Jack Tannous [II]: Christianity in Arabia | Does the Qur'an Know an Arabic Translation of the Bible?

In this video, I have the pleasure of interviewing Professor Jack Tannous of Princeton University. Professor Tannous is an Associate Professor of History and Hellenic Studies; Chair of the Committee for the Study of Late Antiquity; and Director of the Program in Hellenic Studies at Princeton University. He is a distinguished scholar who studies late antiquity, Syriac studies, Arab Christianity, and much more.
Prof. Tannous's book can be purchased here: www.amazon.com/Making-Medieva...
Biblical Turns of Phrase in the Qur'an: www.academia.edu/40903615/_Bi...

[@mohamedakachat3737]

thats some high quality content . thank you so much professor Reynolds

[@AbdulHannanAbdulMatheen]

👏🙂 very interesting interview.

[@Aijan100]

Great channel! So glad to come across it.

[@jackaroo1231]

Great discussion!

[@Kuuzie1]

I am much in love with this Channel ❤.

[@aomar1143]

Dear Gabriel, Excellent discussion 👍 Thank you very much for your videos and for inviting Jack Tannous. It has enriched our understanding of the scope of his work. With your KZbin channel, you're doing a very useful job of teaching. Could you please do a session to present Jacqueline Chabbi's work? Because I think there are several points in common between her work and that of Tannous and al-Jallad. Tannous takes into account the specific social and linguistic context of Tihama. His analysis takes the terrain seriously, at a very specific time. In addition, Tannous insists on a specific analysis of each appearance of the Arabic word in each verse of the Koran, starting from its understanding in its first environment of enunciation. This avoids the anachronisms and projections likely to be made by each and every one of us. Thanks again for the quality of your videos. Aomar

[@adnanmahmutovic]

Wonderful discussion, thank you.

[@sidneysentell2510]

A great version II with Professor Tannous.

[@hassanmirza2392]

Sister, I advise you to focus on conservative translations of Quran like Oxford Quran or Clear Quran. Also, rely on conservative Tafsirs like Muhammad Asad Quran and Study Quran of Hossain Nasr. These Christian scholar here would do their best to prove that Quran is not from Allah, and will try their utmost to create confusion about Quran via peddling historic-critic method. Quran does not need any historic-critic method because the Uthmanic Codex is well preserved, unlike Biblical codexes which come from fragments, and no one knows much about their authors. Western liberals and Christians want to create a class of liberal Muslims who are like Reform & Conservative Jews or Mainline Protestants, who will then accept liberal agendas like LGBTQ and adultery.

[@anaveler4147]

re. 37:48 "phenomenologically there is a Ghospel" - having wished to engage with it like that [Eastern var.], I can very well attest the phenomenon. The text as such inserts itself in speech phenomenally. [/ so very happy to be listening, btw]

[@dadrewtv7946]

Excellent discourse on the source of the writers of Quran reflecting back in 7th century..

[@malekmoubasher9902]

One of best of your episodes and most deep; one point @Gabrial and @Jack it seems that in the time that the Quran was recited, its direct audience had access to the full scripture , please check 5:43 and 5:66

[@gavinjames1145]

Also Q10:94 and _Sunan Abu-Dawud_ Book 33 tell us that the _Torah_ was available to Muhammad.

[@malekmoubasher9902]

@@gavinjames1145yeah this also, but in an indirect way

[@nonomnismoriar9051]

@@malekmoubasher9902 That Abu Dawud hadith was likely invented to explain and provide historical context to the Quranic verses, here indeed interpreted in their plain meaning before the doctrine of "tahrif" was established. So I wouldn't use ahadith to prove this or other issues. The Quran should be taken by itself and read mostly through a Late Antique frame.

[@malekmoubasher9902]

I agree @@nonomnismoriar9051 🙂

[@RezaMohsin]

Wonderful as always. Gabriel: you asked the question about the makeup of Mecca at the time of the prophet. The discussion then focused purely on the presence of Christians. Could you or Jack comment on the question of the religious makeup of Mecca, because what I am picking up from the various videos, for example the one with Ahmad Al-Jallad, and even comments in this video, that Arabia was predominantly monotheistic at the time of the prophet. Is that a generally accepted view now? And if so, what was the fight between the prophet and the Meccans about because the traditional account has been that the conflict was about monotheism vs paganism.

