Dhul Qarnayn – Alexander the Great
When one studies ancient history, we see that the Greeks and the Persians were always at war, similar to how the English and French were always at war during the Middle Ages. This happened from about 500 BC to the the Arab Conquest of Persia in the 7th Century.
In the 7th Century when Islamic armies emerged from Arabia, they went to war with the Byzantine Empire which was Greek and the Sassanian Empire which was Persian. They conquered the Persian Empire and while they took land from the Byzantines, they didn’t conquer them. We have the Theodosian walls of Constantinople and Greek fire in the Byzantine navy to thank for this.
In the early years of war between the Persian and Greek civilization, there were no Christians. There were no Muslims either with the exception of Dhul Qarnayn who is Alexander the Great. Islam says that Alexander the Great was a devout Muslim. Unfortunately for Islam, he didn’t convert any Greeks to the deen.
Eventually the Greek speaking world adopted Christianity in the common era, but even before then early Christianity was soaked in Greek tradition and not Persian tradition. It’s a blessing that Hellenism played a role from the earliest stages of the faith. This is because the Greeks were a literate culture. If you look at Greek civilization before Christ, there are many writings such as Socrates, Plato, Xenophon, Aristotle and so many more.
Because Alexander the Great conquered so much land, he spread the literate culture of the Greeks. At the time of Christ and the early Church, there were so many written documents. The early Jews that believed in Christ lived in a tradition where they knew they had to record the actions of Christ and did. That is why there are so many writings from the early Church including the NT and the apostolic Fathers. They lived in the Greco-Roman literate tradition.
Islam on the other hand inherited Arab and Persian culture which were far more oral than literate. Think of all of the ancient Greek scholars that you know then think of all of the Persian or Arab ones. I’m sure that there were many great ancient Persian and Arab philosophers, poets, and scientists. The only difference is that we don’t know about them since they didn’t leave writings. They only had oral tradition. There may be the odd inscription on a rock but it’s not much more than that folks.
Since they only inherited traditions of oral cultures, very little was put to writing the first two centuries after the founding of Islam. The first hadith collection is the Muwatta of Imam Malik which was written in 179 AH. This Hadith collection is not even considered canonical. The first canonical Hadith comes from Imam Bukhari about a quarter of a millenium after the Hijra. The other five canonical hadiths are even later than that.
Eventually Muslims knew that their oral culture couldn’t compete with Greco-Roman written culture so they eventually made writings. The unfortunate thing for them is that they made them two centuries too late.
The irony is that the man who spread the Greek literate culture around the world was Alexander the Great. He is a devout Muslim according to Surah 18. Having spread the Greek literate culture abroad, Christianity was fortunate enough to inherit this written tradition. Islam doesn’t have it and that’s why today so many revisionist schools exist. All of the early mosques face Petra instead of Mecca and Muslims don’t have the literature to tell us why. Thank you Alexander for helping out the Church despite being a Muslim….at least according to Islamic tradition.
It’s amazing how you made such a big deal about this article, but when posted, it fizzles like most Christian polemical writings. I will write a formal response later, but for now, it suffices to say that Alexander is not actually mentioned in the Quran. Perhaps Allan can provide us with evidence from Surah 18 where Alexander is mentioned by name.
The Quran repeats like a beating drum that it’s fully detailed. Perhaps you, as a brilliant and
experienced Muslim apologist, should provide us with evidence from the Quran about the identity of Dhul Qarnayn.
Orange guy, the Quran is under no obligation to give every detail, you dolt. The Quran is not a history book, like your Bible (which is actually a very bad history book).
This is not a response to my question. The Quran says in at least three passages that it’s fully detailed or that its verses are explained in full detail. So I’ll ask again: where are the details about Dhul (Dull?) Qarnayn’s identity. You insist it’s not Sasha the Great. Show me by Quranic citations you’re right. This should not be problematic for a smart boy like you.
Once again, orange guy, the Quran is under no obligation to give every single detail. Explaining things in detail means giving the important details. It doesn’t mean providing Dhul Qarnayn’s name (which no one in the modern world would find useful anyway), his height, his weight, whether he had short hair or long hair, how many children he had, his favorite color or his favorite food. These are all meaningless details. The Quran was concerned with giving a brief account of Dhul Qarnayn’s exploits as a righteous king and servant of Allah (swt).
