And from among His Signs are the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. Prostrate not to the sun nor to the moon, but prostrate to Allah Who created them, if you (really) worship Him. (Qur'an 41:37)
1. Introduction
One of the favourite arguments of the Christian missionaries over many years had been that Allah of the Qur'an was in fact a pagan Arab "Moon-god" from pre-Islamic times. The seeds of this argument were sown by the work of the Danish scholar Ditlef Nielsen, who divided the semitic deities into a triad of Father-Moon, Mother-Sun and Son-Venus.[1] His ideas (esp., triadic hypothesis) were used uncritically by later scholars who came to excavate many sites in the Near East and consequently assigned astral significance to the deities that they had found. Since 1991 Ditlef Nielsen's views were given a new and unexpected twist by the Christian polemicist Robert Morey. In a series of pamphlets, books and radio programs, he claimed that "Allah" of the Qur'an was nothing but the pagan Arab "Moon-god". To support his views, he presented evidences from the Near East which can be seen in "Appendix C: The Moon God and Archeology" from his book The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion and it was subsequently reprinted with minor changes as a booklet called The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East.[2] It can justifiably be said that this book lies at the heart of missionary propaganda against Islam today. The popularity of Morey's ideas was given a new breath of life by another Christian polemicist Jack T. Chick, who drew a fictionalised racially stereotyped story entitled "Allah Had No Son".
Morey's ideas have gained widespread popularity among amenable Christians, and, more often than not, Muslims find themselves challenged to refute the 'archaeological' evidence presented by Morey. Surprisingly, it has also been suggested by some Christians that Morey has conducted "groundbreaking research on the pre-Islamic origins of Islam." In this article, we would like to examine the two most prominent evidences postulated by Morey, namely the archaeological site in Hazor, Palestine and the Arabian "Moon temple" at Hureidha in Hadhramaut, Yemen, along with the diagrams presented in Appendix C of his book The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion (and booklet The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East) all of which he uses to claim that Allah of the Qur'an was a pagan "Moon-god".[3]
2. The Statue At Hazor: "Allah" Of The Muslims?
One of the most prominent evidences of Morey for showing that Allah was a "Moon god" comes from Hazor.[4] Morey says:
In the 1950's a major temple to the Moon-god was excavated at Hazor in Palestine. Two idols of the moon god were found. Each was a stature of a man sitting upon a throne with a crescent moon carved on his chest (see Diagram 1). The accompanying inscriptions make it clear that these were idols of the Moon-god (see Diagram 2 and 3). Several smaller statues were also found which were identified by their inscriptions as the "daughters" of the Moon-god.[5]
Hazor was a large Canaanite and Israelite city in Upper Galilee. It was identified by J. L. Porter in 1875 and this view was later endorsed by J. Garstang who conducted trials at the site in 1928. In the years 1955-58, the James A. de Rothschild Expedition, under the direction of Yigael Yadin, conducted excavations on the site.[6] Among other things, they found a shrine furnished with an offering table, a lion orthostat, the statue in question, and stelae, all made from regional black basalt [Figure 1(a)].[7] The central stela shows a pair of hands raised below a crescent plus circle symbol, usually considered to depict the crescent moon and the full moon, respectively [Figure 1(b)]. The raised hands may be understood as a gesture of supplication, although Yadin proposed that this posture should be associated with a goddess known from much later Punic iconography as Tanit, who was the consort of the god Sin.[8] The other stelae are plain. The whole shrine has been interpreted as belonging to a Moon-god cult.
(a)

(b)
Figure 1: (a) A close-up of the stelae temple, showing all the stelae, the statue and the offering table. (b) The central stele with the relief.[9]
Figure 2: (Right) Front view of the statue, showing the lunar deity emblem on its chest. (Left) Rear view of the statue.[10]
The principal object of interest is the statue [Figure 2] which Morey has labelled as a "Moon-god".[11] The statue, about 40 cm in height, depicts a man with an inverted crescent suspended from his necklace and holding a cup-like object in his right hand, while the other hand rests on his knees.[12] The question now is what exactly this statue represents which Morey labelled as "Moon-god"?
