Islamic COINS-Responding to Khan's Questions - Video #2

Описание: Muhammad Hassam Khan asked: Islam was not there? So who destroyed the Sassanid empire in 651AD? Who conquered Palestine in 631AD? Who kicked out Byzantine empire from the East? Why did all the Arab & Persian historians lie?

My Response: The problem is that none of the historians lied, it's just that there are no Arab & Persian historians from the 7th-8th centuries which he can go to. And that’s the problem. Everything Khan is dependent on is from his Islamic Traditions (i.e. Ibn Hisham = 833 AD, Al Bukhari = 870 AD, and al Tabari = 923 AD). Which means everything he is dependent on for the history of his religion comes from the 9th-10th centuries, for that which was happening in the 7th century...it's 200 to 300 years too late, and therefore, because it is so late, its just not trustworthy historically.

Concerning the people who were conquering the Byzantines and the Sassanians? I already responded to this question earlier, showing that they weren't people called 'Muslims', since Islam was not in existence that early; yet, the Arabs certainly were.

The coins which I forwarded were all written by Arabs, in Arabic, and they, the Arab Nabateans, did destroy the Sassanian and parts of the Byzantine empires in the 7th century. But they didn’t call themselves ‘Muslims’. When we look at the documents from that era, we find that they used other names to describe themselves; such as: Maghraye, Hagarene, Ishmaelite, Saracen, and Muhajiroun.

What's more, it's not just the coins which point to a different history from that of the Islamic Traditions, but the weight from other evidence, all of which are against the traditional narrative of Islam being true...be it the directions of the first Qiblas (they all point much further north than Mecca, to Petra, in Jordan), the manuscripts (or the lack of any mid-7th century Uthmanic manuscripts), coupled with the sparseness and late dates of the Topkopi, Sana'a , Petropolitan, Ma'il and Samarkand manuscripts (they all are much later 8th and 9th century manuscripts, are not complete, and don't agree completely with the Qur'an we have today).

Muhammad Khan refers to the "7th century Quran" which is present in the Birmingham University as proof of 7th century material.

My response to the Birmingham folios (it comprises just two pages, front and back) is also up on Pfanderfilms. Suffice it to say that one needs to be careful of the Carbon dating for the Birmingham folios (568 AD - 645 AD), since even the latest date is 7 years before the Qur'an was even finished and canonized by Uthman in 652 AD!

Furthermore, be wary of Carbon dating, as it is too inexact. Notice the carbon dating of the Sana'a Manuscript in four European laboratories (Lyon, Kiel, Zurich, and Oxford). They date that manuscript using carbon dating to 390 AD - 550 AD, which would place that Qur'anic manuscript before Muhammad was even born, and before the Qur'an was supposed to have been compiled, and certainly before Islam existed, or Uthman even lived! Francois Deroche, who suggests these two folios are from the Petropolitanus Manuscript, and using Paleographical analysis, dates the folios to the early - mid 8th century.

Khan finishes by stating: It's a good thing that you have coins so we know why Millions of people became Muslim in 3 continents in 7th century since it never existed. Good Job... P.S: BTW, why don't you run for elections? You might win, you have all the elements to be a great candidate. 1: You hate Islam 2: You make no sense 3: Illiterate people follow you (You're the next Trump)

I dislike Islam, but I don't necessarily hate it. However, I do like history, and use it to confront the classical narrative of Islam's beginnings that you have been brought up on. And if you believe what I say makes no sense, then feel free to move on and watch other videos.

To suggest that only illiterate people follow me, suggests that you are running out of arguments, and are defaulting to crass 'ad hominem', which mocks the over 26,000 subscribers I have who follow me. I'm sure they would not enjoy being called 'illiterate'.

© Pfander Centre for Apologetics - US, 2020
(26,550)