Zul-Qarnain - What is the argument?I have never claimed that Zul-Qarnain *is* the historical Alexander the Great. I don't know why your move to agree with me in this is considered a rebuttal... The argument is then that the Qur'anic story is clearly taken from the legends about Alexander. There are many many details of the Qur'an account which are nearly verbatim to be found in the Alexander legends. Conclusion: Zul-Qarnain clearly is the Alexander the Great of the legend stories. And because the Qur'an presents the material from the legends as if this were history, it shows that Muhammad could not distinguish between legends and history when he incorporated this material in the Qur'an. This is evidence that the Qur'an is not of divine origin.
by Jochen Katz
You mean to tell me Jochan Katz doesn't believe the arch-angel Gabriel whispered allah's words into mohammad's ear while he sat in the cave, waiting for his chizoid spells to pass? He doesn't believe mohammad 'heard' allah? That is wasn't allah who 'told' mohammad the secrets of the Universe? About the Sun setting in a muddy Pond? That if you look at the Moon, your eye-balls will fall out? That the devil lives in your nose? Hell is full of women?
Jochan Katz doesn't believe allah was mohammad's sock-puppet?
Well, fair dinkum, I'll be darned!