[@dodgysmum8340]

I've seen various other scholars say (if the dispute was in Mecca rather than further North, which is still a point of contention), that it was about the use of intercessors eg angels. Bt to b clear I've not heard anyone credible say these mini deities were a reincarnation of the old pagan gods eg Manat. The rows were about angels and also the disputes of various types of Christians/ Jews on the nature of Christ - on which there were many many ideas; many such had died out with the growing stranglehold of the Catholic church in "civilised" areas of the Eastern Roman Empire, lthough out of the fringes to the West (eg Germany, Britain) and East, (eg Khorasan), the same ideas persisted.

[@naayou99]

great informative dialogue. for 55:00 minutes what Jack said is obviously accurate. The greatest translator during the Muslim Golden Age was an Arab Christian, Hunain Bin Ishak

[@macready3289]

It would be great to see a formal sit down or debate between Dr. Shoemaker and Dr. Tannous on this issue and chapters from Shoemaker's book regarding his claim for a non-Christian presence in Mecca/Medina and Arabia for a more Syrian/Mesopotamian miliue for Christian content in the Qur'an.

[@traveleurope5756]

A more important question then "Christians in Mecca" is what was Mecca's population at the time of Muhammad? Recent estimates give a number of approx. 500. So it seems Muhammad was really talking to the wall as the host jokingly suggests :) What type of a city was Mecca? It was comprised of a single tribe namely the Quraysh (in charge of Kaaba) who were mostly pagan and partly Jewish and Christian and yet they numbered at most 1000? and there slaves too. Is such a combination possible in such a small society? and Muhammad was talking to them? does it make sense? And don't forget according to the tradition the entire Arabs were pagans and they came to Mecca for Hadj every year!

[@AMGbrmmbrmm]

What do you want to say now?

[@traveleurope5756]

@@AMGbrmmbrmm ​Two things: 1. the traditional Islamic history has problems eg its description of Mecca and pre-Islamic Hijaz's religious makeup doesn't make much sense . 2. The Quran was not formed in Mecca.

[@AMGbrmmbrmm]

@@traveleurope5756 Do you believe the Dan Gibson story?

[@TheGoodOldNas]

@@AMGbrmmbrmmDan Gibson’s theory isn’t academic at all and a theory outside of Hijaz is heavily refuted by the work of both Marijn van Putten and Jallad

[@traveleurope5756]

@@TheGoodOldNas No I dont believe in Dan Gibson's theory and for that matter any other theory. Although Dan Gibson's questioning of Mecca seems plausible. Neither van Putten nor Jallad has theories about reconstructing early Islamic history. Jallad's findings though strongly questions the idea of idolatry in the Hijaz as reported in the Islamic tradition. If I have to name some names I think I like theories set forth by Shoemaker, Tesie, and Peter von Sievers. The last one still has to be interviewed by Prof. Reynolds :)

[@anaveler4147]

re. 30:45 approx, on a mention of translated Christian texts or liturgy, I'd remind that the letter is a memorized text - it goes a long way with little need for written support & invites ad hoc translation [reported then & done now]; broad strokes of textual mechanics & no more.

[@anaveler4147]

re: 36:52 "bible in the air, not ... bible in a book" - quite

[@user-yz1dl3eu8l]

Jack, the tradition is obliged to explain what the Quran says. It could not escape to explain the Christian allusions. They have elaborated stories (wet nurse, cemetery, etc.) to undermine the questions which could be posed. Why nobody in Christianity in Late Antiquity never allude to 'Mecca' a 'prophet', etc.? Because it's neither one nor the other.

[@sang-jinchung3959]

Can you expound on how you disagree with jack?

[@khaledalothman4314]

But isn't there a harmonized Bible that was available in Arabic? The Diatessaron?

[@petergrimshaw492]

The Ebionites or Nazarenes also believed that the Mosaic scriptures were corrupted. This belief prefigures the similar Islamic belief. The Ebionites were a Jewish-Christian sect who believed that 'God is one' and that Jesus was human, not divine, I think. I have not traced their timeline, they are known of from about 200AD, so not particularly close to Islam. But I have scant info.

[@SpoonsXownXsinceX92]

There are more parallels.

[@dodgysmum8340]

They were likely active on the fringes of the empire much later eg in Arabia.

[@Zarghaam12]

Interesting, but scraping the barrel! ... AND talking about cultural / religious influences, the Old Testament was heavily influenced by Ancient Mesopotamia and particularly Ancient Egyptian religion and culture, while the New Testament grew under the looong shadow of Greco-Roman religion, languages (Greek specially) and culture. Robyn Faith Walsh & Dr. Dennis R. MacDonald throw light on this important issue, apart from Bart D. Ehrman. All well established scholars!