Like I said, the Quran is not a petty and boring history book like your Bible. Your Bible goes on and on about who begot who, as if that is important for people’s salvation. The Bible is not even a good history book. It is full of errors, myths and absurdities.
“Explaining things in detail means giving the important details.It doesn’t mean providing Dhul Qarnayn’s name (which no one in the modern world would find useful anyway)”- this “response” was totally ruined by “It is full of errors, myths and absurdities.” Dull Qarnayn’s identity matters, because if he is a fictional character it will be perfectly clear that the Quran does contain ” errors, myths and absurdities.”
“Like I said, the Quran is not a petty and boring history book “- you’re totally right, it’s not a history book.
“Your Bible goes on and on about who begot who, as if that is important for people’s salvation.”- it’s part of the sacred history of the people of Israel (sacred, because even y our Quran affirms that Jews were chosen by divine ordinance over all other nation). If it doesn’t matter “who begot who”, then why your Quran states that all prophets (more like profits) were literally relatives of one another? If it doesn’t matter, why do Muslims insist so much that Muhammad was descendant of Ishmael? You’ve just thrown your own holly book under the bus. You see, it’s because of posts like this one I find you so funny.
LOL!! Calm down orange guy. You must be turning red!
As I said, unlike your petty book which thinks giving some ancient genealogy which cannot even be objectively verified, the Quran doesn’t waste time with such details. The Arabs regarded themselves as Ishmael’s descendants. What reason is there to give a long genealogy? Would you accept it without doubt? Clearly, you are just engaging in slippery slope arguments. Any idiot can make up a mythical genealogy, but verifying it is another matter. Maybe that’s why your Gospels have two genealogies for your savior! That’s what happens in myth-making. You get multiple versions of the same story.
And no, the name of Dhul Qarnayn does not matter. What difference would it make? As a matter of fact, some Islamic scholars did claim to know his name. It is an Arabic name, which would mean that he was an Arab. So now what? Let me guess. You don’t accept that because whatever the name is would probably not be found in historical documents and cannot be verified, but then again, neither are names like Abraham and Moses! Outside of the Bible and Quran, there is no evidence that these figures existed because the historical record is slim.
The Bible is not even a good history book. It is full of errors, myths and absurdities. – quranandbibleblog
This is a real riot, considering how many detailed historical claims of the Bible (both Old and New Testaments) have been corroborated by archaeological finds – even accounts as ‘legendary’ as the Exodus and Conquest.
While the same Biblical events as described by the Quran contain real howlers of anachronisms – like David wearing mail, a Samaritan during the Exodus, drachmas during the Patriarchs period, or Moses being literally one human generation before Jesus – no wonder the former’s Pharaoh could use Late Anitquity crucifixion eh!
“Any idiot can make up a mythical genealogy, but verifying it is another matter.”- then why do you even bring the genealogies up? Because they’re different? Dr.Michael Brown masterfully explains why there is no problem here (and I don’t care about your ridiculous “oh, third party sources again, ah?”):
https://www.amazon.com/Answering-Jewish-Objections-Jesus-Testament/dp/0801064260
“That’s what happens in myth-making. You get multiple versions of the same story. “- I guess this explains why there are at least three different versions of Muhammad that are depicted in the early source of/about Islam.
“And no, the name of Dhul Qarnayn does not matter. What difference would it make?”- so Quran’s claims about certain people and events don’t matter? Then why do you call yourself a Muslim? You seem to be much more interested in Biblical figures and events than the Quranic ones. I wonder why is that…
” As a matter of fact, some Islamic scholars did claim to know his name. It is an Arabic name, which would mean that he was an Arab.”- so “third party sources” are good when they supposedly support your case? Inconsistency is a sign of a failed argument.
“It is an Arabic name, which would mean that he was an Arab.”- yeah, because the Quran have never ascribed Arabic names to non-Arabs. Totally sound reasoning.
“So now what? Let me guess. You don’t accept that because whatever the name is would probably not be found in historical documents and cannot be verified, but then again, neither are names like Abraham and Moses! Outside of the Bible and Quran, there is no evidence that these figures existed because the historical record is slim.”- posts like this one are what make your scribblings such a fun read. You have no idea what are you talking about. You have no idea what’s the difference between objectivity and double standards. The arguments you hurl against the Bible invalidate the Quran as well (it cannot pass the messed up criteria you apply to the Bible).
