The Muslim's Muhammad, is really the Jewish Machmad!

Paul has found that once you understand the Arabic spelling of the name 'Muhammad' in the 7th century, it is read Mahmet, or 'Mahammad', which can be found in various places in the Bible, but is they are nor references to a prophet living in the 7th century, but to something much different.
Follow Paul as he introduces the much earlier Jewish Mahammad...
© Pfander Centre for Apologetics - US, 2021
(54,920) Music: 'Reaching the Sky', by Alexander Nakarada, from filmmusic-io

[@gilbertjones9157]

The perfection of preservation, the perfection of connection, the perfection of understanding, the perfection of perfect recitation, all of it results in the perfection of fiction.

[@euttdsiggh2783]

Perfection of arabic language too

[@asdsad7476]

So you unwantedly proved as muslims claim that the name of their prophet is in bible. That arabic is one of the language of semitic branch family goes without saying. But, incidentally not all verses of koran related to bible mythologies, other mythologies have significant role in making koran as scattered clay tablets in an archeology site, that is a verse or set of verses are taken from ancients culture and religions. Nevertheless, religion makers know how to make a new religion in right time in a right place and in a right culture. By the way, muhammad is neither arabic nor hebrew but a combination of two Indo-European root language. Mahamada is one of the great god of hindus myths. Mah has two meaning, moon and big or great. Mad means a drunkard animals especially cows, bulls, horses, donkeys and camels during sexual arousing. The birth of muhammad has been attributed to mythology as other religions do for their founder, in ibn ishaq account (abdu)lah(sun, heaven) mingled with a goddess (a)minah(moon, earth) giving birth to mahamada(cow-drunkard).

[@gilbertjones9157]

@@asdsad7476 How does one's birth 4 years after death of claimed father be real? The name attributed to the messenger is not a name for a person. It does have meaning for a place or idea. Arabic has two source regions, Arabia Petrus or Arabia Felix. AP in written form is associated with Aramaic had no diacritical marks and has unique syntax usage also found in the Quran plus the diacritical marks were added in sometime in the 8th century. AF in written form has diacritical marks but lacks the unique syntax usage. Arabia Deserta did not have the population numbers that could influence anything. If we have the copies of unique stories contained in the Quran but are 200 to 400 years older and in complete construction beginning to end where the Quranic stories are truncated, which are on the clay tablets in heaven? What is put forward in this video is that the Hebraic words are Hebraic existing prior to Arabic and their have root meaning completely different than what has been put forward in Arabic. An example of the difference: Rio in Spanish is River. It does not morph into Ice or mud.

[@asdsad7476]

@Konstantin Ridaya one of my troublesome is that I rarely copy and paste, secondly, when a copy snd paste has reality in why copy snd paste must be condemned.

[@asdsad7476]

@@gilbertjones9157 1-there is no a correct time and place in koran and hadith both of them are controversial. 2- most of our names are from historical personage or mythological god and goddess. 3- language sources have never defined by a fixed place or one fixed people just conversely it is very movable from time to a time and from a place to another. 4- there are many verses that when the so called messenger saying a story to arabian wise, they said to him what you say are ancient myth if we wanted we could say better than yours. there are many verses that have nothing to do with bible myths but it goes farther to india, persian, sumerian, greek from Homer to Herodotus to egypt and other dwellers of desert. 5-desert and population have scattered population when gathering in a special place and a definite time they make a large number of population that can change the world upside_down genghis khan us a secondary good example in history after arab bedouin tribes aggression. finally your last paragraph assertion is wrong regarding languages you can not say this language is older when about fifty percent if not be exaggerated is from persian language.

[@gazgaffa8437]

Hope hatun is well after todays attack, pray for her

[@paulellis5101]

Absolutely. She us an extraordinary example of courage to us all.

[@peacock69mcp]

Yes. God bless Hatun. Death to Islam.

[@MohammadAliKhalil]

@@peacock69mcp Death to pagan Christianity

[@MohammadAliKhalil]

@@paulellis5101 🤣 hahahaha don’t make me laugh. Hatun is a trash human being maybe she’s exactly like Jesus? 🤔 hatun and Jesus, so that’s how your Jesus acts? Slanders people religion and book?

[@gazgaffa8437]

@@MohammadAliKhalil she got her mannerisms off her parents who are Islamic

[@ygcg8696]

Borrow everything from them but still hate them the most !😬

[@neo3768]

duplicate want to erase all original so it could claim itself as original and take all glory and benefit the original

[@gueguense8258]

@Ya Ma You wrote so much yet you did not make sense. Muhammad was a murderer and a breaker of the 10 commandments of God, so no, he CANNOT be a prophet of God.

[@neo3768]

@@gueguense8258 kuran is from god and still doesn't know what Trinity is ,acording to kuran God the Father,Jesus the son and Mary makes the Trinity, what nonsense is that ,the ignorant is the author of kuran

[@mkamalarahman5639]

Borrowed? They are bothers, Ismael and Isaac. Did you read the OT? Ignorant?

[@neo3768]

@@mkamalarahman5639 proves that Mohammad is from ishmel side? Anyone can claim something like that

[@ConservativeArabNet]

Digging in history with digital tools is uncovering amazing points

[@mahmoodali1533]

When it is done by neutral historians that maybe correct, but when it done by lying christian missionaries, you just get lies an fabrications. Tell me what did Jay Smith discover? 1-He started saying Abbasid invented Islam when confronted with evidence, he abandoned that and started claiming Mu'awiya started Islam. When confronted with evidence, he again abandoned that and started claiming abdulmalik started Islam, then again went to claim Iyas ibn Qabisah, and now he wend down to claim Umar was , actually, prophet Muhammad. And since he reached Umar probably the next step will be abubakr and the last step he will reach the conclusion that the Islamic traditional narrative is correct and prophet Muhammad existed and he was the founder of Islam.

[@Jijicookingchannel]

Yeah you are right digging in history of Judaism and Christianity with digital tools UNCOVERING AMAZING POINTS TOO.

[@TingTong2568]

@@mahmoodali1533 these are all thesis, you fool. Nothing is solid proof yet.

[@watchman4todayreloaded192]

Glad that KZbin put this up under my suggestions again. Now I can remember that it was the Seleucids who brought elephants to Jerusalem not just a fairy tale story of elephants miraculously coming to Mecca through hundreds of miles of desert without water or pasture. I love Paul's work on the Jerusalem ... I don't even want to keep calling it a theory, it seems so clear. The Mountains of Moriah and Scopus being the real Marwa and Safa and the hagg pilgrimages being the original hajj all seem so clear especially when the 'mountains' in Mecca are mere piles of rocks around 20 feet high inside an air-conditioned building.

[@danieladedosugbadero7373]

Deeper inquiries are proving over and over again that SIN is false and Moh is but a fictional character.

[@ldswife5339]

So many holes in the narrative

[@preapple]

Truth. Courage. Resilience. The ability to share ideas without fear. These are the building blocks of any free and open society.

[@alanwebb3454]

Thank you. Now two billion Muslims must read these words. I have been listening to Jay for years, in some admiration, for his discussions about Islam with dedicated, educated, academics who without fear or favour discuss Islam, in all aspects. Well done for your years of research. \

[@paulellis5101]

Thank you. It's been a wonderful way to spend my time, and I thank Mel, Joe and Jay for offering me a platform to share my thoughts.

[@littleninjamofo9841]

Seek advice from Dr Zakir Naik. You low qualified bottom dwelling KNOBJOCKEYS are far from the truth..

[@bourbon4707]

@Flat Sky Jesus in Qur'an is fake Jesus

[@bourbon4707]

@Flat Sky Isa in Qur'an is Joshua, and Mary is sister of Aaron and Moses?

[@jameslevara8027]

The.Muslim is trying to avoid Psalm 147:19-20 in which stated that the Word of God is delivered through Israel....

[@nazeemsultan123]

This is so dumb How were the words of God delivered before israel?

[@tsbkzwct2474]

@Isaac Abraham muhammad wasn't a Jew. That's the problem. Stop taking someone else culture and religion, making a stupefied version of it and then telling them back we are one of you and going around acting like you people know it all. *Cringe*

[@mahmoodali1533]

@@tsbkzwct2474 The insanity is believing that Adam the father of the humanity who God created him by his own and, and spoke to him and then sent him to earth just left him without book or instructions and if he gave him book and instruction to worship him, he still not a prophet simply because he was not a jew. The insanity to believe that God Spoke To Noah in the old testament same like he spoke to Moses and ordered him to built the ark and ordered him to take from every living animals two pair and then God destroyed the whole earth and only saved Noah and his household and then claim that Noah is neither prophet nor a messenger. The Insanity is to believe that God talked to Abraham and Abraham still was not prophet or messenger or even to believe that Abraham was a jew. It is insanity to believe that God sent two angel that talked to Lot and saved him and still lot is not a prophet or messenger. The insanity is to believe that Jonah was a Jewish prophet and then God sent him to non Jewish people who do not even speak Hebrew to and why even God bother to sent a prophet to a non Jewish people.

[@pinklady7184]

Nazeem Sultan Prophet Muhammad's daughter has a *LATIN* name, so Muhammad might have named his daughter after some Roman lady who was in Israel. Lots of Roman women were called Fatima, so how did Muhammad's daughter get the Latin name? Muhammad must have been in Israel once colonised by Romans and so he gave his daughter the Latin name, probably for her future security. That could mean Muhammad founded Islam in Israel.

[@pinklady7184]

Tsbk Zwct Muhammad might have been a Roman and he wore a Roman shirt. He was a *WHITE MAN,* according to the aHadith (or Hadiths). Moreover, his daughter has a *LATIN* name: Fatima. In other words, Muhammad was not an Arab. He was an advanced *WHITE MAN* sot easily misunderstood by Arab philistines, who were backward by white Roman standards. This is no wonder why Arabs like Umar have much misinterpreted Muhammad's teachings over the centuries.

