏃♂
As always, great work! You are one of the best comparative religion channels on the internet, keep up the good work and may Allah preserve you and grant you the best reward for your efforts!
cred ca le-ai picat in plasa. asta e canal propagandistic toata ziua. invoca respingerea miracolelor ca sa evite discutia despre critica Quran-ului dpv istoric.
The Messenger of God, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, advised us in the “wars” and said: “Do not cut down a tree.. and do not kill a woman, a boy, a newborn, an old man, or a sick person.. do not mutilate corpses.. do not kill extravagantly.. do not destroy a temple, and do not vandalize a building.” Amer.. Even camels and cows are not slaughtered except for eating.” He also recommended us to do good to the captive, to honor him and feed him.. and to fulfill the covenant.. and finally, not to force anyone to convert to Islam.. After him came the reign of our master Umar ibn al-Khattab al-Faruq, who distinguished between the truth and the truth. And falsehood, may God be pleased with him.. (Their churches shall not be inhabited, nor demolished, nor be diminished from them, nor from their good, nor from their cross, nor from anything of their wealth, and they shall not be forced against their religion, and none of them shall be harmed).. He has given security to the people of Jerusalem and granted them their religious freedom and safety for their churches
I cannot reconcile what people say about Gai Eaton’s perennialist ‘aqeedah’ and his staunch sunnism and affirmation of Islam being the only true path to Allah in these writings. 🤷♂️
This is the first time I hear of this. I will take it as being false or a misunderstanding or something from his younger years. I cannot believe that he died on nothing but a sunni aqeeda.
The answer is given in the Quran (Sultan Bin Translation): Quran Chp 6 Verse 91: And they [Jews] did not show Allah His due respect when they said [in defence of Torah corruption that], "Allah did not reveal to any human being anything [of light and guidance to be preserved]." Say, "Who revealed the Scripture that Moses brought as light and guidance to the people? You [Jews] were used to break it into pages, disclosing somewhat and suppressing much [that ends up you in worshiping uzair, angels etc]. And you have been taught [through this Quran] that neither you nor your forefathers knew before." Say [O Prophet], "Allah [reveals with full of (things) light, guidance]." Then leave them in their discourse, amusing themselves. Quran Chp 6 Verse 92: And this is a Book We have revealed consecrating itself, evidencing itself everything out here in between its two hands [as blessed and firm, respectively] so that you may warn the Mother of Cities [Mecca, the Mother of all civilizations in the globe] and those [other civilizations that span] around it [with fervor and certainty]. Those who believe in the Hereafter [as per Quran] believe in it [Mecca to be the centre of Pangaea], and they are maintaining their prayers [spiritual connections with its first inhabitants: Eve and Adam].
I am wondering if you have had a chance to read the book by Syed Muhammad Naquib al- Attas titled Islam and Secularism? It's a must read if one wants to understand ....among others....the question of critising the Quran....a long standing question of secular circles. Hope you get to read it.
Bible is a canon of 66 books (excluding 18 books of Apocrypha) and has time span of 1400 years (1300 BC - 100 AD) and was written in Hebrew and Greek. Quran is one single book and has a time-span of only 23 years (610 - 632 AD) and was written in classical Arabic. Quran will never lend itself to these modern critical methods though.
And Even you don't know a Historical Book can't be better than the Pure Words of God ... God Almighty can create anything with any lines with any time ... But whatever God Almighty creates has a purpose...
@Muhammad Fraz Aslam exactly 2+2=3! I can't imagine how Muslims living can continue to resist Western scholarship. Well, the Christians failed to prevent this approach to the bible. Already, Muslims youth are struggling to retain their faith in these lands 😀.
The claim at 5:00 that the "Hebrew and Christian scriptures came to acquire belatedly the status of scripture" is simply false according to historical criticism. The academics you quote are out-of-date with the latest research.
Mun'im Sirry and Abad Badaruzzaman two great Muslim professors from Indonesia are among the ones whose work related to this. There was even done course in Indonesian by this amazing Madurese Muslim Prof Munim Sirry. Yeees, hail Madurese😅!! This theme is not unfamiliar among some Muslims in Indonesia though not without attacks. But as Sheikh Ali Hydar Thomas McElwain if one wants to study the best diverse topics of Islam, One must find it in the Indonesians studies. Salam from Indonesia
Paul, indeed another overwhelming truth of it being the Word of God when God Himself says in the Quran this book will be protected (unlike the earlier scriptures). Quran 85:21-22.
Quran Surah al Nasr (110): "(O Prophet,) When there comes Allah’s help and the Victory, and you see people entering Allah’s (approved) religion in multitudes, then glorify the praises of your Lord and seek His forgiveness, for certainly He is ever Accepting of Repentance." We do not know who will be agents of justice who will keep the purity of this deen alive. If you told someone in Arabia that a White English man would come one day and be the sole cause behind the conversion of thousands upon thousands of non-Muslims, it would be difficult to believe you. In this is a lesson to never judge, for we truly cannot ever grasp the whole picture and we tend to be short-sighted humans.
*Like "Getting it Right, First Time"* *Can we* just *Create without* *Revision, (editing) , "Updates"* Why not? [Allah Most Wise] challenges us to try... And when *We know We were unable to* , We would be Convinced of the Claim of [The Claimant]
This is all well and good about secular assumptions but the discussion doesn't really address whether the Qur'an and hadith can be looked at and established as accurate and consistent. Too many assumptions that it's just inspired. It's not simply about being 'western ' or 'secular' it's about simply enquiring if the claims are actually reliable, consistent and coherent.
25:00 this actually what NonMuslim believe, since In the beginning they didn't believe the Unseen so what happen is that "Rules" about Historical criticism in this book already flawed to how we Read the Quran so there is no point this person writing the book in the first place. IDK what he doing here. Since what he said is "my rules is my glasses and yours is not", there is no point we take this book seriously. xd One more thing, these type of "Critiques" this book suggest, it's already got Critiqued multiple times in Quran (I didn't remember the Verse but it's there). 27:00 I'm with you here. Salam
Have enjoyed the content and your objective approach for this channel. Although unrelated, I believe many followers of yours would like to know something about your family, wife and children. Can you share with us?
