The Dome of the Rock: A Response to AJ Deus - 4 - Conclusion

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 10 янв 2025
  • This video hopefully marks the end to my A.J. Deus series. Initially, I wanted to combine the content of this video with my upcoming videos on the Dome of the Rock wherein I want to present my alternative hypothesis. But I have now decided that I want my videos to stand on their own and not refer to A.J. Deus. Therefore I have made this video wherein I present a conclusion to my series as well as some corrections and some new findings.
    Unfortunately, upon editing the video, I have realised that the video quality is not great. I tried a new setting on my recording software and while the test recordings looked good, it didn't turn out so well with the actual session. There are unfortunately artefacts throughout the video.
    #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 Bitcoin: 36AcDS46SGX23xSDQWJQi9C4xtGaqevGba
    Donate ETH or ERC20 Tokens: 0x466b19D59D0Ad527a27871001e18283fA6F3D2fd
    ____________________
    Here you can find A.J. Deus' paper:
    www.academia.e...

Комментарии •

  • @canaldaandreasantana5849
    @canaldaandreasantana5849 2 года назад +4

    Hi Thomas, I hope you are well, and look forward to watch the next episodes. God bless you.

  • @PenganutAgamaDamaiKolohBakwan
    @PenganutAgamaDamaiKolohBakwan 2 года назад +2

    Hey Thomas, thanks for your works and presentations. Fortunately all your videos are rewatchable, I'm waiting for the next.

  • @thalamay
    @thalamay 3 месяца назад

    I came back and revisited these videos after 2 years and I'm still impressed by both the breadth and depth of the research. I mean for this video alone, the sources include multiple editions of a 16th century Cosmographia, a 15th century pilgrimage book, an obscure Dutch encyclopaedia and a crusader time psalter. On top of that, there was research into multiple Dutch artists as well as an ancient Italian family which settled in Bruges during the middle ages.
    And more than just presenting what others produced, there is some genuine scholarship going on. The research is not just reproduced, but connected and conclusions are drawn. And compared to the other videos in the series, this one is actually pretty light. It's just that in this one, the process is more laid out. The other videos had way more sources and more effort going into them. It's amazing seeing this unfold in real time.

  • @amirpouyaa
    @amirpouyaa 2 года назад

    You are being missed dear thomas alexander, hope everything is going well with you sir

  • @markaxworthy2508
    @markaxworthy2508 Год назад

    I am still hoping that Thomas has more to come. It has been a long wait for his next offering.

  • @aquilam.a2562
    @aquilam.a2562 2 года назад +7

    Alexander with another amazing analysis around AJ Deus attempt at history.

  • @NostalgieFreak
    @NostalgieFreak 2 года назад +3

    Again another phantastic analysis! Grüße aus Wien!

  • @JIHADNEWSNETWORK
    @JIHADNEWSNETWORK 2 года назад

    @Thomas Alexander
    Hast du einen seperaten Kanal auf Deutsch?

  • @christopherhussain9121
    @christopherhussain9121 2 года назад +3

    Hello Thomas. I have question for you, in one of your previous videos you have mentioned that the word qeryana in Syriac means ‘lectionary’. I believe you have also mentioned that there were many different Christian qeryanas in use (which makes sense as there are man such lectionaries today used in churches around the world).
    Do we have examples of such Syriac lectionaries, which might be compared to the Quran?
    Thanks for all of your amazing work!

    • @hagalhagal9989
      @hagalhagal9989 2 года назад

      This does not directly reply your answer but, I think in this episode are the Syriac hymns mentioned from which the proto-Koran was inspired.

  • @toddbeamer6131
    @toddbeamer6131 2 года назад +1

    Hi Thomas, I wonder if you could do an update on Petra, specifically how the nabatean gods relate to islam. Humboldt university has been involved in excavations in Petra, so there should be quite a bit of material and expertise that you would have access to.

  • @amirpouyaa
    @amirpouyaa 2 года назад +2

    Thank you for using your wisdom the best way possible to bring the truth to life dear Thomas Alexander, you have a unique mind man, only a perfectly good hard/soft wired mind can work like yours!!

    • @TAlexander
      @TAlexander  2 года назад +2

      Thank you for your kind words. I really appreciate it. But I'm really only connecting dots here. This whole series about the "Dome-of-the-Rock-Forgery-Theory" was more about sitting down and doing the work than about anything else.

  • @janpahl6015
    @janpahl6015 2 года назад +3

    thomas are you Ok? I miss your videos

    • @TAlexander
      @TAlexander  2 года назад +3

      No worries. I had to take a break due to my job situation changing. I just didn’t have the time. But I’m currently preparing the next batch of videos. Might be another two weeks or so though.