[@aemiliadelroba4022]

Again we knew this long time ago that Muhammad real name was not Muhammad! It may be a ref to something else , a title , but not his real name .

[@alphainitium5737]

Qathem ibn abd'lah

[@P.H.888]

Muhammid ~ The Praised One!

[@grahamford3468]

Very compelling, Paul. It makes the most sense to me. I would like to see a statistical analysis of the ancient Qibla directions to see if they point more to Jerusalem or Petra.

[@grahamford3468]

They point to Jerusalem or Petra .

[@paulellis5101]

Thank you. I think Joe and others have completely shaken my faith in the prospect of Gibson's attempt to comprehensively analyse qiblas yielding clear results. To me there seems to be too much information and too much scope for imprecision for certainty. It's like those cards psychiatrists use in movies. People see what they want. I would make a couple of observations, though. First, of all the qiblas, 3 seem to me of particular interest. Two are the Dome of the Chain and the Church of the Kathisma. Both of these do appear to point to Petra. However, I see no evidence that the dominant early Arab conquerors (630-690) were devotees of Muhammad or the Qur'an. On the contrary, I suspect that they tried hard to bury Islam. They may well have killed Muhammad and all of his companions and destroyed the canonical archetype of the Qur'an and all the regional codices If so this would explain why third generation copies would have become items of popular appeal, but detached from those who knew their original meaning. In this scenario, what qibla, if any, these conquerors built their buildings towards tells us 0 about the meaning of the Qur'an. My second observation is that the third qibla that I think much about is the Ayla mosque, possibly the first Quran-related qibla, which appears to point to Mt Sinai. Sinai is the only definite placename mentioned in the earliest surahs, and I wonder if this may be the 'difficult' qibla that the Qur'an abandons. The layout of the mosque even fits the idea of a dramatic 180° reorientation during prayers as per the legend. But this is, obviously, speculative.

[@tigger55100]

Great discussion and very relevant. Thank you for your research and your analysis.

[@ravindersidhu7655]

An excellent video....an eye opener

[@paulellis5101]

Thank you.

[@ausonius100]

This is so great! The Jerusalem-centric way of thinking by the arabs of the 7th century fits perfectly with the Dome on the rock and the notions of a rebuilding of the Temple.

[@Frst2nxt]

But the people of Jerusalem didn't expect the general of Umar to invade Bethlehem on the way over to Jerusalem. They heard of that earlier invasion with startled consternation and took the following invasion of Jerusalem with great dread. This is all undoubted fact. How could islam be from Jerusalem? Only Catholic Christians were using the temple mount for the daily sacrifice of the mass. This was when the east/west schism was yet centuries away, and all churches now called eastern orthodox were still Catholic, including in Arabia. Nothing fits with the presumption that islam began outside of Arabia. Everyone outside of Arabia, including in Jordan and Syria and Mesopotamia, were surprised by the suddenly appearing muslims. Only Arabia could have facilitated the secrecy of the formation of islam and the planning made. Had islam formed outside of Arabia, no Arab would have let muslims take the nearly all Catholic Arabic peninsula.

[@ausonius100]

@@Frst2nxt There were no "muslims" or "Islam" in the traditional sense until the Abbasids formed this religion from the 9th century onwards. The byzantines had been kicked out of Jerusalem by the arabs during the late 630s, so whatever they did or did not want to happen in the city was simply of no consequence to its new arab masters.

[@Frst2nxt]

@Konstantin Ridaya Sofronius was the Bishop of the See of Jerusalem, and was not an Arian. Do you have a contemporary patristic claim to the effect that Arians were in Jerusalem? If, in the vacuum left by the Christian majority of Arab men defending the Roman empire against the Persian, islam found less men present to stop them from killing the old, and any males left behind, and rape women and claim children, then this would be the only possible bubble zone for the formation of something that so took the world by surprise. Arians that had been infiltrated by Manichaeans pursued Christians into the Hijaz, and the polytheists there were an even worse nightmare that caught the fleeing Catholics. That was the case as far back as the Vandal siege on Carthage in which Augustine of Hippo died. There's no Christian version of the quran, no prototype. It's full of spontaneity that includes some inaccurately recalled random details of heretical teachings and stories mixed with the author's own sexual desires. It fits perfectly with the sleep paralysis from which muhammad frequently derived "revelations". Isolated in the Arabic peninsula, itself still partly left under Byzantine law, with attention turned elsewhere away from it, with many Arab Christian soldiers still garrisoned far away to repair cities destroyed by Persia, the original core muslims would be an entity unknown except in their own cordoned off vicinity. No one would have heard of muhammad outside of his initial stolen domain.

[@Basaljet]

@@Frst2nxt what is your evidence for suggesting that Christian worship was happening in the Temple Mount prior to Islam? Christian worship focussed on the holy sepulchre and Anastasia close by. Is there any evidence that any significant Christian structure was on the Temple Mount? No doubt Christians we’re drawn to the place but it does not relate to the crucifixion or resurrection of Jesus.

[@Frst2nxt]

@@Basaljet The two mosques there were both called the Church of St. Mary. The larger was the earlier, and still shows Byzantine era wood wall layers from hundreds of years earlier. The first mosques were generally stolen, reapropriated Churches. The octagonal base that they added the dome onto originally had no inscriptions and was octagonal as was standard on Chuches name of St. Mary. The smaller building was made after the larger had been ruined by the Zoroastrians, and was an interim Church. And none of those Christians used Arabic script or knew Arabic. They knew Greek and Aramaic. Umar at first gave his word in a seven year "peace" treaty, to not steal the Churches, but halfway into that seven year run, beheaded Sefronios and started making them islamic mosques.

[@springheeledjack9652]

It shows that the traditional mohammad wasn't a phophet, End Game

[@som9097]

You are doing great work.

[@stuvertjohn3549]

Praise the Lord Jesus Christ.God bless you. 🇮🇳

[@tyh3120]

Apocalypse 21/9 The new Jerusalem= the spouse of the Messiah. Apocalypse 21/22 no Temple in the City, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are it’s temple.

[@arunraja3084]

Jay is always ahead and top of the curve

[@4twindad]

ahead of those he leads to the fire

[@khany6345]

Now you are talking sense.But Umar is not Mohamad. Mohammad refers to a person, who could be Jesus , Arabs created a real person who was Arab from Mecca to establish a self identity for themselves. Of course this upset both Jews and Christians thereafter.

[@brownwarrior6867]

Except this mythical character cannot be found in the Century he supposedly lived ,was an orphan ( convenient when making a fictional character up ) who despite having proclaimed (only in the fictional book containing the fictional character) extra special prowess in sexual terms had no children? Wake up.

[@ngashmir]

Hi Dr. Jay & Paul? Loving your work and the insights it's yielding. I look forward to your videos daily. I have always suspected that the name Muhammad is the Arabic equivalent of the Jewish name David. The name David seems to have the meaning of BELOVED/ MY BELOVED ONE. The current trajectory that the conversation is yielding seems to be suggesting something in that direction. NB: I am referring to the meaning of the names and not the direct equivalent translation.

[@sebastianyoon8051]

If I am not mistaken, the Arabic version of David is "Daud".

[@haimanhammo1705]

I wish to add the verse from Haggai 2:7 as support for the use of makhmet to refer to the temple and it’s true fulfilment Christ Jesus. In Arabic it is the word Mushtaha meaning ‘desire of’: وَأُزَلْزِلُ كُلَّ الأُمَمِ. وَيَأْتِي مُشْتَهَى كُلِّ الأُمَمِ، فَأَمْلأُ هذَا الْبَيْتَ مَجْدًا، قَالَ رَبُّ الْجُنُودِ. (حجي ٢: ٧)

[@P.H.888]

Jesus’ water baptism Holy Spirit baptism simultaneously 🕊 then after defeating the devil’s in the wilderness after 40 days fasting was again filled with The Holy Spirit 🔥 Dunamis Power! Then His Transfiguration up on The Mountain Top! On The 3rd Day His Glorious Victorious Resurrection

[@talals7029]

The word " Muhammad "is never mentioned in Meccan surahs !! Interestingly , the word " Messiah " is also never mentioned in Meccan surahs!! Note that: according to Muslim scholars and historians , Meccan period lasted 13 years - 92 surahs was revealed at that period. Medinah period lasted 10 years - 22 surahs was revealed in Medinah . 92+22= 114 surahs. Note that : There is noting about the birth or childhood of Muhammad in Quran, but we find stories about birth or childhood of Jesus and Moses !!

[@anderslvolljohansen1556]

Any biographical information about Muhammad in the Quran would go against the Islamic tradition that says he received it from or via the Angel Gibril. He wouldn't need to receive his own biography from Gibril, because he already knew it well.

[@anderslvolljohansen1556]

@@Oxygen11115 Jibril is an Arabic name for Gabriel, according to en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel#Islam I mistakenly wrote Gibril, but this is actually the way Egyptian Arab speakers say it.

[@paulellis5101]

If there was no Mecca, there can't be any Meccan surahs, but I take your point. The prophet, the Qur'an, his audience, their situation and even the divine voice are all missing from the earliest surahs. The messenger gradually emerges until by the end obedience to himself is the only message.