[@dodgysmum8340]

Absolutely - and this was first spoken about in the late 1800s! But it bears no relation to Islam. We should examine Islam in the same way, according to the same standards - its not a religious competition and this isnt some stoopid apologetics channel.

[@JohnGeometresMaximos]

Gabriel, your guest misses an extremely important point: The quran seeks to CORRECT me [I'm an Orthodox Christian]. How can the quran correct me, unless it proves to me first that it knows what I believe? The quran does not even mention the words "Holy Trinity", or "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit".

[@SzTz100]

Jack was great.

[@TheJackfd81]

It's funny how he says the crown uses the word the word of God the world the lord but when the Christians ask Muhammad he said only Allah knows

[@gnosticquran]

43:10🤣

[@Leila0S]

The first word that Muhammad was ordered to do was the word “READ”, which should prove that reading from a written source should have existed in the area and era of the prophet.

[@ob1kendobe]

The word didn’t actually mean read in that context, but rather “recite”. You can read commentary on that. Reading wasn’t the norm, reciting was (as it was an oral culture).

[@dodgysmum8340]

Doesn't the word mean both? ie we don't really know...For a merchant (like Muhammad) reading and literacy would have been the norm for obvious reasons. @@ob1kendobe

[@DrOmar11]

Very interesting conversation. I heard a little but then I got busy at work. And I hope to listen later. But I feel to offer a corrective to recent notions in some Western academic circles on study of Islamic origins that I think are perhaps overestimating presence of Christianity in Arabia. I think the information on inscriptions is very important but that it is not best at quantification for the following reason: Even if the pagan inscriptions appear to fall off after 380 AD, that may be because more and more of the literate people became Christian. Monotheists are more eager to spread their faith than polytheists so seeing the presence of Christian inscriptions can mistakenly lead one to overestimate the number of Christians. Several passionate Arab Christians of that time may try to do a lot of inscriptions. Again, only a top sliver of the population were even literate to do inscriptions so it is a mistake to infer population numbers from inscriptions alone. Furthermore, the substantial percentage of the Quran to Christians and Jews does not necessarily correlate with percentage of population. There was the problems with the Jews occurring in Madina that can explain some of it. Also, the Quran would find it more important to problematize Christian and Jewish doctrines rather than pagan doctrines since the Quran has to explain the need to supersede or to correct (a few doctrinal aspects of) the Christian and Jewish manifestations of Abrahamic monotheism.

[@dodgysmum8340]

I find the inscriptions very persuasive. Although obviously its just stage 1 of 100 in excavation. I"m not convinced by your explanations, even in tandem. 1) The inscriptions themselves do not lend themselves to proselythising. 2) You are repeating the same thing about monotheists being more literate. I'd like to see evidence of this,but I"m pretty sure in this time/ place it was marginal. 3) The hadith/ biographies conflict completely with the Qu'ran. On the balance of probabilities, I'd say its still 9-1 to the rock writing.

[@johnogrady_]

Can this Question be answered here King James revised the Bible because of corruption, what did he consider corruption??? Wasn’t he a Freemason who persecuted Catholics??? I’ve sources if needed for these Questions

[@zubairhollow]

round 3 agane agane agane

[@jma7600]

I don’t want to believe it was intentional but you have destroyed the idea that the Quran was a revealed text descending on a certain prophet. Bravo!

[@Stardust475]

Glad to see all this accesible to lay people. The tiptoeing around Islamists needs to end and approach the claims made from a historical critical approach.

[@PolarCountry]

If Muhammed had access to the Christian scriptures, why would he got it wrong? Quran is a smart book?😂

[@dodgysmum8340]

The question is which scriptures? As the interviewee states, there were a whole lot of sects in Arabia who had died out elsewhere. Their scriptures would be unrecogniseable to the Catholic Church today - especially extremes like Manicheanism, which was influenced by Zoroastrianism and Messianic Judiasm.

[@user-yz1dl3eu8l]

Najran massacre is the key point of the emergence of the Quranic texts, where, if one considers that the end of the Quran texts today is, in fact its beginning, it is alluded (regularly) that God has no child. Who says that God has a child? Posing the question is answering it.

[@dodgysmum8340]

Interested. Explain why the Najran massacre is key?

[@user-yz1dl3eu8l]

@@dodgysmum8340 Reread me and reflect.

