Palestinians demand return of "their" heritage -- Dead Sea Scolls

[Phoenall]

I cannot express an opinion on the morality of Jewish doctrine which forbids Jews from setting foot in the Al Aqsa Mosque and its Esplanade.

Well, of course you can't, since there IS no such doctrine.

Can you express an opinion about the Muslim insistence that only they should have the privilege of fully accessing the Holy Place? And the Muslim use of violence to uphold this?

I'm sorry but I will not disregard the opinion of the Chief Rabbinate whose clear and binding teaching was delivered on 10th June 1967.

Deflection because you are on the ropes and in the corner

 

[Phoenall]

Well, of course you can't, since there IS no such doctrine.

Can you express an opinion about the Muslim insistence that only they should have the privilege of fully accessing the Holy Place? And the Muslim use of violence to uphold this?

I'm sorry but I will not disregard the opinion of the Chief Rabbinate whose clear and binding teaching was delivered on 10th June 1967.

So from now on will you accept the rulings of the zionist rabbinate ?
Or just the rulings that suit your POV...

I am unaware of any reason to disrespect Chief Rabbinate.

Great I'll remember that! So now that we've put this thing aside you can answer Shusha's questions

I have answered questions to the best of my ability.

NO YOU HAVE DEFLECTED, HEDGED, DERAILED AND MANIPULATED RESPONCES RATHER THAN GIVE A REAL ANSWER TO THE QUESTIONS POSED.

 

[Phoenall]

So, when the Chief Rabbinate decides it will re-build the Temple on the Mount, you will, of course, support the Jewish peoples sole and exclusive right to their Holy Place, yes?

Jerusalem is not a sole and exclusive place for Jews. In a strict sense, Jerusalem belongs to the three great faiths of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. In a broader sense, it is a city that belongs to everyone.

But only when it suits you to take away the Jews rights. Not that long ago you were claiming that it was purely islamic and the Jews had no rights to be there.
The concept you refer to was destroyed and withdrawn the day the arab league invaded the mandate of palestine and the UN refused to intervene in the theft of Jerusalem. When Jordan were driven back across the river and then gave up all rights to Jerusalem it reverted to Israeli control

 

[Phoenall]

I'm sorry but I will not disregard the opinion of the Chief Rabbinate whose clear and binding teaching was delivered on 10th June 1967.

There are two very distinct responses I can make to this.

First, and most importantly, I notice you again dodged the actual question. It is transparently an avoidance. You are perfectly aware that there is only one moral response to the question. Else you would have stated your belief, either way, early on in the conversation. Your reluctance to simply say, "yeah, hey, there is only one moral response to this question" means that your answer is the immoral one and you are unable to justify your immoral response in a social setting which includes multi-ethnic and multi-religious people. Which means, of course, that your immoral response is unjustifiable. And, you are entirely correct, the Muslim insistence that ONLY they have rights to pray and worship and celebrate their faith on a site which is, at best shared and at worst, STOLEN, is immoral. The fact that they use violence to impose their immoral belief is all the more appalling and disgusting.

I am puzzled by your hostility and your determination to put words in my mouth. Everyone except trouble-makers accepts the teaching of the Chief Rabbinate.

Second, you reveal your utterly inadequate knowledge of the Jewish faith and how the Jewish people and their leaders make halakhic decisions. There is a range of thought on how to proceed now that the Jewish people once again have sovereignty on the Temple Mount, all of it halakhically based, whether on Maimondes' understanding of "And you shall build me a sanctuary" or on Rashi's understanding of "The Sanctuary, oh G-d, which your hands have established". No one disagrees that there is only a small portion of the Temple Mount upon which it is prohibited to be present, depending on one's understanding of whether the Shechinah is still present and to what degree. The question is only what to do until we determine where that space is. Given that we can be sure, in many places, where it is NOT, there is plenty of space for the Jewish people to enter the space and pray and worship. And indeed, as previously posted, Israeli law upholds the right of people to freedom of worship.

