Is Muhammad in the Qur'an? Not according to Murad!
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 06. 2020
- Murad, a friend from the Middle East, and a native Arabic speaker, looks at the only four references to Muhammad found in the Qur'an (Surahs 47:2; 48:29; 33:40; and 3:144), and points out how none of them refer to Muhammad at all, but most likely refer instead to 'the blessed one', who could very well be Jesus.
If this is correct, than Muslims cannot use the Qur'an to support Muhammad's existence in the 7th century, and one of the foundational pillars of Islam begins to fall.
Watch this video to find out how he came to his conclusions, and then feel free to comment below with your arguments either for or against. We'd love to hear what you think!
© Pfander Centre for Apologetics - US, 2020
(29,840) (Music: "small adventure", by Rafael Krux (from filmmusic-io - License CC BY) - Zábava
(Murad here) thank you sincerely Dr. Jay for giving me this opportunity. My dream is for Robert Spencer to watch this as I dedicate this presentation to him.
Genesis 29:35 And she conceived again and bore a son, and said, “This time I will *praise* the LORD.” *Therefore she called his name Judah.* Then she ceased bearing.
Genesis 49:8 “Judah, your brothers shall *praise* you; your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies; your father’s sons shall bow down before you.
It therefore becomes perfectly fine for Jesus, as descendant of Judah, to carry the title of "Praised." And the play on words is very appropriate Jesus-Praised One 👍
HERE IS THE TRUTH IN ITS SIMPLEST FORM:
ܝܫܘܥ = THE CHRIST
محمد = THE ANTI-CHRIST
The Quran is NOT talking about
محمد = THE ANTI-CHRIST
The Quran is RATHER talking about
ܝܫܘܥ = THE CHRIST = THE MESSIAH = THE SAVIOR
=== === === === === === ===
I STRONGLY RECOMMEND JOINING OUR EFFORTS, YOU ALONG WITH THE REPUTABLE CHRISTIAN ARAB SCHOLARS AND ARAB EX-MUSLIMS IN ORDER TO TRACE BACK ALL THE VERSES OF THE QURAN THAT ARE BEING TAKEN FROM THE HOLY BOOK, THE TORAH AND THE [INJEEL] GOSPEL.
THEN, WHAT IS LEFT, [I.E.] THE ADDITIONS THAT WERE MADE, CAN TELL US A LOT OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE QURAN.
SHOULD YOU NEED ANY HELP FROM A NATIVE ARAB SPEAKER,
DO NOT HESITATE TO CONTACT ME.
=== === === === === === ===
@Walking The-Talk (Mel) He collaborates with me on my channel. He participates on many of the videos.
@Walking The-Talk
Are you looking for any particular information?!
Murad, excellent research with your Arabic language knowledge is so logical and clear.... God be with you always to guide you in wisdom
I want to see a debate with Jay, David Wood, Sam Shamoun and CP together roasting all Abdool apologists together.......DREAM DEBATE
I forgot Al Fadi, Bro Murad Rachid.... They'll be blown away
Murad killed Islam as softly as possible.
considering only few christians apologist all over the world who are defending christian faith against lofty ideas 2 Cor 10.5 i.e. atheism evolution agnostism islam, jehova's witness, mormons, judaism abd skepticism are making great implication to other belief what more if apologetics and polemics are taught by pastors in our churches or part of churches program
@@stargategoku Unfortunately most pastors are teaching the commentary they studied in school and not the scriptures themselves.
Jay is so good with the summaries.
Thank you again,
Murad and Mel. 👍
Murad started right by quoting Luxemburg and his interpretation of the Dome of the Rock inscription which has Mhmt mentioned only in the 1st line and the rest is all about Jesus. He needed to quote the FULL inscription in Arabic and ask Muslims why is so much space devoted to Jesus in the FIRST public mention of Mhmt by a Muslim ruler who built the FIRST Muslim monument in history ? That inscription only makes sense if the use of word Mhmt, like Christos, is an honorific title to Jesus and not about another man called Mohammed. Also Murad did not add that there is no mention of the word "Mohammed" as an Arab person's name in the 7th century Arabia until the arrival of Mohammed. So how did this name appear all of a sudden, if not as title ?
Dr Jay you need to get your friend Al Fadi, an Ex Muslim, a Hafiz and a native Arabic speaker to comment on Murad's hypothesis.
That would be good.
I am an arabic speaker exmuslim, I think Murad's research is not objective, he is biased to prove his point of view, especially when he discusses Sura 33 Verse 40, trying to force his interpretation that the verse is not speaking about Muhammad and his adopted son
@@alialaraby9680 He compared Jesus had no children while Muhammad had children (one child alive). Hence; if you read Koran without extra document (hadith and sirah) one would see that verse referred to Jesus not Muhammad.
c @@alialaraby9680 with ما كان he has a strong argument here. Mohamet was still alife when he received this verse. or can you show it got added by smo else after his death ? that would also be cool !!!
Robert was a very dangerous threat to Islam. You can tell this because Muslim think tanks have worked very hard to stifle and vilify him. Yet Robert's influence continues....
makes sense if you combine this with the 3rd or 4th cailph who was married to a kadesha and an aisha and had other things in common with the description of Mohammad. quran 4 mohammad means blessed one and was based on jesus [forgives sins] and the Arabic past tense not present tense when it mentioned Mohammad.
well he was poisoned and almost died.
Amen
What I absolutely love about this is here we have 3 individuals who are not attached to any university; yet who are scholars in every sense of the word. Proving the old saying that all it takes to shake the world is little bit of knowledge and a love of honest inquiry! It’s flipping awesome!
Thanks Ryan! We rely heavily on scholars though, for every line we say there might have been several hours of reading academic books and papers. All really we are doing is popularising quite a lot of what is already said by scholars and syncretising it so it is accessible. We also have greater freedom as many academics are afraid to speak of this openly and we have no reputations to defend.
@@Speakers154 Hey Sneaker's, though I do agree with you I do feel I have to push back on the idea that this imposition between what academics do, and what they can share with the rest of the world, is somehow new. The ivory tower phenomenon is present across any number of long lived establishments, and whose component persons have to worry about the reputation of the whole institution. Now whether the institutions reputation aught to be maintained is often the question which turns a great many of these long lasting entities into hypocrites. But worse yet, hypocrites who get all mopy when addressed as such.