[@dodgysmum8340]

Well thanks for the reply, but a riddle doesn't give me a historical context for a massacre of Christians by the Jewish king of a small state near Yemen (40 years before the supposed birth of Muhammad) being the key point for the emergence of the Qu'ran. I asked because i was genuinely interested. But you are going to have give me a bit more than that: the near east at that time was full of Jews who worshipped Jesus, Christians who thought he was simply a man and everything in between!

[@user-yz1dl3eu8l]

@@dodgysmum8340 Make the links.

[@user-yz1dl3eu8l]

@@dodgysmum8340 You're on false premises: no common Jews believed in Jesus, otherwise they would have been Christians. Just read the Talmud and what the Jews before him said about Jesus (Justin/Origen). Starting from false premises like you do doesn't help to understand why Najran took place.

[@A.--.]

The christians were encountered in Ethiopia in 1st hijrah and a few travels by like Warqa

[@jarnpr1316]

Of course, there were Christians in Arabia hundreds of years before Islam: Gazannids (NorthWestern Arabian Kingly Dynasty under the Byzantines) and the Lakmidts (NorthEastern/Eastern Arabian Kingly Dynasty) under the Persians. These are mayor players, many of which converted to Islam under pressure as Arabia invented its own gnostic syncreticism and Mohammedan personality cult. It all grew out of Iraki/Persian religious "thought." Any minority groups who disagree were eliminated and their books burned (my contention). Regrettably, Allah/Hubal the main idol at the Kaba pre-islamically is Islam's "God" still, today. So, not MonoTheism but "MonoIdolatry" rules in the Muslim world today. Luckily, the Most Trusted Islamic Sources are Islam's Nemesis. It's a matter of time in the Information Age when Islam "crawls back to the hole it came from," the only Mohammedan prophesy I fervently pray to Jesus Christ that will come to pass! Deus Vult! Sins of Islam Monitor @IslamSins in "X"

[@ThePOKeTalker]

Stay dead in your sin of worshipping the false Christ. The original Christianity died at the councils.

[@jarnpr1316]

@@ThePOKeTalker You.must be annignorant Muslim trying to teach Christinity. Keep on adoring the 57th Century pre-islamic Moon god Allah/Hubal, pagan.

[@ob1kendobe]

The argument that Allah is “hubal” is untenable, intellectually dishonest, and extremely lazy. The history and the Quran show that hubal was the Qurayshes belief and they would push hubal as a partner of Allah. Anyone can do any cursory research to see that, but biased Christians like you can’t fathom it because it challenges your worldview and theological beleifs.

[@Zazamarkle]

@@ob1kendobeyou know mohammads dads name is Abd- allah right? So he died when Mohammad is 2 months old or 4 year depending who you are reading … bells ringing??

[@ob1kendobe]

@@Zazamarkle there is demonstrable historical evidence of Christian’s and Jews in the Arabian peninsula with the name Abdullah literally hundreds of years before Muhammad. The Arabs in the Arabian peninsula weren’t always pagans in totality they were at times in history ishmaelite monotheists Ring your own bell by reading real history

[@baghdade]

do you really don't know that the grandfather of the prophet from his mom's side was Christian!!!!

[@MBiernat0711]

Oh wow - great conversation and many brilliant points brought up. The only awkward things that stand up is that the guest seems to think that “Mecca” was in (today’s) Saudi Arabia- and that leads him to disregard “Nasara” as Judeo-Christians. Most probably - the terms “Mecca” or “Bacca” or “Station of Abraham” or “Ancient House” refer to places in the Levant - Jerusalem Temple or whereabouts If Mecca WERE in today’s Hijaz - then yes - “Nasara” being Judeo Christians would be a stretch. But since the Quran was most likely composed in the Northern Arabia - the presence of Judeo Christians is common. As to the question “why the Quran does not mention the word “Christian” or “Mesihun” - that is because Christians are belittled and associated with the “mushrikun”. The term “mushrikun” in the Quran includes both what we would consider “pagan” today - and also, Christians. Yeah - the idea of “simple believer” is pretty silly in the world of competing religious ideologies - between religions and within religions. It seems the guest just didn’t want to “bother” with the idea of Judeo Christians- just like he doesn’t want to be bothered with the idea that today’s Mecca is a late 7th / early 8th century invention Other than that - BRILLIANT interview ❤ “Christian missionaries invented the Arabic script ” ok - Woow - that is a sentence that I would NEVER imagine hearing. Did I mis-heard it??

