Here’s an analogy to understand the Sunni Shia split: Muhammad was the sole proprietor of a startup called Islam. After he died, the heirs of the company disagreed on business structure. One side wanted to corporatize the company with an elected CEO (the Sunni), the other side wanted to remain a sole proprietorship with hereditary ownership (the Shia). This disagreement resulted in the company splitting into two different brands.

@christiano9693

10 күн бұрын

According to Shias Abu Bakar did a coup using force. When Mohamed died there is no more one version of the story, there is two versions, the shia and sunni so is not really possible know what version is the real one.

@hoonterofhoonters6588

10 күн бұрын

Finally, my American brain understands sand politics.

@Itskinda_funny

10 күн бұрын

@@hoonterofhoonters6588 😂💀💀💀💀💀

@geesixnine

10 күн бұрын

Right Twix vs. Left Twix lol jk

Rudyard Lynch evangelical fan club member here. ;). Every single one of these history 102 videos is as good or better than college level history courses.

@History102-qg5oj

10 күн бұрын

Awww... thanks b3stie

@azlyri

10 күн бұрын

@@History102-qg5oj ✨✨💅💅

@loganstrait7503

10 күн бұрын

University graduate here and I would say this is a bad exaggeration but the videos are great.

@user-zd3mv5fl2r

10 күн бұрын

I bet your fun at parties

@NixonThr336ix

10 күн бұрын

@@History102-qg5oj all Muslims are Sunni the same way almost all Christian denominations practice baptism, Shias call Sunni’s “non Shia” instead subtle digs they take at each other

This channel has taught me more than my entire high school existence, and has inspired me to make my own history channel

As a spaniard I'm glad that the multicultural myth of Al-Andalus is finally falling down. Here is use by the postmodern left to diminish out Cristian roots. Great video!

@selfprojects1953

10 күн бұрын

Deus vult

@km0262

10 күн бұрын

Depends on what you mean by multicultural. In Al Andalus many different religions and cultures flourished e.g Judaism.

@Itskinda_funny

10 күн бұрын

1st Century: Roman Paganism 2nd Century: Roman Paganism 3rd Century: Roman Paganism 4th Century: Roman Paganism (early) / Christianity (late) 5th Century: Christianity 6th Century: Christianity 7th Century: Christianity 8th Century: Islam (after 711 AD) 9th Century: Islam 10th Century: Islam 11th Century: Islam 12th Century: Islam (early) / Christianity (late) 13th Century: Christianity 14th Century: Christianity 15th Century: Christianity 16th Century: Christianity 17th Century: Christianity 18th Century: Christianity 19th Century: Christianity 20th Century: Christianity 21st Century: Christianity You get the point? Or you stoopid? In 711 AD, the Umayyad Caliphate launched an invasion of the Iberian Peninsula, leading to the significant event known as the Muslim conquest of Spain. This marked the beginning of Islamic rule in large parts of the Iberian Peninsula. Here are the key points:Battle of Guadalete: The Umayyad forces, led by Tariq ibn Ziyad, defeated the Visigothic King Roderic at the Battle of Guadalete.Establishment of Al-Andalus: Following their victory, the Umayyads rapidly expanded their control over much of the peninsula, establishing the region known as Al-Century? In the 12th century, the Christian reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula, known as the Reconquista, was gaining significant momentum. Here are the key points regarding Christians during this period: Reconquista Progress: Christian kingdoms such as Castile, Aragon, and Portugal made substantial advances against the Muslim-controlled territories of Al-Andalus. Significant victories included the capture of major cities like Toledo (1085), Zaragoza (1118), and Lisbon (1147).

@jasonpalacios1363

10 күн бұрын

But you Spanish still deny that Magellan was killed by Lapu-Lapu in The Philippines, your spreading of the Inquisition to Latin America and The Philippines as well as using Natives as slaves to get the silver in Potosi in Bolivia.

@apollontheintp3257

10 күн бұрын

​@@Itskinda_funny This is who ruled but not the population majorities. It's also not great to insult people.

I think this channel is as good as the main one

This video is not bad, but two things are inexcusable. 1st, describing early Islam as capitalist is anachronistic, there are many free market and ecomonic centred elements in Islam, but Islam does not view any kind of interest as beneficial and must be regulated. 2nd, the narrative of Al-Ghazali supposedly causing the downfall of Islamic science is neither true to the history of science nor to Al-Ghazali's own thought, and no reputable scholar of Al-Ghazali would say this. If there is, I would like to see a source That literalist understanding you attributed to him was actually opposed to him, Al-Ghazali was a mutakallim(speculative theologian), an Asha'ri who synthesized the literalist and rationalist theologies. And still, both the literalist and Ash'ari schools of theology remain as just that, schools of theology and was not concerned with science. Al-Ghazali himself said that mathematic was the "blessed science" or something to that manner

@ezzy2254

10 күн бұрын

The mu'tazila school are also often described as free thinking empiricists, but this is inaccurate. The Mu'tazila are a purely theological school, there were many mu'tazila who were only interested in theology and most muslim scientists at the time were not mu'tazili. Ibn Al-Haytham himself, who formulated the scientific method, was of the Ash'ari school of theology, the same as Al-Ghazali. To some extent, it is true that rationalism in all aspects came into society. But it is inaccurate to attribute scientific positions to schools of theology. The literalist Ibn Hazm for example was a literalist only in religion and justified his literalism through rationality. He was also a scientist, doctor and avid reader of the Greeks.