The purpose of the non-academic scholar is to be the work-a-round for those who are working on things which are relevant to the wider discussion of a topic and those structural impositions which says that an academic aught not to act in ways which could bring scrutiny onto the faculty or perhaps the discipline as a whole. Now 'why' said scrutiny is a 'bad' thing is another rather sordid topic filled with many complicating factors. But, as Jay points out from his experiences during his masters degree, for as much as it is nice to share what previous academics have found, sometimes you have to share what they don't want to get out. And that is the irony of the ivory tower, you see ivory is white, and so it merely reflects and refracts light. Whereas a candle produces its own light; which ironically, an ivory cover when placed over top of, does a pretty good job of hiding.
So although I am always happy to pay kudos to where kudos is due the idea that reputations need to be defended on a basis of anything other than wether the academic's methodology is replicable, reliable, refutable, and based off of the best of what they had on hand at the time; needs to go. Otherwise the non-academic scholar in the role of a secret agent who has to sneak information out from the institution in which it has been concentrated. As opposed to a non-academic scholars more idealized role as someone who can take information which is often (and sometimes necessarily) 'jargon' heavy and making it more easily accessible to the masses.
But as always Mel, Murad, Jay, and the whole crue, I am very much appreciative of what you do!
Great information by murad. There should be more like this . We need to dig in more.
After watching the last few of your videos I have to say, you've won me over with your arguments, though I was a bit resistant.
So they named Suras when they originally had no names and later renamed some of those Suras in order to direct the reader's attention to a specific part of the chapter to give underserved weight to certain verses and put a spin on the Sura as a whole. That's very sneaky for the unsuspecting reader. More manipulation from the Quran compilers.
It's like the headlines in the mainstream fake news media,
spinning a narrative,
to flesh out a myth.
Not only that but the koranus isn't ordered by the order of the revelations. Instead, they are all over the place and the koranus is ordered by the length of the suras.
There is a special copy you can get that is in revelation order but it's not very common.
@Roshan Lewis I want to know that too. Good question.
fascinating...the arabization of Jesus....didn't know this...
The perversion of Christ Gospels
great surprise of Yasoo written in Syriac that arabization to muhammad. I think it is true. wow wow wow, why I didn't notice or many don't talk about it.
Great murad you did great scholar work
You just say: the coran is a corrupt arabic version of some biblical text.
Excellent information!! I am going to relisten to learn this. This is starting to clear up a lot of questions, but spurring on more questions. That is how we sort things out.
Murad is a new favorite to add to other truth seekers and truth spreaders.
This is such a fascinating study! I am getting so much out of this series.
WOW! My head is spinning! Super thanks Murad! Note that sometimes other languages are written in with the texts (I remember an image of a Septuagint manuscript with "Yahweh" or IEVE in the Samaritan/proto-hebrew letters). I think that the Hebrew for "unity" (EHAD) (the man and woman will leave they parents and they will come together and become a "unity") is in the "shema" Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear O Israel, The LORD our GOD, the LORD is "unity" (same word, God is an Eternal Unity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). And, yes, the "Muhammad" does seem to make the grammar in the koran strange sometimes .. SO INTERESTING!! WHERE IS THIS NEW UNDERSTANDING OF HISTORY GOING TO TAKE US ALL?
Muhammad could be a new unheàrd name before in seventh century, logically this name must be put on a person that his first name had been deleted.
Ali , fourth caliph in a Hadith says I hate this name and my real name is Zeid ibn... Manaf.
So changing names could be common.
But we don't know what was the real name of Muhammad, it is very in harmony with Mahamada of an Indian Hindu great God.
However, Ahamd can be a contracted form of AhuraMazda of Zoroasterians, as they call Masjid from persian Mazgid which means temple.
It goes without saying that Qur'an is a vessel of salads of words, ideas, traditions of different cultures and religions basically biblicals, even from pagans of Egypt and elsewhere in the world.
Turn Pau the his original name was Quthem ibn Abdulla. The word "mah hamad" or ahmed (different spellings) was an adjective, meaning "altogether lovely" or "the praised one" or the "blessed one". There are ancient Syriac coins with a cross and inscription "ma hamad" (sp?).
In the Song of Solomon book in the Bible, it is a love poem or song and has the phrase mah hamad (sp?). The muslims claim it is prophecy about their Muhammad. I always ask them, " so you think Muhammad was the lover of the writer of that poem?" That shuts them up quickly.
@@LlyneM-rf3gd when everything in Islam is ambiguous, then every guess is possible and be correct.
Another nail crusifying Islam.
Thank you, Murad, for your presentation. I wasn't quite buying it at the beginning but once you showed how the Syriac Jesus became the Arabized Muhammad the light turned on. Twice in fact:
1) I had seen this similarity shown before, several times in fact; but, I never understood its significance up to now. It took your entire discussion (for me at least) to 'see' that significance.
2) Understanding 1) made it easier to see the logic behind your presentation at the beginning. I'm sold. Good work!
Thanks Jay, this was a very enlightening investigation. I sure hope the material discussed today gets more widely disseminated (especially within the academic community). I can hardly wait for Dr. David King's response. Whatever it is, I'm sure what that response lacks in scholarship will be compensated for with invective. Can't ask better than that. (Won't get it either.)
Jay, just to pass on some additional (but seemingly unrelated) information on the importance of knowing names I will provide the following from the story of the fall of Troy. We, nowadays, call the son of Priam who abducted Helen, Paris. Most of us don't know that his name was Alexandros. Homer does use the name Paris but the other name appears four times as often in Homer's Iliad. We use the name Paris because that is the name that the Romans stuck us with in inventing their prehistory. As you know, Virgil's Aeneid has Rome's foundation coming from survivors of the fall of Troy (Paris not being one of them, of course).
Why is that important, or even relevant to today's topic. Well, the war between the Achaeans and Trojans was always thought to be a fiction, until around around the middle of the 20th century (whether or not Schliemann's discovery represented the real Troy was still in doubt). In the early 1900's the Hittite language finally was deciphered and the huge Hittite diplomatic archive was translated. One of the dispatches was from Alexandros, a king of one of the vassal states called Wilusa (Homer called Troy Wilios which over time was shortened to Ilios due to a change in the Greek language). This king was complaining about being attacked by the Ahhiyawa (the Hittite name for the Achaens) and he was requesting aid against the Great King of that people (The king was unnamed but maybe refers to Agamemnon or his equivalent).