Salam paul, i would appreciate if you could talk about the differences between protestantism and catholicism. I'v been curious for a long time. Thank you
Perhaps may i also add how come there are a number or thousands of churches/denominations of Christianity, all believing in Jesus as God, part of trinity, but only one has the salvation. Its baffling
In the beginning *Arrogance combined* *With Reasoning* Got Satan a ticket to Hell, ( "I am better" ) Nowadays "Man is competing" in *Reasoning* , *Arrogantly* , tickets all sold out
When I consider that the prophet Muhammad could not read nor write...and I add to it that he was the most impeccably mannered human being ...I cannot help. thinking that he may not have understood all that he was asked to reveal.... Secondly despite his reputation for truth ,justice and honesty,he never hesitated to attach himself to the messege he revealed.... Any human being would indeed find him 31:16 self in conflict between his reputation and his messege....and he never was... To me that is a testament to his character.... Over and over again ,he revealed things to humanity that no human of his age or before knew.... Or tonly the wrong doers who chose to hide God's previous revelation...or chose to change it.... Muhamad pbuh layed bare the truth and lies that previous religions had tried to cover up. Judaism fell because of scribes and pharisees,while Christianity fell into merging snippets of Judaism with Paganistic Roman Catholic teaching ... Neither of which has recovered from these dilemmas to this day... While Islam has always remained in the ascendancy,,despite the 1258 ransacking of Baghdad ,the fall of The Ottoman Empire and centuries of attempts to maligne it's Quran and it's prophet...of history is a good teacher then I'd venture to say ,that Islam is set to spread all across the Americas in the next century and beyond... .
@@davcan18 Aisha was engaged to another man before him and broke off her engagement. That's not a girl. She lived 50 years after him, lead armies, taught men and women much older than her, never remarried again and chose to spend the rest of her life in propagating her religion. She never said anything bad about her beloved husband or their union. If she was happy with her marriage and so were her parents, family, relatives and not a single person objected in their entire society friends, foes and enemies alike. Who are the new haters pretending to care about her now all of sudden after 1400 years? While having same marriages in their own books and traditions but never see them trash talking those marriages like that of the Prophet of Islam. Double standards and hypocrisy.
The funny thing with all this book which is try to "Disprove" Islam is, they try to prove themselves as a "NonBelivers" and i didn't get their point sometimes, it's kinda like hiding the truth in a rediculous way and with many more jargon to make for other people take their idea of "Why i don't belive in this". and it's stupid IMO, and if this people truly reading the Quran their "What if method" didn't works anyway. ykwim 32:00 And I agree with your closing words there. Salam
It's interesting how critical thought has evolved within the Western and Muslim worlds. Where Muslim thought encompasses both seen and unseen and are open to the divine, western thought has taken a 180 degree approach and rejected anything that can not be made tangible. I do believe that western thought was allowed to be lead astray and not given the ability to see the greater picture by God, due to their arrogance and their willingness to follow men and not God. I often see it in their arguments, and as you have stated, in their pre-suppositions that filter anything that comes to them.
I'm not Muslim nor do I live in the Muslim worlds. I live in Florida in the United States. And I do find your observations about the way "critical thought has evolved" very interesting. I myself do not reject the unseen but I accept the reality of the Creator God. Respectfully...
interestingly, they came out with their own filter to blind them from the truth(of course in reality, it is Allah ta'ala that blinds them. He guides whom He wills). They did not even get a chance to think about it.
Please do a series of talks with Nouman Ali Khan on the stories of the Prophets in the Quran vs. the Bible. How the Arabic words are so accurate to describe the Prophets vs the corrupt versions in the old testament.
YASIR QADHI and his post modernist mates should watch this. A master class in refuting those shubuhaats which these people preach in a subtle, non-overt manner.
I think Paul Williams should bring him to his channel to answer questions on higher criticism and textual criticism application in Quranic/Hadith studies.
Simply said, this 'Historical Critical Method' is made made, and subjected to errors, so it should be subjected to be methologically criticised as a limited method to be applied generally for all books. 🙄
Perfection and obedience may be what it is, but I have other ideas. Christianity is obviously the most followed religion, so that is part of the reason no doubt. It also makes bigger claims than most, if not all religions(admittedly I haven’t read much of it ever). Plus, its content takes place over a much longer amount of time than the Quran does. Much more to dissect.
I have seen in many different versions of the Quran English on one side and Arabic on the other in the Hebrew Bible English on one side and Hebrew on the other side i have never seen in different Versions of the New Testament English on one side and Aramaic the language that Jesus spoke on the other side of the New Testament
Can you please clarify the contradiction how the Quran was revealed to mohammad: in one blessed night Sura 44:3 or revealed in parts in 23 years as in Sura 17:106 w thx
I'd also appreciate any information about the revelation of the Quran to Muhammad. I'm a Christian believer. I'm somewhat open minded to learn more about Islam because it's good to understand the worldviews and beliefs of people. Peace of God to you...
@@johnbrzykcy3076 another contradiction is in Sura 20:85 you see that was a Samiri who has led the people of Moses to astray , but at Moses times wasn’t created yet the Samaria area ( Israel was divided in two areas Samaria and Judea at 880 BC ) , so Quran mentioned a Samiri ( Samaria habitant) at Moses time where Samaria not created yet Sura 20:85 Allah responded, “We have indeed tested your people in your absence, and the Sâmiri1 has led them astray.”
The Qur’an was send down to the first heaven in one night. Not to in one night to Muhammad pbuh. The Qur’an doesn’t say what your limited understanding think it says. This is basic knowledge which you lack. Do your research first before you call something a contradiction which makes you sound like a fool.
Another very interesting presentation. There was no historical Criticism of the Bible for 1600 years. There will be more and more historical criticism of the Quran whether anyone likes it or not. The Bible has been regarded as the inerrant word of God. But reasonable people will know that this can be regarded as a human belief. The same is true of the Quran. The belief that it is an inerrant may be true, but that is not going to stop people looking at it in its historical context. And that will shed some light.. However in Christian doctrine, the gift of interpretation is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit which is ordered to the edification of the hearer or reader. After all, all books are dead until they are interpreted by living souls to living souls in the present, are they not?
The first Quran was destroyed or scattered, I feel like it is difficult to criticise the Bible for not having a canonised NT, when the first NT manuscript came at the turn of the 3rd Century, which was a century after all the NT books have been written. Especially considering the early Church’s persecution.
The first Qur'an was memorised by literally thousands of companions of the prophet. It was primarily an oral recitation. Today millions know it by heart. It has been faithfully preserved to this day.
@@BloggingTheology Memorization of Quran worked so fine that they had first to burn all other parts that did not conform the politically agreed Quran :). For the same reason they also needed write it down in the end (huh, huh) after going to several phases of " standardization". Opposite to the Islamic state that had all the power and forced a certain version of Quran and burned the rest(you will never have the "original"), Christianity developed in a hostile environment under persecution in the first approx. 300 years. But, as always, in our weakness the power of our God is manifested. The Bible is true miracle of preservation, done by God, not forced by men! Not imposed by the power of a regime, like in Islam.