@ezzy2254

10 күн бұрын

What's even more inexcusable is that Al-Ghazali regarded learning medicine, mathematics and other worldly knowledge to be a communal obligation. That in a community, there has to be people who learn these things and not just religious knowledge. That whole narrative of Al-Ghazali ruining science in Islam is a Neil Degrasse Tyson tier understanding and I, as a person who has read Al-Ghazali for years, do not know where does it come from

@khaledali-di9mt

9 күн бұрын

Yes, you are absolutely correct, this is the main mistake in this video, AlGhazali corrected the wrong philosophers ideas, but He was never against science, and saying that he is responsible for the fall of Muslim civilization is a significant and severe mistake that has nothing to do with truth and logic !

@Houthiandtheblowfish

8 күн бұрын

al ghazali gave birth to many scientists from avi cina to al razi al khwarizimi to many others these claims are just old historians with an agenda

Fun fact, Al Rashid gifted an Elephant to Charlemagne, which was one of the most reported events of its reign since it impressed the European soo much. They where in really good terms, exchanging gifts all the time

The centuries 500-1000 are unironically the most important and best centuries in history and we learn absolutely nothing about them in American high school. American high school literally begins with the black death (basically the death-bell of the middle ages) and portrays that as representing the entire middle ages which is just rediculous. But as you pointed out last week, it tracks because to actually talk about the middle ages in a serious way would run counter to the ideological programming of protestants and atheists ((note also that the 'new-atheists' are fundamentally a product of protestant secularism))

@selfprojects1953

10 күн бұрын

💯

@selfprojects1953

10 күн бұрын

💯. Also, 1500 is peak western civilization and we’ve been fortunate enough to coast off of the work done at that time until the present. The coast is running out though.

@loganstrait7503

10 күн бұрын

@@selfprojects1953 I mean WW2 was definitely a finest hour for the Allies, also a lot of spectacular artistic and literary achievements in the 19th and early 20th

@jon9428

10 күн бұрын

How would talking seriously about the middle ages run counter to protestant and atheist ideology? I'm genuinely curious.

@loganstrait7503

10 күн бұрын

@@jon9428 Because their narrative goes that the catholic church was always yknow corrupt and persecuted everyone and censored science and philosophy.

Bruv, the channel and the topics are so good. The only thing holding you guys back is that it’s on Zoom and the sound quality. Please take this criticism seriously

@diponic3344

10 күн бұрын

youtube.com/@history102-qg5oj?si=8PAulB7Oh8ALbWV-

@diponic3344

10 күн бұрын

youtube.com/@history102-qg5oj?si=lCuFUw9GWFQoOxNo

@Remember_Bubblebutt

10 күн бұрын

Yeah, there has to be a better way for this format. Doesn't discord have a facecam? I think if it was using that it would be much better.

@divinegon4671

9 күн бұрын

Fair!

51:13 “Just make a choice man!” Is the funniest thing I’ve heard from this podcast.

consider choosing Mesoamerican civilization next so we can finally get Rudyard to finish his researching!!!

Not bad honestly. I'm a Muslim. Keep it up.

@ashirmalik2310

7 күн бұрын

Same bro

A suggestion for the next episode: Byzantine Empire.

@TheeFitnessEnthusiast

7 күн бұрын

If they did, that would need to be multiple episodes.

I would make the argument that both the geography and religion of Europe and Middle East aren't exactly the same as they were 1000 years ago. The Middle East has become a lot more dry and arid since back then. And as you mentioned, the early Muslim empires were largely run by Syrian Christians and remained majority Christian. Now there are hardly any Christians left in the Middle East.

@jj-yi1ne

10 күн бұрын

stop lying. its majority christian

Here early to support my boy

"What I remember about the rise of the Empire is... is how quiet it was. During the waning hours of the Clone Wars, the 501st Legion was discreetly transferred back to Coruscant. It was a silent trip. We all knew what was about to happen, what we were about to do. Did we have any doubts? Any private, traitorous thoughts? Perhaps, but no one said a word. Not on the flight to Coruscant, not when Order 66 came down, and not when we marched into the Jedi Temple. Not a word." - Operation: Knightfall "Knightfall" - Star Wars Battlefront II (2005)

@FallingPicturesProductions

10 күн бұрын

Next person I see that posts this fucking quote, I'm linking them MLP porn.

@notsocrates9529

10 күн бұрын

[groans in disgust]

Great work. Can you list the titles of the recommended books at the end? Zoom (or whatever you're using) blurs images that aren't in the focus zone, so it's hard to makeout the titles. In the future, you coukd also say the titles and authors, like you did with the Tom Holland book.

The Quran wasn't revealed all at once btw, it was revealed over a 23 year period

7:50 totally thought you were about to say "there's a lot of Zoroastrianism in Game of Thrones"

@charliedontsurf334

10 күн бұрын

It's in the Bible, specifically the book of Esther. I tell people in Church to watch Games of Thrones. They'll understand the Bible better.

