Myths and facts about Jerusalem and Temple Mount

[Roudy]

Myths and facts about Jerusalem and Temple Mount

1) The Islamic claim to the Temple Mount is very recent - Jerusalem's role as "The Third Holiest Site in Islam" in mainstream Islamic writings does not precede the 1930s. It was created by the grand mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini.

2) The Islamic claim to Jerusalem is false - There were no mosques in Jerusalem in 632 c.e. at the death of Muhammad... Jerusalem was [then] a Christian-occupied city. The muslim "claim" to Jerusalem is allegedly based on what is written in the koran, which although does not mention Jerusalem even once, nevertheless talks of the "furthest mosque" (in Sura 17:1) Is there any foundation to the muslim argument that this "furthest mosque" (al-masujidi al-aqsa) refers to what is today called the Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem? The answer is, NO!

3) The present Arabic name of Jerusalem is "Al-Quds"... but "Al-Quds" is an abbreviation for "The Jewish Temple"!
The Arabic name for Jerusalem is "Al-QuDS" (The Holy), which is abbreviation for another Arabic name used for Jerusalem until the last century, "Bayt al-MaQDeS" (The Holy House), since the 10th century c.e. The name "Bayt al-MaQDeS" is a translation of the Hebrew "Beyt ha-MiKDaSH", which means "House of Holiness", "Temple". But Islam has no Temple, only the Jews did. Thus the Arabic name for Jerusalem makes no reference to Muhammad's alleged trip to Heaven, but rather refers to the Jewish Temple!
In fact, it can be seen that significant Islamic interest in the Temple Mount does not precede the Six-Day War in 1967.

 

[irosie91]

Jerusalem is important to muslims in the same way NEW YORK and the WORLD TRADE CENTER is important to muslims-----important target of conquest. When Muhummad was
alive ----an important target of conquest was JEWISH YATHRIB------he was so eager to OWN
it that he ordered his own dead carcass buried there ----at which point the whole city became
a "HOLY MUSLIM SITE" -----thus he "conquored" the jews of arabia in his own fevered mind.

for the record----jews never sold Yathrib to the muslims and, therefore, STILL OWN IT

 

[Roudy]

Jerusalem is important to muslims in the same way NEW YORK and the WORLD TRADE CENTER is important to muslims-----important target of conquest. When Muhummad was
alive ----an important target of conquest was JEWISH YATHRIB------he was so eager to OWN
it that he ordered his own dead carcass buried there ----at which point the whole city became
a "HOLY MUSLIM SITE" -----thus he "conquored" the jews of arabia in his own fevered mind.

for the record----jews never sold Yathrib to the muslims and, therefore, STILL OWN IT

Exactly, irose. Jerusalem is symbolic, yet meaningless to Muslims.

 

[irosie91]

I have a TERRIFIC IDEA roudy------pay attention to my BRILLIANCE----I am
such a good negotiator -------here goes. >>>> how about a TRADE-----
we give them YATHRIB (aka medina) and promise not to bother with it anymore----
if they get the hell out of our Jerusalem -------GREAT IDEA-----I think---regarding
rental on that BURIAL PLOT------we can give that up too. GREAT IDEA???

 

[Jroc]

Jerusalem is important to muslims in the same way NEW YORK and the WORLD TRADE CENTER is important to muslims-----important target of conquest. When Muhummad was
alive ----an important target of conquest was JEWISH YATHRIB------he was so eager to OWN
it that he ordered his own dead carcass buried there ----at which point the whole city became
a "HOLY MUSLIM SITE" -----thus he "conquored" the jews of arabia in his own fevered mind.

for the record----jews never sold Yathrib to the muslims and, therefore, STILL OWN IT

Good video


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkMolLriAkQ]No Mosque at Ground Zero - YouTube[/ame]

 

[irosie91]

they did it in India too------ the important hindu temple or RAMA FAME--
was turned into a mosque in AYODHIYA -----by some creep named BARBUR---
believe it or not-----they grabbed a synagogue in LAHORE too. the mosque
is still on top of the synagogue. The good news is that the BABRY mosque
in Ayodhiya were ---partially removed to reveal the HINDU TEMPLE AGAIN
a few years ago HOPEFULLY this move will start a TREND

Last year a 2500 year old synagogue in TUNISIA was trashed
Trashing everyone elses shrines is what ISA-RESPECTERS do.
Adolf did it in HIS effort to "RE WRITE HISTORY AND CULTURE"

 

[Saigon]

The thing that amazes me about these threads is the sheer gullibility.