@@stefang.9763 Compared to all other scriptures, the Qur’an is the best preserved in both the hearts of Muslims and the written copies of the codex - a manifestation of Allah’s promise to protect Divine revelation from distortion: yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/how-the-quran-was-preserved-during-the-prophets-time-mechanisms-of-oral-and-written-transmission
@@BloggingTheology So, Allah can only preserve some of his revelation, but not all his "divine" revelation ? :) And, the new formula is not "perfect preservation" anymore, but the just "best preserved" ? :) Although presenting itself as a clear and comprehensive guidance, the Quran is almost always in need of additional sources and later interpretations for clarification. Among others also in great dependency of the "corrupted" Bible. By itself alone it hardly ever states something explicitly or clearly. That's why you are not Quran-only Muslims. Quran sloppiness is perfect for building whatever narrative around it. Be it fundamentalist or moderate muslim. Does not seem that, this claim of "best preservation" is good for anything.
@@stefang.9763Quran is preserved by God himself because it is the last revelation,who do you think God is ,is He responsible for the corruption of the scriptures that came before,no human are
how can you see someone like this following a particular religion or group and still not look into it and see why someone as educated as this is supporting it. but if its ur celebrity,you follow them like chicken following there mothers
The Muslim authors quoted just present the received narrative of the Quran's origins and then insist that therefore there is no need for historical criticism of the Quran, when the critical assessment of such narratives is precisely what historical criticism is useful for. But for one thing, even classical Islamic scholars, like al-Suyuti, engaged in textual criticism of the Quran, and of the consonantal text itself, not merely the different recitations.
The geneaology and archeology of the revelation has been done and it confirms what the Qu'ran states about itself. An inquiry about the content has been done and it will never be over but one sure thing is that the miraculous, otherwordly nature of the book has been proven countless times. What you are looking for here is confirmation of what your heart desires: for the Quran to be from other than God. People like yourself are hostile to Islam and/or God and postulate the Quran's non miraculous nature and then work hard to try to prove and you make up things based on conjecture and flawed premises. You can make up all kind of silly ideas and notions and believe them. It will lead you nowhere good.
@@karimb972 These "proofs" of the Quran are nothing more than Muslims 'looking for confirmation of what their hearts desire.' But the popular memes about the Quran being "preserved letter for letter, word for word," and the recitations going back to Muhammad via "mutawatir chains of transmission" have been thoroughly debunked.
@@karimb972 I don't consider myself as "hostile" to Islam or Muslims but I honestly do not see the Quran as inspired by God Himself. I could be wrong. I'm just a simple Christian believer. Respectfully..
I can only imagine how many people Allah guided to this channel who are now muslim through Paul's erudite and deeply intellectual study of theology. May Allah protect you brother
@@davidchedzoy7587 🤣
@@davidchedzoy7587 Hey! What are you talking about?
And one can argue Paul was guided to Islam by Pickthall and Eaton. Truly fascinating how the domino effect of life unfolds.
@@snakejuce Truth of Islam is everywhere.... No one can deny it ...Only ones that have blind heart ...
@@MuhammadFrazAslam 100%
Why do you think they can't keep it out of their vile mouths?
Assalamualaikum Brother Paul. I think it’s time for you to write a book perhaps along the lines of “The Bible vs the Quran for dummies.” I can see no one else who can do this and cover the different angles on the different issues with the required expertise and knowledge for the layman. That InShaAllah could cement your contribution to Islam, if you haven’t already, and your legacy. Jazakumullahu Khair
I was thinking what a wonderful columnist Brother Paul would be! And in the same vein of thought, that it could all be compiled into a book after. 😂 Any publishers in the comments section?
A great question from masterly historians. Keep up surprising us with marvelous questions Paul 👏🏻
Great review and opinion regarding this issue of HCM . You have enlightened many as to the basis and Origin of the notion of Critical review and where it can or cannot be applied. Great talk.
Much appreciated information.
Till now I must confess I never thought of this matter.
Missed these videos, the newer ones are amazing too, but it’s a nice throwback to the 7k subscriber days 💯
Im from the 7k days, and it isnt too long ago!
Thank you so much for putting out content that is worth spending time on. You have my duas and thanks. ❤
Great question and answers. Thanks Paul
we are eaton good tonight with this one 🥁🥁
Very informative and well said. Thank you!
i love the question..really imean being a muslim never thought on this but it is a fantastic thought and solution to what it is in my daily life actually! :) thank you for opening thos closed curtains ;) ps love your bookshelfs on the back..keep us also in your duas 😊
No historical criticism of the Qur'an can be summarized with two words: Perfection and obedience!
Only if you consider the world was created in 6 days and other absurd ideas like djinn.
@@EricAlHarb Only if your heart is blind!
@@EricAlHarb it isn't absurd at all, god is all powerful, if you believe in a creator then you imagine him to be strong and capable of anything
@@EricAlHarb try to understand definition on kun faya kun in islam, my god is beyond your imagination.
no historical criticism of Quran because it cannot be taken seriously from a historical point of view
I was drawn by the title. I don’t know what I expected but I’m not disappointed.
What a phenomenal lecture, sir. A much needed one. Anything by sir Paul is captivating. May Allah bless you.
This kind of content is the best on the channel jzk. I may be wrong but it seems many of these discussions relate to differences between mutazila and ashari world views? If so please bring in SAHM or another qualified man to further elaborate
Mashaallah Paul, thank you for the concise explanation.
Just brilliant.
Jazakallah khairan.
Sir paul would love really if u can recommend us some books to read i feel lost when it comes to those topics
How can you critique perfection???
Why is mary, mother of jesus, called the sister of Aaron in the quran?
Because the Bible is corrupted and the Quran remains unchanged
@@Theresia66 what makes you think that it has to a biological sister,the prophet pbuh answered this,by saying many that people were often named after pious predecessors,so she could had a brother by that name,
@@Lindaeditz8 This question arises when they read from translations instead of mastering Arabic and reading the Al Quran directly.
@@ighfirleeMajority of these people who come to argue dont want to honestly learn about Islam. They want to win discussions, its extremely childish.
Paul is single handedly responsible for my wife questioning why so many book orders keep arriving and when will I get to read them all 😂
Assalamu Alaikum, Brother Paul. I am curious which Jonathan Brown book would you recommend for a new revert to Islam. By the way, my educational background is in history.