[@kumdinikum3314]

Abu Quasim is his childhood name. Muhammad became his Apostolic title. One Gospel: Two Different Apostolic Traditions-The Paulin Tradition versus The Ebionites One

[@kumdinikum3314]

The Arabian Tradition tells us that one orphan who started as an "Evangelist"among Meccan pagans became a Founding Father of a Mighty Empire as he signed off his decrees and treaties as Muhammad. If that narrative is true the Founding Father of the Arabian nation is not the Muhammad in the Qur'an. The Muhammad in the Qur'an is Jesus as Muhammad is used as a euphemism for the title Messiah to circumvent the pagans resistance to the Gospel. If the Muhammad of the Qur'an is Jesus and the Muhammad of the Tradition is Abu Quasim, the lesson we learn is that the Qur'an is not a book of religion but a theory of government thereby the Prince drops his birth name to pick that of the Apostles as the popes do. Indeed the Sassanid Princes too in the Orient drop their birth name to wear a reign name. A case can be made for Jesus being looked up as the Chief Apostle as him being the Messiah sent from heaven to mankind. Remember how Islam never referred to the 12 as apostles but as Jesus'disciples. That's because for Islam the Trinitarians cannot claim to have the correct Apostolic Tradition. Jesus being the Messiah, the Chief Apostle, circumcised the 8th day according to the Tradition of Moses, not knowing anything about Trinity then Islam is the right Christian Apostolic Tradition. As a matter of fact someone is complaining somewhere in one Surat:"your people don't want hear the name of Jesus and when His name is mentioned, your people burst into clamor hereby..." Surat? Which takes us back to my original point that the Qur'an is not a book of religion but a theory of government which states that a Prince or any ruler who ratifies the Law of Moses is on earth the shadow of the Messiah in heaven. Abu Quasim, the Arabian Founding Father or any Sovereign for that matter is a Messiah in the metaphorical sense so it makes sense that he also signed off his decrees and legislations as Muhammad If he ever did. Conclusion: Jesus and Abu Quasim are both Messiah, therefore both are also Muhammad but Jesus is the Original and Abu Quasim is Messiah by analogy in order to enforce the Pristine Apostolic Tradition upon the Arabs so that it may be done on earth as it is heaven: the kingdom of God on earth! "The Making Of The Arabian Messiah, Sole Ruler Of Mankind Like Caesar Augustus."

[@matthewbos6318]

Could y'all discuss how the /x/ in machmad would have transformed into the /ħ/ in محمد? These are separate phonemes in Arabic that result in different meanings, unlike in English. If they had adopted the word machmad from Hebrew into Arabic, the most natural way to adopt it would be as مخمد, which has a different set of root letters and would have a different meaning.

[@bamboo7714]

The origin of the quranic texts is said to be of oral tradition. So rather than looking at the evolution of word spellings, look at the phonetic evolution of such words taken from the Syro-Aramaic or Jewish texts, that were orally translated into Arabic, and eventually written down by the quranic writers as they compile the Quran.

[@matthewbos6318]

@@bamboo7714 I agree. In my original comment I was referring to phonemes, not graphemes.

[@Peter-xf9jy]

@@matthewbos6318 what do we know about the sound of hebrew ח and arabic ح back then ? do you have an idea why חי and حي are related ? wouldnt you/we expect it to be خي، خياة ? or why do we find שמש as شمس ... borrowing isnt always an exact science.

[@johnb9800]

Don’t forget that till the 7th century, Arabic letters didn’t have dots. So when they started using them, they changed many words to different meanings Compare خ and ح

[@aishamatovu3726]

Do what you want with the name you can even use Muhamud , this name is so beautiful to name anyone on Earth , if you claim it it is free take it and use it , it is absolutely amazing name .

[@omarkabanda6396]

Envy is killing em

[@RoarT19]

Ask The Expert Zakir Naik Song of Solomon 🤣🤣🤣 Machmad🤣🤣

[@JaiRamJaiRamJaiRam108]

Joker Nayak is considered as Superman by Urdu chaps of India.

[@nohaydios3590]

Bingo

[@joshuarise3650]

Zakir Naik,they are propagating lies and they know it..cant turn back ,fake

[@kachyn_]

Stopppp😭😭

[@themsmloveswar3985]

The whole thing is rampant with plagiarism.

[@ast3663]

wow, very enlightning, great..I wish he would go further on 'bekka' near Jerusalem.

[@Noname-dr1jm]

Hatun Tash just got stabbed at Speaker Corners 🤯

[@ardenkilikian7990]

Really? God bless her

[@Noname-dr1jm]

@@ardenkilikian7990 Check out Soco Films yt channel...

[@paulellis5101]

Thankfully Hatun has escaped with relatively minor injuries (compared with how bad it could easily have been). I was delighted to watch her first live stream this evening and am, once again, in awe of her courage and goodness.

[@andrewfaniku]

The worst thing you can do to a child is to tell him/her to memorize a book written by God. Any book! It stiffens the child's critical thinking for life. 😪

[@aemiliadelroba4022]

Also there has been editing in Quran , that is obvious.

[@liverpoolvinnerligan]

Today Hatun from speak corner was stabbed with knife...What wrong with world😡

[@firstnamesecondname852]

Hopefully she recovers soon. 😟

[@paulellis5101]

Thankfully Hatun has escaped with relatively minor injuries (compared with how bad it could easily have been). I was delighted to watch her first live stream this evening and am, once again, in awe of her courage and goodness.

[@karriemmisbach3596]

Jay Smith and his hard core missionaries they will never stopped attacking Islam for many years was always attacked by the Christian missionaries it's not something new amazingly some of them converted to Islam they failed miserably in their mission Islam will always prevail falsehood will vanished

[@jeangatti9384]

Let us stick to that: lies must vanish, truth must prevail

[@pinklady7184]

Muhammad's daughter has a Latin name "Fatima." Before Christianity, lots of Roman women were called "Fatima." Mhmd seems to be spelled the Roman way. Romans frequently dropped vowels so to speed up writing on wax tablets which were posted within Roman empire. It was just their shorthand writing. There might be Latin names for Mhmd.

[@nihilonisicruce6843]

Question for Jay and Paul. Can you show us the passages in the qu'ran where the word mahmet is used and how an alternative meaning of Jesus/the temple fits in the narrative?

[@Frst2nxt]

Especially if it's in fact only the Ahmed verse, which name, though coming from the same root, is a completely different name and word and meaning than Muhammad..

[@paulellis5101]

Good question. The word that is conventionally rendered as ’muḥammad‘ and conventionally treated as the personal name of the Qurʾan’s announcer appears in four verses: {3.144}: ‘Muḥammad is naught but a messenger; messengers have passed before him …’ {33.40}: ‘Muḥammad is not the father of any man amongst you; rather he is the … seal of the prophets’ and {47.2}: ‘Those who believe and perform righteous deeds, and believe in what has been sent down unto Muhammad-and it is the truth from their Lord …’ and {48.29}: ‘Muḥammad is the messenger of God...’ I would say that two of these contain indications that it is in fact Jesus who is the person being referred to. The opening words of {3.144} - ‘Muḥammad is naught but a messenger; messengers have passed before him’ - replicates verbatim words that describe Jesus in {5.75}: ‘The Messiah, son of Mary is naught but a messenger; messengers have passed before him’. The phrase ‘naught but a messenger’ by itself challenges the mistaken belief that the person concerned was more than a prophet. But, as Edouard Gallez asks, if the passage relates to the Qurʾan announcer, ‘What else could he be?’ The statement in {33.40} that ‘muḥammad‘ is the ‘seal of the prophets’ is also more apposite to Jesus than the Qurʾan announcer. This phrase is normally treated as a straightforward claim that Muhammad is the final prophet but the symbolism of the attachment of a seal to a document conveys a more profound idea than merely the final act in bringing it into existence. A seal confirms authenticity and lends authority to a document’s contents. It transforms those contents from a mere arrangement of words to being the solemn statement of the sealer. Here again the image seems more Christian than Islamic. In the Christian theology, Jesus’s death and resurrection are treated by Christians as fulfilling the law and the prophets, that had previously been provisional and imperfect. In the Qurʾan, however, even if the announcer of the words is God’s final prophet and a prophet for the Ishmaelites, it is hard to construe in what sense the Qurʾan announcer could have understood himself to be lending authority retrospectively to those prophets sent to other peoples in bygone times. The reference to Muhammad in {47.2} is, I would say, an obvious late interpolation. The famous motto ’Muḥammad is the messenger of God...’ (‘Muhammad rasūl Allah’) could, and almost invariably is, read as a simple factual statement that a person going by the name of Muhammad is the messenger of God. The phrase and its setting in {48.29} do not, to my mind, contain any intrinsic evidence to counter this interpretation. However, one of the phrase’s first uses outside the Qurʾan occurs in the ambulatory mosaic inscriptions on the Dome of the Rock -and this strongly suggests that it was Jesus who is the longed-for messenger of God referred to. The composer of the inscription was unlikely to have intended to repeatedly interrupt and distract from his Christological theme by the assertion that a different individual not otherwise mentioned was the messenger of God.

[@mrgeronimo84]

And the muslim will cut part of this video and give title "alhamdulillah..mohammed is exist in the bible" 😂😂

[@ardenkilikian7990]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@SzTz100]

Wow, great discussion

[@AustinOKeeffe]

Was the Solomon love letter not part of an ongoing correspondence between him and his lover and Mhmd just meant the desired one - instead of something longed for. And how could this be also referring to the Jerusalem temple as something desired or longed for, when the temple was already there? Another Muhammed possibility - if it was an honorary religious/Jewish title that Umar took himself in the 630's after conquering Jerusalem, he may have been worshiped like a god for his achievements, but decades later Abdul Malik didn't want to make him out to be someone to worship and had it written on the Dome on the rock that Mhmd (Umar) was just a messenger, and not to be worshiped.