In conclusion I’ll repeat my question again: Who was Dhul Qarnayn and when did he live? According to Ibn Kathir and the two Jalals (three of Quran’s best interpreters, at least according to Muslims) he was Alexander the Great. Remember
what Muhammad said about scholars? No? Let me help you: “Abud-Dardaa (radyAllaahu ‘anhu) reported: “I heard the Messenger of Allaah (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) say: Whoever treads a path due to which he seeks knowledge, Allaah will make him tread one of the paths towards Paradise. And the angels lower their wings out of contentment for the seeker of knowledge. And verily all those in the heavens and in the earth, even the fish in the depths of the sea ask forgiveness for the scholar. And verily, the virtue of the scholar over the worshipper is like the virtue of the moon on the night of Al-Badr over all of the stars. Indeed, the scholars are the inheritors of the prophets, for the prophets do not leave behind a dinar or a dirham for inheritance, but rather, they leave behind knowledge. So whoever takes hold of it, has acquired a large share (i.e. of inheritance).'” (Reported by Abu Dawood, At-Tirmidhee ((Sunan Tirmidhi, Hadith: 2685) and Ibn Hibbaan, and this is the wording found in his collection, in abridged form. Al-Bukhaaree mentioned in his Saheeh Collection in his Book of Knowledge”).
”Because they’re different? Dr.Michael Brown masterfully explains why there is no problem here (and I don’t care about your ridiculous “oh, third party sources again, ah?”):
https://www.amazon.com/Answering-Jewish-Objections-Jesus-Testament/dp/0801064260”
LOL, another lazy response! Anyway, I have already dealt with these stupid responses. Read my article and educate yourself. Even Christian scholars, at least the honest ones, realize that these genealogies cannot be reconciled.
https://quranandbibleblog.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/the-genealogy-of-jesus-in-the-bible/
“I guess this explains why there are at least three different versions of Muhammad that are depicted in the early source of/about Islam.”
Deflecting again? You better be careful or Allan might whine about that. Right Allan?
“so Quran’s claims about certain people and events don’t matter? Then why do you call yourself a Muslim? You seem to be much more interested in Biblical figures and events than the Quranic ones. I wonder why is that…”
ROTFL!! You truly are a dummy, aren’t you? Do you name the name of the Pharaoh in the Exodus? Hmm, who was that Pharaoh? Oh but let me guess, his name doesn’t really matter. I mean you can speculate that it was Ramses or some other pharaoh, but you can never know for sure.
“so “third party sources” are good when they supposedly support your case? Inconsistency is a sign of a failed argument. ”
So again no response, just a silly question? The point is that there were different theories as to who Dhul Qarnayn was. It was all speculation. We simply don’t know who he was, but what matters is the moral lesson from his story. Get it?
“yeah, because the Quran have never ascribed Arabic names to non-Arabs. Totally sound reasoning.”
Oh Lord, LOL!! Try to read carefully, dummy. I said various scholars knew the Arabic name of Dhul Qarnayn. I wasn’t talking about the title “Dhul Qarnayn”. His “name” is not mentioned in the Quran at all. The Arabic name was suggested by different scholars.
“posts like this one are what make your scribblings such a fun read. You have no idea what are you talking about. You have no idea what’s the difference between objectivity and double standards. The arguments you hurl against the Bible invalidate the Quran as well (it cannot pass the messed up criteria you apply to the Bible).”
That’s my point, dummy! I am exposing your shoddy standards. You don’t apply your own skepticism with Islam to Christianity. This is a common trait among your kind. It’s no wonder Christianity is projected to lose 100,000,000 adherents in the 50 years, alhamdulillah!
“In conclusion I’ll repeat my question again: Who was Dhul Qarnayn and when did he live? According to Ibn Kathir and the two Jalals (three of Quran’s best interpreters, at least according to Muslims) he was Alexander the Great. ”
And many others didn’t, so what’s your point? This is what happens when a dummy tries to interject himself into an issue that is way over his head!
By the way, did you find a rabbit that chews the cud yet? 🙂
Allan,
You may have hit on something here regarding Hellenistic civilisation and how useful it was to the formation of Christianity. That is a very interesting idea, I will have to have a think about it.