Wa alaykumu s-salam I recommend this excellent book: www.amazon.co.uk/Misquoting-Muhammad-Challenge-Interpreting-Prophets/dp/1780747829
@خالد European and Asian. My main research is on the partition of the Ottoman Empire and British Imperialism in Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, and Palestine.
@@BloggingTheologyThank you for your response. 💚
Jonathan brown is Muslim Liberal. Him and he's clowns are tyring to change Islam. I Suggest you to fallow Islamic scholars.
*_Masha'Allah, a good summary._*
May Almighty Allah Bless and Reward you Best in this Life and in the Hereafter.
Salam alaikum. Keep up the good work. May Allah grant you Jannah.
I love the idea that reading works of political/philosophical key contributors such as Hobbes and Locke can give us a better, more wise and informed understanding of the approaches done today such as the HCM
Absolutely
Because the Bible was so corrupt that people noticed and started questioning it. It's so full of contradictions that it needed a whole new literary field to untangle it.
The Qur'an has no such problems.
Question answered.
@@philipcoriolis6614 To the people that asked to see a miracle happen, yes
Why was The Eucharist copied from pagan beliefs?
The moon splitting miracle does not entail any contractions. The problem with the Bible was not the miracles, but the inner contradictions, the factual historical errors, the many changes over the centuries, its patchwork constitution, its vague origins, etc, etc...
@@philipcoriolis6614 No, it doesn't. You can't prove it didn't happen. And we can't scientifically prove it did happen. But that goes for all "miracles". We do have strong anecdotal and circumstantial evidence, the latter being the truth of the prophethood of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), among other things, and the many other miracles of the Qur'an itself.
But the point at hand is not the truth of miracles, but the raison d'être of literary criticism when it comes to the bible, and the lack of such "raison" when it comes to the Qur'an.
@@philipcoriolis6614 Well, you say nobody saw it. We say at least those concerned saw it. And those that saw it were enemies of the prophet who confessed to this after they came to Islam. There was no need for them to lie. Indeed, it would have been much easier for them to deny Islam exactly on this basis. They could have proven Islam wrong and ridicule the prophet for such an outrageous claim. They did at first, but when they saw what they saw, they had no choice but to submit.
Again, the question at hand is not the truth of miracles, it is the need for literary criticism of the Bible versus the absence of such need for the Qur'an.
@@philipcoriolis6614 Not necessarily. If Allah wanted only those people to see it, then only they would see it.
Again, not the point.
Alhamdulillah... Tq Paul
Great & clear thought. Thank you.
Assala mu alaikum 😊
Wa alaykumu s-salam
Fortunately, we now have Robert Spencer's "The Critical Qur'an". Very enlightening!
Baarokallahu fiikum akhi
You tube is full of criticism of the Quran and the Bible. This is current history in the making.
Bangggggerrrrr topic
Thanks!
Many thanks!
Also there are still divisions on the letters of Paul and their authenticity, and some of the arguments for this are based upon writing style, which isn’t the most substantial argument.
another masterpiece to watch :)
Sir, I am eager to watch your analysis and commentary on the debate between Saint Barnabas and Paul.
What "debate" are you referring to? I'm not Muslim but I'm curious too. Thanks
@@johnbrzykcy3076 Acts 15:36-21:16 - It was not a theological debate. Paul and Barnabas had decided to take a small group and revisit some towns they had previously shared Christ with. One of the individuals had proven themselves unreliable in the past and so Paul was against taking him while Barnabas wanted to. The argued about it. Ultimately, the group split up with Paul taking Silas and Barnabas taking the other guy. Luke was writing his account with Paul, so the story continues with Paul and Silas while Barnabas largely exits the story. If @ahmedirfansamad means something else, then it is non-canonical. There is a Gnostic text attribute to Barnabas, but I haven't gotten around to reading it. Perhaps there is something in it.
36 And after some days Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us return and visit the brothers in every city where we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are.” 37 Now Barnabas wanted to take with them John called Mark. 38 But Paul thought best not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia and had not gone with them to the work. 39 And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other. Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus, 40 but Paul chose Silas and departed, having been commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord. 41 And he went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.
You've addressed this beautifully.
A purely rationalist approach to scripture, which is founded on the idea of belief in the unseen - that is, in part, belief in that which cannot be actually witnessed by us, or things that resist objective/literal descriptions - is stupid. A "revelation from God" is only a revelation from God because it, by nature of who revealed it and the circumstances of its revelation, contains something that makes it impossible to be produced by man. Rejecting prophecies, miraculous historical events, and scientific miracles, etc, as totally untrue and then going on to examine it "objectively" is no longer objective; truly, an objective approach would be to study the "text" (and the language in the case of the Qur'an) in its entirety instead. The Qur'an was not revealed in order, and the parts such an approach ignores cannot be left out because it would be unfair to the Book - context of revelation, the way different events led to the revelation of certain verses, and the (style of) language is so important because the Arabs, finding it powerful, would call it "magic". The Qur'an is self-referencing, so can you study such verses fairly? It seems more problematic, more biased (and definitely a very Western approach), the more I think about it. Also, how do you apply this (ha!) "objectivity" (that is limited to the physical/tangible) when you try to interpret verses on the soul or the immaterial world?
There is so much that can be said about it - like Western scholars dismissing Ahadith entirely. In fact, a study of the Qur'an would never be complete if ahadith were not considered because they are such a significant part of the history of the Qur'an - the way it was explained, understood, applied, revealed, all of it (the (sound of) buzzing of bees when it was being revealed, and when the thigh of the Prophet, Allah's peace and blessings be upon him, fell upon Zayd Ibn Thabit's thigh, may Allah be pleased with him, and he thought it would break as it grew in heaviness, etc). A Muhaddith like Sheikh Awwama, may Allah bless him, would refute such scholars easily - but no doubt they've got better things to do.
Thank you for making this video because such criticism of "elite" scholarship on Islam, the Qur'an, etc, is necessary (and rare). May Allah forgive you, increase you in beneficial knowledge, and raise you among the scholars and the heirs of the prophets, His peace be upon all of them.
Historical criticism of the Qur'an has been a significant field of study, and several well-known critiques have emerged over the years. Here are some of the most prominent ones:
John Wansbrough: In his works "Quranic Studies" and "The Sectarian Milieu," Wansbrough argued that the Qur'an emerged over a long period of time and reflected the sectarian conflicts within early Islam. He suggested that the Qur'an was not fully compiled until the 8th or 9th century, much later than traditionally believed.
