Odon-Pt.3: Finally! Evidence the Qur'an has many authors!

[@anjaliroymukherji1086]

Odon brings good and new material to study... and it helps me more and more... Thanks Dr. Jay Smith and Odon.

[@azedinebenammar4339]

Jay, in my previous comment i talked about a member of the team who wrote the Cor'an during Al Mansur reign and escaped to Andalucia with a different copy called in North Africa " Werch reading". Well, what Odon brought today is not new, all famous prophets( Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and others) are mentioned differently in various Surats. Very good job, you are getting closer to discover the secret of Abuodon who fled to Spain and whose confidential work is well kept in Royal Library of Toledo.

[@olafshomkirtimukh9935]

Do you mean "WARSH Reading" (a graphic variant of "wErCh")? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsh#Comparison_of_Warsh_and_Hafs_recitation

[@azedinebenammar4339]

@@olafshomkirtimukh9935 yes!

[@coffeecup7084]

Thank you both I love Odon every time he comes on

[@paalexsamaklyne1040]

With love and care from us Dayaks here in Borneo. Well done Odon and Dr Jay Smith for the wonderful and meaningful presentation for the public. All students studying for their Islamic studies should use the books by these people for their real degrees and PhDs. Ask questions Muslims ask questions and not just follow what your teachers, lecturers and professors teach you. Don't just get your degrees,go home ,grow beards then call yourself ustadz. These two are the most knowledgeable in Islam,not forgetting CP of course. They are simply the BEST.😅😅❤❤😮😮

[@justaminute3111]

I’ve been loving all of this. It is a crazy feeling to be witnessing a major paradigm shift. I actually asked about the ur-Koran before all the broke and these are answering my questions. Leading on from these revelations, I have been wondering: since so much of what Muslims believe they understand about the Koran actually comes from commentary derived from the Hadith, are there similar investigations going on to place them into a real historical matrix?

[@enimoenglishchannel1692]

Nonsense

[@moorek1967]

@@enimoenglishchannel1692 What is nonsense?

[@andysmith-vi1bo]

They follow the hadiths more so than the quran. Many Muslims much like Christians just take the words that the imans or preacher say as truth

[@troyenglish3223]

Fascinating stuff when brought to light.👍

[@ImCarolB]

This is all so interesting! Something new rises to the surfaces all the time. I am always struck by the differences between the Bible and the Quran, such as Eden not being in God's created earth, but in heaven, and Satan's sin being not in refusing to submit to God, but to man. The Quran-writers' choices raise all sorts of theological problems.

[@hereweare9096]

Surely that’s a form of shirk then for Islam. The bowing before Adam?

[@2511x01]

Wow. This is HUGE. Great job 👍

[@dqschannel]

This is too funny, I did a video on this exact thing a while back called I think Fingerprints of Men.

[@OdonLafontaine]

I did not know your channel, but i just subscribed What is your video on "this exact thing" ?

[@dqschannel]

@@OdonLafontaine Hi Odin, I am honored you subscribed. I am already subscribed as I think your work is awesome. KZbin doesn't like links but the video I did is: Fingerprints of men in quran. from Dec 5, 2021 It's my attempt of showing humans had a hand in putting together quran.

[@slippingsnake]

​@@dqschannel it seems youtube allows internal links to youtube videos, channels etc. Though external links are a mess, the comment most likely will vanish, I guess most of us made this experience :) test with your video "Fingerprints of men in Quran" kzbin.info/www/bejne/r5jQZZeBh719la8

[@dqschannel]

@@slippingsnake Ah so links to other YT videos are ok as I see the link. Thanks for info.

[@barringtonbennett5885]

Good knowledge zeen bless 🙏

[@theophilusayantokun5581]

Where else can Islam and its adherents hide from these slamming truths? Thank you, J Smith and Odon. God bless you.

[@nemesis1291]

In the year of the Lord 2022 will be remembered as the year when the korään was exposed as a lie, deus vult ✝️

[@clemontplomina9434]

Once again, there r "HOLES" in the Islamic Standard Narrative, many thanks to Shake Yasir Qadhi. He ignominiously said that this "HOLES" should Not be discussed in public which caused a huge uproar among tens of thousands of muslims.

[@bestKaffir.underTheSon]

The holes are so big. It is like trying to keep out a mosquito with chicken mesh.

[@yakovmatityahu]

Muslims : Quran was given to Muhammad directly from Allah Me : No it was given to Syrian Christian Missionaries 😁...Thank you Jay and Odon for this groundbreaking video.

[@mihailgae-draghici4864]

yes, my friend, the Christians; only xtians?

[@yakovmatityahu]

@@mihailgae-draghici4864 yes Quran was a Lexionary used in Christian churches...it was given to Syrian Christian missionaries by allah.

[@twnb7733]

----- 'the Biography of Muhammad' by Ibn Kathir says that Muhammad didn't have any blood connection with Ismael, Page 51--kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZnaTiamOrcucm8lh--

[@twnb7733]

----Waraka, a Rabbi-Priest, the first to translate the Hebrew Gospel to the Arabic, had presided over the mariage between Kadijah and the young arabic orphan. This young Arab was a judo-christian. There is no islam. The Quran recognizes Jesus as the jewish Messiah, which means that Jesus is the God of Israel.

[@yakovmatityahu]

@@twnb7733 Muhammed is none other than Jesus...the Blessed one or desired one.

[@josefa6064]

Actually this story occurs seven times in the qur'an: Surah 2,30-38; 7,11-25; 15,28-40; 17,61-65; 18,50-51; 20,116; 38,71-85 I guess that the coming into existence of the qur'an was a rather complicated matter.

[@josefa6064]

@@Al-Jahiz These are the seven that I found. I cannot exclude that there are more. Actually there are seven passages about the same topic. But they are not the same. There are differences between them. This rather indicates that they were not told by the same forgetful author but there were several authors who told the same story in different ways.

[@Corolla97ww]

@@Al-Jahiz Maybe you should try again?

[@colinpatterson728]

@@Al-Jahiz...I think your argument on the face of it so far is good...Are you saying that the seven ( if it is in fact seven) varied repetitions of the 'Adam' / Iblis story correspond to the seven reportedly given to Mohammad by 'Jibril' ?

[@johnpakard6386]

@@josefa6064 Well if they are not the same then they are not repetitions. How can that be, Mr. @Alexandrius 2?

[@simonhengle8316]

Another cracking presentation, thank you Odon and Dr. Jay Smith. Are you going to do a presentation that shows when the the Abbasids changed the Quran and what Surahs they introduced etc.?

[@TruthSeekerAll]

If allah was indeed god, why was he demanding Iblis prostrate i.e. worship a man @ Adam, instead of worshiping the creator God? Iblis seemed to display somewhat a superior "wisdom" in refusing to worship Adam.

[@nijoyjohn4366]

Odon Hats of to you for research and insight, Big salute to Mr Jay for your enthusiasm and Zest in peeling of these layers of myth one by one.

[@Peter-xf9jy]

the core difference is in the (alleged) direct speech. added details can be due to different reasons (as you admitted), but when Allah speaks it cant be different. and thats what we find as well.

[@alonzoharris6730]

Why not?

[@Peter-xf9jy]

@@alonzoharris6730 bc direct speech can not differ, otherwise Allah would be paraphrasing himself.