According to Yadin, this statue can represent a deity, a king, or a priest. He says that all the "three alternatives are possible", but he "believes it is a statue of the deity itself".[13] However, it appears that later he had modified his views. Writing in the Encyclopedia Of Archaeological Excavations In The Holy Land, Yadin describes the same statue as
Basalt statue of deity or king from the stelae temple...[14]
Subsequent scholarship has described the same statue either in uncertain or neutral terms. For example, Treasures Of The Holy Land: Ancient Art From The Israel Museum describes the statue of the seated figure as:
It depicts a man, possibly a priest, seated on a cubelike stool. He is beardless with a shaven head; his skirt ends below his knees in an accentuated hen; his feet are bare. He holds a cup in his right hand, while his left hand, clenched into a fist, rests on his left knee. An inverted crescent is suspended from his necklace.[15]
Amnon Ben-Tor in The New Encyclopedia Of Archaeological Excavations In The Holy Land describes the statue as a "seated male figure" without saying what it represented.[16] In a later publication, however, he described the same object as "a small basalt statue of a decapitated deity (or king) whose head was found nearby."[17] Amihai Mazar, in a similar fashion, described the statue as "a sitting male figure (possibly depicting a god or a priest)."[18]
Clearly, there is a difference of opinion among the scholars concerning this statue. It is not too hard to understand why this is the case. It seems illogical that a god should hold offering vessels in his hand; the god is usually the one who receives offerings. Therefore, the statue should, in all probability, depict a priest or a worshipper of a god, who himself is in a way considered present, either invisibly or in the upright stela of the sanctuary. Furthermore, the statue of man holding an offering was seated at the left hand side of the shrine [Figure 1(a)]. This can hardly be a proper position for a revered god, whose position is arranged in the centre of the sanctuary.
Morey claimed that "two idols of the Moon-god were found" and that each of them were "sitting upon a throne with a crescent moon carved on his chest". Apparently, the "accompanying inscriptions made it clear that these were idols of the Moon-god". Regardless of the difference of opinions concerning the nature of statue found at Hazor, however, no scholar has ever identified this statue with a "Moon-god", nor do they say that "accompanying inscriptions" suggest that the statue was that of a "Moon-god". Furthermore, Morey's claimed that "two idols of the Moon-god" were found at Hazor. Contrary to his claims of the discovery of "two idols of the Moon-god", Yadin confirms the discovery of two contemporary temples, dedicated to two different deities - Moon-god and Weather god at Hazor in Area C and Area H, respectively.[19] The temple of the Weather god was represented by a circle-and-rays emblem and the bull which together indicate that it must be Hadad the storm god,[20] whatever his actual name was at Hazor. A likely source of Morey's unsubstantiated claims could be due to the discovery of two beheaded statues, one with an inverted crescent suspended from his necklace that we had discussed earlier and the other representing a king;[21] they look similar to each other. Equally ridiculous is another of Morey's claims that several smaller statues were also found "which were identified by their inscriptions as the "daughters" of the Moon-god." No such statues or inscriptions accompanying them were found in Hazor. Unfortunately for Morey he has been caught red-handed fabricating evidence. Put simply, he is making up stories here.
After Morey's debacle at Hazor, let us now examine his next piece of evidence – that of a "Moon temple" at Hureidha in Southern Arabia and how it proves that Allah of the Qur'an was a pagan "Moon-god" of Arabia.
3. The "Moon" Deities From Southern Arabia?
Morey's claim that Moon worship was dominant in Arabia, especially in the south, can be summed up with a quote from his book:
During the nineteenth century, Amaud, Halevy and Glaser went to Southern Arabia and dug up thousands of Sabean, Minaean, and Qatabanian inscriptions which were subsequently translated. In the 1940's, the archeologists G. Caton Thompson and Carleton S. Coon made some amazing discoveries in Arabia. During the 1950's, Wendell Phillips, W.F. Albright, Richard Bower and others excavated sites at Qataban, Timna, and Marib (the ancient capital of Sheba)...