Patricia Crone and Michael Cook: In their book "Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World," Crone and Cook challenged traditional Islamic narratives, arguing that early Islamic history, including the origins of the Qur'an, was largely constructed retrospectively. They suggested that the Qur'an might have been influenced by Jewish and Christian texts.
Christoph Luxenberg: In "The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran," Luxenberg posited that many unclear or ambiguous passages in the Qur'an could be better understood if read as translations from a Syriac Christian text. His work has been controversial and widely debated.
Fred Donner: In "Narratives of Islamic Origins," Donner explored the context in which the Qur'an was written, suggesting that early Islam was more a monotheistic reform movement within the broader Abrahamic tradition than a distinct new religion from the outset.
Gerd R. Puin: Puin analyzed ancient Qur'anic manuscripts, including the Sana'a palimpsest, one of the oldest Qur'anic manuscripts discovered in Yemen. His findings suggested variations in the early text, leading to questions about the Qur'an's compilation and transmission.
Angelika Neuwirth: Neuwirth's work has focused on the Qur'an in its historical context, emphasizing its connection to late antiquity and suggesting that it was part of a broader religious and cultural milieu rather than a completely unique revelation.
Toby Lester: In "What Is the Koran?" an article published in The Atlantic, Lester discussed the implications of the Sana'a manuscripts, exploring how textual variations could affect the understanding of the Qur'an's history and compilation.
These critiques have sparked significant debate within academic and religious circles, leading to a deeper exploration of the Qur'an's historical context and its development over time.
I think some folks commenting don’t actually understand what was said about HCM in this video. To this video’s treatment of HCM, it’s “methods,” not one single method. At least not anymore. While the philosophers the scholar you’ve cited are seen generally as historical precursors to various facets of HCM, they’re not themselves the direct inspiration of many scholars using HCMs. Some don’t even have the political realist assumptions of Hobbes and Spinoza at all. Some would even repudiate a connection, or distinguish their theoretical background completely, denying any deist or even atheist background assumptions.
Perhaps the HCM scholars are yet to be capable of studying the Qur’an using a kind of HCM. But I doubt HCMs will get good representation here. Just damn all historiography. Not all HCMs inherently doubt miracles or resurrection or attribute the rise of monotheistic religions to cognitive dissonance theory. This is only a recent consensus when the paradigm shift of Biblical scholars went from slightly evangelical to more secular and even classicist and sometimes cognitive-linguistic or even philosophical. But this was never quite the starting point for HCMs in general, except historically, as you mentioned Spinoza.
It is not inherently toxic, and not always Orientalist, for example, Dr. Dan McClellan in his video content combatting Biblical misinformation frequently refers to cultural regions where the Abrahamic texts originate as West Asia instead of “Middle East.” This is not indicative of biased presumptions by HCM Biblical scholars. These are not all “skeptics.” It merely denies that there is any pre-justificatory reason to believe that any text has an Archimedean point of divine revelation, but rather that this has to be proven by scholarly work divesting energy into historiography and history not just theology.
Not all are anti-theological (and are even opposite like Dale Allison or M. David Litwa or James McGrath, among many others). Some merely seek to find a smarter scholarly means to appreciate their religion. While I doubt recent HCM applications to the study of the Qur’an has been fruitful, I don’t think HCM has been given a fairer understanding in your critique or in the texts you cite positively. The scholar, credible as he is, you chose to represent HCM would have opponents in other HCM or post-HCM schools, judging by where he gets his main philosophical presumptions, as some scholars don’t even do that or even outright reject direct philosophical influence from philosophical precursors of HCM in their work. Methods just evolve that way. And there is a pluralism of methods between scholars due to ongoing debates.
I can acknowledge that current HCMs have limitations, namely their being inherently either empirical or hermeneutical or both, in insufficient measure sometimes, and without fitting well the subject matter they are studying (e.g., the Qur’an), but that does not make it right to say that HCMs guarantee that one such scholar in this mould espouses that no miracles exist at all, or that they would be led to that position because of adherence to professional standards of historical scholarship. That’s not always the case, and was not the case, until scholarly community shifted from being of a mostly broadly Protestant or evangelical mindset to a secular one. I also acknowledge that a broadly politically realist and humanist historiography for the Qur’an can be theorized first within or with consideration for the mature scholarly traditions of the religious community.
I’ve been watching this channel for a long time. Only this time, this video has rubbed me the wrong way a bit. Your broader point, however, is correct. If an HCM for studying the Qur’an is to be developed, it ought to develop with consideration for the long traditions of Hadith studies and Islamic studies in general. Not solely retaining the methods as they were evolved and originated from the Biblical criticism of Spinoza and the Protestant Reformation.
Anyway, I only say this as a student of area studies (history and sociology, mainly). I am a bit concerned that one scholar using HCM has the whole method marred because he’s the only example you’ve given.
You asked a great question! But you should have looked at the existing historical critical scholarship on the Quran. It may not be as extensive as in Christianity but I think its more dynamic
I think there has always been healthy discussion about the meaning in the ayat of the Qur'an. Some verses are more comprehensible now than in the past, and scholars of the past made the point, that if they are unable to understand and ayat, then it is incumbant on them to remain silent (ie their opinion doesn't matter, unless based in knowledge).
With respect to textual criticism regarding the authenticity of the text, that seem to mainly be a focus of orientalists and Christian scholars (or non scholars). Really, as Gai Eaton mentioned.
Assalamu alaikum , very insightful brother Paul ! As always .
Wa alaykumu s-salam
@@BloggingTheology Are you lost? I challenge you to answer me.
Why did Uthman burn complete copies and fragments of Quran while the Quran was uncorrupted and same among Muslims'?
Where's the Quran standardized by Uthman?
Why do we have different Qir'aats of Quran today after Uthman standardized the Quran in the Quraish dialect?
*Why *Surah 37: 12* of Hafs is different in other Qir'aats?*
Where can we get the Qir'aat revealed to Muhammad himself?
*In Surah 14: 4, allah said he always sent his prophet with the language of their people so they would clearly understand....*
If JESUS spoke Aramaic, how you believe he's sent by allah to Hebrews?
How you are Muslims if you are not Arabs?
Christian: You should have a separation of church and state just like we did.🤡
Christian: You should reform your religion just like we did.🤡
Christian: All the criticisms of our book apply lock, stock and barrel to yours too.🤡
Muslim: Here. These medicines helped a lot of people. Therefore, you should have them too.