[@markaxworthy2508]

Once again the headline above goes beyond the content. "The Muslims' Muhammed is really the Jewish Machmad!" should read, "The Muslims' Muhammed is really the Jewish Machmad?" This piece raises questions. It does not provide definitive answers, or even claim to. Using tabloid headline techniques as clickbait doesn't do the subject justice or reflect well on the editor concerned. This seems tenuous. One wonders if we shouted the modern English "Jesus" into a crowd of early disciples whether any of them would know what we were talking about either. The Spanish pronunciation today varies from the English in every letter except the "s". Was the pronunciation of "Jesus" in the earliest Greek text of the New Testament the same as in Aramaic? (An open question, as I do not know the answer.)

[@paulellis5101]

With respect, I disagree. My thesis is that the term 'machmad' from the Hebrew bible was deliberately adopted by the principal author of the Qur'an first for Jesus and then for himself. It was meant to be recognised, in part, as a reference to the longed for Jerusalem Temple. Whilst all headlines are, by their nature, shorthand this one doesn't seem to be misleading.

[@markaxworthy2508]

Hi Paul, As you post, you are only advancing a thesis. The headline converts this into an established fact through use of the exclamation mark. This can happen if the headline writer is not the same person as the author. I think you have a viable, if tenuous, question here, but are not in a position to be nearly so declamatory as the "!" implies. I enjoy what you put up, so please do not take my scepticism too seriously.

[@markaxworthy2508]

@Konstantin Ridaya Thanks for the time you have taken. To start at the beginning, what is the hard evidence that "Jesus Christ spoke three languages, Aramaic, Hebrew and Koine Greek and so would all of His disciples and apostles have done for sure too."? Is this a presumption or an established biblical fact? (I refer here to before Jesus's death - necessarily some of them would presumably later have needed other languages, or at least translators, to proselytize outside Palestine). And outside the Bible, how far do we know each of these languages permeated Galilean society at the time and what proportion were tri-lingual in them?

[@paulellis5101]

@@markaxworthy2508 I try to express myself carefully (which I find much easier in the written word, than the spoken.) But it would be a dull old world if everyone expressed themselves in that way. I genuinely appreciate it when Jay takes my ideas and gingers them up with a little razzamataz.

[@markaxworthy2508]

@@paulellis5101 I appreciate that you express yourself carefully. That comes through in your presentation, which I do not fault. And, while indeed, "it would be a dull old world if everyone expressed themselves in that way ", I much prefer that to artifical gingering up and razzamataz. These are the tools of the salesman, (or clickbait, if you will) regardless of the quality of the product they are pushing. This rather leads me to believe that Pfander is essentially a largely Christian tool designed to discredit Islam and not a dispassionate investigation of its roots. Not all of us view the world through a purely Christian prism. That said, a lot of interesting stuff comes up here.

[@shadowkill546]

Looks like two fellows on youtube managed to uncover something that 1500 years of scholarship failed. It should be noted that the Prophet Muhammad was not the first person in Arabia named Muhammad. While it was an uncommon name, it was a pre-existing name. Moreover, this is a highly atheistic approach towards revelation. If we believe that the Bible is of Divine Origin, then its not impossible that it is talking about metaphysical realities that have instantiated in the future (from the perspective of historical Bible) Prophet Muhammad.

[@tahirbanka1213]

Kashmiri language have added vowel in 2010 .we can understand it from context. So is case of other language.

[@dollahmusa6705]

Especially , Islam contradicts the revelation in the Gospels that Jesus is only begotten Son of the Father ; that Jesus died a a "korben" ( sacrifcial / substitutional) death for us ; and that Jesus is the only way to salvation. " O People od the book !! Ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Torah , the Gospel , and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lordc." ( Sura 5 :68) The historical mohd was in facr an ambitious terrorist , criminal and murderer --- whose entire life was based on victimizing innocents and indulging in mindless violence , carnage and massacre. He was a man who destory peace wherever he went , and in its place brought terror , raping , unmerciful butcheries , carnage and death -- all the while invoking God's holy name to sanction his evil deeds.

[@kumdinikum3314]

FROM ABU-QUASIM TO MUHAMMAD. Within the pages of the Corpus of the 114 Surats someone is complaining that a certain Tradition which claims to be an Apostolic Tradition rejects circumcision while the Apostles were all circumcised, didn't believe in Trinity, and had prescribed a dietary Law during the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15:22-34 which dietary law the said Tradition rejects. Is it not ironic! Based on those clues we can infer with certainty that: Qur'an is a codeword for the Torah of Moses Reminder should be the proper Title for the current corpus of those 114 Surats. Islam meaning an Evangelical Political Party supposed to restore the pristine Apostolic Tradition of Jesus' disciples in Jerusalem and also enforce the Torah, the Law of Moses, as the Law of the land. Muhammad as a euphemism for Messiah/Christ Abu Quasim as an Arabian Evangelist who later became a Sovereign Ruler, Legislator, a Founding Father of a nation and picked Muhammad as a reign name as do the Popes when taking their Apostolic Throne. "We(the Children of Israel) sent you, O Abu Quasim, as an Apostle and a Prophet so that you and your people may believe in God and His Messiah/Muhammad/Christ, help Him, praise Him, sing for Him evening and morning. Remember when Jesus Asked, 'who will assist me in the way of God? The disciples replied, 'we shall be the helpers of God; bear witness that we are Muslims.'" Surat... Unfortunately the "Muhammad" of the Palace and the "Mohammad" of the Shahada in the Mosque got blended together in the Tradition. If it is true that Abu Quasim signed off his formal treaties, official decrees, and other legislations as Muhammad as reported by Ibn Hisham, then he is a Founding Father of a state power like Caesar Augustus, Alexander The Great, or George Washington. This might also explain how this present OPTICAL ILLUSION was perpetuated by those who seeking to capitalize on the Pilgrimage to Macca. Let's keep in mind that his Friday sermons in the Mosque were not about himself but about Christ/Messiah and His way. It' s high time to differentiate the palace and the Mosque under the Messianic title Muhammad...!!!

[@Ya_akov1980]

"Is that Beer Jay?" I thought that was funny

[@defenderoftruth3212]

According to Jay Smith the LETTERS OF PAUL are just MERE TAFSEER of the Old Testament and “other scriptures” (?). Tafseer means interpretation. If the letters of Paul are just mere tafseer, why is it they become the main core of the New Testament which comprised almost 90 percent of it. These should be written in a separate book. In the Islamic standard, no single tafseer is included in the Holy Qur’an. Hence, the letters of Paul must be written in a separate book. Jay Smith failed not elaborate as to what specific book or verse/s in the Old Testament that each letter is intended to for being a tafseer. He should have elaborated on the following letters of Paul: LETTERS OF PAUL TO THE DIFFERENT CHURCHES: 1). Romans - tafseer of what is it intended for? 2). Hebrews - tafseer of what is it intended for? 3). Corinthians - tafseer of what is it intended for? 4). Galatians - tafseer of what is it intended for? 5). Colossians - tafseer of what is it intended for? 6). Philippians - tafseer of what is it intended for? 7). Ephesians - tafseer of what is it intended for? 8). Thessalonians - tafseer of what is it intended for? LETTERS OF PAUL TO THE DIFFERENT INDIVIDUALS: 1). Timothy - tafseer of what is it intended for? 2). Titus - tafseer of what is it intended for? 3). Philemon - tafseer of what is it intended for? 4). James - tafseer of what is it intended for? 5). John - tafseer of what is it intended for? 6). Jude - tafseer of what is it intended for? 7). Peter - tafseer of what is it intended for? -08-03-23

[@IR240474]

I always believed they had the same things when I read the translation of the Koran on a plane to Abu Dabi, the Koran is exactly the same as the old testament, it's word for word on the translation I saw. I spent two hours reading Genisis. I said to my friend why are we fighting, and a Muslim man at the end of the seat gave me a glance, as I spent an hour explaining to my friend the old testament. I think the Muslim man was also shocked at the revelation. If Mahammad lived in Petra and had a copy of the Old Testament, decided to write with help in another language the same words that seemed to unite many groups and cultures in the 7th century, thought to himself, hmmmmmmm. You can't have a cult without CULTure.

[@NoOne-zm5wh]

@Vishal Ashtrey not copy-pasted if may put it more clear, a response to biblical +(non-canonical one) and post-biblical literature from monks and rabbis over Mid and Near East

[@BreakFix]

Are you aware that you are disrespecting your own intellect with that argument??!!!

[@paulellis5101]

I agree with No One (that sounds empowering to write!) It's not a copy-and-paste. The Qur'an might be seen as, to use modern movie parlance, a non-canon sequel purporting to form the third part of a trilogy, but retconning much of what went before.

[@paulellis5101]

@Kilian Klaiber I did not suggest that parallels between the Qur'an and prior texts :(eg the name Mhmd and essentially the same word in Ez and SoS) are a coincidence. I drew the comparison with a movie sequel. The fact that a sequel generally features the same characters and plot elements that appear in the original movie does not make it a 'copy and paste' reproduction, since sequels try, by their nature, to use these in a new way. Derivative, I would agree to, but not copied and pasted. The Qur'an is, in my view, innovative.

[@paulellis5101]

@Kilian Klaiber I think that in the later surahs the Qur'an author saw himself announcing God's abrogation of His grant of the Promised Land to the Israelites in the time of the Exodus and Kings due to the Jews' lack of obedience. He declares himself to be a new Moses, commissioned to purify the Promised Land from error and sin, just as the Israelites had once done to the Philistines. This is very much the turning of a new chapter in God's relationship with man.

[@mkamalarahman5639]

Sorry Christian, you confused your own religion, but do not confuse with Judaism and Islam. We still worship one God, not Triune God.

[@tyh3120]

Muhammad must refer to the divin one, cannot be Umar, a man. But the Calife, the representative of Allah on earth, is , like the Pope, the successor of the office of Muhammad, the Jewish Messiah.

