The Christian Elephant in the Meccan Room and the Hidden Cost of Taming it
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 10. 2022
- Nicolai Sinai (Univertity of Oxford) speaks about The Christian Elephant in the Meccan Room and the Hidden Cost of Taming it in the Conference Unlocking the Byzantine Qur'an.
Follow us for more Videos
You can find us on Social Media aswell.
Instagram: piit_upb
Twitter: piit_upb
Visit our homepage to get more Information about us: www.upb.de/piit
Amazing work. I love how at the end he admits that most textual and historical criticism feels like there is an obligation to disprove the Quranic narrative and if they don’t, they aren’t true critics. This is such a wrong belief and why in my opinion most of the Muslim world shies away from these critics because their audience feels as if it is their duty to “debunk” the Quran and cannot have any conclusions that may agree with the Islamic narrative.
The Koran copied Syriac Christian tales. This is a fact. Muslims are in denial.
How does this have 19 upvotes? Youre misrepresenting Sinai. Sinai says this is a problem with the "New Revisionists", not historical critics or historians in general.
This is very fair, balanced and reasonable commentary from Nicolai. It has provided so much food for thought.
EXELLENT! SINAI IS ONE OF THE BEST.
Interesting lecture, definitely a lot of good points discussed here
Which conference is this? We need to hear other talks as well, particularly from Prof. Shoemaker.
Shoemaker is one smelly boy
If missionary work was so common as to encourage a syncretic culture in Mecca, then what explains the theologically motivated outrage and violence of the 'pagan' Arabs against Muhammad after he had declared his prophethood and Allah's unitary nature? Why didn't the Arabs rather react to Muhammad in a benign way as they presumably were reacting to allegedly common Christian missionaries? It's not like Muhammad's assertion of his prophethood and God's monotheistic 'nature' is more or less shocking to the senses as the various Christian Christological and Trinitarian arguments. Basically, where'd the love go and why the hate?
One may argue- the difference is obviously that Muhammed was bringing an Arabic scripture in their native language and that unlike the missionaries he was successful. The missionaries we’re obviously unwelcome and unsuccessful but unlike Muhammed they could simply retreat to where they came from. It is obvious from the Quran that the audience had encountered before similar “warners” but they were foreigners and they would eventually go away. But Muhammed is a local and he is there to stay, and he is gaining a following among the locals. That’s why we know about Muhammed to this day and that’s why the other unsuccessful missionaries are forgotten, accept the brief references to them in the Quran. The same pattern can be seen among the Slavs, they did not convert until the Bible was translated to the Slavic language and until the liturgy was translated to Slavic. Missionaries simply didn’t get around to translate the Bible in Arabic on time. The local boy beat them with a simpler message in a vernacular language.
@@fadiljelin7297 it’s complete lies the Meccans were deep in the Arabian peninsula the Christian influence would have reached the tribes north to Mecca before it also there is rare correspondence with Christianity in the Quran especially the Meccan period
How do you know for a fact that there was hate or animosity against muhammad?
We certainly cannot trust any mahometan sources as they are extremely biased and tainted, by their own admission.
people also tend to forget that muhhamed pbuh was also from one the if not the strongest family in mecca so ofc the elite feared him in that sense too it he was just a common man they would have just ignored him or outright killl him but he was protected by his uncle abu taleb.
According to formal history, they generally tolerated him. He was preaching in Mecca for 13 years.
V eager to read the paper mentioned here 16:27. Any links?
Start here:
Tommaso Tesei: Dhu-l-Qarnayn, Late Antiquity, and Rethinking Qur'anic Authorship
Probably his paper called "The Quran(s) in Context(s)"
When Nicolai speaks of 'traditions' trying to explain why Bacca is Mecca in the Quran and why he finds it difficult to an oral development if they could have just changed the B to an M all depends on when you date these 'traditions.' Shoemaker argues for a final compilation of the Quran around 690 and the written accounts of the traditions much later.
Quran compilation in the form of Uthmanic Codex was complete by around 650 AD. There is enough evidence for this, and carbon dating of Birmingham Quran manuscript and other earliest Quran manuscript shows this. shows this. Western scholarship on the origins of Quran is quite flimsy and has not much authority among Muslims.
@@hassanmirza2392 carbon dating is not reliable.
This really sounds like a man who has been boxed into a corner. His counter arguments remind me of the man who claimed his chicken soup was actually pea soup because he found a pea at the bottom of the bowl.
One of the most unintelligible comments under this video
@@everyzylrian Your inability to fathom the meaning of the analogy will likely not affect other readers who do in fact possess the ability.
Nicolai Sinai's English is scary good.
But sadly not aligned with objective thinking.
Do you think it is because he actually posits a Hijazi origin for the Qur'an's beginnings?@@bobkelly3162
Agreed. His loyalty to this Hijazi region is shocking. I use this word 'shocking' intentionally. It is so absurd and irrational given any clear study of the 7th and 8th centuries, not to mention the 6th.@@bobkelly3162
This is the most idiotic criticisim I have heard. It is true that a lot of people which did not agree with the 'Chrisianity' took refuge at the peripheries of Romans, mainly in more civilized regions, Persia, being one. These missionaries would be viewed as hostile by their hosts anyway if they were there to promote Roman religion. If there was any interaction between Mohammad and 'Christians' , if they existed as this speaker may say, would be opponents of Christianity. Especially knowing that Mohammad had a lot of opponents, and rather than quoting some of them, he is using the similarities of concepts to bring in his missionaries. Roman army was the missionaries.
The heaven, that there be no rain, and that the land yield not her fruit, and lest ye perish quickly from off the good land which the Lord giveth you." This passage gives a clear picture of the biblical Hebrew con ception of the relation between God, Rain and Man: God is the only one who can cause rain.3 If the Children of Israel behave.