Christopher
Hi Christopher,
I got the idea from Dr. E. Michael Jones in his last issue of Culture Wars. I expanded on it here and put it into an apologetic context so I can’t take credit for all of it. It’s amazing how lucky Christianity was in this regard. It’s comforting knowing that all of our documents are first century. By the time of St. Ignatius of Antioch in 107 AD, all of the main orthodox ideas were known and very obvious based on only his seven epistles. That’s why a marginal movement and a movement that remained marginal for 300 years has a plethora of early documents but Islam has next to nothing. Everything comes late and is given authority by “isnad chains” which are very dubious.
God bless,
Allan
“It’s amazing how lucky Christianity was in this regard.”
Luck? I am not usually given to these sort of statements, but I think that we may put this down to Providence.
“Since they only inherited traditions of oral cultures, very little was put to writing the first two centuries after the founding of Islam. The first hadith collection is the Muwatta of Imam Malik which was written in 179 AH.”- we don’t really know that. There are indications that the Islamic ruling authorities in that period initiated something like a “reboot” of the official religion (which does not seem to Islam). This probably included getting rid of sources that don’t fit in the new picture…which could mean almost all of the existing sources, produced in the first two centuries after the founding of “Islam”.
HAHAHA, more conspiracy theories? Is this the best you guys can do?
Says the guy whose religion is one gigantic conspiracy theory.
All of my readers should be interested to know that Faiz has “refuted” me yet again.
My favorite part is how he says that I’m flip flopping on my position on the Mecca-Petra theory. He needs to go back and actually read that piece.
This guy is a walking disaster. I really hope that more and more Muslims will start using his “stuff” and style of “arguing” in doing dawa, it will be the of Islamic apologetics.
Lord willing.
My bad, it should be “it will be the END of Islamic apologetics.”
I see you are going into damage control Allan. Your piece on Alexander the Great is filled with errors. It’s amazing how one short article can have so many mistakes!
So what did I get wrong about your Petra “analysis”?
In my article which you link to, I specifically said that the mosques did face Petra. What I didn’t agree with was the huge story that Jay Smith cooked up on how it goes from Petra to Mecca. Obviously it went from Petra to Mecca at some point for some reason but Jay Smith doesn’t know why because he has no documents because most Muslim documents are super late.
Also, it wasn’t Christians who invented the idea that Dhul Quarnayn is Alexander the Great. You can thank your fellow Muslims for that.
Hey orange guy, did you find any rabbits that chew the cud? 😉
You’re still a little confused. The “pointing” to Petra is based on modern values, using satellites, as King points out. These values would have been unavailable to anyone 1300 years ago.
Rather, Muslims used more basic methods of orienting the mosques. Also, the mosque may point one way, but it is the mihrab (prayer niche) that is the direction of prayer.
And by the way, Christians actually were the first to romanticize Alexander. The legends attributed to Jacob of Serugh were Christian legends, not Muslim ones, but it is possible that some Muslim commentators picked up on the legends and attributed them to Dhul Qarnayn. So, you clearly need to get your facts straight.
“You’re still a little confused. The “pointing” to Petra is based on modern values, using satellites, as King points out. These values would have been unavailable to anyone 1300 years ago.”
No, that’s not true. Back in those days they had ways to measure direction. Yes, they weren’t as sophisticated but they were still accurate. If you’re correct, they should all be pointing in random directions. It sounds like I have more respect for the intellect of early Arabs than you do. Why are the mosques of the first 70 years facing the same place if they didn’t know how to measure? Yes, Jay Smith and Dan Gibson have fancy theories about what happened in the early ummah and have no evidence as I pointed out but the physical orientation of the early mosques is there and it’s a very big problem for the traditional Islamic narrative. I don’t think you realize the weight of this issue.
“Rather, Muslims used more basic methods of orienting the mosques. Also, the mosque may point one way, but it is the mihrab (prayer niche) that is the direction of prayer.”
Do all the early mosques face Petra by accident then?
“And by the way, Christians actually were the first to romanticize Alexander. The legends attributed to Jacob of Serugh were Christian legends, not Muslim ones, but it is possible that some Muslim commentators picked up on the legends and attributed them to Dhul Qarnayn. So, you clearly need to get your facts straight.”