Had we only known of the king (prince) of Troy under his Roman name of Paris we would NOT have clued in to the significance of this diplomatic dispatch. Had we only been aware of the more commonly used (nowadays) name Homer used for the city (Τροία, or Troía) we also would NOT have been able to clue in to the significance of the dispatch.
Names have meanings and why different names are used in different contexts is tremendously import to our understanding of culture and history. I now want to know more about the use of the name Isa and its origins and its contexts. If we ever get a rational explanation for the usage of this name we may come to understand early Islam better than we thought possible. Today's discussion has done that for the 'name' Muhammad. I have a feeling that we've only peeled off the first layer of that onion. Perhaps one day Dan Gibson or another Petra archaeologist will uncover artifacts that help us deal peal off another layer of Muhammad and Isa.
As always, Jay, sorry for the soapboxing but I really do think a comment along the above lines would be useful to someone who comes to this video in the future.
Very well thought out and elegantly written.
Thank you Murad, Lord Jesus bless you.
naked jesus bless u are better
how damaging is this for peaceful religion like PieceLAM
Yes, the religion of the Arab empire was originally a falling away from Christian orthodoxy--and later the cult of Muhammad was formulated to replace Jesus altogether. This was all prophesied in scripture, "that day shall not come, except there come the falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sits in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." [2 Thessalonians 2:3-4]
It certainly explains why some of the silly stories in the koranus are copied from Gnostic stories.
So the 1st century Thessalonians were bring advised about an event 7 centuries in their future? Really? 🤔
Don't think that verse applies to muhammad thats giving him too much credit, at the start of snippet of the verse you give,gives away who your talking about "that day shall not come". It's talking about the antichrist,if muhammad was the antichrist back in 600-700ad we'd not be here cuz shortly after is the rapture.
@@amazingbibleantiquities7221 that's what prophecy is. There are many prophecies in the OT about the Messiah that was to come. Jesus is the Messiah. He was prophesicied hundreds of years before he came.
@buymebluepills Yes, l agree, but 1 and 2 Thessalonians entertain that Jesus' Second Coming would definitely be in the Thessalonian's lifetime, not seven centuries later or at the end of time. 🤔 You have to read all of it and understand all of it, together. And l am open to having discussions about what that looks like, but Mohamet and Joseph Smith certainly were not concerns either Paul or his audience were occupied with. See my essay on this matter: www.atavistbiblechurch.org/apologetics/464-comments-on-matthew-10-23.html
Muslims should open their harts and accept the truth. They had being a victim of misunderstanding and mislead by a few people who corrupted the message of God for 1400 years. There is no point to carry on in Islam when they know the truth. That’s why Jesus said the truth will set you free
Murad, I have had the same idea a while ago that the diatesseron must be the injeel in the quran. Now the question is how did the other non-canonical gospel material work end up in todays quran (infancy gospel of Thomas etc). Maybe we can use this knowledge to seperate old (ie original parts) of the quran (syriac liturgical material it borrowed from canonical gospels) from later additions/embelishments (apocrypha like Thomas etc). Any thoughts?
@Anathema Sit ! You deserve appreciation and my compliments for an excellent observation. Infancy gospel (Apocrypha) had been rejected (at Council of Nicea May to August AD 325) much before the advent of Islam. This begs an obvious question - "How could material be included in the Qur'an that did not exist. My guess would be that though infancy gospel had been excised from the canonical gospels in AD 325, some copies would have existed in public domain and the collators of the Qur'an would have had access to the same because unlike Uthman, Christians wouldn't have burnt all the apocrypha post Nicea council maybe because it wasn't possible to accomplish such a feat. I would like @PfanderFilms (Dr Jay Smith, Mel, Murad) to weigh in with their thoughts. Thanks !
I would love to hear a Muslim respond to the claim of the past tense being changed to the present and why if it is so.
...and Murad on the misreading of Yesua to Mhmd. Check out the old kufic alphabet, the medial kufic arabic Hha looks like the medial syriac Yudh. So I guess this is a pretty good point as it seems to me that there was a historical rupture between the writers of the quran (syriac) and the early muslims (arab). Looks like someone dug out an old book and thought it was a new revelation :)
This information is very revealing and self explanatory. Very helpful.
Jay...please get Christian Prince on your channel for an interview
Good presentation! Will wait to hear the Muslim response to this!
Hey Bala, when will we get you back on board? How's the lockdown treating you? A lot of people looking for you.
@@Speakers154 I'll join you guys soon. Convey my regards to Dr. Jay Smith and Murad.
If mohammed is just another name to refer to Jesus could it be that when the quran tells us that we can find him written in the torah and gospel that this is also just a reference to Jesus and that they had (some) knowledge of the gospels?
Very sensible insight
Very interresting theory!
@Ummer Farooq You are misunderstood. Among the 4 verses, one verse might copy from Syriac referred to Jesus name but Arab read this foreign character as Muhammad. All these 4 verses may referred to Jesus not Muhammad cult. Because Muhammad cult didn't fit Muhammad profile in those 4 verses. In other words, Muhammad cult is the invention and Islam should belong to Jesus. According to Muslim prophecy, in the End Time, Jesus will takeover Muslim after al-Mahdi.
@Ummer Farooq I didn't even hate animal or insect, how could I hate someone else because of ideology difference? Hatred is blind and most of the times humiliate its own-self.
Thank you Dr J Smith for all you do. Much love and respect from Pakistan ✊❤️
You guys are doing great work, thank you!
Because Murad is not a formally trained historian like you are Dr Smith, he must, until he pursues his PHD (like Al Fadi is doing currently), build his hypothesis on the work of other established researchers like Luxemburg and others (just as you do in your presentations, Dr Smith) or risk being dismissed as an amateur scholar, a dilettante, an attention seeker drawing light upon himself as most naysayers and conspiracy theorists do....His presentation needs more referencing to which his friends Mel and Bala can assist. Murad's hypothesis has the potential of destroying Islam because without Mohammed there is no Quran! This presentation must be formalized and fortified to withstand Muslim bickering and be repeatedly posted on CZcams by polemicists like yourself and Mel, Al Fadi, David Wood et al to bring down Islam.