    • @janpahl6015
      @janpahl6015 2 года назад +1

      @@TAlexander excellent !!!

  • @StephenCowley001
    @StephenCowley001 2 года назад +9

    I hope it will not be taken amiss if I say that - speaking perhaps on behalf of some viewers who were never much invested in A J Deus in the first place - indeed, some of whom had likely never so much as heard of him or her - I look forward to a return to the usual fare on this channel, with this project left as useful background for specialists and experts. Begone, A. J. Deus, as Woody Guthrie sang, "So long, it's been good to know you..."!

    • @TAlexander
      @TAlexander  2 года назад +13

      Believe me, I'm looking forward to leaving this subject behind as well. But I had to set the record straight after finding all the issues with AJ Deus.
      The good thing is that I learned a lot about the Dome of the Rock which will be useful for my upcoming videos. They will be part of my "Origins of Islam" series and there will be no reference to AJ Deus whatsoever. But there will be some very interesting information which shows that the Dome of the Rock is not the unique building which it's made out to be. In fact, it follows in a line of very similar buildings of the 5th, 6th and 7th century. Most of them no longer exist, but archaeologists have excavated them and we have good descriptions. The interesting fact is that all these preceding buildings were distinctly Christian, giving further credence to the theory of Abd al-Malik being (an anti-trinitarian) Christian. And it also tells us something about the initial meaning of the Dome. It was not the place of Muhammad's ascent into heaven. But in line with the inscriptions, everything points to it being all about Jesus.

    • @StephenCowley001
      @StephenCowley001 2 года назад +2

      @@TAlexander Fascinating - Danke - Ich freue mich darauf!

  • @roukayajannah5111
    @roukayajannah5111 2 года назад +3

    In A.J. Deus paper, I found little problems with numbers.
    On Page 33: He quotes Quran but the verse number is wrong, it’s written 1.153 but it’s it should be verse 1.158 like in any Quran available on the net. Same problem at footnote 113
    He quotes this verse from Rodwell’s translation (unusual one) but this translator put that verse on 1.154 not 1.153. Misquoting ...
    On Page 45: He said about the inscription ‘’a 20-meter-long text’’. It’s not 20 but 240 meter. Grabar, Kessler, Creswell, Milwright, and others they all say 240 meters.
    On Page 124: It’s written ‘’In 1804, Luigi Mayer’s ‘View of Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives’ shows a round drum but an elongated cupola (image topright)’’.
    But the artist Luigi Mayer died in 1803. So, he couldn’t make a drawing in 1804. He travelled through the Ottoman Empire between 1776 and 1794. So, all his drawings from Palestine are made before 1794 and published in 1804 by others.
    Sorry, I can’t check all the numbers in that paper.

  • @bobfisher1909
    @bobfisher1909 2 года назад +3

    Fantastic, makes perfect sense to me!!!

  • @PhilOutsider
    @PhilOutsider 2 года назад +3

    Thanks for all your work.

  • @simonhengle8316
    @simonhengle8316 2 года назад +1

    Is everything ok Thomas?

    • @TAlexander
      @TAlexander  2 года назад +1

      Yes, I simply didn’t have the time after starting in my new job. But I’m currently preparing the next batch of videos. Might be another two weeks or so though.

    • @simonhengle8316
      @simonhengle8316 2 года назад +1

      @@TAlexander
      I hope the new job works out well for you, and great to hear you’re working on a new series, I consider your videos invaluable 👍

  • @simonhengle8316
    @simonhengle8316 2 года назад +3

    Another brilliantly researched video Thomas, I think you have well and truly dismantled AJ Deus's thesis about the Dome of Rock, and I'm looking forward to your series on the Dome of the Rock, thank you

  • @gavinjames1145
    @gavinjames1145 2 года назад +4

    Reading from Medieval paintings and drawings is often made more difficult, because true perspective renditions were rare before the Renaissance period. However, based on the images shown, and their supporting texts, it seems that the inscriptions found around the inner ambulatory are original; and the drum supporting the dome has always been round.
    However, I am curious about some of the other structures depicted alongside the Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount: there appear to be towers, much like Mel's earlier manuscript depictions. Were they really there? Had they been destroyed by earthquakes?

    • @TAlexander
      @TAlexander  2 года назад +5

      There were indeed several small domes in various places on the Temple Mount.

