The Dome of the Rock: A Response to AJ Deus - 3 - Written Sources
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 05. 2022
- Finally, we're having a look at the many written sources which are brought up by A.J. Deus as evidence for his conjecture of a late Dome of the Rock. But what do they really say?
As it turns out, A.J. is misreading and misinterpreting most of his own sources. In many cases, they say the exact opposite of what A.J. claims they are saying.
By the end, nothing is left, his entire argument crumbles because none of his foundational claims can be supported, in fact, most of them can be refuted.
#islam #domeoftherock #jerusalem #al-malik #al-mamun #dome #rock #safa #ajdeus #fraud #christianity #judaism #arab
Music by Darren Curtis.
____________________
If you like my content and would like me to be able to continue producing more, you can support me in the following ways:
Become a Patron and get access to some exclusive content: / thomasalexander
Donate via PayPal: www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_...
Donate Bitcoin: 36AcDS46SGX23xSDQWJQi9C4xtGaqevGba
Donate ETH or ERC20 Tokens: 0x466b19D59D0Ad527a27871001e18283fA6F3D2fd
____________________
Here you can find A.J. Deus' paper:
www.academia.edu/69970087/THE...
Awesome that you assembled the original sources. Thank you for sharing them with us. This is a credit to your serious work.
One critical point that AJ seems not to be aware of: only Muslims were allowed into mosques and Muslim holy sites. This means that Christian sources will tend to have evidentiary value only for the round drum, not the inscriptions. For the inscriptions, one would need to depend on Muslim sources for eyewitness accounts. For a Christian to have gained access, they would have had to have sneaked in and for Europeans this would have been impossible, given language barriers.
Only during the period 1096-1187 was the Dome of the Rock under Christian control. Did any Christian bother to inspect the inscriptions? They would likely not have been pleased with their message but, given their obscure location in the dark ambulatory and the fact that the inscriptions were in a language that they couldn't read, Christian visitors after the 1st Crusade may have simply ignored them entirely.
Thanks a lot, Thomas! Your great amount of work is phantastic. What you´re doing is real science and critical research and that is what it´s supposed to be! Grüße aus Wien!
Many thanks!
@@TAlexander Hi. Very interesting claims, hypotasies and proofs. You suggest, basicly, that Mohamed never existe and was invented after his alleged period as per Muslim traditions. Could you comment and offer a hyposasy regarding the scorce of split between suni and shia (if Mohamed and his family never existed)?
@@nicolaeursu1824 I am currently looking into it, still a lot to research though, so I can't give you any date.
@@TAlexander any success 3 months later?
Sunnis and Shias have no theological or difference in jurisprudence etc just the Prophet's family and who should have ruled.
Get the prophet out and Walla islam has no split!
You'll be a hero
Thomas, you clearly love the truth and you are willing to work hard to find it. I commend you for your hard skilled
...work. Hmmm sorry!
That was brutal. I don’t see A.J. Deus coming back from this.
It’s not just his pet theory that got exposed as utterly baseless, it’s also his entire approach.
These fundamental errors should never have made it into his paper. Absolutely no work ethic and no quality control. It appears as if he has just superficially glanced over his own sources, looking for bits and pieces that could potentially support his ideas, not bothering to dig deeper.
It’s disgraceful really.
Why was my comment deleted?
I'm agreeing with Mr. Alexander.
@@20july1944 Maybe you put a link in there? CZcams doesn’t seem to like that.
@@thalamay No, but I said that I was surprised that Mel and Jay Smith were both basically taken in by A J Deus and although I'm a total Islam-revisionist I feel Deus's methods/conclusion were effectively discredited.
@@20july1944 The CZcams algorithm works in mysterious ways.
But yes, a bit more diligence would have been better. I guess this is a case of wishful thinking. But if you *want* something to be true, that’s all the more reason to double check everything.
It’s fine to throw out ideas, but in this case, Mel seems to have swallowed the paper hook, line and sinker. He should also have looked at the sources and if he can’t do it, he should have been more careful and not just take A.J. Deus’ claims as gospel.
@@thalamay Yes, that's precisely what I said in my deleted comments. I think Mel will learn from that.
Thank you for the presentation, Thomas. It's very insightful.
one quick note, you mentioned that it's understandable that Deus merely wants people to ask questions about the Dome's history but let's say even if we were to give him credit on that, that part itself still doesn't have room to maneuver.