I can read English and I understand the decision of the Chief Rabbinate. At the same time, I am not and do not claim to be an expert on Jewish dogma.

Keep in mind as well, that all decisions having to do with the presence of the Jewish people on the Mount are political decisions as well as religious ones. The Jewish people are not free to make decisions based solely on religious faith. They are forced to deal with the hissy fits of an overwhelming number of Muslims who are willing to both die and murder people (read: Jews) to enforce their immoral belief.

For the sake of peaceful coexistence, I believe it is best to maintain the status quo on the Al Aqsa Mosque and its Esplanade.

Jews who want to pray at their holiest site, while others are cursing, shouting and spitting at them are the trouble makers???

Not those who score goals on the mount, systematically destroy archeology at site, turn their mosque into an ammunition storage and throw stones at the people praying at the wailing wall?

If THIS is "peaceful coexistence", I guess your version of peace is by submission like the word "Salam" means in Arabic (the opposite of Hebrew "Shalom" which means wholeness, perfection).

I know about Palestinian children being killed by the Israeli Defense Force when they play football but that is another topic.

GET IT RIGHT you know only what the islamonazi propaganda machine wants you to know, so they miss out the facts that the boys died 3 days before the explosions when hamas murdered them for having fatah fathers. As you say that is another topic

 

[Phoenall]

So, when the Chief Rabbinate decides it will re-build the Temple on the Mount, you will, of course, support the Jewish peoples sole and exclusive right to their Holy Place, yes?

Jerusalem is not a sole and exclusive place for Jews. In a strict sense, Jerusalem belongs to the three great faiths of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. In a broader sense, it is a city that belongs to everyone.

And both christians as well as muslims have it plainly stated in their writings that Jews will gather again in zion , it's their land plain and simple.

I never heard of such a thing.

Of course you haven't as your imam/commisar has not told you the whole truth, just the little bit that counts to them

 

[Phoenall]

So, when the Chief Rabbinate decides it will re-build the Temple on the Mount, you will, of course, support the Jewish peoples sole and exclusive right to their Holy Place, yes?

Jerusalem is not a sole and exclusive place for Jews. In a strict sense, Jerusalem belongs to the three great faiths of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. In a broader sense, it is a city that belongs to everyone.

And both christians as well as muslims have it plainly stated in their writings that Jews will gather again in zion , it's their land plain and simple.

I never heard of such a thing.

Here just a few examples:

Isaiah 11:11-12
Isaiah 66:7-8
Ezekiel 37:21-22
Zechariah 8:4-8
Ezekiel 36:34-35
Sura 5:21
Sura 17:104
sura 2:40
sura 2:47
sura 2:83

None of this is from the New Testament.

So does this mean it is not real or something. You cant claim that Christianity and islam are based on Judaism and them deny 80% of the base that Christianity and islam are founded on

 

[Phoenall]

And both christians as well as muslims have it plainly stated in their writings that Jews will gather again in zion , it's their land plain and simple.

I never heard of such a thing.

Here just a few examples:

Isaiah 11:11-12
Isaiah 66:7-8
Ezekiel 37:21-22
Zechariah 8:4-8
Ezekiel 36:34-35
Sura 5:21
Sura 17:104
sura 2:40
sura 2:47
sura 2:83

None of this is from the New Testament.

If you weren't biased you could find those too, easily, but it just shows more the "I only want to know about" part about you.

Wanna play trivia- fine:
Acts 1:6-8
Matthew 5:17-18

I am no expert on Biblical exegesis but I will have a go.
Acts 1:6-8 This appears to be a foretelling by Joshua Ben Joseph that the Kingdom of Israel will be restored when the Holy Spirit will come upon His followers and they in turn will witness about Him throughout all of Jerusalem and all of Judea and Samaria. I suppose Christians believe this has already happened and understand the coming upon them of the Holy Spirit to mean the event of Pentecost followed by preaching that begins in Jerusalem and then spreads just as the Church has done. The "restoration of the Kingdom of Israel" is therefore to be taken to mean the Christian Church.
Matthew 5:17-18 This says all the Jewish Law is fulfilled in Him. This has little bearing on the topic of this thread.