This episode went far more into vague generalisations than other past episodes, which were very good in my opinion. There are a few glaring misleading points, as to my understanding. Firstly, while the Church was split between different factions, I don’t know why he’s calling it “corrupt”, that part came a few centuries later. By this point the Church was still expanding and had an overall positive and prominent influence. Also, honestly he didn’t go into much detail as to why the Sassanid and part of the Byzantines fell, other than the sectarian divisions. The huge event that he never even mentioned was the Byzantine-Sasanian War of 602-628, which was essentially the World Wars of that era and devastated society to such a level that it was east for the Muslims to invade and conquer to begin with. Also, while the Muslims were relatively good rulers in their old Roman territories, there are documented atrocities that they committed in the Persian empire, such as the genocide of large parts of the Khwarezmian people. With the Sassanid Empire, there were significant internal divisions (it was a feudal confederacy) as a result of the previous war which compelled the Parthian nobility, which controlled large parts of the country, to not come to the aid of the royal authority.

26:00 the Reconquista of Spain mentioned in a previous video is just as, if not more amazing.

Could you post the recommended books and authors in the description? I can barely see the titles half of the time.

I like these despite how awkward the interactions with the co-host( or whatever ya call it)are. Good topics selected.

Hi Rudyard, sent you a message on your pod website!

15:08 I'm beginning to understand why Judaism feels more "same" to me, as someone raised southern Baptist, than Catholicism: definite moral code, harsh God, taboos (drinking alcohol) , etc... Southern Baptists, at least from North Alabama and Southern Middle Tennessee where I grew up, can be somewhat "judaising," and its an open secret that the Jews figure prominently in Southern Baptist Eschatology. Basically, they're still God's chosen people to a southern baptist, and will, in the end, be offered a chance to accept Jesus after death. This is really different from what my wife's midwestern catholic family believes... like, really different..

@notsocrates9529

10 күн бұрын

Fun fact: Jews are not allowed to pray next to a Christian or enter a church, but they can pray next to a Muslim and even pray at the mosque. The Talmud was written about 200 years after the Gospels. Once you start noticing, it is impossible to not see it.

@selfprojects1953

10 күн бұрын

As someone also raise southern Baptist who broke free; legalism. And legalism will not save Jew not Baptist.

@jon9428

10 күн бұрын

@@notsocrates9529 Because Orthodox Jews consider Christianity dangerously close to idolatry, meanwhile Islam is strictly monotheistic to them like Judaism. Also the Talmud is a collection of oral traditions that were written down so they would be preserved in around 200CE for the Mishnah and 500 or so CE for the Gemara. These were oral traditions that were around before the 2nd Temple was destroyed, before the time of Jesus. So it was not created after Christianity, it was preserved after.

@notsocrates9529

10 күн бұрын

@@jon9428 rev 3:9 I ain't reading any of your pilpul.

@notsocrates9529

10 күн бұрын

@@selfprojects1953 Woes of the Pharisees might interest you.

Finally a topic where the intro music really fits.

Hi. Long time fan. I can't wait for when you make a history of the jews

21:01 khalid ibn al waleed is his name, "the sharpened sword of allah " is a title bestowed upon him by prophet Muhammed

AUSTRALIAN CIVILISATION VIDEO WHEN?!?!??!?!?

@islambale747

10 күн бұрын

Elect mfs who will legalize guns first.

@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617

10 күн бұрын

😂

Please make a video on caucasus🙏🏻🙏🏻 huge respect to you all from Georgia 🇬🇪

I really liked your video because it represents a deep and respectful reading of islamic history, and it is really interesting to see your history being talked about from different points of view and it's really appreciated, but I disagree with you in 2 main points: 1. The first one is saying that the prophet Muhammad - pbuh - took some of his knowledge from Jews , but this was not the case, because mainly the Jews weren't spreading their religion among the Arabs and when Muhammad - pbuh - said he is a prophet the Jews immediately disbelieved in him and said he was sent only for the Arabs, also - as you said - Muhammad - pbuh - was illiterate, he didn't know how to read and write, and we know that he didn't study with any Jewish scholar, and we know the Jews disbelieved in his message. so how would he take the knowledge from the Jews? 2. Saying that Al-ghazali "killed" the scientific movement in the islamic world. And I mainly disagree with you because I believe that this is not the reason of the collapse of the scientific movement, because if you give it a quick look at some of the important scholars in Islamic civilization you will notice that many of them came after Al-ghazali died - in 1111 - by 3 or 4 centuries, for example the mathematician Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, the astronomers Mu'ayyad al-Din al-Urdi and Shams al-Din al-Khafri, the founder of the modern astronomy - came before Copernicus - Ibn al-Shatir, also we don't forget the navigator and cartographer Ahmad ibn Mājid, and you can read more about this topic in the book of Columbia University professor George Saliba called "The Origin and Development of Arabic Scientific Thought", all these scholars came after Al-ghazali, so I believe he is not the reason. Instead I believe that the reason for the collapse was mainly economical, it was because the Muslim lost Al-andlus (Spain) which was the wealthiest part of the islamic world and the discovery of America and the route of cape of the good hope, all these reasons together made the economy movement change from east to west, so the Muslim world suffered a "depression" that made it lose his advance. I also liked a point you talked around the minute 35 or so about the Hadith and the "code" to check the certainity of saying this Hadith was said by the prophet - pbuh - and the name for this science is "Hadith terminology" and I really see it as the crown jewel of Islamic science, and it was nice that you know about it because many people don't know and don't talk about it. As all it was nice to listen to you, thank you.