I never said anything about romanticizing Alexander. I talked about identifying Dhul Quarnayn as Alexander the Great. Name me the Christian who said that Dhul Quarnayn was Alexander the Great. They didn’t. That was done by Quranic scholars.
“No, that’s not true. Back in those days they had ways to measure direction. Yes, they weren’t as sophisticated but they were still accurate. If you’re correct, they should all be pointing in random directions. It sounds like I have more respect for the intellect of early Arabs than you do. Why are the mosques of the first 70 years facing the same place if they didn’t know how to measure? Yes, Jay Smith and Dan Gibson have fancy theories about what happened in the early ummah and have no evidence as I pointed out but the physical orientation of the early mosques is there and it’s a very big problem for the traditional Islamic narrative. I don’t think you realize the weight of this issue.”
It’s only a problem for people who have no background in early Islamic history. Scholars like King have combed the documentation, and what they have found is that the early Muslims would have lacked the sophisticated knowledge to purposely orient mosques towards Mecca or Petra or anywhere else. Read King’s article again. He explains quite clearly how orientation was determined.
Your so-called “respect” is very touching, but it is not based on facts. Perhaps you can provide evidence that the Arabs had the sophisticated knowledge to make the necessary measurements, because I have yet to see any.
“Do all the early mosques face Petra by accident then?”
You are still confused and ignorant of some basic facts. If “all the early mosque face Petra”, as you claim, then why does the Great Mosque in Cordoba face Algeria rather than Petra or the Arabian desert?
“I never said anything about romanticizing Alexander. I talked about identifying Dhul Quarnayn as Alexander the Great. Name me the Christian who said that Dhul Quarnayn was Alexander the Great. They didn’t. That was done by Quranic scholars.”
You missed the point. Christians tried to incorporate Alexander into their legends. These legends were then picked up by Muslims and became part of popular stories. It was only natural that some scholars would have eventually associated Dhul Qarnayn with Alexander, given the similarities (both were kings who traveled widely).
“Your so-called “respect” is very touching, but it is not based on facts. Perhaps you can provide evidence that the Arabs had the sophisticated knowledge to make the necessary measurements, because I have yet to see any.”
I mentioned that all of the early mosques faced Petra and asked if it was an accident.
You brought up the Cordoba mosque which is a mid 8th century mosque. Before 705 AD, all of the mosques face Petra. The Arabs hadn’t even invaded Spain at this point, let alone built that mosque. From the Hijra to 705 AD, all of the mosques faced Petra. From 705 AD for about 100 years, there were competing quiblas. There was of course Petra, the “in between” quiblas which was a point in between Mecca and Petra, there was Mecca, then there where the “parallel” quiblas which essentially face southeast that included Cordoba and several others in North Africa. About 820 AD they all face Mecca going forward, but only then.
Watch this video to understand what that theory is saying. I don’t expect you to believe it but you obviously have to know what they believe.
I’ve already refuted you on Alexander. You’re just repeating yourself.
“I mentioned that all of the early mosques faced Petra and asked if it was an accident.”
That is not evidence. That is an assumption. You have yet to demonstrate that the Arabs had the sophisticated knowledge to determine alignments using complex calculations involving trigonometry and geometry.
“You brought up the Cordoba mosque which is a mid 8th century mosque. Before 705 AD, all of the mosques face Petra.”
Irrelevant. The point is why doesn’t it point towards Arabia?
” From the Hijra to 705 AD, all of the mosques faced Petra. From 705 AD for about 100 years, there were competing quiblas.”
Incorrect. They don’t “face” Petra at all and don’t have anything to do with Petra. Again, you are saying they “point” to Petra using satellite coordinates, which no society had in those times.The Great Mosque in Yemen “points” to Petra and yet its axis is parallel to the Kaaba, as King notes. It also has a miniature Kaaba inside.
Here’s what I think Allan.
Using the argument from embarassment (as David Wood did in his debate with Robert Spencer on ‘Did Muhammad Exist?’), as well as details of his life story which seem to fit so well that it would take an expert storycrafter to invent (his traumatic childhood leading to his adult psychological issues – David Wood again)…
Muhammad or the person/persons the Hadith legendary accounts were based on probably did exist. The stories of the person/persons were handed down orally for generations.
But what happened when the Hadith were written down? Now all the oral legends were codified, edited and streamlined down to what the Hadith contained. Whoever the original legends had been about, from then on they would be about Muhammad.