[@Peter-xf9jy]

i mean he can paraphrase others ie. when Iblis speaks in the Quran. there some Moslems admit, maybe Allah rephrases the words of Satan, and the others Jinn and human speakers, so that finally all is actuall his speech (as to match the claimed ALL of the Quran is Allahs unaltered word.).

[@alonzoharris6730]

@@Peter-xf9jy Why not? The conclusion doesn't follow from your premise.

[@OdonLafontaine]

that's the point!

[@ishtarlew598]

'And when WE said to the angels'. Who is WE if Allah is only 1?. Also many more times like 3:44 which We reveal unto thee. 3:145 WE will give him thereof; and whoever desires the reward of the Hereafter, WE will give him thereof; and WE will surely reward the grateful. 17:1 We have blessed the precincts, so that We may show to HIM some of Our signs; surely He is the Hearing, the Seeing.

[@johnpakard6386]

MONOtheism at its finest.

[@whoisnext9837]

The Makkans wanted to keep their friendlier skies with its mix of zoological constellations and heroic gods and lovely goddesses. The friendly gods more than offset the few bad apples like the warlike Mars, grouchy Saturn and the moon with its scimitar phase at the end of month. In the pagan era in the Fertile Crescent, the moon-god mostly rowed his boat across the sky and was the farmers’ friend who was associated with bulls, sickles and scythes. In Southern Arabia however the moon-gods were also national war-gods, as Ditlef Nielsen noted. Pagans believed that most of the pagan astral gods would gladly hear an earthly supplicant and then answer the prayer themselves, or intercede with Allah the moon- god, especially when it was not a moonless night. The best time for the other gods to approach Allah was when he showed a smiley crescent face at the beginning of the month. Otherwise, Allah became increasingly hard to approach as the moon became fuller, which is why his brightness rendered other astral objects nearly invisible. In Muhammad’s schema however Allah became omnipotent and less friendly. Heaven help the astral angel like Venus who approached Allah at the end of the month when he appeared as a scimitar. In a moon-o-theistic sky, Allah became like the Persian monarch in the Biblical Book of Esther: All the king’s officials and the people of the royal provinces know that for any man or woman who approaches the king in the inner court without being summoned the king has but one law: that he be put to death. The only exception to this is for the king to extend the gold scepter to him and spare his life (Est 04:11). So this partly answers the question of why the Makkans were so adamant about wanting to keep their intercessors to Allah such as Allat, Manat and Uzza. As Hawting describes it, the Makkans had only “some limited and grudging acceptance of Allah.” Allah the moon-god was unapproachable because of his criminally deranged, warlike disposition and his sodomistic tendencies. That the Makkans knew Allah to be implacably harsh and sexually perverted is evident from the Koran, the Hadith traditions and the character of Muhammad and Islam itself. The Koran shows that Mekkans knew Allah not to be compassionate: “Call upon Allah or call upon Rahman: by whatever name ye call upon Him, (it is well); for to Him belong the Most Beautiful Names “(Quran 17:110), “When it is said to them, ‘Adore ye ‘the Compassionate’ [Al Rahman], they say ‘And what is the Compassionate? Why should we adore what you command?” (Quran 25:60). “They [the Makkans] blaspheme at the mention of [Allah’s being] ‘the Compassionate” (Quran 21:36). That the Makkans thought “compassion” was uncharacteristic of Allah’s is evident from this bit of history. The Sufi Martin Lings wrote: “When they had finally reached an agreement the Prophet told ‘Ali to write down the terms, beginning with...‘in the Name of God, the Good, the Merciful (Al Rahman),’ but Suhayl objected. ‘As to Rahman,’ he said ‘I know not what he is.’ But write...In Thy Name, O God, as thou wert [were] wont [i.e. accustomed] to write.” Muhammad did nothing to improve Allah’s character and in fact made Allah’s personality even more malevolent. Most Makkans recognized this but were forced to accept Islam or else be beheaded during one of Islam’s early Jihad conquests.

[@whoisnext9837]

Normally one might think that the ancients syncretized two religions at a time: their own with the one they admired. Muhammad however tells the Koran reader that he created Islam by distilling and syncretizing complementary elements of Arabian astral paganism (Sabeanism, Sabianism), Judaism, Christianity, Zoroastrianism (Magianism) and the Religion of Ibrahim (Hanifism) (Quran 2:62, 135; 5:69; 22:17). How did Muhammad go about syncretizing these religions? Syncretism was a standard pagan practice and was more art than science. One could import deities or merge two into one. A culture merely needed to match a name or trait of two gods in order to effect a synthesis. These characteristics included position in hierarchy, function, the meaning of the name, an appelation, a personality trait, accouterments, purpose (job), gender and especially the associated astral symbol. Arabian syncretism was especially easy since most of the names and titles of the gods were rather generic, as in “the god” (Allah), “the goddess” (Allat) and “the power” (Al Uzza). Popular moon-gods had these generic-sounding titles: Wadd (love), Hukm (wisdom), Rahmanan (the compassionate), Sin or Su-en (crescent), ‘Amm or ‘Anbay (uncle), Mahram (holy one) and ‘Ilumquh (Il Umquh, meaning “god of the rainstorm”). The polytheistic Makkans seem to have referred disapprovingly to the practice of merging gods based only on their common appelations. It was a slippery slope, because each god had so many similar titles, one could easily end up with monotheism, so the Makkans said: “Do you want to make all the gods into one God, Muhammad? That would be an extraordinary thing...(Quran 38:5)”. Why would the Makkans think this? Perhaps it refers to how Muhammad has Allah saying “we,” “us” and “our” so often in the Koran. The plural indicated to the Makkans that Muhammad had merged Allah and his daughters into one god as though they were Russian nesting dolls (Matryoshki). To the Makkans, the fact that Muhammad said that Allah had at least “ninety- nine” names meant that Muhammad had merged Allah with other gods and that Allah had absorbed the other gods’ names in the process. The most obvious example is how Muhammad called Allah by the Aramaic foreign word “Rahman,” meaning “Merciful” (Quran 17:110). Jacques Ryckmans wrote about the title Rahman: After about AD 350 [in Yemen] monotheistic invocations to Rahmanan, ‘the Merciful’ (an epithet of Aramaic origin used for God by both Jews and Christians), or to the ‘Lord of Heaven and Earth,’ take the place of former polytheistic formulas and dedications. These early monotheistic texts probably emanated from Jewish immigrants from the oases of the Hejaz, although Christianity had already been introduced in South Arabia by Byzantine and Syrian missionaries. This process of syncretization using names was not without its critics. Disputes over deities’ names are mentioned in the traditions and the Koran often, for instance: What! Do you dispute with me about names that you and your fathers have given? Allah has not sent any authority for them (Quran 7:71). You worship nothing besides Allah but mere names that you have named, you and your fathers; Allah has not sent down any authority for them (Quran 12:40; also see 7:71, 180; 12:40; 17:110: 20:8; 53:23; 59:24). Muhammad easily discarded the names of deities that he did not want Allah to assume. In Quran 53:20-23 Muhammad says that Allat, al uzza and Manat were just pseudonyms that his Makkan forebears had applied to male angels. These goddesses however were worshipped throughout the Mideast and their names exist in inscriptions that predate Muhammad by centuries!

