L
Lev23
Guest
If there is or is not a problem with this, please explain.
Thank You!
Thank You!
Muslims-do you have a problem with Jews and Christians praying on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem?
- Status
M
meedo
Guest
As i devout Muslim, i would say i have no problems unless it ends in claiming the property to be a Jewish or Christian property. Or that it becomes an obligation on Muslims to let them do so . People are welcome on the condition that they are there as guests on Islamic property.
The concept was not without precedent in islam as Christians from south of Arabia where permitted to pray in the Mosque of the Prophet in Medina when they came to debate the Prophet on faith.
Sadly i am almost sure that it is a first step to somthing bigger.
salam
S
scipio337
Guest
Was it okay for what was primarily a Jewish property to be proclaimed a Muslim property?
How about the Hagia Sophia?
I
Isa_Almisry
Guest
When I was in Jerusalem on the Temple Mount, I took out my Bible to read the account of David and Mount Moriah. Some official from the Mosque asked me what I was reading. I told him the Bible, at which point he asked me if it was Jewish or Christian. When I said Christian, he told me to put it away.
M
meedo
Guest
There was no jewish poroperty. Its a hill and the worse thing is that by the time muslims came it became a garbage dump. At the time of Muhammed it was known that Muhammed prayed there , So Muslims built a Mosque.
How about Mosques in Spain that turned into churches ?
S
scipio337
Guest
No Jewish property? So we all can assume the “Temple” in “Temple Mount” only refers to the al Asqa and Dome of the Rock Mosques?
Can’t say that I approve much of Mosques in Spain turned in to Catholic Churches, but then again, I didn’t approve much of the Umayyad Conquest of Spain to begin with.
Were I a Spainard, I’d see nothing wrong with returning them into Muslim hands. Can you say the same for the Hagia Sophia?
M
meedo
Guest
Sure , i would trade them tommorow if it was for me . The temple mount is not a muslim name to the place. But since you are using it then i am refering as such . For us the place is no jewish temple and we dont care if its a mount or a hill.
When muslims came there was no temple there , and there was no dispute over the place untill modern day israel came.
I
Isa_Almisry
Guest
You mean like the Great Mosque of Cordoba, built on the Cathedral of Cordoba?
L
Lev23
Guest
Well sorry, but Muslims need to understand the Jews come with the place. Their history runs alot longer there before the Muslims came in. And as a matter of fact, there was 2 temples built by Israel on that Mount.
For Christians, Jesus Christ went there to worship his whole life. Some Christians even say the Holy Spirit was sent those first believers in Jesus at Solomon’s Portico, on the Temple Mount, which means the Church was started on the Temple Mount at the Jewish feast of Pentecost, or Shavuot.
So Muslims, why is it a problem for Christans and Jews to pray on the Temple Mount?
D
Dempsey1919
Guest
The Temple Mount is a Holy place to Jews, Christians, and Muslims.
No one faith has sole rights to the area. I think it’s important that all three faiths be allowed to worship in this area, and it is important that peaceful relations are maintained.
No one faith has sole rights to the area. I think it’s important that all three faiths be allowed to worship in this area, and it is important that peaceful relations are maintained.
L
Lev23
Guest
Well there are witnesses to the Temple, what it stood for and the history of Mount Moriah by Jews and Christians.
Did anyone witness Muhammad ride his horse to heaven from there? Does the Quran even mention the city of Jerusalem as the 3rd holiest site in Islam?
L
Lev23
Guest
Maybe he knew about Luke 4:9-
The devil led him(Jesus) to Jerusalem and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. “If you are the Son of God,” he said, "throw yourself down from here.
Proof of Jesus Christ and the Temple!!!
H
hamba2han
Guest
Jews are very likely praying at the retaining wall of Fort Antonia, the fortress that was used by the Roman soldiers who destroyed their Temple some 2,000 years ago.
Have a look at:
biblemysteries.com/lectures/builtwailingwall.htm
For Jews to continue believing that the Haram al-Sharif is the site of the Temple Mount, then the archeological evidence uncovered so far needs to support this view.
However, the fact of the matter is that after 40 years of the most extensive archeological excavations at the site by Israeli scientists using the most modern and sophisticated intruments available, all of these excavations have failed to turn up any tangible evidence whatsoever that there was ever an ancient Jewish temple there.
Therefore, the logical and sensible thing for the Jews to do now is to finally acknowledge the fact that the Haram al-Sharif is simply not the site of the Temple Mount and for them to continue their search for the location of the lost Temples elsewhere.
Have a look at:
biblemysteries.com/lectures/builtwailingwall.htm
For Jews to continue believing that the Haram al-Sharif is the site of the Temple Mount, then the archeological evidence uncovered so far needs to support this view.