Christian:🏃♂
well said 👍
As always, great work! You are one of the best comparative religion channels on the internet, keep up the good work and may Allah preserve you and grant you the best reward for your efforts!
cred ca le-ai picat in plasa. asta e canal propagandistic toata ziua. invoca respingerea miracolelor ca sa evite discutia despre critica Quran-ului dpv istoric.
@@stefang.9763Miracle rejection ≠ Disproving religion. This is based upon faith and confidence in faith.
Big question 😎🍿
The Messenger of God, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, advised us in the “wars” and said: “Do not cut down a tree.. and do not kill a woman, a boy, a newborn, an old man, or a sick person.. do not mutilate corpses.. do not kill extravagantly.. do not destroy a temple, and do not vandalize a building.” Amer.. Even camels and cows are not slaughtered except for eating.” He also recommended us to do good to the captive, to honor him and feed him.. and to fulfill the covenant.. and finally, not to force anyone to convert to Islam.. After him came the reign of our master Umar ibn al-Khattab al-Faruq, who distinguished between the truth and the truth. And falsehood, may God be pleased with him.. (Their churches shall not be inhabited, nor demolished, nor be diminished from them, nor from their good, nor from their cross, nor from anything of their wealth, and they shall not be forced against their religion, and none of them shall be harmed).. He has given security to the people of Jerusalem and granted them their religious freedom and safety for their churches
I cannot reconcile what people say about Gai Eaton’s perennialist ‘aqeedah’ and his staunch sunnism and affirmation of Islam being the only true path to Allah in these writings. 🤷♂️
it is a problem, I agree
This is the first time I hear of this. I will take it as being false or a misunderstanding or something from his younger years. I cannot believe that he died on nothing but a sunni aqeeda.
The answer is given in the Quran (Sultan Bin Translation):
Quran Chp 6 Verse 91: And they [Jews] did not show Allah His due respect when they said [in defence of Torah corruption that], "Allah did not reveal to any human being anything [of light and guidance to be preserved]." Say, "Who revealed the Scripture that Moses brought as light and guidance to the people? You [Jews] were used to break it into pages, disclosing somewhat and suppressing much [that ends up you in worshiping uzair, angels etc]. And you have been taught [through this Quran] that neither you nor your forefathers knew before." Say [O Prophet], "Allah [reveals with full of (things) light, guidance]." Then leave them in their discourse, amusing themselves.
Quran Chp 6 Verse 92: And this is a Book We have revealed consecrating itself, evidencing itself everything out here in between its two hands [as blessed and firm, respectively] so that you may warn the Mother of Cities [Mecca, the Mother of all civilizations in the globe] and those [other civilizations that span] around it [with fervor and certainty]. Those who believe in the Hereafter [as per Quran] believe in it [Mecca to be the centre of Pangaea], and they are maintaining their prayers [spiritual connections with its first inhabitants: Eve and Adam].
Visiting London. Inshallah will go see and pray at tge Cambridge mosque!
Because Christianity has been romanized! Gentiles paganism from the Roman era till this day.🎉
Thanks for your Information, May Allah, Allaha, God Almighty always bless you brother. Ameen🤲🏼🤲🏼
Ameen
I am wondering if you have had a chance to read the book by Syed Muhammad Naquib al- Attas titled Islam and Secularism?
It's a must read if one wants to understand ....among others....the question of critising the Quran....a long standing question of secular circles. Hope you get to read it.
Kindly interview Angelika Neuwirth of Corpus Coranicum project.
What about Dr. Stephen J. Shoemaker's latest book on the Qur'ān?
Can you please interview Dr Ataullah Bogdan Kopanski
Bible is a canon of 66 books (excluding 18 books of Apocrypha) and has time span of 1400 years (1300 BC - 100 AD) and was written in Hebrew and Greek. Quran is one single book and has a time-span of only 23 years (610 - 632 AD) and was written in classical Arabic. Quran will never lend itself to these modern critical methods though.
So many mistakes in Bible, But you still blindly belief in it ...
And Even you don't know a Historical Book can't be better than the Pure Words of God ... God Almighty can create anything with any lines with any time ... But whatever God Almighty creates has a purpose...
What exactly is your argument? 😅
@@Kuuzie1 He is saying 2+2=3 😜😜😜
@Muhammad Fraz Aslam exactly 2+2=3! I can't imagine how Muslims living can continue to resist Western scholarship. Well, the Christians failed to prevent this approach to the bible. Already, Muslims youth are struggling to retain their faith in these lands 😀.
The claim at 5:00 that the "Hebrew and Christian scriptures came to acquire belatedly the status of scripture" is simply false according to historical criticism. The academics you quote are out-of-date with the latest research.
I think records nearer to the time of Christ is much more accurate rather than research that has been done "latest"
Hi Mr. Green ...... i love to hear your shada one day my friend .... may Allah guides you
"Refusal to believe until proof is given is a rational position; denial of all outside of our own limited experience is absurd."
@@khmerghost hence why the Quran is inaccurate about Jesus.
@@enlightenedvagabond3556 Wait wuut, where?
Mun'im Sirry and Abad Badaruzzaman two great Muslim professors from Indonesia are among the ones whose work related to this. There was even done course in Indonesian by this amazing Madurese Muslim Prof Munim Sirry. Yeees, hail Madurese😅!! This theme is not unfamiliar among some Muslims in Indonesia though not without attacks. But as Sheikh Ali Hydar Thomas McElwain if one wants to study the best diverse topics of Islam, One must find it in the Indonesians studies.
Salam from Indonesia
Paul, indeed another overwhelming truth of it being the Word of God when God Himself says in the Quran this book will be protected (unlike the earlier scriptures). Quran 85:21-22.
Gai Eaton was posted in Madras India during the II world war! A triavia for us Indians !
Quran Surah al Nasr (110):
"(O Prophet,) When there comes Allah’s help and the Victory,
and you see people entering Allah’s (approved) religion in multitudes,
then glorify the praises of your Lord and seek His forgiveness, for certainly He is ever Accepting of Repentance."
We do not know who will be agents of justice who will keep the purity of this deen alive. If you told someone in Arabia that a White English man would come one day and be the sole cause behind the conversion of thousands upon thousands of non-Muslims, it would be difficult to believe you.
In this is a lesson to never judge, for we truly cannot ever grasp the whole picture and we tend to be short-sighted humans.
الحمد لله
Quran was intact Quran is intact and In Sha Allah Quran will remain intact till the last day. Allah O Akbar
Only Allah is perfect and the Quran itself says “today I have perfected your way of life.” (Dean).