Do crusades next

There is no Islam without a ( Successor ) Caliph Even if the entire earth were submitted to Islam and all laws were established

Books at the end: - Cotton, Climate, and Camels (Bulliet) - A Short History of the Arab Peoples (Glubb) - Destiny Disrupted (Ansari) - The Venture of Islam Vol I, II, III (Marshall Hodgson) - Arabs a 3000 Year History (Mackintosh-Smith)

What's the name of the last shown book? Was a bit blurry

Muhammad got lucky in that he was born early in the Dark ages. Enormous chunks of the population had died off from the 536 AD and the nations were still being stupid. He unified and conquered people living in a miserable time. I would argue Islam began to have their own Dark Age beginning with Al-Ghazali and they never escaped it.

@islambale747

10 күн бұрын

Their conservatism becomes their fall.

Rudyard is a bit wrong on a few points. Biggest that comes to mind is that Mohammad MARRIED a 6 year old, but waited until she was 9 years old to have sex with her. And, no, that wasn't acceptable back then and several of his own followers took issue with the fact Mohammad was lusting after a 6 year old to which he gave the tried and true "Allah wills it" as a rebuttal. And due to this; what is considered pedophilia by all definitions is actually accepted in much of the Islamic world because Mohammad is the most perfect man who will ever exist.

@ibadurrehman1210

8 күн бұрын

that's false, provide a source for that lie

Ancient egypt , Mongolia or they phoenitians would be cool and pretty different from what's been covered

I'm curious to know more about the venician empire, and their alliance with the ottomans against Portugal, spice trade, new world etc.

This is a welcome surprise. I have just started a challenging, but nonetheless superb, history of Islam by Marshall G.S. Hodgson titled The Venture of Islam. As recommended by Toby Matthiesen, who is also very good.

You totally glossed over the Mughals, indians, etc. who had their Golden Age(Taj Mahal, Delhi, etc.), which is much after your time period for golden age of Islam. You also skipped over the Indonesia, Malaysia. Just these 2 groups account for about half of all the Muslims in the world right now. Then you also had the Ottomans that reigned for 700 years, 300-400 of those years were also their golden age of military dominance.

There was one reason for Mohammed to arise: arabs were pagan at that time and there was rentier aristocracy at Mecca who controlled trade and the Kabba (pilgrimage business). Because of the realization of the outer powerful empires, this ancient regime could not met with the resentment to the faith of "one omnipotent God" and that everybody is equal before him, to the degree of the charity and praying and participating to the survival of Islam etc. You may be an aristocrat but now you are "equal": same laws same prayers common cause, equal share of the spoils apply to you. In islam the relation with god is not father and son but master and slaves, including Mohammed. So that creates a unity where it is "we obey our master and he gives us morality, heaven, wealth, family, peace, harmony etc." kind of feeling. However this Master became more and more of a nonresponsible king over time, as Muslims obtained more power.

@cmleibenguth

10 күн бұрын

This framework description makes it a little clearer how Islamo-socialism can form

@theironknight597

10 күн бұрын

Everyone was equal unless you weren't a muslim.

@uguralpkosar

10 күн бұрын

@theironknight597 yeah it was seen because nonmuslims don't serve in the military, they should pay for it to make it equal lol. "I keep you safe bro!" sometimes this was the case though like Spanish Jews and the Ottomans

@perniciousseizurehellio3438

6 күн бұрын

@@theironknight597 every society has a standard you must conform to

@theironknight597

6 күн бұрын

@@perniciousseizurehellio3438 And that makes discrimination ok?

The intro music🔥🔥🔥👳🏽‍♂️

Hey how about a history of the carribbean? I'd like to see how long it goes before Puerto Rico gets mentioned and the inevitable elephant in the room gets addressed about its status pertaining to the USA.

Islam focuses alot on the fact that it's God and God only. A dig at Christianity if you ask me more than anything else

@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617

10 күн бұрын

As well as war, slaving and paedophilia.

@notsocrates9529

10 күн бұрын

@@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617 Don't forget the castration of male slaves.

@KARKATELCESARENVIADODESA-pv4yd

10 күн бұрын

That's, exactly, what Christianity is about. If you're trying to go against the Holy Trinity here you're just ignorant and haven't studied why we know that is true.

@KARKATELCESARENVIADODESA-pv4yd

10 күн бұрын

Also Islam prays to a black cube so.

@diponic3344

10 күн бұрын

⁠​⁠​⁠@@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617 Christianity has done this in 10+ worse ways than any other religion

Ackchyually..... zakat is only 2.5 percent of wealth, the other tax called the Jizya (tax for only non-Muslims, which was around 10-20%) and was the only source of revenue for their empire. When the majority of the people converted, the Arabs administrators instituted jizya on non arab muslims (which was very controversial) which sparked massive revolts, which helped destroy the Ummayads.

Does he mention the Ottoman contraction in this video?

Can you show up to the sequel with a scimitar? 😂

This video is really useful, but Rudyard has a lot of misconceptions about Islam and the analysis is pretty biased to make Islam look better than it really is.

TLDR: You can't hold together an empire in the Middle East

There are things you got wrong. Just to name something: Zakat is not 10%, etc. I am free from all false statements and Islam and the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ is also.

I wonder if we’ll have a second axial age

@islambale747

10 күн бұрын

A Peterson-Rogan-Trump like figure will be the prophet. Lobsters, psychedelics and freedom is a reasonable combination.

@QuizmasterLaw

9 күн бұрын

we are in one. really. I just wrote a book about it "Nukes Jets and Transistors".

