Yes, but Cyrus has no imagery of "two horns" associated with him. You see the KEY to this issue is the "two horns". Once again - ONLY Alexander was given this imagery. It really CAN'T POSSIBLY be anyone else.

Actually:

Furthermore, two horns and two horned symbolism was not an unknown emblem of the kingdoms of Persia and its predecessors, for we see that Elamite kings used this symbol routinely in their insignia.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_t...t_in_the_Quran

So your claim is actually wrong on numerous levels. According to historical evidence, NUMEROUS kings were known to have used this symbolism. Also, the horned feature of a battle helmet could have adorned NUMEROUS historical figures. There is no logical basis for restricting it to Alexander the great.

In which case the point is meaningless.

Wrong. Cyrus is just one other example.
Why does it have to be a hero that arabs knew of? You're presupposing that the Qur'an was written by man. You can't assume that it was written by men in order to prove it was written by men!

No! The Arabs would not have known of these other kings! But in addition to the Amon imagery there is the fact that he reached where the "sun sets". THATS ALEXANDER!

Of course it was written by men. Have you ever read Surat Al Kafirun? Dude, come one, no wise god would possibly write that stuff. Only a pretty angry dude can write that!

Even if that were true, would that prove anything? No.
According to your favourite source, wikipedia, it fits Cyrus even better:

"The limit where the sun set" does not mean the "place" of the setting of the sun. According to Ibn Kathir, it means that he marched to the West conquering one country after the other till he reached the last boundary of the land, beyond which there was ocean. "He found the sun setting in black muddy waters of the sea": if Dhul-Qarnain was Cyrus, then that place would be the western limit of Asia Minor and the "black waters" would be the Aegean Sea. This interpretation is supported by the use of the word "`ain" instead of "bahr" in the Qur'an.

...Thus in the light of the above, it is easy to conclude that of all the conquerors who had passed away before the revelation of the Qur'an, Cyrus alone is the one to whom the characteristics of "Dhul-Qarnain" are most applicable. There is no other conqueror to whom the characteristics stated in the Qur'an are as much applicable as to Cyrus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_t...t_in_the_Quran

You've just conceded the flaw in your argument. You cna't assume the Qur'an was written by men to prove it was written by men!!

Talk about twisted reasoning!
Yes, but now you're switching subject. You dropped the DhulQarnayn charge. Why? Realized you lost the debate?
Why not? Can you provide objective reasoning that logically negates the possibility of such a passage arising from an AllWise God?

Cyrus was NOT an Elamite King! The two horned imagery was NEVER associated with Cyrus. The article never says that. Also saying Qarnain was Cyrus will only reveal another Quranic error. Cyrus was "made" into a Monotheist by the grateful Jew (since he was lenient on them) and he was inducted as a righteous king into the Jewish hall of fame. So are you saying Allah was reading up on jewish legends and decided to include it in the Quran?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhul-Qarnayn

Do you know who the other three kings could have been that are mentioned here?...From the above it looks like there are scholars that believe Dhul-Qarnayn was Alexander the Great...so I guess it's a matter of opinion. Because the Quran isn't clear enough.


I was talking about all world leaders, political leader mentioned in the Quran.
What names of world leaders mentioned in the Quran have not be discovered yet?

I'm not talking about digging up the bones from Adam...but surely there would be some historical evidence elsewhere in the world...He of two horns built a long wall that keeps Gog and Magog from attacking the people of the West
Looking at the evidence, how many people in history does this...it seems very likely that Mohammed was referring to Alexander the Great.

Yes, the article says in plain english that considering the familiarty of the 'two-horned' symbolism to the Jews, it is massively likely that it could have applied to Cyrus.
Actually his religious beliefs remain unknown.
Please tell me your reasoning is not as distorted as the above statement! An omniscient God does need to read up on anything!

It has nothign to do with the Qur'an clarity, because the Qur'an never sought to identify Dhul-Qarnayn with a historically known figure in the first place.

How about all the Prophets mentioned in the Qur'an and Bible?

Why do you not expect to know the historical identity of Adam but you do for Dhul-Qarnayn?
Read the Cyrus link.

Regards

There's an explanation of Surat al-Kahf (by Bilal Philips), at this link:

http://nwapp.emirates.net.ae/channel.../lectures2.jsp

Watch this video from the 26th minute: http://213.42.1.10/ramgen/eim/bilal/0002-9.rm

Dr. Philips explains how he got to be known as Dhul-Qarnayn.
It has got nothing to do with horns.
Ali ibn Abi Talib was asked about this and he explained that during his call to righteousness he was struck twice on the tip of his head. The tip of the head, in arabic, is refered to as "al-Qarn". The same way, the top of the sun during sunrise is called Qarn and so is the peak of the mountain.
It has nothing to do with horns.

Thus, the fact that Alexander the Great was depicted as having horns on a coin is irrelevant. Dhul-Qarnayn wasn't called what he was called because of horns, but because of the fact that he was struck two times on his head.
Watch the video for more information.

SubhanAllah, this really shows the importance of knowing one's Deen and the explanation of the Qur'an, so we can answer these kind of things.

this topic is still going on? didnt bro ansar al adl answer more than enough?

Hehehe OK Bro. Ansar, you've managed to get my attention to the whole discussion. This is really funny. Hahahaha!

Another point come in mind. Dhul-Qarnayn mentioned in the Quran was a pious Believer of the One God, Allah. It is because of his piety (mentioned in the Quran) that Allah endowed him with the ability to construct the wall to separate between the people (who was beleaguered) from the Gog and Magog tribes.

They ask thee concerning Zul-qarnain. Say, "I will rehearse to you something of his story." (Q 18:83)

He (Dhul-Qarnayn) said: "(The power) in which my Lord has established me is better (than tribute): Help me therefore with strength (and labour): I will erect a strong barrier between you and them (Q 18:95)

He said: "This is a mercy from my Lord: But when the promise of my Lord comes to pass, He will make it into dust; and the promise of my Lord is true" (Q 18:98)

The verses explain themselves clearly.

Alexander the Great, on the other hand, was a Greek Pagan, a worshipper of the gods and goddesses in ancient Greece. Nowhere in the records mention him as the worshipper of the one God.

Additionally, there is a lie perpretrated by modern historical books (in Malaysia, for example) where they (modern historians) try to equate Dhul-Qarnayn with Alexander the Great by inserting (a supposed transliteration) "Iskandar" into his name (transforming it into "Iskandar Zulkarnain"). My reasoning is that nowhere in the Quran did it mention Dhul-Qarnayn as having alternate name as "Iskandar" or "Alexander". There is "Dhul Qarnayn" in the Quran, but no "Alexander".