[@Zazamarkle]

Mohammad s 1st wifes cousin is an ebionite nestorian priest , so Mohammad married her when he is 25 and revelations happened at 40 , so go figure.

[@anaveler4147]

57:21 'needlessly complex' - churchyard theologies of one, that is, the kind that sometimes turn into biographies of theologians, or lives of saints, or both. Then, how well read the minting of a new revealed book might be… Let - Putna, end of the mass of the Dormition this year, remarks on whether sermons are needed to salt The word [videotaped here, translation required] theology served cold - fitting the notion (via R Hoyland) that the clear arabi was minted 'so as to be understood'; I understand that understanding to be of the acts of following: of politics [benchmark, Medina], acts of textualist memory not yet detached from speech & ad hoc recension [as it were], burden commensurate with tradition a cauda not quite by way of ink… @ana_veler, owing apologies, over & out.

[@watchman4todayreloaded192]

Etymology of the word Gospel in the Quran "The Arabic word Injil (إنجيل) as found in Islamic texts, and now used also by Muslim non-Arabs and Arab non-Muslims, is derived from the Syriac Aramaic word awongaleeyoon (ܐܘܢܓܠܝܘܢ) found in the Peshitta (Syriac translation of the Bible),[1] which in turn derives from the Greek word euangelion (Εὐαγγέλιον)[2] of the originally Greek language New Testament, where it means "good news" (from Greek "Εὐ αγγέλιον"; Old English "gōdspel"; Modern English "gospel", or "evangel" as an archaism, cf. e.g. Spanish "evangelio") The word Injil occurs twelve times in the Quran.[3]" People think that the Quran is the book written in pure Arabic that the Quran talks about but something like 15% of the Quran is loan words from all over, so either the Quran is talking about a different book, or the Quran we have today is at least 15% corrupted.

[@ahmedmanan3124]

There is no such thing as a pure language you have to have another dialect as a standard and there is no reason to say that classical Arabic Wich appeared after Islam should be a standard

[@cogit0ergo705]

The Quran claims to be the literal words of Allah, yet Q 5:32 is from Talmudic Jews doing exegesis on Genesis. This is not the Word of God delivered through prophets, but is exegesis. The Talmud is after the destruction of the 2nd Temple in Jerusalem, so after 70 A.D. According to Islam, there would be no prophets to speak the Word of God in that period anyway, since according to Islam there are no prophets between the time of Jesus ("Isa" to them) and Muhammad.

[@DutchComedian]

​​@@cogit0ergo705and if the Quran says the sky is blue I suppose you'd call that plagiarism too?

[@StatisticalCat]

​@@DutchComedianthat's the point. If Quran says human are two legged creatures then they will say copied from Torah and Gospels. These guys are sure funny

[@cogit0ergo705]

@@DutchComedian - You are clueless. 1) Islam's claim is that the quran is the LITERAL words of allah. 2) Q 5:32 is not the Word of God spoken by a Confirmed Prophet. 3) Q 5:32 is exegesis of Genesis by Talmud scholars. Talmud comes after 70 A.D. 4) Islam claims there are NO prophets in that time. 5) Q 5:32 is not from a Confirmed Prophet (Islam's own standard) Quran is fake. Do I have to go mono-syllable for you?

[@iyepmamun2315]

I think there is no influence whether there is translation or not to the Crux or Core Islamic teaching.

[@raindrops1047]

Be aware of the orientalist and their intensions.

[@nonomnismoriar9051]

Which is... to try and reach the truth as best as possible by interpreting data? Contrary to religious fanatics and apologists, whose goal is to find congruent data, fabricate it, or destroy contradictory data to reach a pre-conceived conclusion they feel worthy to be defended at any cost? And insult (as though someone like Reynolds or Shoemaker can be equated with a 19th-century missionary), defame or even silence, persecute and kill those who don't?

[@parkerflop]

@@nonomnismoriar9051 no, its to try to tear islam to shreds like they succeeded in with the Bible which is why any informed pastor starts doubting his fake faith if he allows himself to listen or think 😂 but they will fail and christians will roast along with atheists

[@nonomnismoriar9051]

@@parkerflop To study history you need to study it from natural causes. Otherwise, anybody can claim their case is different and all of history is based on myths and religious claims. If you fear your particular case is too fragile to resist critical inquiry, that is your problem. Scholars don't have multibillion dollar propaganda and repressive apparatuses like the Wahhabis to spread and enforce their views, nor do they want to. Their books are overwhelmingly intra-academic affairs. (Note: this is not to go into the classic Quranic dilemma you've just buried yourself into by criticizing the Bible as the two are inseparably connected, but that's largely beyond the scope of this theme on scholarship so let's leave it at that.)