[@jameswbuchananjr]

Both the calife and the pope, who are mere men, or you or I can claim to be God's representative on earth, but I am believing Jesus, who rose from the dead as His representative and also co-equal with God!

[@tyh3120]

@@jameswbuchananjr God appointed Moses to start a religious system, so did the Christ with the Apostle Peter. If you want to understand Islam , you must study the religious system of the Catholic Church, for Islam copy every rule, every ritual and every coutumes of the Catholic Church. At the end, the Islamic Calife will devour Rome. This Pope is the last one.

[@defenderoftruth3212]

According to Jay Smith is that he believed that there is really ONE ORIGINAL GOSPEL. Since he cannot find it, he assumed that the gospel of John is already that book. But his is only mere assumption. He failed to make any clear evidence to show that his assumption is correct. Hence, he has to show manuscripts in Aramaic as evidence for his assumption that the gospel of John is the already real Gospel of Pophet jESUs (pbuh). By his hasty assumption, he undoubtedly discarded the gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke into useless books which have no more meaning to the whole Christendom, and hence not fit to be used as the basis of the religiosity of the Christians. -07-26-23

[@albertpurification9413]

I am a writer , but taught to write something because I live in Asia .

[@gilaschannel1855]

The Levites, as part of their preparation for their original service to G-d in the Torah, shaved their whole bodies.

[@bennywolfe4357]

Are you sure about that? I’m pretty sure there are laws against shaving your head and sideburns.

[@isaiahfiftythree5334]

@Konstantin Ridaya. And Dr. Andy Woods.

[@gilaschannel1855]

@@bennywolfe4357 Yes. Just a one time thing.

[@bennywolfe4357]

@Konstantin Ridaya I read the paragraphs you sent and I couldn’t find what you were talking about. Where did god say that the laws were temporary?

[@bennywolfe4357]

@Konstantin Ridaya shaving is not connected to levites. Of course the Levite and priest laws aren’t relevant today, but they will be once the temple is rebuilt.

[@jeangatti9384]

There clearly is a distinction to make between the initial meaning of the coranic text (which was originally christian though anti-trinitarian) and the meaning that was imposed (and distorted) later (9th and 10th centuries) by the abbassid caliphs (with the creation of the so-called "prophetic tradition" or "sunnah" with hadiths, tafsir and siraa). Their goal was to create a new religion serving their imperial interests of conquest and domination by the sword

[@davidmcintosh3468]

You forgot about Hosea:8:6-7, MHMD, the prophet was was "carried by the winds", a maniac, the crooked snare. God bless you all!

[@defenderoftruth3212]

The BIBLE in the eyes of JAY SMITH. According to Jay Smith is that he believed that there is really ONE ORIGINAL GOSPEL. Since he cannot find it, he assumed that the gospel of John is already that book. But his is only mere assumption. He failed to make any clear evidence to show that his assumption is correct. Hence, he has to show manuscripts in Aramaic as evidence for his assumption that the gospel of John is the already real Gospel of Pophet jESUs (pbuh). By his hasty assumption, he undoubtedly discarded the gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke into useless books which have no more meaning to the whole Christendom, and hence not fit to be used as the basis of the religiosity of the Christians. According to Jay Smith the LETTERS OF PAUL are just MERE TAFSEER of the Old Testament and “other scriptures” (?). Tafseer means interpretation. If the letters of Paul are just mere tafseer, why is it they become the main core of the New Testament which comprised almost 90 percent of it. These should be written in a separate book. In the Islamic standard, no single tafseer is included in the Holy Qur’an. Hence, the letters of Paul must be written in a separate book. Jay Smith failed not elaborate as to what specific book or verse/s in the Old Testament that each letter is intended to for being a tafseer. He should have elaborated on the following letters of Paul: LETTERS OF PAUL TO THE DIFFERENT CHURCHES: 1). Romans - tafseer of what is it intended for? 2). Hebrews - tafseer of what is it intended for? 3). Corinthians - tafseer of what is it intended for? 4). Galatians - tafseer of what is it intended for? 5). Colossians - tafseer of what is it intended for? 6). Philippians - tafseer of what is it intended for? 7). Ephesians - tafseer of what is it intended for? 8). Thessalonians - tafseer of what is it intended for? LETTERS OF PAUL TO THE DIFFERENT INDIVIDUALS: 1). Timothy - tafseer of what is it intended for? 2). Titus - tafseer of what is it intended for? 3). Philemon - tafseer of what is it intended for? 4). James - tafseer of what is it intended for? 5). John - tafseer of what is it intended for? 6). Jude - tafseer of what is it intended for? 7). Peter - tafseer of what is it intended for? -08-11-23

[@SaintFort]

No disrespect to Islam, but it's unnecessary from the perspective of Judaism; Islam doesn't teach anything new relative to Judaism (e.g. there is only one God and he is absolutely one; there will be a ressurection and the Day of Judgement; there have been many prophets; etc). Furthermore, the Quran clearly contains excerpts from the Jewish Talmud and Mishnah, and certain Islamic prohibitions were clearly taken from Judaism without understanding them (e.g. the prohibition against only pork, even though in Judaism pigs are only one of many animals that are forbidden to eat due to not BOTH chewing the cud and having split hooves, etc). If someone wants to worship the God of Abraham, then they should just become Jewish or become a Noachide (a "sect" of Judaism for non-Jews).

[@SaintFort]

@John Wick The Mishna was compiled around the year 200, which was four hundred years before Muhammad is believed to have lived. Yet, we have the following. Mishna: Sanhedrin 4:4-5: _Only one man, Adam, was originally created in order to teach us that if one destroys a single life, it’s as if he destroyed an entire world, while if one saves a single life, it’s as if he saved an entire world._ Surah 5:32: _That is why We ordained for the Children of Israel that whoever takes a life-unless as a punishment for murder or mischief in the land-it will be as if they killed all of humanity; and whoever saves a life, it will be as if they saved all of humanity.1 ˹Although˺ Our messengers already came to them with clear proofs, many of them still transgressed afterwards through the land._

[@kodesh3642]

It's surprising to me that Dr Jay Smith still believes the messiah rose on the “first day”, seeing how learned he is I would of thought he would of discerned that he rose on the Sabbath.

[@vericacvetkovic9093]

Jesus didn't rise on the Sabbath, but on the 1st day, on Sunday.

[@kodesh3642]

The first witness to this is every time the resurrection is mentioned the Greek manuscripts say either πρῶτος σάββατον or εἷς σάββατον , these mean on the chief/high sabbath and on one of the sabbaths respectively (check sabbaton use here -> www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g4521/kjv/tr/0-1/ also check every resurrection account -> www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/mar/16/9/t_conc_973009 and even when they gathered after his death was on the sabbath -> www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/act/20/7/s_1038007 ). A additional witness to this is that along side the dead sea scrolls we find a calendar that is a 364 day calendar. That calendar Passover is always on the 3rd day of the week. Now what does our messiah say about how long he will be dead “ But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous nation seeks after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Yonah: For as Yonah was three days and three nights in the fish's belly; so shall the Son of A'dam be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” MATTITHYAHU (MATTHEW) 12:39-40 . Note he said 3 days and three nights, the Christian resurrection account is from the 6th day to the first day but the accounts say they went to the tomb in the morning, this would not be 3 days and 3 nights. If he died on the night of the 6th day and was in the gave 3 days and 3 nights that would be the 2 day of the Hebrew week not the first day. This is clearly a mistranslation because “first day of the week” doesn’t make sense when used against the messiah’s own words, he knew that Ha’Satan would twist his words to trick many into breaking one of the Ten Commandments, despite the numerous witnesses in scripture saying we should keep the commandments even after the messiahs death and resurrection (Matt 5:17-19, Matt 7:23 note that he turns away those that transgress the Torah/law, John 14:15, Paul telling people to keep the commandments acts 21:18-28 , Rom 3:31, 2 Peter 3:15-28 note this combines grace with commandments we are saved by the messiah and keep the commandments to show love of 𐤉𐤄𐤅𐤄, Rev 12:17). Now if we use the calendar found in the dead sea scrolls (not the calendar of the synagogues of Ha’Satan) we have our blemish-less Passover lamb dying on the 3rd day (at night) and was in the belly of the earth 3 days and nights this would mean he would rise on the 7th day and is why the manuscripts say πρῶτος σάββατον and εἷς σάββατον . Also note that we have intercepted letters by jesuits (agents of the whore of Babylon) saying they would make tiny changes to the word which are hardly detectable but have big consequences (kzbin.info/www/bejne/qn_ZXq2wpa6qeNU) the translation of πρῶτος σάββατον and εἷς σάββατον to “first day of the week” has lead to the most wide spread commandment breaking by believers of all, breaking one of the ten. Did our messiah not say he is the father, did our messiah not say that he is lord of the sabbath day? We also can look back through history and see where did Sunday worship come from. It came from Constantine not from the bible (ref-> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunday#Sunday_in_Christianity). I could go on but I don’t want to overwhelm you as a lot of this is probably news to you. Please test everything I have said and pray to 𐤉𐤄𐤅𐤄 for guidance but you will find all I say to be true. I pray that this removes the deception of Ha’Satan from your eyes and all that read and I see you all at the marriage supper of the lamb. Do not thank me when you find these things to be true, I am but a messenger, all glory to the one who made the message. 𐤉𐤄𐤅𐤄 ALMIGHTY who dwelt amongst us as the messiah OW𐤉𐤄𐤅 and through him alone we’re all of his children saved . Halleluyah halleluyah.

[@kodesh3642]

@@vericacvetkovic9093 hello family I pray you are well. Have you looked over what I said?

[@kopipahit3773]

For simple answer that in sabath yhwh make it as a rest day. He cannot break his ownlaw.