Even putting aside tha issue of the depictions of the shape of the building, we can still look at the simple reasons for the Dome's construction in the late 7th century. A lot of the established Islamic critical research, including Inarah, is already working on the premise that of all the rulers, Abdul Malik was the one with the motive and the most to gain with building the Dome and putting those inscriptions into it. Tom Holland in Shadow of the Sword has already explained that part for example. Going by that, Deus' theory is awfully convoluted and veering off into Dan Brown territory that undermines and distracts from real questions that need to be asked about the Dome's origins.
Great point on the earthquake protection. Along these lines also can be added the Japanese pagoda Shinbashira pillar.
What is also important to understand is that the people who made the original woodcuts had original drawings to work from. So that are already two steps. And what you have to take into account as well is at what angle did see the dome when they drew it. What you see is that the earliest woodcut is drawn almost looking straight at a wall. So you can see three walls and a very thin slice of the wall on the most right side. So four walls in total. You see that copyists only draw three of the walls but they draw the dome from the same perspective as the original woodcut. But what makes it difficult for a copyist is that the pillars of the drum are not aligned with the walls and the angles of the octagonal base. So that is confusing for a copyist or a 'third person'. Especially when you have to draw a roof that goes from an octagonal base to a round drum.
Great research Thomas; I think you're right and A.J. was too fast with his conclusions.
Excellent T.A this shows that you can't trust copies of copies, now you wounder about the SIN accuracy 200 years of oral words then a book just think what the original Quran said if there was one...
BOOM!!! HEADSHOT!!!
Tracing the accounts back to their source and reading the things in context really dismantled this entire stupid argument!
Good job Thomas!
Now lets demolish Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock and lets build a proper Temple!!
Thank you Thomas, great work
How you come up with coherent well researched material so quickly is incredible.Do you ever sleep ?
Barely, as you can tell by me responding at 2:20 AM. 😉
Thomas your a Legend in my Mind !
Thank you very much. Though this was really not that difficult. It was simply a matter of putting in the work and looking for the primary sources which were missing in AJ's paper. Though it was certainly a lot of work ;)
@@TAlexander Yes it's incredibly difficult the awesome work you do. You have my deepest admiration.
Grüße aus Berlin!
Amazing work.
Some decent amount of research you must've gone through!! I feel like my researches are shallow in comparison to your ability to find references from all around history.. Yet still I'm longing for your Origin videos and your 3-minutes studies!! Much Respect from Egypt
I'm sorry to hear you're anti-Mubarak, I think he was one in a line of secular strongmen who have protected minorities in many Moslem countries for the last 100+ years.
@@20july1944 the Mubarak regime exploited religious discrimination and profited from it. They had an interest in keeping tensions between sects as a divide and conquer strategy, and as a way to keep more mometary aid coming in. Furthermore, his administration saw the muslim brotherhood join the parliament, a huge fall in the quality of education, health, housing, utilities and infrastructure, as well as a huge spike in corruption and police brutality.. this was my username since I joined YT in 2007 before we ousted him in 2011 💪
@@20july1944 who do you think protected the minorities for the other 1400yrs if the strongmen did for the last 100yrs? Or you allege Islam is 100yrs old?
@@Klopp2543 The minorities were hammered for most of the last 1400 years, Einstein.
@@20july1944 hammered? You mean like how Christians in Europe exterminated pagans and non Christians to extinction?
How? Were they so incompetent?
Damn! They weren't good at hammering then
oh dear, pretty devastating. one for the bin I fear
Great work, Thomas. But it's sad there is no jewish serpent king, a serpent king would be straight marvel stuff.
Maybe AJ can switch careers and become a writer for Disney....
It's beginning to look like A.J.Deus is playing fast and loose with the evidence.
"Beginning to look like…" must be the understatement of the year 😂
@@thalamay Let's just say he's trying to make facts that fit theory instead of theory that fits facts.
Semitic MLK means "royal" or "imperial". This designation in Syria referred to those Syrians who followed the Byzantine theological dogma. This would mean following both the councils of Ephesus (anti Nestorian) and Chalcedon (anti Monophysite). So it is wrong for AJ to equate Melkite with heterodox theology. Today, there are Greek and Catholic Melkites, since much later the Imperial Church split in two and the Crusades brought both versions to Syria.
Hi.their are many possibilities.
so is it possible that the small building where The ascension of Jesus took place; could the original dome of the rock building,have been modelled as a bigger version of that building,then was changed to a different styled dome,and then changed back to a rounded dome.
NB.earthquakes mentioned in history can/could be a means to cover up the reasons of a building being changed/renovated.