Resurrection of the dead - t’chiyat hameitim in Hebrew - is a core doctrine of traditional Jewish theology. Traditional Jews believe that during the Messianic Age, the temple will be rebuilt in Jerusalem, the Jewish people ingathered from the far corners of the earth and the bodies of the dead will be brought back to life and reunited with their souls. It is not entirely clear whether only Jews, or all people, are expected to be resurrected at this time.
Here we find the non Christian elephantine concepts of these Godly functions. They are children of Israel concepts post Moses, and pre Christian.
To consider the Koranic narrative styles to be of multiple authors is speculative science we can’t name its multiple authors.
When you suppose or speculate the least probability of error is 50 percent an error of such substantial proportion which isn’t true can be termed false, fallacious, falsehood, and more of the sort. The result of any research that mixes mixed fallacious content of this proportion is worthless.
So what Meccan room , why the hidden cost?
U must be funny in person
This guy needs to control his 'um's
Ummm
Patricia Crone overstepped her limit may be when she was trying to "put the Meccan trade" business to rest! She got quite a few things wrong here and elsewhere too.
What did Crone get wrong then?
This has literally never been debunked and is accepted by basically all secular scholars..
It's...um... difficult to ...um... listen to.. um... this.
Wait...
Macca was not a modest trading hub if you read our history.
Macca was a convention city by modern definition where traders from Persia and sham and yaman exchanged merchandise and poetry.
The arabs qabelah were used to guard the trading routs.
Listen young man......our history is our history not yours or any academic institution.
Fabricating history according to your whims will not change the facts.
Christians and jews were big traders with macca and its people were well aware of both religions.
Prove it outside of Islamic sources. If it was such a big trade network, then non-Islamic sources should be able to attest to that.
Mecca was definitely not a trading center according to the evidence known to historians. Screaming about "our history!!" doesnt change that. With a separation of 1400 years, its not your history anyways
Mecca dis not exist before Islam. So Mahomet.
I stopped after the 20th “Um”. 😂
There was nothing like Christian Religion, Judio- Christianity is what they were.
at seventh century
No need of an ' arab judeo-christian sect' .
24:00
Professor Sinai is referring to koran 9.29.
I will have to disagree with him in his assessment that the koran does not articulate a message of territorial conquest.
The koran allegedly being the literal word of allah doesn't need to constantly repeat verses that call for conquest or subjugation. Even one verse is more than enough.
We also need to take into account the fact that the koran seeks to dehumanize the unbelievers. In my opinion this is done within the context of war propaganda.
There are about a dozen verses where allah forbids and warns believers against having friendly relations with the unbelievers. On top of that there are verses which state the unbelievers are the worst creatures in all of allah's creation. When I first read these verses I remembered the many infamous propaganda posters of WW2, where the enemy is portrayed as rats, cockroaches, apes, etc. The point was to dehumanize the enemy to facilitate conquest with a clean conscience.
Show me these so dozen verses ....... or u just took em out of context like you haters always do, christians got fed to to the lions under roman rules the jews got decimated during christian rule islam protected both religious groups multiple times in history
I find it very amusing that one can detect the obvious negative bias in some people by their usage of the spelling "Koran" 😂😂😂
@@JohnGeometresMaximos its been 2 months cant find the verses?liar liar
What rubbish. Do you even realise the severe oppression the early muslims faced? Tortured, murdered and abused for 12 years straight. Of course the Quran will criticise the polytheist ‘unbelievers’ of that time. Note that Jews and Christians are not counted as unbelievers in the way the polytheists are. They are described as ‘people if the book’. Do your research before you run your mouth.
the quran is not a person
This man doesn't speak a clear language. He cannot articulate his conclusions very well. I try hard to complete a full lecture of his.
I found it easy to follow along, maybe the issue is with you?
@@everyzylrian I do not think so. He gives many points, and he is taping upon them respectively, yet he doesn't ultimately say what his conclusion really is ! He also does not areange his ideas very well. It seems he is think as he speaks!
@@Khaledf You're right.
NIcolai Sinai: please review your video and learn from your delivery. I hear you say "uhm" about once every other second. It is a poor habit for a speaker.
Every speaker on Islam does this. His first language is not English, at least he tried.
Marry is given semi-Divine status by Catholic and Orthodox Christians. That is a fact. It is not inaccurate to say this. From Quranic perspective any kind of mystical idea about Jesus and Marry is Shirk. Also, Quran only has one author, as is quite evident from its Arabic. No other writing style and author can be detected by doing any scientific analysis? Nicolai Sinai should correct his understanding!
Define "semi-divine". Because intercessory prayer (asking Mary to ask God to look out for you) is not "semi-divinity".
This is just a secular view based on the premise that no real God is involved.
And the speaker keeps mentioning “authorS of the Qur’an”.
Man you can’t discuss religion with secular tools of expression unless your end game is to purposefully miss the point.
He is an academic scholar. I actually find it offensive and cringeworthy when non-muslims call muhammad a prophet.
I refuse to even capitalize the name muhammad because it would show way too much respect.
@@JohnGeometresMaximos
Tell me why you don’t respect the prophets of other religions than yours!
Don’t you see that Islam includes and reveres all the prophets that preceded Mohammad (pbuh)?
What has Prophet Mohammad done to you to warrant your disrespect towards him?
@@Vreidyfarm
islam is not a religion, it is a Deen.
Mo was a horny, vengeful warlord.
@@JohnGeometresMaximos well said
We aren't obligated to recognise the same theological position you hold. You can call him prophet if you want to, but academically speaking, there's no established criteria to determine "prophethood"
I say this as an ex Muslim