9:39 - on the contrary Dr. Kerr, I for one am really enjoying this series and waiting expectantly for every upcoming episode :) hope the rest of the audience shares this feeling too :)

Another excellent video, with once again a huge amount of information, if only someone could write a book with the basic information so the general public could easily understand it. A huge thank you to both👍

Love the post editing, it makes things so much more comprehensible :) Thanks Mel

@IslamicOrigins

Жыл бұрын

Glad you think so!

What a wealth of information! Dr. Kerr is certainly fleshing out a clearer picture of what was going on in the 6th and 7th centuries.

Mel. Another one hit outa the park!! Love Dr. Kerrs explanations. So clear and common sense. Thanks!’

@IslamicOrigins

Жыл бұрын

Glad you like them!

Hi mel .all the research is out then why it is not mainstream. What is stopping it spreading like wildfire

@hagalhagal9989

Жыл бұрын

I wrote a reply, but KZread is censoring it for some reason. I'll try to figure a way of reposting it.

@hagalhagal9989

Жыл бұрын

Part 1 Dr Jay Smith and Thomas Alexander have an episode on this on Pfander Films.

@hagalhagal9989

Жыл бұрын

Part 2 If researchers talk publicly then they are removed from their positions. Dr Jay Smith personally experienced this when he debated Dr Shabir Ally using Dr Patricia Croner's material, which she could not divulge but happily shared with Dr Jay Smith.

@hagalhagal9989

Жыл бұрын

Part 3 They also describe the story of Christoph Luxenberg who after attaining the highest honours for his thesis, he was then shunned from all universities.

@hagalhagal9989

Жыл бұрын

Part 4 I think that at this point it is very clear that scholars have to thread very carefully if they do not want to suffer any consequences.

Muslims have a strange way of proving the perfect preservation of Allah’s Quran - they set fire to it from the time of Uthman ibn Affan (or sink them into the Nile River in 1924) to show that Allah’s words have been perfectly preserved fire-by-fire, smoke-by-smoke, water-by-water. * Oh, one more: Sword-by-sword if you question the “Standard Islamic Source” - SIN.

@zakback9937

Жыл бұрын

Bruh.

Very good history education just proves how Islam got it so wrong, sorry missed it Mel I was watching my team play AFL, Mel your lights are so bright in the background do you have enough light buddy, lol, GBU till next time peace and love.

if rashidun means the first, and is related to ras, does it mean that initially it was pronounced as rasidun?

Perhaps, the kiss or waive 👐 @ start point ... Possibility of the darkness

It was Phocas who overthrew Maurice, not Heraclious

"Flucht von Vorne" Being pro-active. Not to wait till the enemy attacks with overwelling force but attack yourself to get a better position.

@IslamicOrigins

Жыл бұрын

Love that. Might make it my motto.

@maxschon7709

Жыл бұрын

@@IslamicOrigins In the 6 day war Israel launched a series of pre-emptive airstrikes against Egyptian airfields. Egyptian forces were caught by surprise, and nearly all Egypt's military aerial assets were destroyed, giving Israel the advantage of air supremacy.

@Indah-tjs

Жыл бұрын

Soweit ich mich erinnere an meine Zeit in Deutschland, heisst der Spruch "Flucht NACH vorn". Ist im Grunde aber auch egal, irgendwo ist der Sinn der gleiche... 😊

@ilanbouwmeester6838

10 ай бұрын

@@Indah-tjs You're right, the German expression is "Flucht nach vorn". It's usually translated into English as "headlong rush". But it's not a very precise translation. Because in reverse 'headlong rush" is usually translated as "mit offenen Augen ins Verderben rennen" - "rush headlong into disaster with one's eyes wide open". Translating expressions can be very challenging. The less related the languages are the more difficult it gets, usually. But with regards to the expression itself the preposition "von" cannot substitute "nach", so it does matter.

@Indah-tjs

10 ай бұрын

@@ilanbouwmeester6838 Of course you are right. Since my German language skills outweigh my English skills, I thank you for your explanations. "nach" here is to indicate the direction, which is generally expressed in English as "to" or "into". I'm sure there are hundreds of examples.... Thanks again 😊

Hi Mel, That Muawiah's inscription and coin are not Islamic can be questioned if one assumes that the Moumenin in Amir Al Moumenin is the same Moumenin in the Quran, as Muslims do! I wish you had asked him this point :)

Mel first to comment

The black rock is one of thee Economic powerhouse Corp in this earth 🌎

I'm really impressed with Kerr's knowledge and I've enjoyed this series. I hope he also submits himself to Jesus as Lord. Thanks for the interview, Mel.

Interesting but his vice with the pipe is unbearable!!!

Very good video , therefore I feel hurt that the Muslim's are converting spiritual people of other faith's, when they don't even know their own belief system... They doing exactly what the Ottoman Empire did ... These are a subliminally damaged people that are in confusion , and lie that they witness a dead person ie : Moe Be warned of their fake 'Shahada' and dream 'Call to prayer'

@ahmedalsaaidi3714

Жыл бұрын

We know our religion very well.its the christians who are unique,every christian i meet is unique once he is cornered in a conversation,he will say ; will i dont believe in this,and i dont believe in that.every christian has his own sets of believes.