@basedindividual7748

9 күн бұрын

@@islambale747you got to be kidding man

2:32 I would suggest primary historical cause of the rise of Islam is the fracturing of Christianity over the nature of Christ (Christological debate, 400s-600s AD).

nice introductory video however there is many errors of your explanations of both historical and theological facts, for example Shia vs Sunni was not Arabs vs Persians in early Islamic history. The Persians were forcefully converted to shi'ism by the Turks in the 15th century under Safavid rule. Shi'ism in the beginning was more concentrated in Iraq nor Persia. This is just one of many, still it is a good introductory video for people to get into Islamic history.

Hype

12:20 Rudyard laughs because he knows it wasn't even normal for the time to marry 9 year olds in most cultures 😅

@zgramzhnisk3036

10 күн бұрын

Roman noblewoman frequently got married at 12, per Sir Edward Coke within the Thirteen colonies it was common for people to get married below the age of 12 with examples as young as 4 years of age, the medieval Catholic church made it legal for 13 yo girls and 15 yo boys to get married without parental consent. Child marriage was common globally, not just in Arabia, until the last couple of centuries. Attempting to exonerate your own nation from historically participating in this crime is delusional, believe me it's guaranteed that if you go back a thousand years within your own ancestory, you are gonna come across plenty of marriages where at least one partner was uncomfortably young.

@user-dl5ln3wd6f

10 күн бұрын

​@@zgramzhnisk3036 Umar Married Um Kulthum when she was 10, Ali Married Fatima when she was 14-16.

@perniciousseizurehellio3438

6 күн бұрын

bruh is that all you got out of this video

Zakat was 2.5% not 10%

I don't think the current situation of Muslims is due to geography. They have significant geographical advantages, such as controlling areas where major continents meet, making them the center of the global economy. If the Umayyads and Abbasids had continued the Rashidun mindset and pushed into Europe, which I believe they could have, the world would be different today. I think they became complacent. Even today, with the substantial oil reserves in Muslim-controlled territories, they should be a dominant civilization. The issue isn't ideological superiority or lack of motivation or bad geography but rather terrible leadership.

Ethnic map at 30:20 is wrong, Pashtun area was Punjabi. Pashtun ethnogenesis had not occurred yet & i doubt that today's Pashtuns have any ancestry from the people that lived there at the time of the Ummayads.

The arabic quran is around 600 pages. Arabic is a more complex language than english so explains why the english translations are much shorter

@vinniegiordano9024

5 күн бұрын

Not true. I just finished reading the Quran and it’s about 1/9 the size of the Bible.

@thalionraw9747

5 күн бұрын

i just looked it up the page counts of: the king james bible (~1200 pages), an english translation of the quran (~400 pages), and the traditional arabic quran (~600 pages)

@vinniegiordano9024

3 күн бұрын

@@thalionraw9747Sure, that could make sense, but the word count is the most accurate measure. Also, the King James Bible took out ten books, so if we use the Orthodox Canon, ends up equivalent to about 900,000 words in the full, while the Quran, on average in the English translation is 80,000 words. Hope this helps

Your point about Christianity and Islam being mostly similar except for a handful of key differences has me thinking about an idea that's been in my mind ever since I first saw the documentary Jesus Camp as a teenager in the 2000s. I think you can see a lot of this common DNA in fundamentalist Christian sects, especially in pentacostal and fundamentalist Baptist groups. It's to the point I've been jokingly calling them Christian jihadis for years because their understanding of our faith always struck me as badically islamic. Youve got their aversion to idols and iconography, understanding God as a being that must be followed to the letter lest we collectively bring down His wrath, and an extremely literal understanding of the Bible as if it were doctated word for word from God to the authors like the Koran to Mohammed. You also have the extreme social conservatism and the similar history between fundamentalism and the post Abassid Islam coming into being in reaction to the decadence of their civilization. What got me thinking along those lines was in Jesus Camp where the camp director expressed almost an envy of the modern islamists and how good they were at indoctrinating and inspiring fanaticism in their children.

Finally you covered Islam 😊😊😊

@ashirmalik2310

7 күн бұрын

Wait he did?

I can't read the names.

Aisha downvoted this video

@jj-yi1ne

10 күн бұрын

dont support pedophelia because jesus allowed it

13:48 Okay, Rujuard is starting to get prot iconoclast here. Images were always a thing in ancient israelite religion, just look at Ezekiel's and the Torah's description of the second temple and ark respectively. As well, as look at the Dara Europis Synagogue. Now, one could argue it got more As for Bizzare superstitions, maybe among the people but by your own admission in the last video the Catholic Church, which at this time was the Roman Empire's Church, did not even believe in witches.

@amirmichaelroyer

9 күн бұрын

Yes, you could say that the Church was split between different factions, but I don’t know why he’s calling it “corrupt”, that part came a few centuries later. By this point the Church was still expanding and had an overall positive and prominent influence. Also, honestly he didn’t go into much detail as to why the Sassanid and part of the Byzantines fell, other than the sectarian divisions.