Islam is already gone ,long going on currently till it's totally finished
GODWIN TOPPO is that why Islam continues to be the fastest growing religion? Meanwhile hundreds of Christian churches are closing and more Christians are apostatizing than people who convert to the religion. So maybe it’s Christianity you should be worrying about.
Michel Martinez atheism and non-religiousness is growing at an astronomical rate in the U.S. and Europe. When you look at just conversions, Islam is doing much better than Christianity.
You say the internet has “spelled the end of Islam” lol I think you’re worried about the wrong religion being finished by the internet.
www.pewforum.org/2017/04/05/the-changing-global-religious-landscape/
@Jay Sokhi ! I don't think Muslims can conjure up credible counter narrative to Murad's excellent hypothesis. Expect them to revert with usual blind rhetoric than any compelling arguments based on hard undeniable & unimpeachable historical facts.
Thank you Jay, Mel and Murad... very interesting and enlightment. Let’s echo this...
Thanks brother for being able to help us.
Going on Murad's methodology I've been doing something similar (in correspondence with him) and I've found a few interesting passages that have a completely different meaning if you look back at the Arabic or Syriac origins.
The Saheeh International is a very bad translation and I prefer Abdul Haleem.
1) Surah 97: "Indeed We have delivered It on the Night of Glory. What will explain to you what that Night of Glory is? The Night of Glory is better than a thousand months; on that night the angels and the Spirit descend again and again with their Lord's permission on every task. Peace it is until the rising of dawn."
- First, it should be noted that in Arabic, like in many Romance languages, the third person pronoun "Him" and the article "it" are very ambiguous. So it could easily be rendered "Him".
- Second, the Arabic translated here as "glory" looks like the Syriac for attendants, as in a royal attendant, or watchers (cf. Daniel 4). Who do we know who has been sent down by God at night, is like a king and has a host attending him?
- Third, a thousand months is roughly 80 years, so an entire lifetime.
- Fourth, the Spirit is obviously referring to the Holy Spirit.
- Fifth, "Again and again", variously rendered as "therein", looks like the Syriac for "Bread". What is a holy place named after bread?
- Sixth, the Arabic "rising" is translated as "fajar", has the connotation of "nearing completion" while "dawn", "al-Fajar" looks like the Syriac for "a good will". This is directly from the nativity narrative in Luke's gospel.
Thus, we may easily render this passage as:
"Indeed, We have delivered Him on the Royal Eve. To what can you compare this Royal Eve? The Royal Eve is holier than an entire lifetime. On this Eve the Angels and the Holy Spirit descend to Bethlehem [lit. the place of bread], and in the glory of God, declare: 'Peace it is on earth, and to all those of good will."
Proof that this passage is about Christmas can be found by comparing the Syriac Advent tradition with Ramadan. In Syriac Christmas they perform around a 3 week fast ending on Christmas eve. Ramadan is closed off by Eid al Fitr, but a couple days before the Muslims have a festival of lights called "Laylatul Qadr" (the Night of Glory) which supposedly marks the night the Quran was *sent down* to Muhammad in the cave which they mark by candlelit prayers. This is also how the Syriacs celebrate Christmas eve. (Note 1: i don't remember where but i read somewhere that the tradition of the Eternal uncreated Quran emerged in the middle agea as a sublimation of Jesus's divine nature as it was viewed as co eternal with Allah. The Mutazilite or rationalist school realized this irony and disagreed greatly with this growing orthodox view of the Quran. Note 2: Ali in Arabic means the Risen-who else is risen? Ali is also said to have been born in the Sanctuary. This idea just came to me but I wonder if the Sanctuary and Cave ideas are suppressed symbols for Mary's womb.)
2) Surah 48: Titled "The Victory" the first few lines give us some interesting clues...
"Truly, We have opened up a path to a clear triumph for you [Prophet], so that God may forgive you your past and future sins, complete His grace upon you,guide you to a straight path, and help you mightily. It was He who made His Tranquility descend into the hearts of the believers, to add faith to their faith--the forces of the heavens and earth belong to god." (v. 1-4)
- Note that the prophet Muhammad is never indicated as the subject in the original Arabic, so this may just be referring to the audience. Who has given us a victory through which God forgives us our sins?
- The Arabic for "tranquility" is Sakinah, which sounds like the Hebrew Shekhinah, the term for God's wisdom or spirit.
Thus it is rendered:
"Truly, We have granted you a clear victory, through which God has and will forgive you your sins, grant you His grace, guide you to the straight path, and greatly help you. It was He who sent down his Holy Spirit into the hearts of believers, to add faith to their faith; for the glory and the earthly and heavenly hosts belong to God."
3) Surah 26: Titled the Poets, it has interesting discussions about the effect of those past believers (mainly in the OT and Arabic folklore) who rejected God's prophets and their fate. Interestingly, the first and longest passage belongs to Moses, whose people were noted to be the most obedient. Thus this has the effect of heightening tension until the end when it demands obedience to His Prophets with the threat of the Fire.
"My Lord, grant me wisdom, join me with the righteous, give me a good name among later generations, make me one of those given the Garden of Bliss. Forgive my father, for he is one of those who have gone astray, and do not disgrace me on the Day when all people are resurrected." - v. 83-87
Compare the Orthodox Hymn to the Dead: "And cleanse me through Your loving kindness; and the homeland of my heart’s desire bestow on me
By making me a citizen of Paradise.
Blessed are You, O Lord; teach me Your statutes.
Give rest, O God,
to the souls of your servant, and appoint for them a place in Paradise; where the choirs of the Saints, O Lord, and the just will shine forth like stars; to Your servants that are sleeping now
Give rest, overlooking all his (her) offenses."
4) Later on in Surah 26, v. 192-200:
" Truly, this Qur'an has been sent down by the Lord of all worlds: the Trustworthy Spirit brought it down to your heart [Prophet] so that you could bring warning in a clear Arabic tongue. This was foretold in the scriptures of earlier religions. Is it not proof enough for them that the learned men of the children of Israel have recognized it? If we had sent it down to someone who was not an Arab [lit. a foreigner] and he had recited it to them, they still would not have believed in it."
- Again, as with (1), the third person pronoun and article "it" are ambiguous.
- The Trustworthy Spirit is obviously the Holy Spirit
- In the Syriac, the term "Arabiyya" means Westerner, as in "the Western dialect of Syriac"
- Who was foretold in the older scriptures and was sent by God?