Perfect Alhamdulillah❤
if u can add french translate in ur vidéos it would be perfect cuz you have many muslims french that follow you
*Like "Getting it Right, First Time"*
*Can we* just *Create without*
*Revision, (editing) , "Updates"*
Why not?
[Allah Most Wise] challenges us to try...
And when *We know We were unable to* , We would be Convinced of the Claim of [The Claimant]
This is all well and good about secular assumptions but the discussion doesn't really address whether the Qur'an and hadith can be looked at and established as accurate and consistent. Too many assumptions that it's just inspired. It's not simply about being 'western ' or 'secular' it's about simply enquiring if the claims are actually reliable, consistent and coherent.
Sir,nobody wants to lose his head.
May the reward for Gai Eaton quadruplicate!
❤ MashaAllah ❤
Did these books translate into Arabic ?
25:00 this actually what NonMuslim believe, since In the beginning they didn't believe the Unseen so what happen is that "Rules" about Historical criticism in this book already flawed to how we Read the Quran so there is no point this person writing the book in the first place. IDK what he doing here. Since what he said is "my rules is my glasses and yours is not", there is no point we take this book seriously. xd
One more thing, these type of "Critiques" this book suggest, it's already got Critiqued multiple times in Quran (I didn't remember the Verse but it's there).
27:00 I'm with you here. Salam
May peace be upon us all. I just wanted point out that a hadith can only be true if it parallels the Qur'an.
There is not even criticism of the hadith or the clergy that made hadith "sahih".
Have enjoyed the content and your objective approach for this channel. Although unrelated, I believe many followers of yours would like to know something about your family, wife and children. Can you share with us?
that's not anyone's business. just gossip fodder which is haram. mind your own business, brother. it is better for you
Alhmdulilah for is Islam 🤲🏾😊
Salam paul, i would appreciate if you could talk about the differences between protestantism and catholicism. I'v been curious for a long time. Thank you
Salam good idea
Agree
Perhaps may i also add how come there are a number or thousands of churches/denominations of Christianity, all believing in Jesus as God, part of trinity, but only one has the salvation. Its baffling
HCM sounds vey circular in terms of its argumentation, especially when examining books that claim to be divine.
In the beginning
*Arrogance combined*
*With Reasoning*
Got Satan a ticket to
Hell, ( "I am better" )
Nowadays
"Man is competing" in *Reasoning* ,
*Arrogantly* , tickets all sold out
When I consider that the prophet Muhammad could not read nor write...and I add to it that he was the most impeccably mannered human being ...I cannot help. thinking that he may not have understood all that he was asked to reveal....
Secondly despite his reputation for truth ,justice and honesty,he never hesitated to attach himself to the messege he revealed....
Any human being would indeed find him 31:16 self in conflict between his reputation and his messege....and he never was...
To me that is a testament to his character....
Over and over again ,he revealed things to humanity that no human of his age or before knew....
Or tonly the wrong doers who chose to hide God's previous revelation...or chose to change it....
Muhamad pbuh layed bare the truth and lies that previous religions had tried to cover up.
Judaism fell because of scribes and pharisees,while Christianity fell into merging snippets of Judaism with Paganistic Roman Catholic teaching ...
Neither of which has recovered from these dilemmas to this day...
While Islam has always remained in the ascendancy,,despite the 1258 ransacking of Baghdad ,the fall of The Ottoman Empire and centuries of attempts to maligne it's Quran and it's prophet...of history is a good teacher then I'd venture to say ,that Islam is set to spread all across the Americas in the next century and beyond...
.
And consumating his marriage with a 9 y.o girl. Yes, stand up fellow.
@@davcan18 Like Mary and Joseph or Isaac and Rebekah. Yes, stand up fellow.
@@davcan18 Aisha was engaged to another man before him and broke off her engagement. That's not a girl. She lived 50 years after him, lead armies, taught men and women much older than her, never remarried again and chose to spend the rest of her life in propagating her religion. She never said anything bad about her beloved husband or their union. If she was happy with her marriage and so were her parents, family, relatives and not a single person objected in their entire society friends, foes and enemies alike. Who are the new haters pretending to care about her now all of sudden after 1400 years? While having same marriages in their own books and traditions but never see them trash talking those marriages like that of the Prophet of Islam. Double standards and hypocrisy.
@@aminaaden2921 Amd your point is? No idea what you're talking about.
@@aminaaden2921 So you are denying he married a 6 y.o and had sex with her when she was 9?
The funny thing with all this book which is try to "Disprove" Islam is, they try to prove themselves as a "NonBelivers" and i didn't get their point sometimes, it's kinda like hiding the truth in a rediculous way and with many more jargon to make for other people take their idea of "Why i don't belive in this".
and it's stupid IMO, and if this people truly reading the Quran their "What if method" didn't works anyway. ykwim
32:00 And I agree with your closing words there. Salam
It's interesting how critical thought has evolved within the Western and Muslim worlds. Where Muslim thought encompasses both seen and unseen and are open to the divine, western thought has taken a 180 degree approach and rejected anything that can not be made tangible. I do believe that western thought was allowed to be lead astray and not given the ability to see the greater picture by God, due to their arrogance and their willingness to follow men and not God. I often see it in their arguments, and as you have stated, in their pre-suppositions that filter anything that comes to them.
I'm not Muslim nor do I live in the Muslim worlds. I live in Florida in the United States.
And I do find your observations about the way "critical thought has evolved" very interesting. I myself do not reject the unseen but I accept the reality of the Creator God.
Respectfully...
interestingly, they came out with their own filter to blind them from the truth(of course in reality, it is Allah ta'ala that blinds them. He guides whom He wills). They did not even get a chance to think about it.
@Blogging Theology , Paul, could you share with use why you did not apply this Historical Critical Method whej u read the Quran, before you reverted?
Please do a series of talks with Nouman Ali Khan on the stories of the Prophets in the Quran vs. the Bible. How the Arabic words are so accurate to describe the Prophets vs the corrupt versions in the old testament.
YASIR QADHI and his post modernist mates should watch this. A master class in refuting those shubuhaats which these people preach in a subtle, non-overt manner.
I think Paul Williams should bring him to his channel to answer questions on higher criticism and textual criticism application in Quranic/Hadith studies.
Simply said, this 'Historical Critical Method' is made made, and subjected to errors, so it should be subjected to be methologically criticised as a limited method to be applied generally for all books. 🙄
Or simply just suggest to these academics to produce a verse similar as the Quran... as what Allah ta'ala has openedly challenged to disbelievers....