5:36- 5:38 nope. Incarnation is not Reincarnation. Christ never undertook transmigration of souls also, it is not a tiny argument (except if you employ today's indifferentism in presentist manner, which is anarchronistic) Christ is divine before ages and took human nature, without it you will never fully obey Him or respect Him as He is

@miguelatkinson

10 күн бұрын

Which still doesn't work and also the divinity of christ very contentious debate even amongst certain Christians

French Revolution and independence movements

Do late neolithic

4:55 - 5:19 you sure it was 650 AD? by that time Muslims already took over as far as Tripolitania and entirety of Persia

Decadence wasn't the whole reason for the fall of the Abbasids, though it was the final blow at the end. The decline began with Harun's terrible succession plans causing a civil war from 809-819, which ended the power of the Khurasanis, former backbone of the Abbasids. And damaged the all important Iraqi irrigation systems. Mamun also made a lot of stupid decisions like attempting to rule from Merv for 6 years alienating Baghdadis and the west and appointing Ali Rida as his successor alienating the rest of the Abbasid house. The result of Mamun's alienating policies and collapse of Khurasanis left him with no supporters, so he turned to Mutasim's Turkic slave soldiers. But Mutawakkil wanted to replace the Turks, so they murdered him and the next 3 Caliphs, resulting in 9 years of anarchy (861-870), most of the Caliphate becoming independent and further devastating Iraqi irrigation. Until 870 when the military oriented Muwaffaq ensured the Turks that they wouldn't be replaced, ending the chaos. Setting about defeating the Zanj marshland guerilla, and the Saffarids who under a Persian coppersmith took most of Iran and almost took Baghdad. His son Mutadid was the most militarily active of any Abbasid Caliph. Restoring control over western Iran and Syria. And he gave the civilian bureaucracy control over the military for the first time in Islamic history. His son Muktafi took Egypt but died suddenly in 908, with no succession plans. So the bureaucrats chose 13 year old Muqtadir so they could manipulate him for their own gain. Muqtadir was the quintessence of decadence. Spending most of his time and a high portion of state wealth on the harem and extravagance. Despite there being a major financial catastrophe due to the previous century of damage to the Iraqi irrigation networks. This resulted in the Caliphate going backrupt, resulting in the military killing the Caliph in 932, leading to more infighting. Until the sons of a Caspian fisherman managed to take Baghdad in 945.

@kamikazeblackjack

10 күн бұрын

You can also said he is product of decadent

@Wakobear.

10 күн бұрын

@@kamikazeblackjack ye. Although, if alMuktafi ruled longer, or the more capable was chosen, such as the experienced Ahmed ibn alMutazz (who briefly launched a coup and became Caliph for 1 day, before the plot was undone). Then the fall of the abbasids could be postponed for decades or even centuries

@user-dl5ln3wd6f

10 күн бұрын

@@Wakobear. That’s Overestimation, Ibn al-Mutazz was already 48 years old when al-Muktafi died and the Abbasid Caliphs during that period rarely pass the year 50 alive meaning that the caliphate would inevitable go to al-Muqatdir leading to its decline. Plus, I remember reading about a climate change during the 10th century that also made that decline even more inevitable.

@Wakobear.

10 күн бұрын

@@user-dl5ln3wd6f True, ibn alMutazz has already outlived most Abbasid Caliphs before his accession. But Mansur lived to 61 as did numerous Umayyad Caliphs. Hugh Kennedy said he probably would've made a "good if not outstanding caliph" ...... But even if he rules for a short while, he could easily not choose Muqtadir as his successor and choose his own son or relative. Or Mutazz could better prepare Muqtadir as his successor by kicking him out of the harem, forcing him to lead military campaigns and learn about how the finances of the Caliphate works. Making him far less incompetent, who believes every new vizier who promises him unachievable amounts of wealth for his extravagant lifestyle.. But the most important thing would be that the able and senior administrators who supported ibn alMutazz's coup wouldn't be executed or discredited. The Jarrahids Muhammad ibn Dawud and Ali ibn Isa. Ali ibn Isa was an extremely capable financial administrator and was strongly supported by Mu'nis, head of the military. But his attempts to reduce the expenditure of the Harem and Court made enemies of the queen mother and other courtiers, resulting in him frequently get removed. In this case, Ali ibn Isa would immediately be appointed as Vizier on Mutazz's ascension, instead of the less capable ibn al Furat. Ideally he would continue in this position for the next 30 years straight (died 946 at 87), giving stable rule unlike the historical Muqtadir's rapidly changing viziers. The alliance between Ali ibn Isa and Mu'nis would ensure that the administration and the military work harmoniously. Combined with his long vizierate and financial competency, the irrigation networks of southern Iraq could be repaired, allowing it to produce 1/4 of the middle East's wealth once more - which alone would prevent the fall of the Abbasids. Using said wealth to strengthen their hold on western Iran (perhaps a joint Samanid-Abbasid campaign against Saffarid remnant) and perhaps even go on the offensive against the Ifriqiyan Fatimids with help from revolts of their majority Sunni population? As for climatic problems then this was initially mentioned by Richard Bulliet in Camels climate and cotton, and elaborated upon in Ronnie Elunblum's Collapse of the Eastern Mediterranean. During which Iraq, Persia, Anatolia, Syria and Egypt received some extremely cold weather for some years in the late 900s. Intensifying in the early 1000s before ceasing around 1060. The result was widespread famines, but most importantly the Seljuk invasions - seeking warmer pastures of Iran, greatly devastating sedentary and Agricultural society of the middle east. But their is difference of opinion regarding the impact of this as mentioned by ASC Peacock in Chapter 8 of The Great Seljuk Empire. Who mentions that freak events of extreme cold in Iraq were recorded as soon as records began in the 800s and they continued to be recorded into the 1100s, while scientific evidence records warmer temperatures for this period. And also that evidence for an Iranian cotton boom is flimsy. The agricultural decline was more due to the Buyid non hereditary Iqta system. Which encouraged maximal extraction and zero long term investment. As well as the proliferation of nomads in Syria due to collapse of Abbasids. And there were still many nomads throughout the central Asian pasturelands who weren't forced to migrate like the Seljuks.... The unified Abbasids would be much stronger than the 3 Buyid Emirates, Kakuyids and various other small principalities of Iran. And so would probably be able to put up a much stronger defence against the Seljuks in the 1040s.