[@fnjesusfreak]

Maybe it comes from Judaism, where the word for God is actually a plural (elohim)? Or from Christianity, where God is considered triune (which the Quran seems to misunderstand, by accusing Christians of tritheism)?

[@thinkforyourself9100]

There is something I found out from the presentation. 1. Sura 2 used WE rather than Your Lord. You know Muslim believe that the WE means Royal but I sense something else. The usage of the WE points that sura 2 was a Nestorianism idea of the creation which believe that God is father, son and holy Spirit. The use of we Yet, So the rewriting tries to eliminate the plurality of God usage of WE

[@C.Veigas]

If the book was from one author I can't see any reason to write the same story 3 different times in different places and on top of that if they are not equal, case closed.

[@khany6345]

Well done. Right on target.

[@dqschannel]

I did a video on this topic back on Dec 5, 2021

[@C.Veigas]

@@dqschannel which one? Can't find it

[@dqschannel]

@@C.Veigas it's called, Fingerprints of men in quran. from Dec 5, 2021 unfortunately YT hates links.

[@dqschannel]

@@C.Veigas let me know if you find it and what you think. Granted I am no Odin I do my best to expose Islam and it's claims as best as I can.

[@robertdegroot8302]

A few more observations can be made: - Q2:34 says Iblees became one of the 'disbelievers'. Does this mean that suddenly Iblees stopped believing that Allah was God? He became a rebel against God, not a disbeliever of a fact that would be obvious to him. - God told the angels to bow down, but Iblees refused. This is like saying: 'God told the French people to smoke a pipe, but Jay Smith refused.' Iblees was not an angel, but a jinn. As is noted in Surah 38, Iblees was made from fire, while angels are made of light. - The stories contain direct quotes from Allah. These can not be rephrased in different versions. Did Allah say 'Get out of Paradise', or did he say 'Get out of it'? Do Muslims really want to believe God said the same condemnation of Iblees twice in a row with one word difference?

[@ross3818]

So Iblees, a creation of God, was cursed for not prostrating to another creation of God. So from this, kissing the Black Stone, which is another creation of God, makes perfect sense.

[@roshinipe1967]

Awesome, can you clarify whether the author of Q2.34 is referring to Trinity by the use of the word "we" in the words "And when We said to the angels,....."?

[@dqschannel]

Muslims will claim if the Royal We which is BS. They have no real understand of that term which came into use centuries later.

[@fantasia55]

@@dqschannel the Royal We was invented by the papacy.

[@dqschannel]

@@fantasia55 I can't recall but you may be right.

[@dqschannel]

@@fantasia55 But Allah uses ours etc

[@johnpakard6386]

@@fantasia55 😂Opps! Sucks to be muslim and defend that one

[@markkuuss]

Cas intéressant de "téléphone Arabe" :)

[@embmaxim.3340]

❤️👍

[@catlovers725]

I just converted to Islam a week ago after 3 years of searching.

[@leedza]

This sounds like seminaries. Like how the Apostles and writers of the Gospels would recall verses from old testament to get their points across. Preachers do it today funny enough. I was once handed some preaching notes by a a pastor and you'll see outlines and themes everywhere including the short term verses. The composition is aimed at getting the point acroos.

[@urbandsouza7279]

I like the way odon the way he pipe smoking odon

[@FRED-gx2qk]

good men !

[@Ajzgut]

❤

[@prakz71]

That makes sense

[@NotLikeWhatYouThink]

kzbin.info/aero/PLD119B7669B0A3CE6 look it yourself that verse..focus on arabic word used.

[@johnseventhday9145]

Correction Bible claims it is a compilation of Books by different prophets not just mere men.

[@bobfisher1909]

Was Matthew Mark Luke and John prophets?

[@samroma837]

Yes, but prophets are mere men. This is why if you find a discrepancy in the Bible or a scribal error it doesn't post any problem for Christianity because men make mistakes but Muslims claim that the Qur'an comes from Allah and was recited directly into Mohammad's ear by the angel Jibril (Gabriel). So the Qur'an shouldn't have any of the things Odon and Jay are showing us in the video.

[@leedza]

By saying the Qur'an is eternal and incorruptible it means it cant be examined or criticized. Any criticism is blasphemy. Thats sounds like cheap escape to stop people from asking questions. Especially Muslims

[@henryelemuo6785]

At the mention Odom, Koran falls apart; if he sneezes the Koran catches Cold; the Koran had a great fall and how can it be put together again?

[@NotLikeWhatYouThink]

What do you mean put together..we busy. kzbin.info/www/bejne/pKivgaSmaLGZedE look minute 55 above😅

[@thinkingperson2122]

Rob Christian yesterday uploaded a quite interesting short video about what Muslim universities are teaching on how Muslims are allowed to do to non Muslims. You all should watch the video. I think the video sumarises the view of Islam of non Muslims. It summarises what Islam us really all about.

[@shdwbnndbyyt]

Interesting that the quran says that iblees became "one of the unbelievers" or "among the haughty"... so they, the disbelievers/haughty existed BEFORE the creation of man per the quran...

[@dqschannel]

I see you have same issue I did, who were these other disbelievers?

[@NotLikeWhatYouThink]

The term iblis show that they used to belive then chose to disbelief.Their real name azazil from jin tribe.Not all jin disbeliver some muslim too.They being called jin..take from meaning Jan its unseen.Human status higher than angel and iblis..but human can be worse than satan..if not careful.

[@earlscottchambers4280]

Can the Sura’s in Arabic Quran be rearranged in an order to make it easier to read/understand?

[@wlcsp]

What is the 7th century book Odon was talking about? Can anybody provide a reference?

[@markaxworthy2508]

At 1:50 Odon says "which seems to me evidence that there were different authors.....". This is a nuanced position. However, Jay's headline, "Finally! Proof the Qur'an has many authors!" hypes this up beyond the evidence Odon presents. For me, Jay's over-the-top editorializing weakens, rather than strengthens, what Odon, Thomas, etc., are saying. He needs to rein his over enthusiasm in a bit. I am sure we are all grateful that he is providing the platform to unite and publicize their work and that of their sources, but he is not helping his own cause by over stating matters. "Evidence" is not the same as "proof".

[@MrCheesywaffles]

Valid view. I think the common usage of the word proof, both in a legal and general sense, is strong convincing evidence, not necessarily absolute proof as in mathematics or logic. I agree the title is dramatic and to be fair the ending card makes clear this title refers to the series, not just this video or the videos up to this one.

[@pfanderfilms]

Point taken, thanks Mark

[@OdonLafontaine]

I agree. Jay made this video into a standalone whereas it was just supposed to give an example of Guillaume Dye's work that I introduced in the first video. I had said during this video that I did not have all hisreferences in mind, so Jay and I recorded this video later that was supposed to be inserted in the first. Now as a standalone video, I find Jay's headline a bit far fetched too. But it is not wrong either.

[@pfanderfilms]

I have now changed the title to reflect your suggestion. Thanks!

[@Dorfapoligetik]

You also telling me Allah is a idiot and put 3 time the same story with little variations in his ultimative revelation? When you can show the source of the story before koran was writen, that's 100 % proof that koran is man made.... and we know the source for this story... it's done... nobody can save koran....

[@miguelsureda9762]

AJ Deus has done it again ! His new epic paper of 130 pages DEMOLISHES the idea that therr was a inscription from Abd el Malik in the Dome of the Rock. Itjsfrom the 18 th centrury !!!!The Dome wad not even there in 700 !!!! In the beginning there were others. Bigigest HOLE in the SIN yet !!!

