Why am I seeing this?

It’s the nicest way of saying the Sana Palimsest flys in the face of Muslims claiming the Quran is preserved.

Wasn't the Hebrew Bible pronunciations a reconstruction from Aramaic, Greek and even some Syriac since the Jewish clergy had lost the knowledge of Pronunciation and phonetics of hebrew words? So, perhaps it is accurate to quote it was Aramaic rather than Hebrew.

This is fascinating. And seems to be the trend in late antique studies in the region? Id be beyond stoked to know wht took place 150 yrs pre Muhammad for everyone to convert to monotheism as the rock inscription evidence seems to suggest it was quite sudden.

Very interesting, thanks. I’ll watch the whole series.

did you just say that it is really interesting (as if it is something groundbreaking) that believers are invited to learn from the experiences of the Prophet pbuh as recorded in the Quran? If so, could you please clarify what exactly is new (or very interesting) about this?

fascinating to hear a different perspective.

Arabic is older than hebrew in case you didnt know

Uhm, the last verse he quoted had nothing to do with the proceeding supposed Syriac terms used. “Woe to” ( ويل) is a commonly used expression even in pre-Islamic poetry. Its use in the Qur’an is supposed to indicate some foreign provenance? Laughable.

All Christian and Jewish writings after 6th century has been heavily influenced by Muslim thinking.

IF ARABIC HAS BEEN FULLY DEVELOPED BY THE TIME THE QURAN WAS REVEALED, why must the inscription be written by a companion of the prophet or someone linked to him in PALEO-ARABIC?

Beating around the bush...

Farid Responds had a video where he fact checked Shady’s sources which called to question his research and conclusions. Have you per-chance seen his video? For one, he demonstrated when Shady was criticizing Asim’s memory because of his weakness in Hadith transmission, he showed how SN actually has the reciter confused with different Asim.

The quran is the only book in the world that must inform the reader about the language, in which it is written! I think that should raise your alarm bells!!

Tom Holland, he is a brilliant historian who put things into perspective of where they belong. Reading his book the shadow of the sword, as well as his work in the untold story of Islam. He is most brilliant historian of our time.

I use big words😂

Loan words and borrowings are the nature of all languages. English is a wonderful example of Germanic syntax married to a vast corpus of Latin thanks to the Norman invasion. If this is used as a Trojan horse argument to insinuate a non-Arabian origin for the book itself, well that’s reaching, akin to accusing the Bard of not being the author of his many works because there’s Latin in them sonnets. “Qur’an” is clearly derived from the Arabic triliteral verb قرأ. But keep trying. We’ll entertain the effort.

Very lovely to hear this discussion. Thank you.