Adult people happy to believe anything - and I mean ANYTHING - which is posted, providing it fits their political beliefs.

No questions, no checking facts, no interest in genuine information - and a complete refusal to read any kind of quality historical research.

The dishonest leading the blind.

btw, A city called Rušalim in the Execration texts of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt (c. 19th century BCE) is widely, but not universally, identified as Jerusalem. Jerusalem is called Urušalimin in the Amarna letters of Abdi-Heba (1330s BCE).

 

[irosie91]

so???

 

[GHook93]

The thing that amazes me about these threads is the sheer gullibility.

Adult people happy to believe anything - and I mean ANYTHING - which is posted, providing it fits their political beliefs.

No questions, no checking facts, no interest in genuine information - and a complete refusal to read any kind of quality historical research.

The dishonest leading the blind.

btw, A city called Rušalim in the Execration texts of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt (c. 19th century BCE) is widely, but not universally, identified as Jerusalem. Jerusalem is called Urušalimin in the Amarna letters of Abdi-Heba (1330s BCE).

Well before Islam nutjob and you call yourself a journalist!

 

[irosie91]

Jerusalem is located in a place convenient to sorrounding agricultural land----historically ---
it seems to be in ANCIENT times-----a kind of centralized area for trade in agricultural stuffs

salem------is a kind of alternate word for the fulfillment of a trade agreement---
like paying a bill or settling an account FULFILLMENT----SETTLE UP---
PAY THE BILL ---A-OK----ALL IS WELL

 

[Saigon]

iRosie -

The point is that if you believe a word Roudy tells you without confirming the facts from a legitimate source, you are doing both yourself and the board a disservice.

For instance, Roudy claims that there were no mosques in Jerusalem in 635, but neglects to mention that Arab people had lived in Jersualem since the Bronze Age. He also neglects to mention that the Al Aqsa mosque was built in 705, making it older than any surviving synagogue in Jerusalem.

What you two get out of telling lies to each other I have no idea.

 

[Roudy]

Arab people have lived in Jerusalem since the bronze age....

Ha ha ha. What a fucking ignorant illiterate idiot! The Aqsa Mosque is sitting on a Jewish Temple!

The site on which the silver domed mosque sits, along with the Dome of the Rock, also referred to as al-Haram ash-Sharif or "Noble Sanctuary,"[2] is the Temple Mount, the holiest site in Judaism, the place where the Temple is generally accepted to have stood.

Al-Aqsa Mosque - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Saigon]

Roudy -

What do you get out of deliberatiely misleading people here?

Why not post with a little integrity, and stick to subjects you know something about?

Jesus man, you've never even BEEN to any of these places!

 

[Roudy]

Roudy -

What do you get out of deliberatiely misleading people here?

Why not post with a little integrity, and stick to subjects you know something about?

Jesus man, you've never even BEEN to any of these places!

Hah? Shut the fuck up you have the perceptiveness of a person with mental retardation. You know JACKSHIT.

 

[Saigon]

2) The Islamic claim to Jerusalem is false - There were no mosques in Jerusalem in 632 c.e. at the death of Muhammad

This is great example of how propaganda works -

Firstly, Roudy avoids mentioning that Arab people lived in this area since the Stone Age

Secondly, he skips around the fact that there were no mosques anywhere on earth until around 622 - so why there should have been on in Jerusalem in 635 I have no idea. The great mosque in Mecca wasn't built then either - but Roudy forgot to mention that! Some of the most important mosques in the world (e.g. al Ummayyad, Damacus) are significantly younger than Al Aqsa.

If there is a less honest or less informed poster on this forum, I've yet to come across him.

 

[Roudy]

The thing that amazes me about these threads is the sheer gullibility.

Adult people happy to believe anything - and I mean ANYTHING - which is posted, providing it fits their political beliefs.

No questions, no checking facts, no interest in genuine information - and a complete refusal to read any kind of quality historical research.

The dishonest leading the blind.

btw, A city called Rušalim in the Execration texts of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt (c. 19th century BCE) is widely, but not universally, identified as Jerusalem. Jerusalem is called Urušalimin in the Amarna letters of Abdi-Heba (1330s BCE).

Well before Islam nutjob and you call yourself a journalist!

He writes articles for Islam Daily in English. LOL

 

[Saigon]

Roidy -

Asking you to post honestly has nothing at all to do with defending Islam or Judaism or any other religion.