- Who has been recognized by the Children of Israel? If it's referring to the Children of Israel in the previous passage, isn't it clear from the context that "foreigner" in the next line means "Gentile"?
Thus it is rendered:
"Truly, He has been sent down by the Lord of all worlds: the Holy Spirit brought Him into your heart so that you could warn them in a clear Western dialect. This was foretold in the Scripture. Is it not proof enough for them that the Rabbis of the Children of Israel have recognized Him? If we had sent Him to the Gentiles and He had delivered to them [the Good News], they still would not have believed in Him."
Laylut Al Qadr = Starry night (Jesus birth )
I must say that this is actually quite fascinating.
Wow! Wow! Wow! Thank you!
This is amazing, totally mind blowing.
Does anybody know the Diatesseron reference he's talking about? And the specific verses in Matthew and Mark?
How do we get the koran that murad translated into English?
Great material !👍
RESPECT to Mr. Murad for this thorough study... What an eye opening. God bless you Sir. Thanks Ko Jay and Mel for making this happen. 🙏. Glory be too God. ❤
Thank you guys for this wonderful job.
Excellent hypothesis by Murad. Really riveting and compelling.
Day by day the evidence are coming more and more. I now wonder if it has anything to do with the old coin in Palestina around 647-658 A.D with letter "m" on it's side and on other side with the symbol "cross". I don' t think it was the Muhammad of 7th century.
I am so happy that Murad and Jay bring up this interesting discussion. God bless all of you.
The M is a number. I think it meant something like 50.
@@Speakers154 I thought it was a name or somekinda related to that name.
@@esmeraldalowry2836 No, Mel is correct. The 'M' is a numerical denomination only
@@pfanderfilms I see... okay, thank you for the info. 🙇
In the translation I’ve got…
Who is the “WE” spoken of in SERA(chapter)33:45 ???
And other place.
S.V.Mir Ahmed Ali, United Muslim Foundation (Florida)saying it is an interpreted translation.
Excellent! But Dr. J. Smith talks too much between! That is hurting!
Quran 2:6
How can you disbelieve in Allah when (you) were lifeless and
He brought (you) to life; then *(Virgin Birth)*
He will cause (you) to die, then *(Crucifixion)*
He will bring (you) [back] to life, and *(Resurrection)*
then to Him (you) will be returned. *(Heaven)*
Many are learning from people like Dr Jay, CP, Rob, David, Sam, Adam and many more. God blessed.
you said Murad translated the koran. how do we get his translation?
What's the name of the music that plays before your videos
Seriously, the soundtrack you start with, always makes me want to laugh really hard. Sounds like you're about to expose someone and you're so happy about it
Cool vid Jay. I can totally see where they mistake the spelling and with the lower literacy at that time. Also God reminds us to be truthful, honest, and not to use misleading or any sinful way to advance the word of God. It's the best foundation starting with truth.
26:27.
Could not the father be referring too, The Father ( the title Christ Jesus uses for THE GOD).
Or on the flip side of the coin,the
Arabic word 'MA' ,may mean the opposite of NOT eg IS . 'MA' is affirming and Not negating as in the Qur'an verse ' Wa MA Muhammadan ila rasul'. (Sorry can not give verse number,not got it in memory).
Ps.nothing factual, what I say,it's just idea's ,upon observation's.thanks.
Dr.Smith, I don't know if you're going to read this, but I believe I can add something important to the conversation. There's a middle eastern religion that's quite relevant to this topic called Manichaeism. In (western) Manichaeism there's a belief there were multiple Jesuses-there's one that is physical, another one is spiritual. Maybe it's possible when adopting ancient traditions the early Muslims used Isa as the spiritual Jesus, while "muhammad" was the physical one.
Why? Maybe the Muslims constructed a narrative as a polemic against Christianity. The Christian Jesus was Trinitarian, peaceful, charitable and unmarried, while a Jesus (muhammad) who was an unitarian, conqueror, businessman, and fathered with many wives is ideal for an expanding empire.
To push Manichaeism even further, Manichaens kept a book titled The Evangelion (the injil), Mani referred to himself as the seal of the prophets & the Paraclete, and the religion spread come the east of the mediterranean to China.
If the Arabic word Mohammed is similar to Yashua of the Syriac., I'm wondering if there's any thing showing allaoh in Arabic mistranslated from Syriac..?
Look for Edouard-Marie Gallez's paper in the next Inârah publication (Inârah volume 10, to be published in september - article linked to his lecture at given at the 2019 „Die historischen
Geburtswehen des Islams und der Ursprung des Korans“ Inârah symposium in Germany ; I was there, and Gallez is also a close friend and mentor). Its title : "Muhammad's mentions in Quran : the lost years since 1949". He explains how French scholar Régis Blachère already pointed in his 1949 French translation of the Quran the very same awkwardnesses Murad shows in this video. Gallez then proceeds to a detailed philologic study of the 4 Muhammad mentions and the Ahmad one, and demonstrates they are all interpolations...
Thanks guys from the knowledge.
Dr. Jay it is helpful to look at the Nsara sect and waraqa bin nawfal that was translating scriptures to arabic.
Remember that the story of Waraqa ibn Nofal comes to us from the 9th century, which is 200 years too late to be important for this discussion. He could be totally fictitious, or someone else closer to the 8th or 9th century redacted to the story of Muhammad to give it authority
@@pfanderfilms Its from Waraqa we get the 'story' of mohammad and the first revelation. Its like if we were to watch 3 films in a trilogy series like, star wars, or Lord of the Rings, or Harry Potter films back to back one evening. By the 3rd night you will have had a dream about the film and be convinced that you have to defeat the empire, help a boy wizard or destroy a ring, or a mixture of all 3.
In the same vein, its when mohammad would go to waraqa's place to hear about christian and jewish stories, since waraqa was translating into arabic, and.....waraqa showing mohammad the original text (in Aramaic or Syriac or Greek etc) and mohammad saying "I cannot read, because I don't know Aramaic or Greek etc).
He then later goes to the cave, being suffering from eplipcy (or so some records indicate) probably abit of heatstroke from the hot desert sun and as a dream about the things waraqa was telling him about, like.....?....like Gabriel visiting Mary....
And in his mixed up dream (everyone has mixed up dreams) mohammad mixes up his answer to waraqa about not being able to read Aramaic, Greek etc and when again in the dream 'gabriel' asks mohammad to read 'this'....mohammad replies "I cannot read it!".