@user-dl5ln3wd6f

9 күн бұрын

@Wakobear. 1-if he rules for a short time then I doubt that he would train al muqtadir enough as he would still likely be a child. 2-the history books don't mention any good successors to al-muktafi expect ibn al mutazz which is in itself a huge hint/sign about the abbasid decadence at that time. 3-if the caliphate becomes a Puppet of good viziers who would become the de-facto rulers of it then it would likely end up like the fatimid caliphate.

The Fatimids were likely Persians similar to the Rustimids and Qarmantians NOT Berbers even though the berbers made a huge part of its army.

We have to remember that all of our religious cultures, even the Zen and Buddhist, have engaged in various wars and pursuits of expansion. As much as the imposition of ideals can go to destructive extremes, it doesn't mean there is no value to be had in spreading wisdom, and the correct mode of thinking. You just need to recognize the unclear relationship between what you think to be good, and what others believe to be good. Don't take their perspective as invalid. Instead, if you are honest in your belief, seek to transform the perspective of the other to your own, by stages instead of conclusions. Even if they don't conform in the moment, you can sow the seeds of your perspective. This process can also help root out your own misgivings, by identifying and rationalizing all of those perspectives in which you find no underlying ground.

@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617

10 күн бұрын

But none of those are war/slaving cults.

@KARKATELCESARENVIADODESA-pv4yd

10 күн бұрын

Christianity is built different. Not exempt from it, not at all, but it's one which actively promotes safe conversion and it is, in fact, at its very root (not peaceful conversion, just one that doesn't involve killing or subduing, in fact, it invites YOU to be the bearer of death and torture to achieve that same conversion.)

@notsocrates9529

10 күн бұрын

Ashin Wirathu did nothing wrong.

@doronaznible7298

10 күн бұрын

@@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617literally all of those religions practiced slavery and warfare.

@doronaznible7298

10 күн бұрын

@@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617alll of those religions at one point or another practiced expansionism and slavery.

Zoroastrians were not fire worshippers… completely incorrect statement

Deus Vult!

Shiism was not really a mainstream belief, it was usually enforced such as by the Fatimids or the Safavids

Where's your sword ?! !! 😏😏

@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617

8 күн бұрын

He's said multiple times that he only collects European swords.

@perniciousseizurehellio3438

6 күн бұрын

@@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617 bruh he should collect middle eastern sword they are badass

first

The Christian coptic were they welcome the Muslim Arab when they Conquer Egypt because the car they are oppressed by the Greek Byzantine like in the time when Amr ibn al-Aas Conquer Egypt the patriarch of Alexandria yuhanna kicked out and replace by a Greek patriarch and he roaming The Desert of Egypt and when Amr ibn al-Aas Conquer Egypt he and he bring back yuhanna to his title as the patriarch and till day the Coptic Christian prayers Amr ibn al-Aas

ws in his thought is funny

I'm kinda disappointed that you went with the traditional Islamic retelling of Muhammad's life, treating the Islamic Sīra uncritically as established history. And, I mean, you can do that, but I can't imagine you, as a student of history, would take the same approach with say the New Testament, and uncritically accept that as the only authoritative source and established history of early Christianity. No, you go looking for outside sources, archaeological evidence etc. And scholars have indeed done the same thing for the early Islamic period and I think we have ample reason to believe that Islam isn't this one special case in human history after all, where a Prophet just arrives with a finished Holy Book and a pre-packaged religion that from the get-go already looks exactly like Islam (Wahhābīte Islam, to be precise) looks today. I think it much more plausible that Islam evolved more gradually, very much like any other religion. I don't feel competent enough to go into much detail here, but just look at the so-called "Constitution of Medina" or the fact, that many early mosques seem to have been built pointing to Petra (in Jordan), and not Jerusalem or the Kaaba in Mecca. Even the word "Islam" is only used ten times in all the (over 6000) verses of the Qur'an and the name "Muhammad" is specifically mentioned only four times. I think this video could've profited from adding that critical perspective, like for example the works of Patricia Crone and Michael Cook ("Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World" already in the 70s argued that all of the primary Islamic sources which we have are from decades, if not centuries, after the events which they describe and so they have to be viewed critically, because people definitely had a motive to falsify events and invent stories to legitimise their own political and religious views) or Fred Donner ("Muhammad and the Believers: At the Origins of Islam" argues that the Qur'an may, at least partially, predate the historical Muhammad and that very early on, Islam most likely began not as a distinct, separate religion, but should more broadly defined as a "Believers" movement, that was united by a strict monotheism, but, to an extent, confessionally open, also including Christians and Jews) and others.

@Mcfunface

10 күн бұрын

Well said. I believe the gnostics within early Christianity heavily influenced the development of Islam in its first expansion across Arabia.

@kamikazeblackjack

10 күн бұрын

​i argue that jews and non tritarian Christians have bigger influence then gnostism @@Mcfunface

@zgramzhnisk3036

10 күн бұрын

The whole claim about the original Qibla being Petra has been debunked and most historians reject that claim. I recommend watching Al Muqaddimah's video in it.