[@sayahkhalfa7892]

According to scholar of Islamic Studies, Dr. Sean W. Anthony, when asked on Mythvision on Petra Theory, he says and I quote, "None sense, real garbage"

[@gmann1968]

Mind blown

[@paulellis5101]

It is incredible that so much of human history and culture has been built upon so an obviously false narrative.

[@jeangatti9384]

From recent lexical analysis it appears that what is referred to as "muhammad" in the quran (which means "the praised one") is not a name but a title which refers to Jesus, as the prophet and messiah. So early muslims (not called muslims but mumineen) were in fact anti-trinitarian christians who accepted Jesus as prophet and messiah but rejected his divine nature (this is why he is always called "Issa ibn Meryam" ie "Jesus son of Mary" in the quran, but not "son of God")

[@AndalusPoet]

You seem to have it wrong! Also, it’s missing from your commentary. The consonantal roots ‘h m d’ means to ‘praise’. H mm d is the second form of the Arabic verb which means to praise a lot or heap praise on. Muhammad is an honorific title and name which means to heap praise on etc. Mahmad means an object or place of praise. A lot of the meanings ascribed to the verb, supposedly the Hebrew word, are fanciful figments of the Western imagination adding extra layers of myths. There is no way of knowing what it meant at the time. The Arabic language is vast and incorporates huge elements of past Semitic languages.

[@MrBell-hy5us]

If the title is correct, Muhammad is a Jewish Machmad why is it many of the passages in the qur'an the hostile aims mostly towards Jews?

[@buddysilver5788]

Long before the Arab conquest, as a British Member of Parliament pointed out in 1939, "... a thousand years before the Prophet Mohammed was born, the Jew, already exiled, sitting by the waters of Babylon, was singing: "If I forget thee O Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its cunning."1 1. Parkes, Whose Land?, p. 26. According to Arabist scholar Alfred Guillaume, Jews probably first settled in Arabia in connection with the fall of Samaria in 721 B.C.: ...it is almost certain that the self-contained Jewish military colony in Aswan and upper Egypt, about which the world knew nothing until a few years ago, was founded just after the fall of Samaria, and consequently it is not impossible that some Jewish settlements in Arabia were due to fugitives fleeing from the old northern capital of the Hebrews. Guillaurne is certain that "in the first and second centuries A.D., Arabia offered a near asylum" to the Jews who had been victimized by the "utterly ruthless" Romans.{2} {2}Salo W. Baron, A Social and Religious History of the Jews, 3 vols. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1937), 1, pp. 308T

[@FirstLast-rb5zj]

So many jokes could be made. MacMad. Machmad, crazy speeds!

[@rustomlalji8207]

Super evidences produced.

[@paulellis5101]

Thank you. I am glad that you found it interesting.

[@defenderoftruth3212]

It looks like Jay Smith and Abdul Fadi become irritatingly jealous and infuriated when they could read something beautiful is written about Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). What they want is that all writers would always go by their line of thinking by always finding faults against Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), and that what they should write will always be about his bad sides. If only they have a supernatural power to squeeze the intelligence of Michael H. Hart, Marijn Van Putten, Hythem Sidky and the likes of them, they would do so to make them write anything negative only about Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). What they lose sight of the fact is that they cannot suppress the intelligence of the writers and their independence to write. They cannot make them succumb to their evil motives. -09-01-23

[@jeangatti9384]

The quest for truth is not an insult to God ... quite the opposite in fact ... God loves Truth Truth has its own utility and efficiency ... truth is the destroyer of lies

[@MBiernat0711]

Robert Spencer describes TWO separate “Muhammad-like” individuals- one was a merchant and other warrior. Again - this tells us that the “Prophet Muhammad” was a much later invention - as a conglomerate “prophet”, combing the past traditions of all teachers of proto-Islamic monotheism (ishmaeli). That is why there are as two different Muhammad’s: one merchant married to one woman, the “trustworthy”, - the other, sex-craved blood thirsty maniac and a treaty-breaker liar. Conglomerate prophet - and the Hadiths refer to both or ALL of the “Muhammad’s”.

[@defenderoftruth3212]

One Source. One message to all Prophets. One Religion. Only ISLAM. Q. 3:19. Indeed, the RELIGION in the sight of ALLAH is ISLAM. And those who were given the Scripture did not differ except after knowledge had come to them out of jealous animosity between themselves. And whoever disbelieves in the verses of Allah, then indeed, Allah is swift in [taking] account. Q. 2:213. Mankind was [of] ONE RELIGION [before their deviation]; then Allah sent the prophets as bringers of good tidings and warners and sent down with them the Scripture in truth to judge between the people concerning that in which they differed. AND NONE DIFFERED OVER THE SCRIPTURE EXCEPT THOSE WHO WERE GIVEN IT - after the clear proofs came to them - out of jealous animosity among themselves. And Allah guided those who believed to the truth concerning that over which they had differed, by His permission. And Allah guides whom He wills to a straight path. Q. 2:208. O you who have believed, enter into Islam completely [and perfectly] and DO NOT FOLLOW the footsteps of Satan. Indeed, he is to you a clear enemy. Q. 2:112. Yes [on the contrary], whoever submits his face in Islam to Allah while being a doer of good will have his reward with his Lord. And no fear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve. Q. 2:256. There shall be NO COMPULSION in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut (evil) and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing. Q. 5:4. … This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you ISLAM as your religion. … Q. 23:52. And indeed this, your religion, is ONE RELIGION, and I am your Lord, so fear Me." Q. 3:83. So is it other than the religion of Allah they desire, while to Him have submitted [all] those within the heavens and earth, willingly or by compulsion, and to Him they will be returned? Q. 3:85. And whoever desires other than ISLAM as religion - NEVER will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers. -08-14-23

[@Krypterium]

Plot Twist : kuran is a Copy ,Paste ,Edit

[@albertpurification9413]

I am from Asia , paul has given the truth to us ,though I knew something about the expantion of Islam .ok go ahead .

[@salancy3279]

💐💐✝️❤️👍

[@michaels4255]

In Turkish, Muhammed is rendered as Mehmet or Mehmed. Just google Mehmet/Mehmed.

[@abdulrahiman541]

Need subtitle for people like us....

[@Piccodon]

The closest english word to MHMD would seem to be "desire" and "desirable". Covet is not much in current use.

[@nihilonisicruce6843]

Covet is not much in current use because of it's terrible negative connotations. The Commandment tells us not to covert anything: "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, or set thy heart upon thy neighbour’s wife, or servant or hand-maid or ox or ass or anything else that is his." Covet is a much stronger word/emotion that simply to desire; I might desire my neighbour's new Ferrari, but I don't want to take it from him as my own to deny him his right to it.

[@Piccodon]

@@nihilonisicruce6843 that was the problem with the Mosaic law, it addressed thinking. Nobody except one human could ever live up to it.

[@staggeredpotato6941]

Famously Islam is just Arabised Judaism no?

[@staggeredpotato6941]

@Ya Ma Jacob :"aah ahh CHOO" Dad : "Bless you" Esau : hooo boy "

[@kumdinikum3314]

Does Judaism acknowledges Jesus as Christ, i.e. Messiah? Ummm.... The difference between Judaism and Islam is Jesus'Messiahship...

[@kumdinikum3314]

@mysotiras12 Does Judaism acknowledges Jesus as Christ, i.e. Messiah? Ummm.... The difference between Judaism and Islam is Jesus'Messiahship

[@kumdinikum3314]

@mysotiras12 The Qur'an says the Children Of Israel rejected Jesus as not the Messiah, Christ foretold by Moses and as a result they were scattered from the land promised to their fathers. So even thought the first Christians were Jews the official Judaism never accepted that Jesus was the Messiah because of His death on the cross even to these days. So some are still waiting for the Messiah. I am assuming that you know Messiah and Christ are the same word. This explains why persecutions broke out in Jerusalem in the First centuries and the believers are to flee to Antioch. Do you know that Stephen got stoned to death and Paul was one the leaders who sent him to capital punishment? Now do we have individuals Jews who happen to accept Jesus as the Christ? Of course yes, and this has been so since the early time of Christianity yet there is still rabbinical Synagogues all over the world for Jews of Judaism...

[@dicksnoeren2090]

They have created islam. There whas no Jibriel for mohammed.

[@dollahmusa6705]

Nothing connected ,in the bible regarding mohd...pulling the robe right n left to put him in book ,but he is a criminal,voilent,killing, murderer,sex ,coveting, how could u say he is messenger ... compare ...Jesus is a sinless person ,rose to heaven and a Living God.

[@peacock69mcp]

So now, what happens to Petra thesis? Why were all Nabatean temples oriented their Qiblas towards Petra?

[@nsebald]

Interesting content but Paul’s delivery of it was really dry

[@danieldelger2434]

It is not a stretch fo say Mohamud ,being upwardly mobile,might want to give himself this monicer.Either given by himself or those around him to give an alussion or impression of aspired to gravitas Perhaps he wanted to glam on a little to the messianic paradigm ;and it had that effect to suplant the main thrust ofJesus?

[@TheNewYouTubeHandlesAreDumb]

People say Muhammad is mentioned by name in the OT because of the word MACHMAD, oft translated as delight. It comes from the word CHAMAD meaning to covet. So in Exodus you shall not Muhammad? I mean, considering what that man did it's very fitting.

[@kumdinikum3314]

You are beside the point made in this video...

[@TheNewYouTubeHandlesAreDumb]

@@kumdinikum3314 A bit, but it's still related to his name. And they did bring up the Isaiah/Song of Solomon verse at one point I do believe.