The Arabic language is the origin of languages: I would like to offer some comments on this video, which appears to have been recorded with the intention of casting doubt on the Quran. Despite the large number of Arabic books and references shown behind the speaker or maybe picture of Arabic books, I don't know why he did not show his understanding of the Arabic language and present this video in it. He spoke in English, maybe to mislead those who do not know Arabic well. The speaker has not conducted proper and sufficient scientific research, and I urge you, if you are searching for the truth, to do more research, as I cannot write everything here. The problem is that many of our Muslim scholars have accepted that the Quran was revealed in the language of Quraysh, which led them to claim that the Quran contains 275 non-Arabic words since these words were not in the vocabulary of Quraysh, not just the ones you mentioned with your victorious smile, but ignorance is a bless. Let me explain to you why you find many words used in other languages, in the Quran: Arabic is the mother of the Indo-European languages. There are many references to prove this, but I refer you to two books: The first book by Dr. Tahayya Abdel Aziz Ismail, 'Classic Arabic as the Ancestor of Indo-European Language and Origin of Speech' (the book is in English and the author spent 10 years writing it with the assistance of other scholars in old English, Latin, and old German). The second book by Dr. Mohamed Bahjat Qubaisi, 'Understanding the Arabic Dialects' (Fiqh Al Lahajat Al Arabiah) (this book is in Arabic, but that should not be a problem for you.) All languages of the world originated from Arabic, not the other way around. I cannot elaborate too much here, but the enumeration of roots and derived words prove this. Arabic has more than 6 million derived words (Al-Khalil ibn Ahmad al-Farahidi and modern references) and more than 17,000 roots. The closest language to it is English, which has 600,000 words and between two to three thousand roots (Modern Oxford Dictionary). Arabic is an original language, not derived from others. This view is supported by many researchers including the German professor of Semitic languages and Arabic dialects, Werner Arnold, from the University of Heidelberg, and the Italian Professor Sabatino Moscati, who also confirmed that Arabic did not branch off from other languages. Arabic is the most eloquent of languages and is rich in vocabulary, as attested by all fair researchers. Thus, tribes like Ad and Thamud are called extinct Arabs, and their inscriptions have been found in Lihyanite, Thamudic, and Safaitic scripts, all derived from Classical Arabic, otherwise why would they be called Arabs if they did not speak Arabic or one of its dialects? The 'Arab al-Ariba' are the Qahtani Yemenis, and the 'Arab al-Musta'riba' are the Arabs who came to the Arabian Peninsula and mixed with its people and became Arabized. All these dialects are Arabic dialects, but the Quran was revealed in the clear, eloquent Arabic language that corrected the tongues of the Arabs. The reason Arabic words are found in all languages of the world is that it is the origin, and when the descendants of Adam spread across the earth, they changed the mother language (Arabic), and some Arabic words remained in their dialects. Take for example the words that describe parents (Abi “baba”/ Omi “mama”-Arabic-. PAPA / MOM or MAMA English and other languages. APPA / Amma - Korean, Chinese, etc.). Also, almost all languages alphabet starts with (A, B) Why? The Quran is the clear Arabic language that standardized the various Arab dialects. Thus, the word 'Arabic' does not mean the language of the Arabs but means 'a clear, original, distinct tongue without defect or deficiency.' So, as you mentioned in your video, when the Quran says, “Quran revealed in clear Arabic”, it does not mean it was revealed in the language of the Arabs, it means that this is Quran revealed in a clear, original, distinct tongue without defect or deficiency. Ibn Faris and Al-Suyuti (Muslim scholars) agree that the Arabic letters are divinely ordained as Adam was taught. Hence, in light of the above the Quran is 100% Arabic. I know this is new to you and may shock you... Do more research. I ask Allah to guide you to the straight path. Peace be onto you.

I m just confused what is different between what Hitler did and what west did to native Americans and blacks , Orientalism is really core in Holland thinking

So Adam is also a god according to Christians?

Allah was always a part of the worship of the people of Hijaz. Remember that monotheism was introduced by Abraham through his son Ishmael. So the concept of the one god was not foreign pre-islam. But over the years, the monotheistic religion was corrupted and polytheism by the introduction of deities as intercessors was incorporated. So they were aware of the one supreme, but adulterated and introduced other gods so that more money could be collected during pilgrimage to mecca and the ka'bah which had existed since the time of Abraham and Ishmael.

An unbiased, factually leaning, interpretation of the paleo evidences found in the Arabian lands. Very enthusiastically discussed and presented. Thank you.

People usually are prone to write inscriptions on walls, rocks, trees, and caves while away from their homes. Tourists and wonderers oftens do that and we witness sit when we see graffiti of their names on important or historical sites. Even Kings used to use stones to write proclamation of their name and authority on rocks.

This interview makes it sound like God did it. How details collate exceeds casual memetics.

A reviewer, Abid, writes this: “While I've enjoyed some of Holland's other work I feel he's missed the boat here by setting his cap at Patricia Crone, the Danish Orientalist who makes most modern scholars of Islam/Arabia come all over giggles; he might have read Wilferd Madelung instead, or at least used his fellow BBC-wallah, Richard Miles', skeptical attitude towards 'scholars' who simply tell their side of the story, especially a discredited, Orientalist one... all in all Reza Aslan is the far better read for a history of Islam's beginnings.”

Islam is not empire of faith there is nothing in the Quran says anything about state/empire but there has been Muslim empires unfortunately many Hadith centric or at they are referred to Suni belief this nonsense prophet’s role in madina was a mediator judge and then after his death growing Muslim community chose leader according to Arabic tradition

The Quran says it is a book that explains everything in detail, then it contradicts itself by not explaining everything in detail. Inshallah we will get a more detailed revelation next time

Different heads?

Because the Text is extremely obscure and incoherent. It's not the usual babble about the meaning of Texts, its way more in the quran. This proves that the meaning was lost at some Point in time to the transmitters of the Text, en Passant disproving oral Transmission of the quran.

Everyone is smiling and happy. I love a world full of truth and righteousness.