[@aevumcorvi2108]

There are inscriptions written in Kufic script for the dedication of the building in the 7th century.

[@miguelsureda9762]

@@aevumcorvi2108 Read it !

[@1541965]

This is very silly and ignorant alligation. It is the same story in two different occasion. According to your logic if you say the same story in two different narration then story has different writer such as the different story of the crucifixin and the lineage of Jesus Christ in the Bible ? You can write one story in two different naration and time.

[@AndiWidjaja]

Can you share what that guy wrote exactly, it might be your misinterpretation. The inner circle didn't seem to change from the original.

[@slippingsnake]

@@miguelsureda9762 it's just that afaik no academic doubt that the Dome of the Rock was finished around 690; This was what today is the inner part without the "skirt". Also around the same time the coins (Coins and Dome of the Rock reflect political power) changes to arabic scriptures, from the british musseum a description for a gold Dinar: "This is the first issue of coins struck by the Umayyad caliph ‘Abd al-Malik (reigned AD 685-706) as part of his revolutionary reform of the Islamic coinage in AD 696-7. ‘Abd al-Malik’s reform introduced a purely epigraphic coinage which created a complete break with the past. Images were replaced by Quranic verses and the profession of faith, the shahada, in Kufic script. The central inscription on one side reads ‘There is no god but Allah alone. He has no partner’. Along the margin appears Sura 9.33 from the Quran. The central inscription on the other side states that ‘God is one, God is eternal, He was not born nor does He give birth’. Here, the marginal inscription gives the date of the gold dinar as Hijri year 77/AD 696-7."

[@oprophetisfake9482]

Amen. This is the proof that the Muslim idea of inspiration is completely false. Either that or almighty Allah cannot remember even his own words from one surah to the next. We find this here, we find it in the different accounts of Moses and the burning bush in Surahs 27 28 and 20 and we find it even in creation between Surah 7:54 and 41:9-12. I'm sure there are many many many more that we just haven't noticed yet.

[@lahceno2168]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/nYebkK1uZaihe9E

[@daudhusni6791]

It seems you don't understand. Where is reworking here??? " we said to the angels " and "when your Lord said to the angels " still refers back to the one person. Secondly on that part of prostration it is only extension of some stories.. on black mud and clay,... angel who was assigned collected it from different part of the earth....

[@dqschannel]

One who doesn't understand seems to be you.

[@israeliteswillreturn-ttd-islam]

Allah says two different things at the same single event.

[@polemeros]

In Christianity, God became Man in Christ. In Islam, God became Text in the Koran. For Muslims, the Koran is the revelation and Mohammed is just a witness. For Christians, Christ is the revelation and the Bible is just a witness. Makes all comparisons between the Koran and the Bible very difficult.

[@gilbertjones9157]

Oden has the evidence.

[@billjackson8641]

If I understand correctly, Jay is saying that the Qur'an was made by means of accretion. If this is true, by who and when?🤔

[@colinpatterson728]

Its not clear to me why a mohammadan could not say - "Fine - its varied - Mohammad just preached it highlighting different aspects of or from the eternal Koran- Both Odon and Jay acknowledge that such variation is not unreasonable....

[@cavalier2097]

Let them show us the Qu'ran that came down to the earth.

[@Basaljet]

Aren't these discussions rooted in the"Apocalypse of Adam?"

[@sheikhboyardee556]

Well, maybe Allah suffered from Multiple Personality Disorder. The Quran was written by Allah but just by his other personalities. Yes, that's it!

[@johnpakard6386]

wouldn't that technically count as polytheism? you just broke islam

[@Honey1xyz]

The Old Testament was miraculous written by the 12 Jews , the New Testament is all Jesus Words n what he did by the people present who saw him ✝️💯

[@yarnybart5911]

Four different testimonies with different details enhance the story? That suggests inconsistency rather than enhancing the story.

[@P.H.888]

Don’t be silly.

[@AndiWidjaja]

It's called abrogations, because al lah didn't like what Al lah said before. Worst, it's regressive enhancements instead of progressive. That al lah was replaced, from the God of Jews & Christians, to the moon god (satan). 😁

[@P.H.888]

Character 🧔🏼‍♂️ Love the pipe

[@bobSeigar]

Is Iblis and Iblees the same thing?

[@andysmith-vi1bo]

When you consider that Mohammed supposedly could not read or write, he dictated the revelations he received ti others to write. I know by hadiths that his youngest bride wrote some of it and lost some chapters do In part to a pet goat or sheep eating it. Since he could not read or write how do we know his words were properly recorded? Multiple authors and Multiple dialects change its meaning

[@rabukkayeshua2479]

QS 38, QS 15 is copy paste passages in Arabic Quran ☝🤭🤣... You've my day Mr. Odon thank you... Al Lah is Khairul Makirin ☝🤭🤦‍♂️

[@satmat6566]

We have 4 gospels according mathew marc luke and john respectively but we do not know the authors of the korans since muhamud died before he was able to edit the koran. Muslims claim that the koran had been transmitted by recitation. The one billion dollar question : who wrote the korans ???? Why Muslims today claim that their written korans are an exact copy of the written one in heaven without any change to the letter ,even a iota has not been changed !! How do they know that since nobody ascended to Heaven except Jesus ??? This ideology is quite fishy , confusing and absurd to be accepted as divine !!

[@harparkrat1]

There is not the word paradise in sura 38 versus 77

[@ahmedazriel5097]

"Then he said get out of paradise" doen not exist in the quran (in the arabic). Just in some english translations.

[@colinpatterson728]

You are kidding right ?

[@ahmedazriel5097]

@@colinpatterson728 why kidding? I can read arabic, and i did never read this. Satan did get out twice from different places, the first time was from a myterious place, the second one was indeed from paradise, but the word "paradise" was never mentioned. And especially this "Then he said get out of paradise" was never mentioned in the quran. It was "Get out of IT" not get out of paradise. And if you think that this "Then he said get out of paradise" really exist in the quran somewhere, then just tell me where. Thank you:)

[@colinpatterson728]

@@ahmedazriel5097 Very polite. You did say that "Then he said get out of paradise' is in some English translations...INCREDIBLY you also said that this 'TRANSLATED' material is NOT in the ARABIC....I find that, as a currently non- Arabic speaker a bit disturbing....do you understand what I mean ?

[@ahmedazriel5097]

@@colinpatterson728 Its oke no worries. I did indeed mean that in the original arabic quran "Then he said get out of paradise" does not exist. Just in some english translations. In the original arabic quran it says "get out of it" but some translators did change it to "get out of paradise". Sorry for my bad english tho.

[@colinpatterson728]

@@ahmedazriel5097 Your English is fine enough for communication on the net----So let me get this clear.....some Arabic 'translators' of the Koran alter it in translation....They actually alter the word of their God ? Really ? Obviously I can't yet check for myself ! Do you see the problem for anyone who reads a 'Translation' ? or is even given one ?

[@gavinjames1145]

Does the supposedly eternal Quran which sits alongside Allah in Heaven contain a single, complete story of Iblees and Adam? If yes, then the Islamic Quran cannot be a revealed copy of the eternal, heavenly Quran, because it does not contain a single, complete story of Iblees and Adam: it has seven, incomplete, variant versions of the story.