The bit that is left out is ".....because I cannot read Aramaic, Greek etc"
mohammad was no illiterate.... He knew Arabic,... just not Aramaic, Greek etc.
its this mixed up dream in the cave about what waraqa had told mohammad and mohammad's answer to waraqa asking him to read Aramaic etc, its this dream that started the events.........well some of them.
Where can I find teachings of sheikh MURAD ???
Fascinating and valuable. Thanks
Hello Dr. Smith
In the same theory
Concerning the historic Mohammed
We agree with you, the traditional Islam narrative is written too late after the events to be credible. Then, let us stop picking at the tradition.
We have to believe, that there was a leader of the Arab herd and may not have been named Mohammed. For simplicity, let us named him Frank.
Frank and a herd of Arabs joined the Sasanian and the Rabbinic Jews for the conquest of Jerusalem in 614 as per secular historians. Jerusalem has a significance if you one was Christian or Jews and all sect variants of them: The center of the world.
What was the motivation for the Arabs to participate in the conquest?
Before answering the question, Father Édouard-Marie Gallez defended his doctoral thesis on this very subject. He is defending Frank was educated to lead militarily and religiously the Arabs in a Nazorean, “Messianic Jews” belief system. He was also told that Christ was imminently coming back (saved in extremis from the cross), to restore rightness, eradicate sins (the 8th day of the creation).
In 614, opportunity rings. The Sasanian and Rabbinic Jews wanted to conquer Jerusalem. Frank and a bunch of followers joined their forces in their quest for Jerusalem.
When Jerusalem was seized, the Arabs raced to the esplanade to build a tabernacle tent and prepare rituals to welcome Christ that was imminently coming. However, the rabbinical Jews did not like the idea of Christ coming back. Therefore, they got the Sasanian to oust the Arabs out of Jerusalem and they fled, very likely to Petra.
Time has passed and Christ is not back yet.
In 622, Heraclius was preparing to retake the land and Jerusalem. Frank and his group left Petra by fear of Heraclius retaliation and fled south to Medina (the real Hijrah). We supposed that Frank and his bunch were anti rabbinical Jews because the 614 esplanade ousting by rabbinical Jews. It may explain antagonism with Jews of Medina. After all, they interfere prevented Jesus from coming back.
We also believe, the infantile defective Arabic script: the RASM, leaves several interpretations, when 150 years after, to normalized, diacritic marks are added, and created different meaning there For one, the name “Muhammad” in Syriac (northern Arabia) this means “the praised one”. Is it possible that the mention of Mohammed is an inscription inside the Dome of The rock is referring to “The praised one”? We believe that later Abassids mistakenly named the leader of the initial Arabs herd “Mohammad”.
Is it also possible that Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan was of that last generation who were still expecting Jesus's messiah imminently coming back, providing a tabernacle to welcome Jesus? This is, we think, the primary significance of the building “the Dome of the rock”: A house to welcome Jesus, the Messiah.
The significance of the building structure leaves us with a few clues:
The eastern entrance, facing the Golden gate by which Jesus with his army is to come from.
Then, through the dome of the Chain, where humans are judges: the good ones may proceed through to the eastern door to the Rock to get to heaven: The stargate to heaven.
In addition, the octagonal shape of the building is refereeing by Christian to the 8th day: end of the world, following the creation in 7 days= The eighth day.
The number eight is also as the Baptisms fount octagonal shape: the passing from one world to the New World, from sin to sinless.
So, in general, Like Saint John of Damascus is writing (circa 730), Saracen, Hagar people, Ishmaelite’s…., follow a Christian heresy. Frank, the man that led the Arabs, was named Mohammed mistakenly much later because of the wrong interpretation of the script in the Dome of the rock lack of diacritical mark.
Dr jay Gbu brother for your good work
When can we get a copy of Murad's translation of the Qur'an?
Great work Murad!!
Question not related to the video at all: When the word Ajami (عجمي) is used in the Hadith, is it referring specifically to Persians? Did Mohammed see them as (almost) equals? Did he call them his kin? Did he refer specifically to the lineage of al-Ajam when he spoke of Ajami? Thanks to anyone who can help.
What year were the titles were introduced?
Wow! Very interesting info
Brilliant video 🙏, I just confused why Sebeos refered to Mohammad in his writings, does it mean that there was a person named Mohammad???
Jay, have you considered doing a podcast?
We need more like this . It’s a great topic
The case for Ahmed being used to foretell the coming of Prophet Mohammad is nicely detailed in this work by F.P. Cotterell: The Gospel of Barnabas. Link found here: biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/vox/vol10/barnabas_cotterell.pdf
According to Lonsdale Ragg the Italian version does not contain any parallel to the
Johannine Paraclete passages, but he traces Sale’s comment to an Arabic marginal gloss connecting Ahmed, the Latin Consolator and the Greek Paracletus.
Footnote: [8] L. Ragg, ‘The Mohammedan “Gospel of Barnabas” ’, JTS 6 (1904-5), note on p. 425.
beginning music is so good. what is it
Incredible. The question must be asked: "Was there a 7th Century Arab hero named Muhammad?"
Yes, there were maybe 3, one in petra....one in northen iraq and one in south saudi arabia. The islamic history is a mish-mash of all 3 lives into one religion.
Tsbk Zwct do you have a source for this?
+Richard Thornhill Most probably NOT.
Richard Thornhill You asked, "Was there a 7th Century Arab hero named Mohammad?"
Mel & Murad did another video on youtube saying that "Mohammad" did live about the correct time. I don't know the name of the video. The only thing is that he was an Arab ruler in Hirah of Lakhmid. He was never called Mohammad. His real name was Iyas Ibn Qabisah al Ta'i. Apparently Lakmid was in modern Iraq. He was ruler of that area for awhile and then came back to rule it again about 25 years later. The basics of the story are similar to the basics to the story of Mohamed so Mel and Murad from Sneakers Corner think that this is the man that the story of Mohammad is taken from. He probably believed in the Abrahamic religion of the time that was later suppressed by Islam.