This guy is a fraud. He has to realise the implications of what hes saying. "The data is imdeterminate". That means extremist and violent interpretations are just as valid as the moderate and liberal ones people like him champion. The facts are regardless of sect within sunnism , certain things are agreed upon and there is no dispute in 1400 years of islam. And even differences of opinion on fiqh issues are to a certain degree respected as equally valid. On this basis the data cannot be indeterminate.

As for the handala , there are many compagnons and non compagnons with the name handala's ibn amru/ibn abi amir : Handala ibn amru al aslami Handala ibn amru ibn handala Handala ibn amru al rizqi Handala ibn qeis ibn amru al rizqi (not a compagnon but saw many compagnons and transmited hadiths from them) Handala ibn rabi'a ibn saifi that was known as ibn amru because he descended from amru , know as the writer because he wrote somthing for the prophet as they say Handala al ghassil , who is name is handala ibn abi a'amir , a compagnon , his grand father amru was a cristian monk (rahib) Handala ibn qays ibn amru : a compagnon also ! Handala ibn abi amir ibn sayfi : the one that the researchers point to. So the name was very commun , amru or abu amir are also very commun names , and those who the hadith reporters have knows are only few of many handala's ibn amru or ibn abi amir that were not muslims maybe and maybe never heard of islam in arabia at the time of the inscription

Identifying handalah as the compagnon because of abdel uzza is based on an assumption, wich is that there was islam in that region at the time of the inscription ! , and that the inscription goes back to the 6th century and to someone who knows the prophet , who let him write the name of his grand father as it is... Circular thinking falasy there by sidky !

The words were used in common language and integrated at that time within Arabic for more than thousand years before Muhammad came.

Sorry but this clearly a later inscription from not earlier then the 8th century ...the style of writing is clearly kufi B (8th century) , that can be seen in "أوصي" and especially how he wrote the ي under the ص , in how the ـه is writen Handallah lived till 3 hijri !!! We have no kufi from that time or earlier I'm shocked to see al jalad participating in this ! And , putting everything aside , the only thing that can make us believe it is an inscription by the hand of Handallah is the name ! There is no date , we can't carbon date rock inscriptions (thus the fact that they are a secondary or third source and can never equal animal/vegetal support manuscripts) But amru and handallah are very commun names , there are thousands of Amru who named their sons Handallah ! So how do you know he is not a simple worked that halped in the building of the mosque attributed to ali (with also no proof) ?! Or a person that lived in later generations ?! Or a 21 century saudi muslim who wants to fight dan gibson's theories , just like those who wrote the inscriptions attributed to omar near mekka but didnt care about the history of paleography

There are tens of fals iscriptions in saudi arabia claiming to be to umar , ali , uthman , when they're all recent Why is this one relevant and authentic ? The style of writing can't prove anything as it is so similar to nowadays style of writing + Haitham sidky isn't a neutral researcher , he is known to be anti revesionist and anti orientalist

Loool, can someone tell him about semitic languages tree?

Quran chapter 18 : is the most fascinating chapter of Quran

Torah and Gospel and Quran are all from the Creator the One God of all the. It is a guide to good living . When the source of the book is the same the message in it is same too .

This is the best discussions i have seen so far concerning pre-Islamic inscriptions. Some big jumps and assumptions are being made here. There is still not a convincing argument for saying that Syriac does not heavily influence Arabic writing and scripts. It is not natural for languages to make these quantum jumps unless a powerful empire is driving the process. So, process to Arabic script develop would have been a lot slower and diverse in the 5th century until the rise of the Arab empires that would be the case

Must be « god » .. sudenly 🤪🤪🤪

Sorry .. 😂😂😂

What are the proof of « Mekka » and worst « masjid haram » ????? 😳😳😳

Dont be stupido 😂😂😂

There might be speculation this guy is an idiot but I highly doubt it's speculation and just a fact.

S. G. Palamas

Salaamun alaykum, Answering this question:absolutely not because,using all the diacritic marks and the organic quranic methodology reveals that the true stories of the quran are very different then the Christian biblical stories pasted over the scripture.These true stories hold deep insight,unlike the stories that have been taught for quite some time.These trues stories are very different.inshaallahh we will all be increased in evidence based knowledge,and put to rest the erroneousness and misguidance.No more opinions.just eilm.rabbi ighfirlee wa zidnae eilman.

Excellent program

I dont what is the intentions of this Pls explain