[@andrewphilip3308]

how many 'informed pastors' do you know ? what a silly generalisation - the point is that in the Christian faith we are able to ask questions - which you have never learned to do, it appears.

[@A.--.]

Dont say "certain verses are difficult to understand" but rather say "certain concepts are difficult or impossible to understand." We can only know very little of the true reality of creation and science has helped us uncover just a tinny fraction of it. As we dig deeper (Quantum Physics) we are realizing what we assumed to be factual truth reality is actually not that. Humble yourself guys, dont be arrogant and emotional (Jahiloon). Stay within the lanes of 17:36 and 3:7. Dont assume things abd dont delve into things you have no clear understanding of.

[@AbdulHannanAbdulMatheen]

You sound like you don't wish to learn. When you say "Humble yourself guys" to Learned Professors in the highest schools, you intern reveal yourself to be arrogant and emotional.

[@A.--.]

@@AbdulHannanAbdulMatheen brother i love to learn but not hypotheticals, connect-the-dot theories, or narratives. I come to the profesors for evidences. Instead, i find narratives being sold. These universities have been hijacked by narrative pushing, slave-owning, tax-dodging, war-suplorting, capitalism worshiping evil people who use the intellectual brainpower of the nerds to spread lies and corruption around the world. They try to confuse the ignorant massess.

[@A.--.]

@@AbdulHannanAbdulMatheen brother, i know world history. When the East India Trade company went to Asia, they used their surgeons (completely against the Hippocratic Oat to be used as a political tool) to fix hemorrhoids of the Raj so he would let them open shop. That opened the door to their enslavement.

[@SpoonsXownXsinceX92]

Frustrating to watch this one. Tannous is talking from two sides of his mouth. It's really strange to me. Maybe I mishear the larger argument, but I will lay out my thoughts anyway. The most infuriating part is around the halfway point where just starts arguing that the Quran knows something about the Bible - an argument I cannot imagine anyone making and which was not presented by Gabriel at all. He has a tangent about the word 'Injil' as being a stand in for the New Testament/Bible, meanwhile not noting that it is clearly a loanword of which he does not denote whether is a normal word to use that way in surrounding languages. After all, the New Testament is not just gospels, he mentions the Book of Romans but that's obviously an epistle. So why would 'injil' be an okay word to talk about the whole New Testament? Why is it that Early Muslims disregard Paul's work, yet the Quran alludes to him then? What does the Quran think the Injil is? Is the injil the acceptable term for New Testament in this region or not? That's a far more interesting and relevant line of thought that would go into Gabriel's question, but instead he waffles on about how the Quran clearly knowns of the Bible. To top it off, that is a complete strawmen - no one made this argument and no one would. His arguments here are particularly strange for the reason the Biblical allusions are non-direct. The first argument is that he "heard" that it would give authority to the direct text in the Bible, which the Quran (?) didn't want to do. Yet we know from the tradition that Muhammad swore on whatever was 'between their hands' and asked to hold what was 'between their hands' to do so. Wouldn't that give direct authority to the whole document? His second argument is that people at that time couldn't cite things by verse and number, so there can't be direct citations. Nobody said that, first of all, and second of all, if the providence is divine or by someone - as he also stated - is "deeply learned" about the Bible, then why are there no direct citations? He even gives the example of the name Amram (Imran) but doesn't note that the supposedly very learned originator of the Quran must have misheard the name as the lemma is incorrect - why is that? For similar reasons, it would be more interesting from Jack Tannous to go into why 'Isa (a 'Bible A-lister') is used instead of Yasu' and if that makes sense to do in this area. He just presupposes that 'Al-Ilah' leads to 'Allah', but how that philologically/linguistically-theologically makes sense he does not discuss. He just presumes it based ont he traditional narratives that came after that mentions these names as such for the first time. Matter of fact, Tannous cited very little evidence for anything in the first forty minutes from his own expertise, relying more so on 'phenomenology' (read: induction/guesswork) and what he has heard others say. He frontloads everything by assuming the tradition is correct without critically evaluating any of it. But he does state 'our' way of reading (in context, 'translating' at the start) the Quran is problematic because we assume many things that Medieval authors wrote about the Quran. So which is it? Neither does he cite things from Syriac or other contextually interesting languages like Himyar from that time to come to any conclusion other than piggybacking off of Gabriel's account. Similarly, he cites nothing from Bible variants or refer to evidence that we have about the liturgies from Damascus, Antioch or Alexandria at this time while it would be pertinent to do so. He also disregards Crone and Shoemaker in throwaway comments without putting up a defense against them. Tannous just keeps assuming the tradition is correct and accurate history, and not retroprojections from centuries later. I am not asking him to believe Petra is the Umm l-Qurra (which I don't believe either) or to completely deny traditional providence of the Quran, but could he at least argue against the grain of the tradition? Could he at least contrast/situate/contextualize the tradition? He just takes it as uncontextual truth and then postulates what the situation must've been based on his own personal human experiences. His integrity as a specialist on these texts is also dubious from this call. The distinctions he gives for the Surahs is generic, as we know that parts of some Surahs are mixtures of Medinan and Meccan material (he instead gives thought to the idea that parts are from Ta'if and "from Heaven"). It's hard to take that seriously and you would never see something like this in Critical New Testatement Studies. He criticizes some of the ideas that Mecca is not the Star Wars Cantina, but isn't your expertise supposed to tell us then where all these strange word choices and question-answer and characters originate? It's a defense of the tradition while also swatting away modern Muslim readings. Who is Tannous trying to appeal to then? At least people who like pop culture references and Whedon-esque language will be pleased, but I am not here for that.