The Abrahamic aspect would explain why the Dome of the Rock where Abraham was going to sacrifice Isaac (Ishmael in the Abrahamic religion) was the first place to have Quranic verses on it dated 691 AD. Of course it would have been a very important place for the Abrahamic religion. The Abrahamic religion was a foundational part of Islam. Pagan aspects of Islam ran in parallel with the Abrahamic aspect. The pagan aspect was first centred in Petra. The Quran was invented by Abdul Malik at 691 AD who wanted to appeal to all the local Arab tribes by permanently uniting them together as a fighting force. Islam is a religion of war. He also explained that the stories in the Quran were designed to appeal to the all the local Arab tribes in various ways (eg Mohammad cross dressing - there was a tribe that did this at that time) so that Abdul Malik could get all the tribes to unite and stay united. I thought that his theory was an excellent explanation of the earliest days of Islam. The theory ties up a lot of loose ends very nicely. Like all legends there is a kernel of truth at the bottom of it.
@@bobgriffin316 - Agreed. "Muhammad" and "Robin Hood" have much in common, many legends but very little historical documentation. Both seem to be an amalgamation of individual's activities.
Murad must mention the original Quranic verse in Arabic and read it aloud, in Arabic, from the 1924 Hafs version to lend more credibility to his thesis. He should mention the English translator's name as well and use all popular translators: Pickthall, Sahih International and Yusuf Ali. Because native Arab speaking Muslims will nit pick translations and complain that the English translations are not accurate. We need Muslim translators to turn them against Muslims and show them the inconsistencies present in the Quran.
This is fascinating to contemplate. I have thought of Muhammad as a title rather than a given name for some time but I normally think of the Gospel as meaning the fourfold Gospel of Matthew Mark Luke and John as a whole. To think of it as the Diatessaron is a fascinating prospect.
I'm not convinced but the Quran mentioning Muhammad only 4 times in the whole book, is an interesting observation
Yes while Jesus and Mary are mentioned much more than that and quran goes even further calling Jesus "The word of God" and "Spirit of God"....
It's believed by scholars that there is no historical evidence that Jesus existed apart from the Gospels which is quite problematic.
Then we can conclude that the Praised one in the Quran is Jesus!!!
Most likely... at least in the qur'an's earliest and original context.
Were the surah name changes an attempt to reflect Gospel tradition of assigning names to each one? If so, could Muhammed's name represent a minor cult figure that was then uploaded to the later compositions of the Quran, and then totally amplified within the greater community?
In surah 47:2 (I'm not an Arabic speaker) most translators put 'He will remove them from their misdeeds' indicating that it is not Muhammad himself that removes sins but Allah. Would you say that this has little linguistic basis based on what the Arabic of the text says?
13:15 I'm pretty sure the thing that 'removed their sins and amended their condition' in this verse is the Qur'ān, or, rather, more correctly, whatever is meant by 'that which was sent down upon Muhammad'. It does refer to whatever removed their sins as 'it', and not 'he'. However, if Muhammad is a name for Jesus, considering the hypothesis of a Nestorian, Syriac Christian origin to Qur'ānic material, then this verse could still make sense within that theory, considering the Nestorian view of the *hypostatic union*, which was understood by them as two persons rather than two natures in one person, which would fit with the verse (i.e. the thing sent down to Muhammad would be the Divine Person of the Logos, and Muhammad would be Jesus of Nazareth the human person. The basic Nestorian view). This possibility only works if there's any evidence that 'it' is used to refer to the Divine Person of the Logos in Syriac Nestorianism, which I'm not yet certain of.
Interesting hypothesis, must be proven with more evidences. Gbu'all
godbless you jay and your friends
For when you tackle surah 61:6 /John 14,15,16:
1. The term παράκλητος "parakletos" (meaning comforter or intercessor) was a Greek term (in John 14:16,26, 15:26, 16:7, 1 John 2:1, Job 16:2 [LXX], Job 16:20, 33:23 [Targum]) probably familiar to those who wrote Aramaic and Hebrew. So when translating it they would either transliterate it as: פרקלטא "parakleta" or translate it using the equivalent term מְנַחֵם "Menahem".
2. Re: the "periklutos" argument
(ie, original = "Ahmad"/ احمد = praised/ περικλυτός which was supposedly corrupted to παράκλητος)
it must be mentioned that there is no variant with "periklutos" (nor is it a biblical Greek word). Also periklutos means "famous/ through hearing" not "praised". (In the Arabic Iliad, περικλυτός is translated as مجدا "majida" not احمد.) Hence (even if used) περικλυτός would have been a translation of משמא "meshama" not ahmad.
3. חמד "hmd" in Hebrew and Aramaic means "desirable" (the semantic shifted in Arabic to mean "praised"). So if Jesus had mentioned אחמד "ahmad" then it would have likely been translated as επιθυμείτε "epithymeite" or εὐδοκέω "evdokeo" not περικλυτός
4. The first recorded (possible) connection between John 16 and surah 61:6 is in Ibn Ishaq's sirat rasul allah (p104). There is no charge of textual corruption but rather that "al Munahhemana" (ie the Arabic transliteration of "Menahem" [in the Christian Palestinian Aramaic translation of John 16]) is Syriac for "muhammad" (NB not ahmad)... which it isn't... (Also, John the Apostle is mentioned as the Gospel writer/ biographer).
5. The term "ahmadu" in surah 61:6 is probably not a name but just the term "praised".
6. It's not impossible that παράκλητος "parakletos" could have been translated to נביא or نبيا "nabya" meaning prophet/ exhorter (eg Acts 4:36 where παρακλήσεως "parakleseos" is translated from נביא)
7. Interestingly, Ubayy bin Kaab had a variant reading of Q61:6 which has a "prophet" (naby) who would be the "seal of the prophets" (Daniel 9:24) [not a "messenger" (rasul) whose "name" would be "praised" (ahmad) as the Hafs version has] (see LXI 6, archive.org/stream/in.ernet.dli.2015.76212/2015.76212.Materials-For-The-History-Of-The-Text-Of-The-Quran-The-Old-Codices#page/n185)
8. The teachings of Mani (the gnostic false messiah/ prophet of the 3rd century AD) may also have influenced the quran's authors' embellishment of muhammad. Mani was described as a "prophet" and had titles associated with Jesus and the Holy Spirit attributed to him: "Comforter" (Mani is short for Manehem), "paraclete" and "seal [of the prophets]" (see Dan 9:24, Matt 11:13, Eph 1:13). His name was also praised in gnostic hymns.
