Dhul-Qarnayn and the Alexander Romance: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Dhul-Qarnayn and the Alexander Romance (view source)

Revision as of 00:55, 15 January 2021

1,231 bytes removed ,  15 January 2021
→‎Conclusion
[checked revision][checked revision]
mNo edit summary
Line 326: Line 326:


This wall cannot be the same as the one in the Qur'an because it is not built between two mountains. The walls near Derbent were built with the Caspian sea as one border. In his comments on Derbent, Yusuf Ali mentions, that "there is no iron gate there now, but there was one in the seventh century, when the Chinese traveler Hiouen Tsiang saw it on his journey to India. He saw two folding gates cased with iron hung with bells".<ref name="YusufAli" /> Again, if this gate is the same as the one in the Qur'anic story then the apologist must admit that the revelation of the gate holding back Gog and Magog must have failed since they did not rampage over the nations nor bring about judgement day. Additionally, the solitary claim of a single eye witness from the 7<sup>th</sup> century is spurious at best. We should expect a massive structure would have left copious amounts of archaeological evidence, instead all we have are rumors and folktales.
This wall cannot be the same as the one in the Qur'an because it is not built between two mountains. The walls near Derbent were built with the Caspian sea as one border. In his comments on Derbent, Yusuf Ali mentions, that "there is no iron gate there now, but there was one in the seventh century, when the Chinese traveler Hiouen Tsiang saw it on his journey to India. He saw two folding gates cased with iron hung with bells".<ref name="YusufAli" /> Again, if this gate is the same as the one in the Qur'anic story then the apologist must admit that the revelation of the gate holding back Gog and Magog must have failed since they did not rampage over the nations nor bring about judgement day. Additionally, the solitary claim of a single eye witness from the 7<sup>th</sup> century is spurious at best. We should expect a massive structure would have left copious amounts of archaeological evidence, instead all we have are rumors and folktales.
==Conclusion==
In summary, the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence supports that:
*The story in the Qur'an parallels a medieval Syriac legend of Alexander; it portrays him as a believing king who traveled the world and built a barrier of iron which holds back the tribes of Gog and Magog until Judgement Day.
*Almost every major element of the Qur'anic story can be found in Christian and Jewish folklore that dates hundreds of years prior to the time of Prophet Muhammad.
*Most early Muslim commentators and scholars identified Dhul-Qarnayn as Alexander the Great, and some modern ones do too.
*Historical and Archaeological evidence has revealed that the real Alexander was a polytheistic pagan who believed he was the literal son of Greek and Egyptian gods.
*The theory that Dhul-Qarnayn is Cyrus the Great has little evidence in its favor compared to the overwhelming evidence that the story is actually based on a legendary version of Alexander.
*Today, there is no giant wall of iron and brass between two mountains that is holding back a tribe of people; it likely never existed.
From all of this it can be concluded that the story of Dhul-Qarnayn is a myth about Alexander the Great and has no basis in history.


==See Also==
==See Also==
Asmith
Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers
4,686

edits

Retrieved from "http://wikiislamica.net/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/127429"

Navigation menu