[@aemiliadelroba4022]

I didn’t know Iblis was in paradise ! So Allah tells him to get out of paradise ! Also , yes iblis is arrogant and superior , in many ways he is superior but not better ! he failed to realize that . he broke the laws !

[@peacock69mcp]

Monsieur Odon, would you like some cannabis in your pipe instead of tobacco? I remember one of my grand old uncles from the past century used to smoke all kinds of aromatic spices in his pipe.

[@danmannz]

Have to admit, I'm a total bigot, The strong french accent does a big number on me. To my total detriment, I'm sure I missed out on really good content. I'm sure this guy has all the credentials, normies like this will drift off. For some reason, Thomas is a total superstar. But his English is spot on, and I totally connect to him. I wish I was more thoughtful. Jay can you do an update on Petra vs Jerusalem on the real original antitrinitarian movement etc.

[@gilaschannel1855]

Keep going, you will get used to this gentleman's way of speaking if you try. Certainly his knowledge of English is excellent!

[@danmannz]

@@gilaschannel1855 I want to be wrong. like everyone, I score I wish on the big on experience. If your guy, was 100% right? I totally want to learn french. Atleast I don't know if you know this. but totally, African young guys, are this. Maybe english has its time in the sun?

[@universalflamethrower6342]

@@danmannz it's not that difficult, do franch duolingo every day 10 min

[@shdwbnndbyyt]

Of course you would do horribly in places like England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland where there still multiple mutually incomprehensible dialects of English, although much fewer than a mere 100 years ago, when London had over 100 such... most of which are/were much harder to understand than Odon. Or in the USA, especially pre-1960 before nationwide broadcasting started changing the dialects.... Oh, ebonics and the current American black culture largely derives from the dialect of SW England that existed in the 17th through 19th centuries. While the Virginian representatives (Jefferson, even George Washington - although he was a general) to the constitutional convention could speak eloquently as they had been schooled to speak like English aristocracy when giving public speeches, their normal speech was almost indistinguishable from that of the inner city blacks today, as many of the other delegates complained in their letters home.

[@tommyrotton9468]

4 authors as you have the plagiarised version too? I assumed of course the Quran versions do not match the life of Adam and Eve manuscripts.

[@lyoung8584]

Why does allah ask all the angels to bow before Adam + expect compliance from iblees -who in Islam is NOT an angel?!??. Iblees=satan in islam is made from FIRE.. Different from angels in Islam.The story is nonsensical... ex-Asking all the girls to stand up but punishment for the boy who refuses. Another Islamic dilemma. Yet why are allah's angels asked to bow down before a human anyways? Just numerous problems w this adam+ iblees quranic story. Great video+ research! God Bless &Maranatha !

[@peterclemerson3197]

Please please use the word "evidence" rather than proof. What we were presented with was EVIDENCE, not a proof.

[@P.H.888]

Clay, black mud, blood clot which 1 ⁉️ The real Question is this ~ Human SIN leading to death How Is it rectified ⁉️ The Bible is a clear outworking of this dilemma. Adam Sinned by taking the forbidden fruit that led to immediate death ~ Spiritual Which led to eventual physical death But God covered them both in animal skins ~ The picture of substitution atonement HE also promised to send The Redeemer! The Bible is an unfolding Revelation JESUS CHRIST IS THE REVELATION HE is Our Substitutionary Redeemer ✝️ HE went obediently back on The Tree The Bible is a complete book and covers life Everyone dies Jesus Christ said “You Must Be Born Again From Above”! Spiritual birth! Accept Almighty God’s plan purpose and execution The Way is very Narrow indeed 1 man high wide The Lord Jesus Christ ✝️🕊♥️ God is indeed LOVE THE GOSPEL IS VERY GOOD NEWS‼️ If you are truly Born Again From Above & baptised in The HOLY SPIRIT You know 🙏🏻🙏🏽🙏🏼🙏🏿😇

[@zoymont7466]

2+2=4 2+1+1=4 4=2+2 OMG different authors ..................L. O. L................

[@colinpatterson728]

Neat and Creative.

[@endoirus9510]

All this proves is that more information is being given from different verses of the Quran... there has been no contradiction. I don't understand why this video even exists?

[@israeliteswillreturn-ttd-islam]

Allah is using different words to say the same thing at the same event. So there are either 2 Allahs and 2 Adams, or Allah had a memory lapse.

[@midimusicforever]

The Quran is not from God!

[@muezamueza2797]

Hallo odo You can Find this in Wikipedia Ok. Stop dreaming bullshit …. 🤣 The_Syro-Aramaic_Reading_of_the_Koran Reception Luxenberg's book has been reviewed by Blois (2003),[11] Neuwirth (2003)[12] and following the English translation by King (2009) [13] and Saleh (2011).[5] The most detailed scholarly review is by Daniel King, a Syriacist at the University of Cardiff, who endorses some of Luxenberg's emendations and readings and cites other scholars who have done the same, but concludes: "Luxenberg's meta-theory of Qur'ānic origins is not proved by the evidence he sets forth in this book. That certain of the Qur'ān's expressions and words (as well as broader ideas and themes) are of Christian origin is well founded, and should in general be sufficient to explain the data presented here without needing recourse to either of the two more radical theories he espouses, namely that the Qur’ān was in origin no more than a Christian lectionary, and that the language which it is written is an 'Aramaic-Arabic hybrid'. More must be offered to convince anybody as to the mechanisms by which such a strong cultural and linguistic contact could have occurred".[14] The conclusion of King's article summarizes the most prominent reviews of Luxenberg's work that have been published by other scholars. Gabriel Said Reynolds complains that Luxenberg "consults very few sources" -- only one exegete (Abu Jafar al-Tabari) -- and seldom integrates the work of earlier critical studies into his work; "turns from orthography to phonology and back again"; and that his use of Syriac is "largely based on modern dictionaries".[1] Robert Hoyland argues against Luxenberg's thesis that Syro-Aramaic language was prevalent in the Hijaz during the time of the Quran's inception, finding Arabic script on funerary text, building text inscriptions, graffiti, stone inscriptions of that era in the area.[15] He further argues that Arabic evolved from Nabataean Aramaic script not Syriac.[16] He concludes that Arabic was widely written, was used for sacred expression and literary expression, and was widely spoken in the Middle East by the seventh century CE.[17] He proposes that "the rise of an Arabic script in the sixth century" was likely the work of "Arab tribes allied to Rome" and Christian missionaries working to convert Arab tribes.[18] The Quran is "the translation of a Syriac text," is how Angelika Neuwirth describes Luxenberg's thesis - "The general thesis underlying his entire book thus is that the Quran is a corpus of translations and paraphrases of original Syriac texts recited in church services as elements of a lectionary." She considers it as "an extremely pretentious hypothesis which is unfortunately relying on rather modest foundations." Neuwirth points out that Luxenberg doesn't consider the previous work in Quran studies, but "limits himself to a very mechanistic, positivist linguistic method without caring for theoretical considerations developed in modern linguistics."[12] Blois (2003) is particularly scathing, describing the book as "not a work of scholarship but of dilettantism" and concluding that Luxenberg's "grasp of Syriac is limited to knowledge of dictionaries and in his Arabic he makes mistakes that are typical for the Arabs of the Middle East."[11] Saleh (2011) describes Luxenberg's method as "so idiosyncratic, so inconsistent, that it is simply impossible to keep his line of argument straight."[5]: 51  He adds that according to Luxenberg, for the last two hundred years, Western scholars "have totally misread the Qur'ān" and that, ad hominem, no one can understand the Qur'an as "Only he can fret out for us the Syrian skeleton of this text."[5]: 56  Summing up his assessment of Luxenberg's method, he states: The first fundamental premise of his approach, that the Qur'ān is a Syriac text, is the easiest to refute on linguistic evidence. Nothing in the Qur'ān is Syriac, even the Syriac borrowed terms are Arabic, in so far as they now Arabized and used inside an Arabic linguistic medium. Luxenberg is pushing the etymological fallacy to its natural conclusion. The Qur'ān not only is borrowing words according to Luxenberg, it is speaking a gibberish language.[5]: 55 [19] Saleh further attests[5]: 47  that Luxenberg does not follow his own proposed rules.[20] Richard Kroes (2004) describes him as "unaware of much of the other literature on the subject" and that "quite a few of his theories are doubtful and motivated too much by a Christian apologetic agenda."[21] Patricia Crone, professor of Islamic history at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, in a 2008 article at opendemocracy.net refers to Luxenberg's work as "open to so many scholarly objections" and "notably amateurism".[22]