9. The term شفيع "shafye" is an Arabic translation of the word παράκλητος "parakletos" and פרקלטא "parakleta". It's used to describe Jesus (1 John 2:1). According to the quran there is no "shafye" but allah (Q6:51, Q6:70, Q32:4), so Jesus and the Holy Spirit are God,
24:36, New translation by Muhammad Asad says [IS NOT]. It's not only old but new translations that still say [IS NOT] instead of [WAS NOT]. You are mistaken.
This is out of the subject what do you think about erdogan want to convert Aya Sophia to a mosque??
● What Do You Think About the Bible in Aramaic?
● Why Not Make it ( Aramaic Bible ) Available To the Public and Researchers?
● What Do You Think About the Book》Revelation of Child《?
( in Hebrew : התגלות לילדים )
A breathtaking thesis by Murad on the cut & paste religion of ‘peace,’ also supported by Mel and of course Jay, ‘over and out!’
Excellent video!
Thank you for this excellent scholarly discussion. It is apparent and certain that the name Muhammad does not appear in the Quran. In one particular instance the name Ahmad cannot be understood as Muhammad. As to the word Yesuah there are sufficient grounds to assume that it was misinterpreted as Muhammad in the Syriac. Am I correct ? I am following your work and that of Robert Spencer. India has suffered intensely from the Invading Islamic onslaught over the past millennium and a quarter. Thanks , once again.
Isn't Isa from the Mani?
Father "Gallon" (20'50) who is that guy?
I think this father “Gallen” is in fact father “Edouard-Marie GALLEZ” a French scholar who wrote a gigantic thesis on the origins of Islam. His work has been vulgarized by Odon Lafontaine : see his CZcams channel : Olaf. Of course, all this material is in French language.
@@gerardreligionofpeace9044 That's correct.
Great video
I didn’t understand ” Calling Muhmmad by name contradicts the notion that the Quran is always telling Muhammad say” What does this mean?
My post, On the Likely Significance of the Name Isa
In my view the mysterious name Isa عيسى probably originally had the same significance as Yassa يسى (Jesse--King David’s father). From the Syriac Ishai ܐܝܫܝ. Now if the initial letter of Ishai (olaph--a glottal stop) was pronounced like the Arabic ayin, we can see a reason for the change of letter, and the final letter (yud ‘i’) became alif maqsurah ى.
I think it is import to remember that Jesus was more than just a prophet and fulfilled three distinct roles - in ref to Luke 16:16, this makes it clear - while it also clearly rule out Muhammad as a prophet.
As you have presented 4 verses of the Qur'an we are aware that there has been a conflation of ideas with in the Qur'an. It would be important that there be synopsis of the different non-Quranic sources stories (identified jewish or sectarian christian) with possible dates of production and where they have been incorporated into the Qur'an.
Murad has said quite a bit abt a few verses! My concern is we have everything we need in the Bible! The Quran has many other issues that do not agree with the Bible. Are we not getting into the dangerous ground of compromise and make way to dilute the strong doctrines of the Bible?
I noticed ayah 2 surah 47 in this video.
This is the verse in Arabic.
وَالَّذِيۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا وَعَمِلُوا الصّٰلِحٰتِ وَاٰمَنُوۡا بِمَا نُزِّلَ عَلٰى مُحَمَّدٍ وَّهُوَ الۡحَقُّ مِنۡ رَّبِّهِمۡۙ كَفَّرَ عَنۡهُمۡ سَيِّاٰتِهِمۡ وَاَصۡلَحَ بَالَهُمۡ
وَالَّذِيۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا وَعَمِلُوا الصّٰلِحٰتِ وَاٰمَنُوۡا بِمَا نُزِّلَ عَلٰى مُحَمَّدٍ
translated = Those who believe and work righteousness and believe in what was sent upon MOHAMMED
وَّهُوَ الۡحَقُّ مِنۡ رَّبِّهِمۡ
translated = and He is the truth. Also translated as "it is the truth".
وَّهُوَ translated as "and it is" also means "and he is".
Who is the truth? In the Gospel of John Jesus is the truth.
وَّهُوَ الۡحَقُّ مِنۡ رَّبِّهِمۡۙ كَفَّرَ عَنۡهُمۡ سَيِّاٰتِهِمۡ وَاَصۡلَحَ بَالَهُمۡ
translated= and he is the truth from their Lord, he covered from them their sins and justified them.
كَفَّرَ
which means covered reminds me of the Hebrew word כיפור
meaning attonement.
كَفَّرَ عَنۡهُمۡ سَيِّاٰتِهِمۡ وَاَصۡلَحَ بَالَهُمۡ
translated = and he attoned their sins and justified them.
This is how I understand this verse.
Those who believe and work righteousness and believe in what was sent upon MOHAMMED(who is Jesus) and he is the truth from their Lord [who] attoned their sins and made them righteous.
*I.Q. [Intelligence Quotient] > 140*
*----------------------------------------------*
1. *(Important)* the consonants are the same in Hebrew & all Aramaic version. (i.e. The Yeshua & Esho is actually an only change of the vowels)
2. Jesus [Ιησούς] in Greek is pronounced Iisoús / Eeshus
3. Yeshua is the original Hebrew pronunciation
4. Yesu is south (western) Peshitta ( new testament ) rendering
5. Esho is eastern (Northern) Peshitta ( new testament) rendering
6. Aramaic (or Syriac) spoken in Palestine at the time if Jesus was closer to eastern (Northern) because of the Babylonian captivity, but they also mixed it with the Hebrew way of speaking.
7. *(Important)* Edessa or the city of king Agbar also had a Greek-speaking population. Nestorian himself was a Greek not Arab. This is probably why even of the eastern and western new testaments has the same consents the words are pronounced differently
8. *(Important)* Abdul Malik choose Isa to shame Jesus as a Hellenized prophet of the Semitic people. Using the Greek sounding name in the south at that time would have ignited the Arab & Jewish racist sentiments
I love that music❣️
Thanks. Very useful. Also see The Bible in Arabic by Sidney H Griffiths (Princeton, 2015) which also echos some Murad's thoughts particularly 'Dialessaron'. I discovered this book from a review by Shabir Ally in Quran Speaks. This book also traces what was happening in Syria and other regions before the Quran was written down. It also confirms some of Robert Spencer's views incl the school of Docetists influencing the Quranic writers. God bless. PS: Also note how Bill Warner has a theory of 'Political Islam'.