[@A.--.]

Bani Israeel are the Ethnically unique group of people that all descended from Jacob through his 12 sons. They were given guidance (were Muslims) and regarded as 1 Ummah but some of them disbelieved. The term Christian refers to anyone who believes Jesus is divine and died for sins of christians on the cross at the hands of romans + jews. They are not Hawariyoon (who were Muslims) but rather their origins is unclear exactly. Paul definitely was a major early christian. The concepts of Trinity, divinity, salvation thru death were all concepts that evolved over time and space. Jesus + Hawariyoon were Muslims. Jesus was from Bani Israel ethnically and some of his Hawariyoo were as well but maybe not all of them.

[@jma7600]

The stupidity never ceases. The length some people will go to prove that the Quran has something to add to the Bible is hilarious.

[@epoel634]

How do people become so certain that the bible has influenced the Quran? Isn't it possible that they have no direct relationship at all?

[@user-yz1dl3eu8l]

You're joking, right?

[@StatisticalCat]

@@user-yz1dl3eu8l Bible is a joke. Read Bart Ehrman. Nobody has been able to counter him in a debate

[@jma7600]

Why not also explore the possibility that the Quran has a kaleidoscope viewpoint of ideas and stories addressed to and taken from its late antiquity milieu.

[@user-yz1dl3eu8l]

@@jma7600 Because he has not a kaleidoscope viewpoint. Read it.

[@gavinjames1145]

The Qur'an is obviously influenced by the Hebrew Bible and Christian New Testament. Compare the following: "Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written." (_John_ 21:25; _Diatesseron_ ) "Say, 'If the whole ocean were ink for writing the words of my Lord, it would run dry before those words were exhausted' even if We were to add another ocean to it." ( _Qur'an_ 18:109) Obviously, a world full of books would need an ocean full of ink with which to be written! As was discussed in the interview, the Qur'an rarely quotes the Bible, but it certainly does reflect the Bible.

[@A.--.]

Jack why dont you cite your references. It seems like you just read something and then stating things from memory. Very unprofessional and unaccecademic

[@DrOmar11]

This is not an academic paper but an informal discussion. Jack is a good academic but this is not the place to give footnotes of all the details.

[@A.--.]

@@DrOmar11 he cant even remember his references. This topic should not be discussed informally. Would you see a patient and casually discuss his new cancer diagnosis with him? A serious topic requires sincerity and formality.

[@nonomnismoriar9051]

@@A.--. The only "sincerity" apologists like you would tolerate would be an agreement with everything that traditionalist narratives of Islam have always enforced. So please drop this charade.

[@A.--.]

@@nonomnismoriar9051 traditionalists have diverse views and opinions but their sincerity is undoubted. Men who dont speak without evidence and references and spend a lifetime searching and verifying statements (ie Bukhari, Muslim) to ensure the highest level of textual integrity possible. Men who dedicate a lifetime to memorizing a book to ensure textual integrity like all the Hufaaz have done.