@user-dl5ln3wd6f

10 күн бұрын

These Theories are too outdated now, read Musa Ibn Uqba's Maghazi. a Historian only born like 30 years after the Prophet's Death.

@MarquisLaFayette

10 күн бұрын

@@user-dl5ln3wd6f, I'm aware that this supposedly has been rediscovered recently but as of yet I've been unable to find any non-religious critical scholarship on its rediscovery, so for now I remain sceptic (which is not to say that you need to be non-Muslim for me to trust your scholarship on Islam, but you'd have to agree that for a believing Muslim there's an incentive to disprove any criticism on the classical narrative).

og colonization

Second Caliphate

@KARKATELCESARENVIADODESA-pv4yd

10 күн бұрын

Umayyads were more sophisticated.

Calling Mohammed a Prophet is like calling Ghenghis Khan the same.

@ethank.3201

10 күн бұрын

Moe Ham Head is to propheteering as George Soros is to profiteering

@km0262

10 күн бұрын

Except one is a prophet from God and another isn’t.

@svg3876

10 күн бұрын

You mean a prophet of Satan.

@Winston_SA

10 күн бұрын

Genghis Khan didn't start one of the biggest religion in the world.

@FetusK1cker

10 күн бұрын

@@km0262 neither are

As a muslim. The main reason I think for the reason for way prophet Muhammad peace be upon him is that he was the last prophet sent Islam into a large scale visible civilization who instead of spreading the message of Islam to one specific group or nation (think Moses and the children of Israel) instead spread Islam to the entirety of the world. Though I’m not a complete expert on this So I might be missing something. Edit: Also yes Rudyard Prohphet Muhammad was an orphan and both his mother and father died when he was young. And I think it was either his uncle or grandfather who took care of him afterwards.

History isn't cyclical, thankfully a better analogy would be a spiral of upward progress. Time series analysis of purported cycles doesn't hold up, though how long Turchin can run the con is a good question. There is however a 100 year cycle of "no lived experience" basically we "reset" the population every three hundred years which is why you can get recurrent global wars. No one alive now remembers how truly terrible WW2 was and wait a hundred years and there will be no one who even knew anyone who knew it. Keep in mind war does its worst damages to people who are dead so our lived experiences of war are distorted from the get go. I suggest getting a lot more quantitative, qualitative analysis is useful. By the way there is not going to be a civil war but at least Rudyard Lynch isn't trying to milk that meme for clicks. To get a civil war you need famines, lots of domestic terrorism, people don't just spontaneously decide to kill each other we need really good reasons beyond "I don't like your taste". Also if you actually lived in a moslem country for a long time you would likely learn to hate it, no alcohol, no gays, i could go on you would basically be forced to conform and not be a typical westerner.

Rise of a death cult.

@SacClass650

10 күн бұрын

What an obtuse and moronic thing to write, all you've done is report on yourself.

@josephstalin839

10 күн бұрын

And the youngest child of the Abrahamic religions.

@Nukatha

10 күн бұрын

Anything-goes liberal "Christianity" and "Reformed Judaism" are newer (and both extremely heretical, like Islam)

@MF_DOOMer

10 күн бұрын

Unfortunately

@averageviewer6279

10 күн бұрын

​@@josephstalin839 actually that would be Rebecca

in b4 zoomer crusaders take palestine

@KARKATELCESARENVIADODESA-pv4yd

10 күн бұрын

Present! 🙋‍♂🙋‍♂🙋‍♂🙋‍♂🙋‍♂🙋‍♂ embrace the LARP!

@ivangrozny496

10 күн бұрын

DEVS VVLT

Muhammad came into existence because of Turks migration. All Islamic empires were silk route Turk empires. Silk route collapsed so did Islam.

@shafsteryellow

10 күн бұрын

No

You appear to be using the word "Semite" as a racial/ethnic marker, rather than a linguistic one. The term was first used in the 1700s as a biblically sourced racial category, but once Europeans soon figured out that different groups of so-called "Semites" actually had very little to do with each other aside from loosely similar languages, the term "Semite" was adjusted to "Semitic" and relegated purely to the realm of linguistics.

Only things I disagree on. I'd say Mohammad never existed.

@kamikazeblackjack

10 күн бұрын

There are some conteperary sources of him even tho it not clear bc he live in dessert that no one give a f at the time

@ivangrozny496

10 күн бұрын

Nah, he definitely existed, you couldn't invent such a wicked man if you tried

@codytownsend3259

9 күн бұрын

@@ivangrozny496 I mean theres like no mention of him in any of those events that took place. Also mosques dont make sense according to the timeline within the quran etc

Well this is codswallop... it was in Somalia before anywhere else

Dancing through history to make islam neutral is crazzy

How did they convert nations they took over?😂 tell the audience what they did to Christians during thier golden age lmao

Orthodox and catholics don't agree on religious topics pertaining to Christianity that's not political😂

Jesus was born from a virgin became a carpenter until his time when he became a teacher proclaiming he was the son of man then the jews and Roman's killed him😂😂😂 like what bro 19:11

Wow, trying to be historically neutral with islam. It's the most embarrassing video he's ever posted.

@user-mamamia

10 күн бұрын

And of course we have the expert here

@SayNoToDemocide1

10 күн бұрын

Then post your own reply to him.

@Itskinda_funny

10 күн бұрын

@SayNoToDemocide1 lol it's basic history and religious doctrine🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡 how many christian countries did Islam rape and enslave to have their golden age🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