Or it could all be BS lol
The original Church of the Ascension was indeed very similar to the Dome of the Rock. Today, only the small chapel remains which was inside the original building. I'll get into the parallels in my upcoming videos where I'll talk about the my ideas about the history of the Dome of the Rock.
@@yarnybart5911 .Mel from Sneakers Corner(Origins) stated a tale that,the dome of the rock building had a golden statue in it at some point.that gold may have been used for the golden dome.
NB.dont know which video of Mel's tho,he has many.
@علي ياسر . I have not researched liquid gold.
Wats with the golden door at the Kaaba? Does golden door make the building more godly? it seems that people adore that crap door.
@علي ياسر . true it was wood,then silver and now gold.
A J Deus just added his bit. I think he was plain lazy. He dint want to know the truth . He added his bit
Local Arabic-speaking Christians could have translated the inscriptions for visitors.
Are you American or German?
German
dear bro alex
you .bro jay smith and bro mel
have to confer with each other before coming out with contradicting informations
All of you are excellant in your own way.
But what shall ordinary viewers
understand from all of you at the end ?
Who is right ?
you
or mel ?
or jay
or A J Deus ?
Straight to the point, There is no contradiction in information. Deus' theory is not information. It's bogus. Thomas has shown irrefutable evidence via primary sources that Deus misinterpretes the data of the Dome's history. Thomas has clearly won the argument and the ball is on Deus' court as well as on Mel and Jay's to reevaluate their position.
They're all doing independent research and presenting their results.
A synthesis will come later.
A J Deus seems very discredited to me.
@@20july1944
thanks for your reply.
I love all these people for their excellant independant work
But they all are doing the research in the same subject and in the same topic but coming out with differant results which at the end confuses the ordinary readers.
as to decide who and what is right
Jay and Mel confer with each other even before coming out publically with their findings
Why not they take thomas alexander also into their confidance before coming out with individual findings ?
When you listen to all of them individually we the ordinary public are left with confusion
only instead of clarity and clearance. because we love all these individual findings
After all Jay introduced Thomas 's book some time back. and I think , has good rapport with Thomas even today.
It will be for the good of everyone and for the Lords kingdom if good and intelligent minds join together.
GOD , BLESS THEM ALL
LORD , GIVE ALL THESE WARRIORS OF JESUS STRENGTH AND SUPPORT IN THEIR FIGHT AGAINST THE
SATANIC EVIL CALLED ISLAM
Thomas, I wish you to be objective to the end in your work, I respect your work, I would like to clarify something from you and advise you, I am writing to you from Dagestan, explain your point of view, do you think that the Saracens built a large temple like a synagogue, under Omar?and what was built at the first entrance of the capture of Jerusalem in 614 and how do you see those events?And I would like to advise you to unite with "Odon" Lafontaine,"red Judaism" and Mohammed-Ali Amir moezzi , ,
This series was only about AJ Deus' claims. I will however get into what I think the meaning of the Dome originally was. I'm currently lining out the videos. They'll come soon.
@@TAlexander I will be waiting for a video with your opinion about what the original dome was and who these Judeo-Nazarians are, I live in such a republic, I travel through the area where all these wars took place, and I can't believe that the Saracens would have gone so far in seizing land if they weren't so convinced that Muhammad was a messenger, on the other hand, it remains the same strange fact that they could conquer such distant lands without adhering to the same opinion, for example, that Ali for Shiites is the same Jesus as the word of God, and who was Muhammad for them?????how the Jews could have pulled it all off, damn it
AJ Deus is not a scholar. You are also not a scholar.
You have both in common that you try to overrule real scholarship.
@alonzo harris
COPE HARDER!!
Every new discovery ever was made by questioning previously held beliefs. The question is: How do you go about it. Do you succumb to your confirmation bias? Do you read selectively? Do you look at sources superficially? Do you only look for evidence that potentially supports your idea? Or do you put in the work and actually read your sources in detail? Do you try to disprove your own theory? Do you actively look for sources which contradict your theory?
If you work like AJ Deus and only do the former, then you'll end up with a failed hypothesis. But if you're diligent, then you can upend old dogmas.
When was Mecca founded?
@@TAlexander
Confirmation bias are many of your videos.
Claiming that Mohamed is Jesus is nothing else than confirmation bias.
It's an absurd theory. You have to reject each and every source to try to make this absurd claim 'work' and survive.
People wbo claim that Mohamed on the dome of the rock is Jesus are dishonest. These people have double standards when it comes to history.
@@20july1944
I have no idea. Is that relevant?