[@cainecaine8783]

Love your work Odon! Sorry but this dos not prove 100 % that there are different Autors. Same massage but here and there different story. I can tel a story that happend to me in more than 3 different ways. Thus that mean there are different me s ? Ps i already believe that the Quran is Syriac Arameic and its talking about Christ the “praised one” Just saying the conclusion from Jay. 3 different writings equals 3 authors. You will not convince a muslim believer only the ones who already saying that Quran is man made….

[@OdonLafontaine]

This shows at least 3 authors, but not for the reasons Jay put forth, I think (3 versions=3 authors) Author 1 : the one(s) who wrote these Jewish legends about Adam and Satan Author 2 : the one(s) who who wrote down the most detailed story Author 3 : the one(s) who copied and pasted But what I wanted to point out here was not the number of authors but the evidence for an editing process & a re-writing process. There could have been tens of authors for what we know

[@cainecaine8783]

@@OdonLafontaine thank you for this explanation. I will reed it again and watch the video again. Thank you for your work! May you be blessed 🙏🏻

[@NotLikeWhatYouThink]

@@OdonLafontaine you must didnt know muhamad cannot read or write😄Al quran not even muhamad speech..how,when,where,to who,what verse reveal muhamad didnt know😄

[@abdellahkharicha8776]

Very weak evidences!!! Not enough to convince any serious Historian.

[@R-rr1]

But go on Odon Lafontaine channel. Historians support those claims

[@charlesiragui2473]

Taking the example of the synoptic gospels, we do not know their source material (direct oral testimony, written testimony, transmitted oral testimony?) and that question has dominated New Testament scholarship for the last 250 years. Were Mark and Q sources for Matthew and Luke? What was the source for the special material of Matthew and Luke? So the Quran passages: Was there a lost Arabic source text for all three (there does not seem to be in existence today an Arabic version of the Life of Adam and Eve that Odon mentioned)? Were there really three authors using such a source or did the latter two use the simplest, sura 2, similar to the Markan Priority hypothesis? But take a step back. Why are there three versions of the same story in the Quran? If this is God's perfectly preserved text, why would it get repeated three times at all (and why would this eternally exist in heaven in triplicate)? If, on the other hand, Abd al Malik is the first compiler of the Quran, why would he include the same story three times in slightly different versions? That would seem to point to texts already having religious stature such that the contents could not be rationalized without potential controversy. Odon mentioned perhaps perhaps the proto Quran could be a compilation of one preacher's sermons and perhaps that preacher liked to include this story but embellished it slightly each time. We can understand why the different gospels all were accepted as canonical: because they were all ancient and because they each added something. The fact that they differed somewhat, perhaps even contradicting each other (disputed), mattered less to people. It is my understanding that the suras of the Quran would not seem to function literarily as standalone "books" and no one has suggested that each sura might be from a different author. How did the suras themselves get compiled?

[@AndiWidjaja]

Short answer, obviously quran wasn't written only once, and not by the same person.

[@OdonLafontaine]

_"the suras of the Quran would not seem to function literarily as standalone "book"_ This seems a very logic statement in regard of the quranic text. As a writing, it looks like it has been composed like a sort of mishmash of previous texts that were copied, edited, recopied and so on. British Arabist Richard Bell had already observed this in the 20th cent. He thought of the quranic text as having been cut into smaller pieces, which were then mixed up for an incomprehensible reason, without logic. There could be a reason, a logic nonetheless: I think the quranic text was made out several collections of proclamations drafts, out of notes and instructions. Those collections belonged to the original preachers and maybe also for a part to their religious masters (the Judeonazarenes). Various Arab factions took hold of those collections. As they became united under the same rule, their new leader (I guess Abd al Malik then) collected everything, and mixed it into what would become the quranic text, so that a faction could not recognize its own collection from the collections of the others. So the various Arab factions could not fight among themselves anymore on "quranic" motives. This was also a way for Abd al Malik to assert his dominance on every faction.

[@alonzoharris6730]

The comparison with the bible is hilarious. They have nothing to do with eachother. In poems lines are repeated. Just like in pre islamic poems. It's crazy to compare an Arabic text from the 7th century with Greek texts that have nothing to do with eachother. No comparison in style, rythm, content or anything. The conclusion from your premise doesn't follow.

[@OdonLafontaine]

@@alonzoharris6730 Gospels are originally Aramaic recitations, which were mostly composed from the same pool of oral traditions (at least for the 3 synoptic Gospels). The Greek texts are translations from Aramaic.

[@alonzoharris6730]

@@OdonLafontaine Mark is the earliest gospel. He uses Paul and rewrite his story. We know for sure Paul wrote in Greek. For I received from the Lord what I also handed over to you, that the Lord Jesus, during the night he was handed over, took bread, and having given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in the remembrance of me.” Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, as often as you might drink it in remembrance of me.” For as often as you might eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 While they were eating, having taken bread, and having blessed it, he broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “Take; this is my body.” Then, having taken a cup, and having given thanks, he gave it to them, and they all drank from it. And he said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. Truly I tell you, that never again shall I drink from the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it anew in the kingdom of God.” And having sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. Mark 14:22-26 Paul's audience is future Christians. Mark has transformed this into a narrative story by adding people being present and having Jesus interact with them.

[@briendoyle4680]

Do you have any evidence that supports your deity is not imaginary? Were the Greek gods legend or real? Were the Egyptian gods real or legend? Were the Roman gods real or legend? Were the Aztec and Mayan and Hawaiian gods real or legend? How about the Norse gods... legend? You see, all cultures invented gods to interpret and answer what man could not before we had science for valid, satisfactory answers. The problem with yours, as the rest of them, is that you all make outrageous claims and it makes your belief as equally ridiculous as the other god believers.

[@rafirashid2504]

Url are the fake authors url are not people of understanding

[@mf8485]

haha angel prostate and adam did what and its edited and we gonna believe that haha good luck

[@sulekangi]

WE ARE HAPPY 😁 TO SEE INFIDELS TELLING LIE AGAINST THE QURAN AND THEIR INFIDELS AUDIENCE ARE BELIEVING THE LIES , THIS STRENGTHEN OUR IMAN IN ALLAH AND HIS HOLY QURAN.