I think Prof Kerr is mistaken to say that Christians got it wrong in using the word Adonai as word use to call "I AM" or Yahweh. Since Jews also call God as Lord in the Old testament. Jews translated Yahweh to Lord. In the Gospel you can read thru it where the Gospel call Jesus as Lord to basically say he is God. But the new testament they use the word "God" to call God the father. When St Paul say God he usually mean its the Father and when he says the Lord he means Jesus Christ. Jesus also call himself as "I AM" to be basically say I am the God of Abraham. So to say that Christian just got it wrong is pretty inaccurate. I dont understand Robert Kerr Background but maybe he has some bias against Christianity. He seems to think that early Christians who are Jewish in background does not understand the Torah. First they had to argue with Jews using the Torah. When they said Jesus died according to the scriptures, they are saying according to the Jewish scriptures. Of course in the New covenant, the Apostles Authority is very powerful. Because Christians view the Old Covenant to already been fulfilled by Christ. So many of the requirements of the Old covenants has been replaced by new Sacraments founded by the Christ and his Church.

It is an infancy faith , that took from other belief systems and thought they could create little Moe's all over the world to submit to their BS ... Excuse my harsh lingo...

The Song of Solomon isn't inspired.

How did you know prof you were not there

Muawiya 🤍🤍🤍

Hence , we don't hear the linguists , or the dream given 'adhaan'

🇸🇦 this is a week ص 🔪... What an iconic flag , emoji , I CON

Perhaps , Ebrahim (A.S) was told to be blindfolded by Ishaq (A.S) 🤔

Their relics don't blindfold a Devinely Recitation and Interpretation of the Holy Bible & the Holy Quræn understood from a Holy lens , the 'Relics' won't survive IA..

Is it not evident enough that 'Mohammad' name appears in song of 'Solomon' Bin That's where it belongs , to the Bin

@ilanbouwmeester6838

10 ай бұрын

maḥămaddîm - מחמדים is not Muḥammad - محمد. The Hebrew is a masculine plural indefinite noun, and the Arabic is a masculine singular passive participle. In this specific case the Biblical Hebrew uses the plural as an elative. Mechanical translation: Pallette-his (חכ-ו) [is] most sweet (מ-מתק-ים) and-everything-he (ו-כל-ו) [is] most precious (מ-חמד-ים)... If you read it in context, it clearly is a poem that anthropomorphizes the Temple of Jerusalem. And is absolutely not referring to a man or prophet. The Open New Arabic Version has mushtahian مشتهيان as a translation for maḥămaddîm - מחמדים. The Arabic uses the passive participle of desire (as an adjective, in the fem. plural). The plural here also functions as an elative, mirroring the Hebrew very close in both grammar and meaning. The root ḥ-m-d / ח-מ-ד / ح-م-د is shared in the Semitic languages, but is slightly shifted in meaning: Hebrew - precious Safaitic - glory Arabic / South-Arabian - praised See for instance in the standard praise to G-d formula Biblical Hebrew uses a totally different root to mean praise. Mechanical Arabic: The-praise-him (ال-حمد) to-G'd (ل-له) Mechanical Biblical Hebrew: Praise (הלל) to-G'd (ל-אל). (Biblical) Hebrew and (Nabataean) Aramaic use the verbal root h-l-l / ה-ל-ל / ه-ل-ل to mean praise. In Arabic this same root renders the meaning 'to dedicate' as in Q2:173, and Q5:3 for example. Even if the roots are the same, the meaning isn't. The morphology of words and grammar differ enough to limit the mutual intelligibility substantially. For reference look at the Arabic translations of SnG 5:16 Mechanical translation Open New Arabic Version: Mouth-his (فم-ه) [is] sweet (عذب) and-everything-he (و-كل-ه) [is] most desired (مشتهيان)... Mechanical translation Arabic ERV: Mouth-his (فم-ه) [is] sweet (عذب) very (جدا). And-everything (و-كل) that which (ما) in-him (فيه) [is] desired (شهى) very (جدا)...

@I0888

10 ай бұрын

@ilanbouwmeester6838 Thank You , tell them to remove ISMAEL name , in every scripture existing on this earth please... he does not exist , and Did not exist ever in World History

@I0888

10 ай бұрын

@@ilanbouwmeester6838 so every single scripture or whichever carries the name should do blood tests

"First" is what is called an ordinal number. Proto-Semitic (almost certainly) did not have ordinal numbers. So non of the Semitic languages inherited those from their common ancestor. In Akkadian only a single attestation is known of the ordinal number 1, ištiyu from the cardinal ištēn, meaning 1. In the following sentence iš-ti-ia-um-ma šú-uš-ša "her first name". In Hebrew it is ראשון (rishon), from ראש (rosh) - head. In Arabic it is اول (awwal), from اهل (ʔahl) - family, from the root tent, as attested in Hebrew and Ugaritic. The rashidat راشدة caliphate, is probably only indirectly linked to the ordinal 1 and head in Hebrew. It seems to me more likely it has a relation to the Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic (and later Syriac) ܪܝܫܢܘܬܐ (rēšānūṯā) - head of a (Jewish) academy, prince. Secondary meaning governance. Note: prince in this context is a title for a ruler who isn't a king, not in the sense of a son of a king. This etymology fits better with the actual function of the rashidun caliphs. I do not think this a direct one-to-one borrowing, but more like an Arabian equivalent title for the JBA one. In a similar vein as the use of Isa as described by Al-Jallad, instead of either Jesus or Joshua. But the spelling seems to be more informed by the JBA or Syriac. Also note the ta marbuta in the Arabic spelling which often points to a 'taw' in the Aramaic rendition of the word.

Islam destroy.