  • @mannyhabib2867
    @mannyhabib2867 2 года назад +2

    Subhanallah Thomas great research and very good analysis, Jazakallah!

  • @mariangelabaker3718
    @mariangelabaker3718 2 года назад +1

    Hello Thomas. I hope everything is fine with you! It's been a while since you published the last video! I hope you'll be back soon. Greetings from Italy!❤

  • @esprit-critique
    @esprit-critique 2 года назад

    Hi. I assume you attended the last Trêve Symposium organized by Inarah. If so, could you summarize the presentations of the speakers? I think that would be of interest to your followers. For clarity, I think it would be better to look at one or two presentations per video instead of dedicating a single video to all the presentations.

  • @markaxworthy2508
    @markaxworthy2508 2 года назад +3

    I hope Thomas hasn't run out of steam. I was looking forward to my weekly fix of his work but it is now 9 days since the last one. More please, ASAP.

  • @charlesiragui2473
    @charlesiragui2473 2 года назад

    Fascinating story about Jan van Eyck. Oddly, this makes the painting a better argument for AJ's thesis than the arguments he made himself. Van Eyck was an eyewitness!

  • @divyachacko3449
    @divyachacko3449 2 года назад

    TA can u plz spell his name out. The guy who drew the 3 Mary's pic

  • @bentajay8973
    @bentajay8973 2 года назад +2

    Excellent research

  • @ultrasignificantfootnote3378
    @ultrasignificantfootnote3378 2 года назад +2

    If you look at an octagonal vertical structure from one side , you should see four sides , but on the van Eijk painting I only see three.

    • @von_nobody
      @von_nobody 2 года назад

      At 32:00 you can count visible vertices, there are 7 visible + 1 that should be behind dome. On right side you can see very short 4th wall because of perspective.

    • @charlesiragui2473
      @charlesiragui2473 2 года назад

      That's not exactly correct: if you look at an octagonal building from exactly the middle of one side, one would see only three sides; the next sides on right and left, parallel to each other, would be invisible. This could be what van Eyck is showing.

  • @MONKEYDUDE2701
    @MONKEYDUDE2701 2 года назад

    Hey Thomas, I have s question. You once said that muhajirun and ansar actually means arabs and christians. Can you elaborate on that, it is very interesting to me. Or can you make a small video for that?
    Best Regards

  • @rockzalt
    @rockzalt 2 года назад

    AJ Deus' work did do one very important thing. It opened up a conversation. But it's not a new conversation for scholars. There's an Ivy league academic work available written by a non-Christian scholar afaik titled: "The Dome of the Rock as Palimpsest: 'Abd Al-Malik's Grand Narrative and Sultan Suleyman's Glosses"
    I wouldn't judge a work by one line however it does peak some interest. To quote: "The collapsed cupola of the Dome of the Rock was rebuilt in 1022-23 and its drum mosaics repaired in 1027-28".
    It's an interesting read but above my paygrade. Something like the very first time I read a Bible, it sorta makes sense but it needs decades to master.

    • @TAlexander
      @TAlexander  2 года назад

      Yes, there were major restorations in the 11th century. Also some in the 9th century and then again around 1960. The Ottomans were also responsible for major updates.

  • @baba.volanath
    @baba.volanath 2 года назад

    Please make new video!

  • @sgt.grinch3299
    @sgt.grinch3299 2 года назад +2

    Excellent

  • @larsmorlingbibelstudium3301
    @larsmorlingbibelstudium3301 Год назад

    But notice other structures in the painting are clearly round. Your hypothsis seams to be a construction in order to avoid the obvious structure in the painting.

  • @mlaut_777
    @mlaut_777 2 года назад +2

    Paar Erklärungen von AJ Deus sind legitim, aber bei den meisten Argumenten muss ich dir zustimmen 👌

  • @seanmacsweeney2985
    @seanmacsweeney2985 2 года назад

    Although, they could have made their chapel to replicate the dome of the rock, it’s just supposition to say the painting replicated their chapel and not the other way round and don’t forget the earthquakes of 749, 808, 846, 881, 1015, 1016, 1033 and 1202, three of these were attested to have created major destruction of the dome of the rock (808, 846, 1015)

    • @TAlexander
      @TAlexander  2 года назад +3

      Well, for one, the chapel was consecrated in 1429 whereas Jan van Eyck only moved to Bruges in 1431. Before that he was in Lille at the court of Phillip the Good.
      But beyond that, of course it's likely that the roof of the chapel is a nod to the actual Dome of the Rock.

  • @blacklisted4885
    @blacklisted4885 2 года назад +4

    Adios AJ