[@andysmith-vi1bo]

The very fact that you all claim that Mohammed was illiterate and could not read or write, but received the revelation from an angel who wrote this down into script. There are hadiths that say that Mohammeds youngest wife wrote some of these for him , along with many of his closest friends. Now if multiple people wrote this does this make the video a lie? No it exposed the fact that many people wrote this, do in part thier writing style are different. Now ask yourself did they actually write it word for word and not add to it , if not how would Mohammed know?

[@R-rr1]

Mohammed wasn't illiterate

[@R-rr1]

Watch Rob Christian channel

[@hdl135605]

What is the truth of the Quran if Jay Smith tells lies? You don't say!!!

[@khaledalothman4314]

This doesn't really qualify as evidence for an editing process but rather a redundancy used in orally transmitting the story. The duplicate verses are a common occurrence in the Quran. When people transmit religious text orally, a primitive mechanism must be embedded to preserve the core content of the stories and message, and this has been done in the Quran by duplicating verses, while subtle variances don't impact the core ideas. It's an obvious thing any Quran reader will notice! I can't believe you guys just now payed attention to it! When someone does editing on writings, surely he would not be so careless to ignore the so many duplications and redundancies; if so, what's the point of introducing subtle differences that don't add any value? Surely any scribe would bring the so many different variations in duplicate verses forth to the religious authority and simply consolidate since he has it writing. It's obviously rather a built in approach to preserve the core content while continously memorizing and reciting, over and over by many people and over the generations; that's in fact still done and here in Kuwait we have contests and prizes for such an old tradition; It is common for elite devout Muslim children to be so committed that they memorize the whole Quran. These redundancies must have been an aid for that memorization and review through recitation, life long activity. We arabic readers of the Quran notice the things you described here immediately. I noticed that redundancy in primary school. It's nothing new.

[@Vato3605]

Soo pretty much your admitting that the quran is a poorly written book.

[@OdonLafontaine]

Oral transmission is very precise. You cannot tamper with an oral recitation, adding this, removing that. This would ruin the whole process of the oral transmission, this would ruin any trust one could have in its integrity. The text I showed is evidence enough to show that it did not come from an oral transmission but from a scriptural transmission, and that the text had been tampered with. Besides, why reveal "a book" by the way of an oral transmission?

[@khaledalothman4314]

@@OdonLafontaine I'm sorry but I cannot see how "oral transmission is very precise", that's totally nonsensical for me. I'm not saying there has only been oral transmission but surely a combination of oral and written, otherwise how do you end up with a book anyway. In the process of jotting things down, from memorizers (whoever was practicing this), things get duplicated, missed and displaced. Oral transmission is not precise. Anyone can prove it 😂

[@khaledalothman4314]

@@Vato3605 yes I am

[@khaledalothman4314]

@@Al-Jahiz yes as I said repetition is embedded in the style to help preserve it through oral transmission and your quoted verse simply confirms the author had this in mind.

[@alonzoharris6730]

The comparison with the bible is hilarious. They have nothing to do with eachother. In poems lines are repeated. Just like in pre islamic poems. It's crazy to compare an Arabic text from the 7th century with Greek texts that have nothing to do with eachother. No comparison in style, rythm, content or anything. The conclusion from your premise doesn't follow.

[@OdonLafontaine]

Gospels are Aramaic recitations. The Greek texts are translations from Aramaic.

[@alonzoharris6730]

@@OdonLafontaine The source material of the gospels is Greek. Many Greek works are used for the gospels. I don't think there is any evidence for Aramaic source material.

[@OdonLafontaine]

@@alonzoharris6730 The Greek texts themselves are evidence: anyone who knows Greek and Aramaic comes to the conclusion that the Greek texts are translations from Aramaic.

[@alonzoharris6730]

@@OdonLafontaine Can you give me an example? In which dialect and script of Aramaic?

[@OdonLafontaine]

@@alonzoharris6730 Imperial Aramaic i already wrote an answer with references but it was taken out by KZbin I pointed you to an article on the website of my organisation, EEChO. The article is in French but the google translation seems OK Look for "Primauté de l’araméen sur le grec : indices cumulés"

[@meg5042]

Many vers in the Quran has been repeated in different forms for the purpose of emphasis. God knows that no one could read the whole Quran in one session, rather almost 100% of people would read few pages only. And God did emphasized on this fact هُوَ ٱلَّذِىٓ أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ مِنْهُ ءَايَٰتٌ مُّحْكَمَٰتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَٰبِهَٰتٌ ۖ فَأَمَّا ٱلَّذِينَ فِى قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَٰبَهَ مِنْهُ ٱبْتِغَآءَ ٱلْفِتْنَةِ وَٱبْتِغَآءَ تَأْوِيلِهِۦ ۗ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُۥٓ إِلَّا ٱللَّهُ ۗ وَٱلرَّٰسِخُونَ فِى ٱلْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ ءَامَنَّا بِهِۦ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا ۗ وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلَّآ أُوْلُواْ ٱلْأَلْبَٰبِ He it is Who has revealed the Book (Quran)to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical( or repeated in deferent context);then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding. Actually,one of the famous scholars of Islam once said: if God did not reveal none but Surat Alaser ( By the marvelous creation of time,all mankind at loss; except those who believed , and the righteous things,and constantly advise one another of piety,and advise one another of patience[[ of difficulties to do so]]), if He didn’t revealed but that,it should be enough for man kind, only those who wants the truth. Actually the repetition of similar vers in deferent locations with slight modification,is one of the first basics taught to students who wants to memorize the whole Quran ( and there are millions of them throughout the world,Vs none in the world memorizes the Bible).

[@israeliteswillreturn-ttd-islam]

Why would Allah say something different each time? Did he forget what he said the first time?

[@meg5042]

@@israeliteswillreturn-ttd-islam wishful thinking, you’re not the first. Rather few hundreds of millions had it.the problem that Islam has been and still the fastest growing religion in the world. Again,this is not repetition,rather emphasis. Allah said in the holy Quran;,indeed, reminder certainly of the benefit to the believers . My friend,at the end, no one will stand in place of the other when he would be questioned in the day of judgment. So things are really serious, and we better really study and search,then conclude . Remember, the Israelis of Arabia knew that Muhammad is indeed the long waited prophet,and his religion will spread all over the world,but, they were mad at God because he didn’t send of the offspring of Isaac, rather from Ismael. And stubbornly decided not to follow. Remember, we are trading a maximum of eighty some years old life with trillions of years one. I would be extremely careful. At that time there is no appeal or second chance, we had all of our chances on this earth. May God guid you and us all

[@israeliteswillreturn-ttd-islam]

@@meg5042 I will follow a God who can at least get His scribes to write in a sensible way. Even school books are easier to read than the Quran.

[@user-nx5be4sw6w]

Hahaha how can you take this serious

[@dqschannel]

How can you not? I would love to hear your intellectual explanation.

[@user-nx5be4sw6w]

@@dqschannel im not the one who made the claim.

[@dqschannel]

@@user-nx5be4sw6w Actually you made a claim by saying, "Hahaha how can you take this serious" and I asked for an explanation.

[@user-nx5be4sw6w]

@@dqschannel that was about their claims.