[@rustomlalji8207]

Lal-Ilaha-Illala0Mahamdur-Rasullah. Wow! This is the true Shahadah of Christians. There is no God but Yahweh and the desired one is the Rasul -The living Word of Yahweh.

[@aaabrams1889]

WOW - Now Mohammad (saw) in the Quran is Jesus..ha ha ha IN THAT CASE - REVERT TO ISLAM.

[@BattleSymphony349]

Muslims should be open with criticism

[@bobbybrooks4826]

Many THINGS now WERE turned into names of people but WERE only TITLES...

[@richardhallaj1907]

it depends on the declination of the noun.

[@thalamay]

I will have to disagree here with the conclusions. But first, let’s lay down some things: 1) Whether people pronounced MHMD as Mahmet or Mahammad or Muhammad is quite inconsequential. We have evidence of all of it, but it doesn’t really mean anything. It’s just a function of the Rasm. 2) Semitic languages are built around roots. Paul is looking at the HMD root. However, while the Semitic languages are related, they have evolved differently. In Hebrew, HMD indeed means covet or desire. In Arabic and Syriac however, it means praise. That is well attested. So we shouldn’t jump to conclusions based on two homophone words/roots in different languages. The explanation that is way more likely is that the Arab writers of the Koran intended to use the meaning of HMD in either Syriac or Arabic (languages typically spoken by Arabs) rather than Hebrew (a language they didn’t typically speak). In fact, today we know that the Koran was written in a mixed Syriac-Arabic language whereas we have zero evidence of Hebrew words in there. So to interpret MHMD as a Hebrew word in this instance seems like a major stretch.

[@paulellis5101]

Hi, thank you for your observations. I agree that different words can carry a range of meanings even in one language and can certainly acquire new shades of meaning as they develop over time in different languages. But my thesis is not based upon the literal meaning of the word. As you may know, this video is part of a series of videos in which I argue that the Qur'an's descriptions of the Masjid al-Haram are references either to the destroyed Jerusalem temple or the site where the temple once stood. In these I argue that every attribute of the Masjid can be related to the temple. Inevitably, not every point of correspondence between the two that I mention will be completely persuasive on it's own. I would, however, suggest that three are, namely the connections of the Masjid to the testing of Abraham, the description of it as God's House and the reference to going between Safa and Marwa. Other points of correspondence (the reference to Bakka, the Kaaba, the hajj and the shaving of heads) may not, when considered individually, prove my thesis but I believe that each corroborates it and do, taken together make the case ever more compelling. This video is one of three further pieces of corroborating evidence (the other two being the Qur'an's acceptance of Jerusalem environs as the eschatological landscape and the companions of the elephant surah.) These three issues do not relate to the Masjid al-Haram directly but nevertheless indicate that the Qur'an author regarded the Jerusalem temple as the focus of his sacred landscape. The fact that essentially the same word was twice used in the Hebrew Bible for the longed-for temple and that the author of the Qur'an adopted it as his name may, taken on its own, be dismissed as a coincidence. But just as the strands of a rope may be weak by themselves but stronger than a chain when bound together, I believe that the totality of the many pieces of evidence that I am presenting to show that the Qur'an is referring to Jerusalem is extremely strong. To counter my thesis effectively, it would not be sufficient to take any one strand and suggest an alternative explanation. One must explain why it is that ALL of these strands appear to link the Qur'an to Jerusalem. I accept, of course, that I have now presented so many pieces of evidence that to deal with them compendiously, either to argue for or against my thesis, is becoming very difficult.

[@thalamay]

@@paulellis5101 thanks for the extensive reply. I’ve seen your other videos and I think you do make a lot of sense. Some really keen observations for sure. However, I feel as if you’re taking the “Masjid al-Haram“ thing a bit too far. I would totally agree that the proponents of the Koranic religion (most importantly Abd al-Malik) saw Jerusalem as the focal point of their religion. The Rock was al-Malik’s haram. But you can explain that without going to such lengths. Their religion was largely influenced by Pre-Nicene Syrian Christianity which itself was still very close to Judaism, almost like Ebionites. That’s why we see the focus on the OT and allusions the many Jewish apocrypha and legends. At the same time, we do however see other elements as well, like the staunch opposition to the Jews which was also typical in early Syrian Christianity, like with Tatian, the writer of the Diatesseron which was the gospel used by the Pre-Nicene Syrian Christians and most likely also by the authors of the Koran. We see Buddhist, Zoroastrian and even Gnostic influences, none of which jive with the Jewish origin hypothesis, though it perfectly works with the Pre-Nicene Syrian origin, given that the authors of the Koran lived in the Persian exile (which can for example be deduced by the plants they write of). Anyway, that’s why I don’t just see your case for the interpretation of “Muhammad” as unconvincing, on its own or in context, but I see the well attested Syro-Aramaic reading used to interpret that word as an argument against your construct. Back to the Rock in Jerusalem. I don’t know if you have read the book of the cave of treasures, an apocryphical Christian book which also describes the Rock in Jerusalem as the Center of the earth. According to the tradition that is picked up on in the cave of treasures, the Rock is where Adam was created, where Melchizedek functioned as priest, where Abraham nearly offered up Isaac as a sacrifice and where Jesus was crucified. As it happens, the cave of treasures was written in Mesopotamia, in relatively close proximity to the writers of the Koran at roughly the same time as the Koran…maybe a couple of decades earlier. There are even some traditions that interpret the crypt underneath the Rock (which is underneath the cupola of the dome) as the tomb of Jesus and the place of his resurrection. These traditions seem to have been strong in the Koranic movement. There is another tradition, that if one visits the holy land and wants to see the place atop the mount of olives from which Christ ascended into heaven, one will be let into a walled courtyard, in the middle of which a medium sized stone rises up a bit from the ground. There one will be pointed to two depressions which are supposed to be the footprints Christ left behind at his ascension. Incidentally, the same legend is told to the visitors of the Dome of the Rock. Only there it’s the footprints of the horse Buraq on whose back “the Prophet” Muhammad ascended into heaven. As the Koranic movement lost its connection to Christianity and as they (mis)interpreted their own tradition so that Jesus was not crucified and that Muhammad was not a title but a person, those old folk beliefs were appropriated and applied to Muhammad and the Rock. But that probably only took place under the Abbasids, at least to its full extend.

[@paulellis5101]

@@thalamay I will start my reply dealing with the issue of methodology. One of the problems faced in interpreting the Qur'an is that the evidence, in all its forms, is so complex and fragmented, nothing makes sense at all unless it is placed within a conceptual framework which has to be constructed before the interpretation can take place. But this obviously carries the danger that one interprets the evidence according to one's overall 'pet' theory. It is hard to keep one's theory constantly under review and changing with new insights from the text or historical sources and not to fall into confirmation bias. My approach to avoid this is to make no assumptions about what the Qur'an author (I should really say the principal Qur'an author since there was clearly later editing) was before he was the Qur'an author. Instead, I look for firm ground, stepping stones of certainty, from which one can work out. I accept that within our little neighbourhood, this can make my approach seem rather small scale and prosaic compared with the grand sweeps of history presented by Mel and Joe (and dare I say yourself?) Anyway, the first thing that I have chosen to talk about is the Qur'an author's focus upon Jerusalem. I regard this as a demonstrable fact that is independent of any theory of the author's background or overall purpose.it is something solid to work with, in an area with too few solid facts. As we discuss my fifth video on the topic (with 2 more in the pipeline!) you may well say that I am labouring the point. I do have many other ideas about the Qur'an. I appre iate that I must come across as 'Jerusalem, Jerusalem Jerusalem' but in my mind I am firming up the foundations before I get to work on the spires and flying buttresses.

[@paulellis5101]

@@thalamay @thalamay You say that 'the proponents of the Koranic religion saw Jerusalem as the focal point of their religion' but may I ask if you also agree with me that the Qur'an itself presents Jerusalem as the Masjid al-Haram, the place towards which people are told to pray and make pilgrimage and from which (more importantly) they are told to fight to expel their opponents? Your reasons for rejecting the Mhmd = Temple part of my argument is in part because you think that it relies upon a linguistic transfer of a word from Hebrew to Arabic that you think is unlikely. To this I can only reiterate that I do not say that I do not propose a simple word transfer, but propose it as a biblical allusion. I think that the Qur'an author expected his audience to understand the reference to Ezekiel and Songs. The language, then, is fairly irrelevant. By way if a comparison, the author calls Iblis 'Iblis' because this is a name for the devil used in the New Testament (this is associated with another reason: he is a rhyming twin for Idris who is raised up from earth to heaven as Iblis makes the reverse downward journey). This would not IMO be weakened by the observation that the Qur'an author wasn't generally inclined to slip into using Greek words. So if I do not rely upon linguistic factors, an objection based upon linguistic factors is not, I think, damaging to my theory. You also refer to (and imply that my thesis is in conflict with) 'the well-attested Syro-Aramaic reading' of Mhmd. I am unsure what it is that you refer to. Could you explain? Obviously, as I mention in my video, I treat the Qur'an's use of Mhmd as tied into the figure of Jesus, who identified himself as the temple and who promised to return in glory. But for the purposes of the video I wanted to focus just upon the 'longed for temple' connection.

[@paulellis5101]

@@thalamay One further point, if I may. I found your reference to Persian plants in the Qur'an intriguing. Certainly the Qur'an describes a fertile land of agriculture and gardens that does not fit the Hijaz (never mind the elephants, how did a bee get to Mecca?) Do you have a source looking specifically at Persian plants in the Qur'an? I do recall reading an article insisting that zanjabīl (Q.76.5) was camphor and not ginger (which read as though it had been sponsored by a Camphor Production and Marketing Board). But nothing more general.