However, the fact of the matter is that after 40 years of the most extensive archeological excavations at the site by Israeli scientists using the most modern and sophisticated intruments available, all of these excavations have failed to turn up any tangible evidence whatsoever that there was ever an ancient Jewish temple there.
Therefore, the logical and sensible thing for the Jews to do now is to finally acknowledge the fact that the Haram al-Sharif is simply not the site of the Temple Mount and for them to continue their search for the location of the lost Temples elsewhere.
I
Isa_Almisry
Guest
Yes, it does, and also as the first direction of prayer.
I
Isa_Almisry
Guest
What planet are you on?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/Temple_inscription_in_greek.jpg
A Greek language inscription from Herod’s Temple, late 1st century BC. It warns gentiles to refrain from entering the Temple enclosure, on pain of death.
Not to mention all the ritual baths around the place, etc.
Like the Church.
H
hamba2han
Guest
Even if this stone turns out to be what you say it is – which I very seriously doubt – then considering the size of the Temple and it’s surrounding walls, why are the Israeli scientists who have been diligently excavating and examining the area around the Dome of the Rock, unable to outline the boundaries of the Temple and in particular the location of Gihon Spring which was an integral feature of the Temple?
The following is an excerpt from a webpage:
The Temple was a slaughterhouse and hundred of animals were killed daily. Water was a vital necessity for the priests who had to wash constantly. The water was brought up and stored in huge lavers or cisterns.
“The edifice looks toward the EAST, and its back is to the west. The entire floor is paved with stones and sloped downward to the appropriate places, to admit of flushing with water in order to wash away the blood of the sacrifices; for many myriads of beasts are offered on the days of the festivals. The water supply is inexhaustible, for an abundant natural Spring pours forth within the Temple area, and there are furthermore marvelous underground reservoirs passing description. . .” (Letter of Aristeas, p.135, an eye-witness account written about 300 B.C.)
It contained an inexhaustible spring (Tacitus)
http://judicial-inc.biz/Solomzzo1.jpg
… there has never been a natural water spring within the Haram esh-Sharif. That fact alone disqualifies the area around the Dome of the Rock from being the site of the former Temples…
I
Isa_Almisry
Guest
That’s easy:
(Matthew 23
37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! 38 Behold, your house is forsaken and desolate. 39 For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’” 24:1 Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. 2 But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another, that will not be thrown down.”Next question.
Where do you get that it was an integral feature of the Temple? It is only mentioned a few times in Scripture, never in connection with the Temple, and Josephus tells us (Ant. vii. 14, § 5) that it was outside the city (as Scriputure and archeology locate it), whereas the Temple was in the city.
An Muslim apologist website I see. John 8:13.
When Tacitus writes the Temple was gone (notice the past tense?). So we need not tarry on him.
I’m quite familiar with Aristeas: I’ve used him as proof of the Christian text of the OT (LXX), over the later Masoretic text many a time.
Before your quote from Aristeas (he claims to be 3rd, but he as been dated to the 2nd cent. BC):
I will first of all give you a description of the whole country. When we arrived in the land of the Jews we saw **the city situated **84 in the middle of the whole of Judea on the top of a mountain of considerable altitude. **On the summit the temple **had been built in all its splendour. It was surrounded by three walls more than seventy cubits high and in length and breadth corresponding to the structure of the edifice.
Where can you fit that Temple on another Mount there?
and after your excerpt:
There are moreover wonderful and indescribable cisterns underground, as they pointed out to me, at a distance of five furlongs all round the site of the temple, and each of them has countless pipes 90 so that the different streams converge together. And all these were fastened with lead at the bottom and at the sidewalls, and over them a great quantity of plaster had been spread, and every part of the work had been most carefully carried out. There are many openings for water at the base of the altar which are invisible to all except to those who are engaged in the ministration, so that all the blood of the sacrifices which is collected in great quantities is washed away in the twinkling of an 91 eye. Such is my opinion with regard to the character of the reservoirs and I will now show you how it was confirmed. They led me more than four furlongs outside the city and bade me peer down towards a certain spot and listen to the noise that was made by the meeting of the waters, so that the great size of the reservoirs became manifest to me, as has already been pointed out.
ccel.org/c/charles/otpseudepig/aristeas.htm
As is manifest, more than the spring of Gihon was involved.
I seem to remember seeing a well (bi’r) and spring ('ayn) marked on the map when I was there.