Perfection and obedience may be what it is, but I have other ideas. Christianity is obviously the most followed religion, so that is part of the reason no doubt. It also makes bigger claims than most, if not all religions(admittedly I haven’t read much of it ever). Plus, its content takes place over a much longer amount of time than the Quran does. Much more to dissect.
I have seen in many different versions of the Quran English on one side and Arabic on the other in the Hebrew Bible English on one side and Hebrew on the other side i have never seen in different Versions of the New Testament English on one side and Aramaic the language that Jesus spoke on the other side of the New Testament
Can you please clarify the contradiction how the Quran was revealed to mohammad: in one blessed night Sura 44:3 or revealed in parts in 23 years as in Sura 17:106 w thx
Hehe.. now i understand how atheist scratches there heads.. 😂😂😂
I'd also appreciate any information about the revelation of the Quran to Muhammad. I'm a Christian believer. I'm somewhat open minded to learn more about Islam because it's good to understand the worldviews and beliefs of people.
Peace of God to you...
@@johnbrzykcy3076 good for you..
@@johnbrzykcy3076 another contradiction is in Sura 20:85 you see that was a Samiri who has led the people of Moses to astray , but at Moses times wasn’t created yet the Samaria area ( Israel was divided in two areas Samaria and Judea at 880 BC ) , so Quran mentioned a Samiri ( Samaria habitant) at Moses time where Samaria not created yet
Sura 20:85
Allah responded, “We have indeed tested your people in your absence, and the Sâmiri1 has led them astray.”
The Qur’an was send down to the first heaven in one night. Not to in one night to Muhammad pbuh. The Qur’an doesn’t say what your limited understanding think it says. This is basic knowledge which you lack.
Do your research first before you call something a contradiction which makes you sound like a fool.
Quran preservesion was through memorizing....this tradition preserve untill today with million people memorizing it
Another very interesting presentation.
There was no historical Criticism of the Bible for 1600 years. There will be more and more historical
criticism of the Quran whether anyone likes it or not.
The Bible has been regarded as the inerrant word of God. But reasonable people will know that this can be regarded as a human belief. The same is true of the Quran. The belief that it is an inerrant may be true, but that is not going to stop people looking at it in its historical context.
And that will shed some light..
However in Christian doctrine, the gift of interpretation is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit which is ordered to the edification of the hearer or reader. After all, all books are dead until they are interpreted by living souls to living souls in the present, are they not?
*i.T.* is moving so _fast_
Everyone *is*
_Losing Track_ of *Time*
" Click "
*How long does " i.T. " take*
[These days] seem " Lighter "
[Days passing] in " seconds "
*To start a fire* 🔥 *these "days"*
The first Quran was destroyed or scattered, I feel like it is difficult to criticise the Bible for not having a canonised NT, when the first NT manuscript came at the turn of the 3rd Century, which was a century after all the NT books have been written. Especially considering the early Church’s persecution.
The first Qur'an was memorised by literally thousands of companions of the prophet. It was primarily an oral recitation. Today millions know it by heart. It has been faithfully preserved to this day.
@@BloggingTheology Memorization of Quran worked so fine that they had first to burn all other parts that did not conform the politically agreed Quran :). For the same reason they also needed write it down in the end (huh, huh) after going to several phases of " standardization".
Opposite to the Islamic state that had all the power and forced a certain version of Quran and burned the rest(you will never have the "original"), Christianity developed in a hostile environment under persecution in the first approx. 300 years. But, as always, in our weakness the power of our God is manifested. The Bible is true miracle of preservation, done by God, not forced by men! Not imposed by the power of a regime, like in Islam.
@@stefang.9763 Compared to all other scriptures, the Qur’an is the best preserved in both the hearts of Muslims and the written copies of the codex - a manifestation of Allah’s promise to protect Divine revelation from distortion: yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/how-the-quran-was-preserved-during-the-prophets-time-mechanisms-of-oral-and-written-transmission
@@BloggingTheology So, Allah can only preserve some of his revelation, but not all his "divine" revelation ? :) And, the new formula is not "perfect preservation" anymore, but the just "best preserved" ? :)
Although presenting itself as a clear and comprehensive guidance, the Quran is almost always in need of additional sources and later interpretations for clarification. Among others also in great dependency of the "corrupted" Bible. By itself alone it hardly ever states something explicitly or clearly. That's why you are not Quran-only Muslims. Quran sloppiness is perfect for building whatever narrative around it. Be it fundamentalist or moderate muslim. Does not seem that, this claim of "best preservation" is good for anything.
@@stefang.9763Quran is preserved by God himself because it is the last revelation,who do you think God is ,is He responsible for the corruption of the scriptures that came before,no human are
Paul, if the Bible from God then Why is it copyrighted? 🤔
Sir,there is a very simple explanation for this other than semantics.
Blasphemy and consequent beheading is the simple reason.
3:40
7:07
how can you see someone like this following a particular religion or group and still not look into it and see why someone as educated as this is supporting it. but if its ur celebrity,you follow them like chicken following there mothers
😂
Islam is my treasure n quran is the guidance, the revelation given from God to the imam of the prophets.
let it be criticism from christian or Pope himself to give ask in publicly
The Muslim authors quoted just present the received narrative of the Quran's origins and then insist that therefore there is no need for historical criticism of the Quran, when the critical assessment of such narratives is precisely what historical criticism is useful for.
But for one thing, even classical Islamic scholars, like al-Suyuti, engaged in textual criticism of the Quran, and of the consonantal text itself, not merely the different recitations.
Just stick your Bible, your hypocrisy is not gonna help your afterlife, whatsoever.
The geneaology and archeology of the revelation has been done and it confirms what the Qu'ran states about itself. An inquiry about the content has been done and it will never be over but one sure thing is that the miraculous, otherwordly nature of the book has been proven countless times.
What you are looking for here is confirmation of what your heart desires: for the Quran to be from other than God. People like yourself are hostile to Islam and/or God and postulate the Quran's non miraculous nature and then work hard to try to prove and you make up things based on conjecture and flawed premises. You can make up all kind of silly ideas and notions and believe them. It will lead you nowhere good.
@@karimb972
These "proofs" of the Quran are nothing more than Muslims 'looking for confirmation of what their hearts desire.'
But the popular memes about the Quran being "preserved letter for letter, word for word," and the recitations going back to Muhammad via "mutawatir chains of transmission" have been thoroughly debunked.
@@karimb972 I don't consider myself as "hostile" to Islam or Muslims but I honestly do not see the Quran as inspired by God Himself. I could be wrong. I'm just a simple Christian believer.
Respectfully..