[@nonomnismoriar9051]

@@A.--. Actually no, lots of traditionalists (not just Muslims though, I'm talking about any person who cannot separate his or her personal beliefs from investigation and public policy. It need not even be in a religious context) are systematically dishonest in representing what others and their own sources teach, for example. But anyway, you're still proving my point, that they're not willing to think outside of the classical sources paradigm. That's fine if they are satisfied with that. But many will viciously attack, defame and demonize - like you yourself did in another comment in this thread - anyone who does otherwise. And given the power, will silence, persecute and even kill them. These are facts.

[@A.--.]

I recommend everyone listen to Bart Ehrman. He is more of an authority on NT history than Jack. Also Jack, beacuse you have demonstrated poor recall memory, please bring your references next time....best to read it outloud so we can verify it. Gabe: please read Munsouah to know the meaning of each verse as understood by first 3 generations instead of making up your own understanding of verses. You can diwnload the 24 volumes on line.

[@StatisticalCat]

Yes Bart Ehrman is an authority. Could your share the online version of the refrence of the first three centuries that you referred to

[@A.--.]

@@StatisticalCat download all 24 volumes in pdf. Vol 1 is introduction. This Tafseer gives a verse by verse explanation of what Sahaba, Tabiyeen, Taba-Tabiyeen said about that verse with references. It is color coded for easy read. When there is disagreement among them then obviously the Sahaba take precedence and among them the scholars (Ibn Abbas, Ibn Masood, Ibn Umar etc).

[@StatisticalCat]

@@A.--. link plz

[@StatisticalCat]

@@A.--. where is the link? The name of author etc. Send me some details

[@andrewphilip3308]

if Bart turned his attention to your tradition he would have a field day pointing out its inconsistencies and tearing it apart.

[@A.--.]

What is Injeel: Mathew 4:23 says: 23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people. Here is an example of the difference between Injeel.and Bible (New Testament). This writter (whoever he was) is teling us that Jesus went to a place and preacher the Injeel. Unfortunately imstead of documenting the Injeel, he was documenting the event. This is how most of the Injeel was lost and most of the bible is NOT Injeel.

[@misterprogressive8730]

You dont have any idea what the "gospel" is. You like bart ehrman so much, why dont you read his book "lost christianities", then you might understand what the "gospel" is. For short, the gospel is not a book!

[@A.--.]

@@misterprogressive8730 thank you brother. I think i have a little understanding of what gosple is but you can share your thoughts with me too. Since youve read that book why not just discuss the topic. The earliest written evidence of gosple is P52 (tinny puece of John) which dates to 40-90yrs after Jesus written in greek. Since its a copy of something and it came after mark, Mathew, luke, Q and M it implies there were those teachings circulating begore 40-90 after Jesus. Now your turn.

[@JohnGeometresMaximos]

@@A.--. Mathew 4:23 says: "Καὶ περιῆγεν ὅλην τὴν Γαλιλαίαν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς διδάσκων ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς αὐτῶν καὶ κηρύσσων τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς βασιλείας..." The text states our Lord Jesus Christ preached about the Good News of the Kingdom of Heaven. The verse does not mention a book titled "Injeel".

[@A.--.]

Quran is a very smart Book! Good job Jake now your reaching the Truth 👍👏👏👏👍

[@abubakarbaba9781]

Honestly Gabriel Jack is one of your worst guests ever. Absolutely baseless discussion

[@A.--.]

Dont say "biblical ideas" but rather say "prophetic traditions" from time of Abraham to Jesus.

[@AbdulHannanAbdulMatheen]

why?

[@A.--.]

@@AbdulHannanAbdulMatheen well beacuse the biblical versions are corrupted. Examples are: Lot (a righetous man) escapes LGBT city cursed by God turns around to commit incest 🤮 with his daughters. David sends his innocent foot soldier to frontline to die so he can get with his wife 🤮.

[@mziskin]

You the biblical ideas police now?

[@A.--.]

@@mziskin explain how please

[@mziskin]

@@A.--. my brother, if you do not know English why have an opinion

[@A.--.]

Instead of making up your own interpretations of what Arabi and Ajami mmimples why dont you two open up al-Mansoa and see what Ibn Abbas, Ibn Masood, Ibn Umar etc said about it.

[@DutchComedian]

Al Mansoa? What is that? Because I've never heard of such a book in Arabic, unless you mean Urdu or Bangla perhaps

[@SpoonsXownXsinceX92]

He means Al-Dur al-Manthur @@DutchComedian

[@n.o.n.e.]

7th century Mecca never existed

[@Htfs57h4j8]

@AominOrg