Btw, because of the uproar over digging anywhere near, the entire place has not gotten the archeological survey it needs and deserves. Until then, your allegation that there has never been a natural spring…
D
dolphinlove
Guest
Due to the extreme political sensitivity of the site, few archaeological excavations have been conducted on the Temple Mount itself. Protests commonly occur whenever archaeologists conduct projects on or near the Mount. Aside from visual observation of surface features, most other archaeological knowledge of the site comes from the 19th century survey carried out by Charles Wilson and Charles Warren. This sensitivity has not prevented the Muslim Waqf from destroying archeological evidence on a number of occasions.
H
hamba2han
Guest
It is funny that you should mention Josephus because since his was the only eye-witness account of the destruction of the Temple, why then won’t you believe what he himself said about the wall?
The following is an excerpt from the first link which I posted:
‘JOSEPHUS War of the Jews:
Book 7 - Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
HOW THE ENTIRE CITY OF JERUSALEM WAS DEMOLISHED, EXCEPTING THREE TOWERS; AND HOW TITUS COMMENDED HIS SOLDIERS IN A SPEECH MADE TO THEM, AND DISTRIBUTED REWARDS TO THEM AND THEN DISMISSED MANY OF THEM.’
NOW as soon as the army had no more people to slay or to plunder, because there remained none to be the objects of their fury, (for they would not have spared any, had there remained any other work to be done,) Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the entire city and temple, but should leave as many of the towers standing as were of the greatest eminency; that is, Phasaelus, and Hippicus, and Mariamne; and so much of the wall as enclosed the city on the west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as were to lie in garrison, as were the towers also spared, in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how well fortified, which the Roman valor had subdued; but for all the rest of the wall, it was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that were for innovations; a city otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind.
When Jerusalem is totally destroyed and the Temple gone surely the wall which is now massive and imposing must have stood out like a sore thumb, the veritable “elephant in the room”. No, there is not one single word about what must have been the only major structure standing in all of Jerusalem. After all if it had been built by Herod, it MUST have been there standing out in all its massiveness. Nor can this be the sin of omission. Josephus does mention that one wall is left standing, the one that enclosed the CITY on the West side. Nothing about a massive wall surrounding the Temple Mount.
Based on this eye-witness account by Josephus himself, why then are Jews and many Christians claiming that the “Wailing Wall” was actually a part of the Temple?
Why are they praying at the wall when it most certainly follows that not only was it NOT a part of the Temple but more astonishingly, it appears so very likely that it is indeed a part of Fort Antonia which was used by the Romans to destroy their Temple?
L
Lev23
Guest
Fort Antonia was North of the Temple Mount. Anyways, you can interpret Josephus any way you want, but many archealogical finds right by the Temple Mount that date from the 2nd Temple prove the Temple stood there. For instance, at the southwest corner of the Mount, a stone was found that had chisled in Hebrew-“To the place of trumpeting.” This stone fell from the top of the wall where it marked where the priests would blow a trumpet, announcing the beginning of Sabbath.It is funny that you should mention Josephus because since his was the only eye-witness account of the destruction of the Temple, why then won’t you believe what he himself said about the wall?
The following is an excerpt from the first link which I posted:
‘JOSEPHUS War of the Jews:
Book 7 - Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
HOW THE ENTIRE CITY OF JERUSALEM WAS DEMOLISHED, EXCEPTING THREE TOWERS; AND HOW TITUS COMMENDED HIS SOLDIERS IN A SPEECH MADE TO THEM, AND DISTRIBUTED REWARDS TO THEM AND THEN DISMISSED MANY OF THEM.’
NOW as soon as the army had no more people to slay or to plunder, because there remained none to be the objects of their fury, (for they would not have spared any, had there remained any other work to be done,) Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the entire city and temple, but should leave as many of the towers standing as were of the greatest eminency; that is, Phasaelus, and Hippicus, and Mariamne; and so much of the wall as enclosed the city on the west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as were to lie in garrison, as were the towers also spared, in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how well fortified, which the Roman valor had subdued; but for all the rest of the wall, it was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that were for innovations; a city otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind.
When Jerusalem is totally destroyed and the Temple gone surely the wall which is now massive and imposing must have stood out like a sore thumb, the veritable “elephant in the room”. No, there is not one single word about what must have been the only major structure standing in all of Jerusalem. After all if it had been built by Herod, it MUST have been there standing out in all its massiveness. Nor can this be the sin of omission. Josephus does mention that one wall is left standing, the one that enclosed the CITY on the West side. Nothing about a massive wall surrounding the Temple Mount.
Based on this eye-witness account by Josephus himself, why then are Jews and many Christians claiming that the “Wailing Wall” was actually a part of the Temple?
Why are they praying at the wall when it most certainly follows that not only was it NOT a part of the Temple but more astonishingly, it appears so very likely that it is indeed a part of Fort Antonia which was used by the Romans to destroy their Temple?
- Status