It is just about trying to discourage you from posting what you know to be lies.

 

[irosie91]

iRosie -

The point is that if you believe a word Roudy tells you without confirming the facts from a legitimate source, you are doing both yourself and the board a disservice.

For instance, Roudy claims that there were no mosques in Jerusalem in 635, but neglects to mention that Arab people had lived in Jersualem since the Bronze Age. He also neglects to mention that the Al Aqsa mosque was built in 705, making it older than any surviving synagogue in Jerusalem.

What you two get out of telling lies to each other I have no idea.

the "facts" you present ----are moot. and some simply NOT FACTS at all.
Your claim of "arab people living in Jerusalem ----is kinda funny "arab"
people in 1200 BC were PEOPLE LIVING IN ARABIA not in Jerusalem.
BUT people being the migratory things that they are----there is a possiblity
that somehow some people from arabia moved about especially as TRADERS--
arabians have been in the slave trade since before 1200 BC----if you are trying
to tell me that there was an ARABIAN COMMUNITY and CULTURE in
Jerusalem ----you are nuts. I am fully aware of the fact that some of
your fellow nuts and historic revisionists refer to all sorts of places now
ARABIZED by conquest----to have been "ARABIAN" since "creation" ---
nope-----arabians are people from arabia In 1200 BC arabic
was not even a written language---edomites are not "arabs"

"SURVIVING SYNAGOGUE"??? what does that mean? that if
the romans and arabs managed to TRASH THEM ALL----the jews
magically become a non issue? besides----what does "surviving"
mean----there were secret little synagogues in the hills thruout
the entire time------the SAME ONES HAVE TO BE IN USE?
They are being dug out of the hills all the time
Have you decided to discount the SAMARITAN synagogues----btw --
just what are you calling a "synagogue" synagogue is simply
a greek word-----for HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY ----BEIT KNESSET---
any place in which jews assmble for prayer is a SYNAGOGUE
synagogues are not SPECIAL SANCTIFIED MAGICAL PLACES
any more than are quaker meeting rooms. The only
SPECIAL house of assembly for jews with some sort of SANCTIFIED
issue involved is THE TEMPLE IN JERUSALEM and even then the
STRUCTURE itself is only part of the issue------the PLACE is the issue
I fail to see a point in your JOY over the trashing of most synagogues
as a way to GET RID OF PEOPLE and CULTURES
but your reaction does provide insight into the triumphalist
destruction of the BUDDHIST STATUARY in AFGHANISTAN.
YOUR focus on shrines as points of POWER and OWNERSHIP
is quaint and primitive. It is very islamic but I do not think
you are muslim

 

[Roudy]

2) The Islamic claim to Jerusalem is false - There were no mosques in Jerusalem in 632 c.e. at the death of Muhammad

This is great example of how propaganda works -

Firstly, Roudy avoids mentioning that Arab people lived in this area since the Stone Age

Secondly, he skips around the fact that there were no mosques anywhere on earth until around 622 - so why there should have been on in Jerusalem in 635 I have no idea. The great mosque in Mecca wasn't built then either - but Roudy forgot to mention that! Some of the most important mosques in the world (e.g. al Ummayyad, Damacus) are significantly younger than Al Aqsa.

If there is a less honest or less informed poster on this forum, I've yet to come across him.

Stone ages! You fucking moron there were no such thing as "ARAB PEOPLE" in the Stone Ages! What a total illiterate buffoon! Where did you get educated, school for those with "special needs"? I have yet to meet someone who claims to know so much, that actually knows so little! Ha ha ha, what a DICKHEAD!

In the modern era, defining who is an Arab is done on the grounds of one or more of the following two criteria:


Distribution of Arabic as sole official language (green) and one of several official or national languages (blue).
Genealogical: someone who can trace his or her ancestry to the tribes of Arabia – the original inhabitants of the Arabian Peninsula – and the Syrian Desert. This was the definition used in medieval times, for example by Ibn Khaldun, but has decreased in importance over time, as a portion of those of Arab ancestry lost their links with their ancestors' motherland. In the modern era, however, DNA tests have at times proved reliable in identifying those of Arab genealogical descent. For example, it has been found that the frequency of the "Arab marker" Haplogroup J1 collapses suddenly at the borders of Arabic speaking countries.[27]

Arab people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[irosie91]

btw---I reviewed roudy's post-----I see no "LIES"