What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Is the Temple Mount of Historical Significance and Would Tearing it Down Be a Violation of Antiquite

Boston1

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2015
Messages
3,421
Reaction score
501
Points
170
Location
Colorado
Last part of that title should have read "antiquities, law"

Is The Temple Mount A Historical Structure.

One of my businesses is a company that specializes in historical restorations. As I look at the Temple Mount and its alterations over the years I wonder just what if anything of a historical nature remains.

Two major renovations which didn't even remotely resemble historical restorations took place in the 65 to 72 period by the Jordanians. Both the dome and many, if not most of the buildings were demolished and new structures built.

Which effectively means that no historic structures remain on the temple mount at this time.

If Israel at some time in the future decides that placating the Muslims is no longer policy would they be in violation of international antiquities laws by tearing down the modern constructs on the Temple Mount.

Kicking and screaming aside what are the legal confines of demolishing non historical structures in Israel? Does religious significance hold any merit in Israeli law ?
 

aris2chat

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
18,678
Reaction score
4,679
Points
280
Yes and yes

The waqf won't let Israel repair the walls under the al-aqsa and it posses a danger to those below. It is also subject to earthquakes.
Just trying to repair the bridge nearly caused war. Ottoman construction was discovered during the repair.
by the same token, digging on the mount for muslim building of a mosque in the stables and removal of rubble being dumped has lead to small items and pottery, probably many offering jars for the temple going back to the time of the first temple. Even seal from the time of david have been found sifting through the rubble dump as garbage.
The historic fact f herods temple and a smaller temple from the time of cyrus built by the jews are fact.
The quran tells of the building of the temple by solomon. He was considered among the prophets.
Somehow muslims today want to believe the temple was built elsewhere.
The mount has been home to roman temples and christian basilica, but for some reason the idea of a jewish temple is threatening to them.
Alexander also records awe at the jewish temple in his conquests.
Now, even through David is also prophet and the psalms are part of Islamic holy books, there are attempts to say david never existed and Jerusalem was never a jewish city.

Muslim are so scared of jews they want to erase all historical evidence of them in the region.
 

Roudy

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2012
Messages
51,494
Reaction score
9,906
Points
2,030
Since when did Muslims have respect for religious sites of other faiths that they're going to start with the Temple Mount? Even Shiites and Sunnis are blowing up each other's ancient structures left and right. In fact one could say that the Iraq sectarian civil war started when Sunnis blew up an ancient Shiite mosque that is very holy to them.
 
OP
Boston1

Boston1

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2015
Messages
3,421
Reaction score
501
Points
170
Location
Colorado
The way I read this

Quote
1) Any object, whether detached or fixed, which was made by man before the year 1700 of the general era, and includes anything subsequently added thereto which forms an integral part thereof;
End Quote

If any part of the structure was build prior to 1700 or there about is likely protected.

Although I'm not so sure just how much if anything remains of the original structures from previous to that date.
 

Shusha

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
12,258
Reaction score
1,782
Points
290
The way I read this

Quote
1) Any object, whether detached or fixed, which was made by man before the year 1700 of the general era, and includes anything subsequently added thereto which forms an integral part thereof;
End Quote

If any part of the structure was build prior to 1700 or there about is likely protected.

Although I'm not so sure just how much if anything remains of the original structures from previous to that date.

Well, the ORIGINAL structures have been destroyed by earthquakes half a dozen times and rebuilt. But there certainly remains several sections of the mosque built prior to 1700. And consequently, if I read your post correctly, anything attached to those sections is also protected.
 
OP
Boston1

Boston1

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2015
Messages
3,421
Reaction score
501
Points
170
Location
Colorado
I'm sure there is more to it than what we've discussed so far tho.

The forbearance the Israeli's have shown at this site is amazing. So I'm curious why they allow such a flashpoint to continue. The site is basically a modern construct but as you say probably has some older sections.

Around here the historic nature is sometimes defined by how much of the original structure remains. I was curious if the same applies to the Dome of the Rock.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$260.01
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top