[@deltadom33]

Why is there no references to the apostles in the Qur'an if it is a Christian book , I am interested in the greek version of the Qur'an

[@crixusthenorman1603]

Me too

[@wyattearpswoman838]

Oh, that is how I spell it, Mhmd. Interesting.

[@johnnythelowery]

Oh my! Head spinning on this one. Will have to replay this one a few times. Looks.....dangerous to Islam. Looks like this is a bonafide in-coming missile. Pretending it's a smudge on the radar isn't going stand. BTW I thought the Masjif Al Haram was Petra per the initial set of Quiblas pointing to Petra, (which they do with a 5 sigma certainty). and not Mecca in S.A. After they changed it from Jerusalem....? Jay: We need a 'Where are we' summary of all this research coming in from all your different sources.

[@Bei-Abedan]

28:15 you might want to correct your slip of the tongue there Jay.

[@RoninofRamen]

In fairness, Mel has also presented the Umar perspective (kzbin.info/www/bejne/r5jLd5aqhsyBZ6s) and he did acknowledge you on that one (around the 7 minute mark).

[@Bei-Abedan]

@@RoninofRamen All the more reason why Jay should correct his slip of the tongue.

[@Bei-Abedan]

Here is a video you might not have seen when the idea came out of the closet on the 12th of March this year. kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y3OQhKRrZcdgnsU

[@Md.Kamarussalihin]

Oh now there is "MHMD" in the bible...

[@muezamueza2797]

St John of Damascus sayings is unrefutable Proof on Muhammad existence. In his book The Fountain of Wisdom, St John of Damascus called Muslims “Saracens”, “Ishmaelites” and “Agarenes”, except that the “Saracens” designation might have been used earlier. All those names were pejorative. He specifically called Muhammad by name six times 1) From that time (the reign of Heraclius) to the present a false prophet named Mohammed has appeared in their midst 2) As has been related, this Mohammed wrote many ridiculous books, to each one of which he set a title. 3) Mohammed had a friend named Zeid. 4) This man had a beautiful wife with whom Mohammed fell in love 5) Once, when they were sitting together, Mohammed said: ‘Oh, by the way 6). Mohammed says that the Christ asked God for a table and that it was given Him How could a Christian Saint, who live his earlier adult age in 7th century, a few decades after prophet death, vigorously assails Islam and Muhammad, but Muhammad didn’t exist.... ha ha ha ha Jay Smith change the meaning of Muhammad into the blessed one or Jesus. Well in that case the meaning sentence became ridiculous. 1) From that time (the reign of Heraclius) to the present a false prophet named Jesus has appeared in their midst. This ridiculous because Jesus lived long before Heraclius Jay Smith created so many bogus characters included Abdul Malik, Al Hajaj who live in the 8’th century. Did these bogus characters exist in the reign of emperor Heraclius? The answer is clearly no. 3) Jesus had a friend named Zeid. 4) This man had a beautiful wife with whom Jesus fell in love 5) Once, when they were sitting together, Jesus said: ‘Oh, by the way Point no. 3,4,5 although intended as a mockery, each item can only be applied to one person, namely the Prophet Muhammad. It can't be Jesus or anyone else. There are even verses in the Qur'an related to this story, which can only be attributed to one person, namely the Prophet Muhammad. This the finale of Jay Smith bogus history. A prophet named Jesus referring to Christ .... hahaha. 6). Jesus says that the Christ asked God for a table and that it was given Him So Mr. Smith, St John of Damascus Will always be a thorn inside your eyes, because his sayings is unrefutable Proof on The existence of prophet Muhammad.

[@subramayamrvr8774]

see how Jesus is written in syrian script

[@davidchase1439]

Muslims your book and man now totally destroyed please come back to real book and man Bible and Messiah Jesus!

[@littleninjamofo9841]

Jay and the other .: Seek advice from Dr Zakir Naik. You low qualified bottom dwelling KNOBJOCKEYS are far from the truth..

[@davidchase1439]

@@littleninjamofo9841 Koran disproved and muhammed Lord is Jesus

[@davidchase1439]

@Ya Ma Messiah was the final Revelation from God as Jesus is God! Helper is Holy Spirit

[@davidchase1439]

@Ya Ma helper was Holy Spirit as He glorified Jesus as Lord did Muhammed? Was he always in then and with them 600 years before was born?

[@kumdinikum3314]

@@davidchase1439 FROM ABU-QUASIM TO MUHAMMAD. Within the pages of the Corpus of the 114 Surats someone is complaining that a certain Tradition which claims to be an Apostolic Tradition rejects circumcision while the Apostles were all circumcised, didn't believe in Trinity, and had prescribed a dietary Law during the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15:22-34 which dietary law the said Tradition rejects. Is it not ironic! Based on those clues we can infer with certainty that: Qur'an is a codeword for the Torah of Moses Reminder should be the proper Title for the current corpus of those 114 Surats. Islam meaning an Evangelical Political Party supposed to restore the pristine Apostolic Tradition of Jesus' disciples in Jerusalem and also enforce the Torah, the Law of Moses, as the Law of the land. Muhammad as a euphemism for Messiah/Christ Abu Quasim as an Arabian Evangelist who later became a Sovereign Ruler, Legislator, a Founding Father of a nation and picked Muhammad as a reign name as do the Popes when taking their Apostolic Throne. "We(the Children of Israel) sent you, O Abu Quasim, as an Apostle and a Prophet so that you and your people may believe in God and His Messiah/Muhammad/Christ, help Him, praise Him, sing for Him evening and morning. Remember when Jesus Asked, 'who will assist me in the way of God? The disciples replied, 'we shall be the helpers of God; bear witness that we are Muslims.'" Surat... Unfortunately the "Muhammad" of the Palace and the "Mohammad" of the Shahada in the Mosque got blended together in the Tradition. If it is true that Abu Quasim signed off his formal treaties, official decrees, and other legislations as Muhammad as reported by Ibn Hisham, then he is a Founding Father of a state power like Caesar Augustus, Alexander The Great, or George Washington. This might also explain how this present OPTICAL ILLUSION was perpetuated by those who seeking to capitalize on the Pilgrimage to Macca. Let's keep in mind that his Friday sermons in the Mosque were not about himself but about Christ/Messiah and His way. It' s high time to differentiate the palace and the Mosque under the Messianic title Muhammad...!!!

[@Savandero]

What if Mahomed is pronunced Mahomet (D=pronunced as a T), then It sounds almost like Baphomet. Any connection there?

[@paulellis5101]

There could well be a connection, but I am unaware of 'Baphomet' in 7C.

[@BreakFix]

Are you for real 🤣

[@baddbeliever]

the hebrew root H M D is beloved and Arabic is closer to praised and they would've naturally used the name and I think the Islamic claim is that Mohammad existed as a name before the prophet and possibly commonly used in the regions. because only Yahya is claimed to be given as a Virgin name to John the Baptist in the quran as never used before.

[@skippyroast2642]

Is It True That in the Holy Bible Mathew 10-34 Jesus Christ Said "DO NOT THINK THAT I HAVE COME TO BRING PEACE TO THE EARTH. I HAVE NOT COME TO BRING PEACE BUT A SWORD. FOR I HAVE COME TO SET A MAN AGAINST HIS FATHER, AND DAUGHTER AGAINST HER MOTHER..???🙏🙏

[@barnettronald230]

I'm waiting to hear how Paul connects the Hebrew words "machmad" and 'machamadim" using the transliterated Arabic into Greek chart he showed. If I understand what he is saying he is carying this argument over into the New Testament so that Muhammad is referred to in the Greek text. But simply comparing the linguistic structure of words in different languages does not prove any causal relationship between them. There are so many linguistic utterances in the languages of the world that you can find almost absolute matches which have absolutely no historical connection one with another. I read the NT in Greek so I am anxiously waiting to see how he connects the Arabic or Hebrew terms to the Greek terms in the NT.

[@Heshem_Joel]

Absolutely. Phonetic similarities in different linguistics does not necessarily denote the same meaning.

[@paulellis5101]

I agree, but this is much more than two words sharing, possibly by chance, a linguistic structure. The words 'machmad' and 'machmadim' are different grammatical forms of the same word. Moreover, they are both used to the same effect in different contexts: to refer to the (lost) Jerusalem Temple using a term meaning 'the longed for one', with the particular association with an absent spouse . This cannot be a coincidence. Presumably one came first and the other used the same imagery. The Qur'an is in Arabic and borrows the same imagery again. Probably, I suggest, he also intends to refer to the new element of Jesus (who identified himself with the Temple, that he predicted was to be destroyed, and who also used spousal imagery for God's relationship with man) but demonstrating this was not necessary for the point that my presentation was making. This was limited to demonstrating that the Qur'an author adopted him himself as a name or title a word evocative of the longed for Jerusalem Temple. This corroborates, I argue, the Jerusalem Thesis that I have set out in earlier videos. Greek has very little to do with it. 'Machmad' is a Hebrew word that appears in the Qur'an's Arabic script as 'mhmd'. The significance of the Greek translations was limited to demonstrating that the first vowel was originally pronounced 'a' and not, as had become customary, 'u'.

[@coolbuddydude1]

Is that why it is very controversial to draw Muhammad ?

[@dilip505]

It is said Muhammad's in old testament..you guys are evil doers.

[@almazchati4178]

There is actually a closer word to Mohammad in Saka language. Your should explore it further.

[@aaabrams1889]

Arabs knew their own language without vowels and only added the vowels when Islam expanded so others could read the Quran with proper pronunciation. Obviously, if the vowels are added in the wrong places, the word does not make sense or has a differed sound and meaning. For decades Jay and others DID NOT want to know that Mohammad (saw) is in the bible and fought nail and tooth with Muslims...ha ha ha ...now he Hypocritically entertains that but obviously with a biased spin

[@isratnipa5965]

They r Brainwashing fans