The archeological evidence demonstrates that the dominant religion of Arabia was the cult of the Moon-god...
In 1944, G. Caton Thompson revealed in her book, The Tombs and Moon Temple of Hureidha, that she had uncovered a temple of the Moon-god in southern Arabia. The symbols of the crescent moon and no less than twenty-one inscriptions with the name Sin were found in this temple. An idol which may be the Moon-god himself was also discovered. This was later confirmed by other well-known archeologists.[22]
Let us now look into some "amazing discoveries" made in Southern Arabia which led Morey to claim that the archaeological evidence "demonstrates" that the dominant religion in Arabia was the cult of Moon-god.
To begin with, the South-Arabian pantheon is not properly known. Its astral foundation is indisputable. As in most contemporary semitic cults, the southern Arabs worshipped stars and planets, chief among whom were the Sun, Moon and 'Athtar, the Venus.[23] The relation to the divine was deeply rooted in public and private life. The concept of State was expressed through the "national god, sovereign, people". Each of the South Arabian kingdoms had its own national god, who was the patron of the principal temple in the capital. In Sheba, it was Ilmaqah (also called Ilumquh or Ilmuqah or Almaqah or Almouqah), in the temple of the federation of the Sabaean tribes in Marib. In Hadramaut (or Hadhramaut), Syn (or Sayin) was the national god and his temple was located in the capital Shabwa. In Qataban, the national god was called 'Amm ("paternal uncle"), who was the patron of the principal temple in the capital Timna'. 'Amm was seen as a protector of the Qatabanite dynasty, and it was under his authority that the ruler carried out various projects of the state. In Ma'in, the national god was Wadd ("love") and it originated most probably from Northern Arabia. He was sometimes invoked as Wadd-Abb ("Wadd is father").[24]
In order to understand the religion and culture of Southern Arabia, it must be borne in mind that the monuments and inscriptions already show a highly developed civilization, whose earlier and more primitive phases we know nothing about. This civilization had links with the Mediterranean region and Mesopotamian areas - which is evidenced by the development and evolutionary trends of its architecture and numismatics. This exchange certainly influenced the religious phenomena of the culture and it is primarily here we should look to illuminate the theological outlook of the Sheba region; certainly not among the nomadic bedouin of the centre and north of the Arabian peninsula.
It was the failure to take into account these crucial principles that led Ditlef Nielsen into his extravagant hypothesis that all ancient Arabian religion was a primitive religion of nomads, whose objects of worship were exclusively a triad of the Father-Moon, Mother-Sun and the Son-Venus star envisaged as their child.[25] Not only was this an over-simplified view based on an unproven hypothesis, it is also quite absurd to think that over a millennium-long period during which paganism is known to have flourished, there was not substantial shifts of thinking about the deities. Not surprisingly, Nielsen's triadic hypothesis was handed a devastating refutation by many scholars, albeit some of them still retained his arbitrary assignment of astral significance to the deities.[26] While discussing the pantheon of South Arabian gods and its reduction to a triad by Nielsen, Jacques Ryckmans says:
Many mention of gods are pure appellations, which do not allow defining the nature, or even the sex, of the deities names. This explains why the ancient claim of D. Nielsen to reduce the whole pantheon to a basic triad Moon-father, Sun-mother (sun is feminine in Arabia), and Venus-son, has continued to exert negative influence, in spite of its having been widely contested: it remained tempting to explain an unidentified feminine epithet as relating to the Sun-goddess, etc.[27]
The crude logic of proponents of Nielsen's hypothesis is that since Shams ("Sun") is feminine in epigraphic South Arabian, the other principal deity must be masculine and this was equated with the Moon. The relationship between Father-Moon and Mother-Sun produced Son-Venus star, their child. How did this erroneous interpretation affect the data from Southern Arabia where some "amazing discoveries" were made? We will examine this is the next few sections.