[@dqschannel]

@@user-nx5be4sw6w maybe I am not getting it, are you saying how can we take the Muslim claims or how can we take what is being shown on video from Jay and Odin?

[@albm706]

Odon I am afraid I really cannot follow you here. You really must refer the Arabic Quran. These translations will not help you too much. There is no "soul" in the Quran. Rooh is not soul. Yet your translation uses the word soul quite freely. this is a biblical inclination. There is no physical prostration either. Su-jood is not a physical prostration. It is a submission, a regard, a respect. There is no such thing as paradise. Jannah literally means a garden. Yes the verses repeat with extra information added in different verses. The entire Quran is written like this. It is called mutashaabihat which means similarity / repetitive / consimilar. Please refer Sura 3:7. Mutashabihat does not mean vague or unclear. As another example please look at the stories of Moses. It is repeated in many verses. Each verse may add to complete the whole story. Meaning you have to read all the verses about Moses to understand the whole story about Moses (in the Quran). in one verse it says that when Allah called Moses, he (Moses) ran away. In another verse when he is called to come back (from running away) Moses says 'But I killed a man.' So the story becomes more complete - Moses ran away because he felt guilty about killing a man. It does not mean there are many authors about the story of Moses. What you really need to grapple with is that there is no "god" in the Quran. Allah is not god. There is no worship in the Quran. There are no five daily prayers anywhere in the Quran. (You will not be able to find them anywhere in the Quran). There is no hereafter in the Quran. Do try and search for it. Aakhirat is not hereafter. You have to get into the Arabic.

[@chia-yinshih6155]

1. Do you imply that the world can Dutch all the English Qurans now? 2. If every part adds up to COMPLETE the whole story, whether it be Moses or Adam and Eve, why did not Allah put them all together at the same place instead of SPREADING them ALL OVER THE PLACES in one Quran?

[@OdonLafontaine]

The issue here is not the English translation, wether or not it captures the right meaning of the Arabic text, but the comparison of the composition of different passages. Are they the same? What is added? What is missing?

[@albm706]

@@chia-yinshih6155 It is in one place. Its called the Quran

[@dqschannel]

Even the Arabic has same problem. 🤦‍♂

[@dqschannel]

@@albm706 your quran sadly is a disjointed incoherent mess which we are showing in my YT series Dissecting Quran Series.

[@muhammadismaeeljaumeer7755]

I burst out laughing with this stupidity. The alleged discrepancies and addition Odon is talking about is simply change in voice. One is a narrative voice and the other is not. Does it have to mention angels all the time? Ans is no because the Qur'an is meant to be read and understood holistically. Now when we read the Gospels, there is conflicting reports such as did Mary stood by the cross? The synoptics says no but the Gospel of John says yes. Are the Gospel writers direct disciples of Jesus? Answer is no and biblical scholarships says the same.

[@P.H.888]

Matthew & John both were and Luke & Mark wrote for Paul and Peter so accompanied Apostles They went all over telling The Good News even being persecuted and martyred Unlike Islam that used the sword lies and manipulation and fear and killed The crusades are Not a true reflection of The Lord Jesus Christ ✝️ but Roman Catholicism ~ another religion. Jesus is building His Own Kingdom just like HE said HE Would Spiritual invisible unobservable within The True Believers and followers of Messiah Yeshua ~ YHVH Saves ✝️🕊

[@P.H.888]

Sinners are Born Again From Above in Christ Jesus and are transformed But Islam turns people into liars and murderers!!! If followers of its so called original prophet! How can peace be upon him when he was a blood thirsty warmonger? King David was not allowed to build The Temple for YHVH because of the fighting It had to be his SON! Do you get the metaphor ⁉️ The Son of David Not islam or anything else ‼️

[@pvdguitars2951]

That’s not the point brother. If the Quran is the perfect, unchanged word from God ( with the original in heaven) brought down PERFECTLY and preserved flawlessly in the book, then it makes absolutely no sense to have 3 versions of the same story. That has nothing to do with different narrations! But points directly to different authors, similar sources and a book that was put together as a collage, not a divine revelation !

[@alonzoharris6730]

@@pvdguitars2951 You are only claiming that. 'It doesn't make sense'. That's not an argument. That's forcing your own rules and presupposition on the text. Lines are often repeated in poems for example.

[@pvdguitars2951]

@@alonzoharris6730 not my point. Quran is supposed to be the exact (letter for letter) incorrupted copy of the original in heaven. Any deviation means that Islam is false. Then: Why are there 3 versions of the same story Different versions of the Quran ( nr of chapters of 114 vs 116, different verses with sometimes opposite meanings) Addition of diacritical marks and vowels (both absent in the early manuscripts). One deviation is enough to debunk the authenticity of the Quran. We now have many!

[@1541965]

This is very silly and ignorant alligation. It is the same story in two different occasion. According to your logic if you say the same story in two different narration then story has different writer such as the different story of the crucifixin and the lineage of Jesus Christ in the Bible ? You can write one story in two different naration and time.

[@AndiWidjaja]

So tell me, wasn't quran the words of al lah? Please answer and don't run away as usual. Yes or No?

[@danadam1296]

You have subjected Koran to human writing? Why that!!

[@OdonLafontaine]

Who then wrote this "one story" in two (actually three) "different naration and time" ?

[@alonzoharris6730]

You are right. Instead of demonstration with evidence. He just says 'there are two verses that are alike. There must be 2 authors'.😂 What kind of logic is that?

[@OdonLafontaine]

@@alonzoharris6730 Just logic

[@aldredtawasil9339]

the holy Quran does not have any human author..a Quran,it is a word of Allah and revealed by him to guide human beings.. Allah ( s.w.t) says: [ This is] a book whose verses are perfected and then presented in details from [ one who is] wise and acquainted".( Holy Quran ,chapter 11 verse 1)

[@nemesis1291]

Quotation of the korään will not have any weight in this case, please step out of your narrow box.

[@moorek1967]

Are you ready? Quran 6:7 EVEN IF we had sent down written scripture on a page they could hold with their hands, they would say it is nothing but obvious magic. Quran 6:8 And they ask why no angel was sent down to him, EVEN IF we had sent down an angel then the matter would be resolved Quran 6:9 And EVEN IF we had sent an angel, we would have made him appear as a man. So muslim, given the verse you posted and the verse I posted, which of these Quran verses is true? They can't both be true if you say it was divine authorship but the Quran also says no quran was sent down and no angel was sent..... Which is it muslim?

[@trevorgriffiths5611]

Baseless claim .. It’s clear that the Quran is just made up drivel.. Thank goodness 😅 it’s getting exposed for the fraud it really is.. It just doesn’t have a human author ✍️ it has many different human author’s over an extended time period.. It’s plagiarised from Jewish stories and Gnostic Christian scriptures even Zoroastrian scriptures.. A real Pick-N-Mix book 📚.. Wise up Aldred Tawasil.. Islam is BUSTED.. Totally busted cult..

[@munawaralias8980]

It really hurt for christians when their holy book downgraded from "word of God" to "inspired word of God" and now "work of anonimous writers". Pathetic.

[@moorek1967]

@@munawaralias8980 Which one of the verses is true? If one verse says it was written by allah, then another verse says it was not written by allah, that is a contradiction. So tell me muslim, no dancing around like a puppet, which one is true?