Because you read them as a muslim would, and dont take in the whole context of surrounding lines to clarify what they mean.

 

[Phoenall]

Yes, you read that right -- the Arab Palestinians are going to make a formal request to UNESCO to have "their" cultural heritage, the Dead Sea Scrolls, returned to them.

The audacity of it is shocking.

Next they'll be asking for their Talmud back.

When you have no history, cultural identity, or legitimacy - you are forced to steal that from someone else. They are not even a real people, they were conjured in a KGB lab.

Palestinians are recognized by everyone except the Israelis who wish they would disappear.

LIAR as very few of the surrounding nations recognise the palestinians as anything other than terrorists and violent criminals

 

[rhodescholar]

Palestinians are recognized by everyone except the Israelis who wish they would disappear.

"Everyone"? Like the 57 filth muslim countries? And the scumbag feckless Euros trying to curry brownie points with their large muslim immigrant populations? Sure they are.

 

[Shusha]

Shusha, et al,

Somethings are meant, within the human fabric of belief, to be shared.

Jerusalem is not a sole and exclusive place for Jews.

Really? Why not?

Ah. I think my comment may have been interpreted as a belief that Jerusalem and the Temple Mount should be an exclusive place for Jews. That was not at all my intent. My intent was a trap for Eloy who seems to have a problem with the Temple Mount being an exclusive place for Jews yet no problem with the Temple Mount being an exclusive place for Muslims. I was just going to point out his hypocrisy.

On the contrary my belief aligns with this:

Also a gentile who is not of Your people Israel, but will come from a distant land, for Your Name's sake -- for they will hear of Your great Name and Your strong hand and Your outstretched arm -- and will come and pray toward this Temple -- may You hear from Heaven, the foundation of Your abode, and act according to all that the gentile calls out to You, so that all the peoples of the world may know Your Name to fear You as [does] Your people Israel, and to know that Your Name is proclaimed upon this Temple that I have built.

 

[Eloy]

...
So are you trying to argue that the new testament nullified all the promises and covenants given to the Jews, in the eyes of the christians? ...

Yes; I believe this is traditional Christian dogma.

 

[Eloy]

Jerusalem is not a sole and exclusive place for Jews.

Really? Why not?

I have already answered this question.

 

[Eloy]

Shusha, et al,

Somethings are meant, within the human fabric of belief, to be shared.

Jerusalem is not a sole and exclusive place for Jews.

Really? Why not?

Ah. I think my comment may have been interpreted as a belief that Jerusalem and the Temple Mount should be an exclusive place for Jews. That was not at all my intent. My intent was a trap for Eloy who seems to have a problem with the Temple Mount being an exclusive place for Jews yet no problem with the Temple Mount being an exclusive place for Muslims. I was just going to point out his hypocrisy. ...

Perhaps when posting, instead of trying to trap other people, you were to write what you mean, you will not come across as someone who believes in the superiority of your religion over others' with unique rights.

 

[Shusha]

Perhaps when posting, instead of trying to trap other people, you were to write what you mean, you will not come across as someone who believes in the superiority of your religion over others' with unique rights.

I have never written anything which even remotely, even the tiniest bit, suggests the superiority of my religion over another's. Ever. I know this for certain because I do not believe that my religion is superior to other religious faiths. (Though obviously I find great value for myself, personally, in my faith).

So clearly, your idea that I believe my religion is superior to other's comes from elsewhere and not from my own statements of beliefs. I would suggest that it comes from a longstanding anti-semitic canard.

Should we talk about unique rights? Well, of course we should, but you will avoid it just as you have avoided all my other questions.

Why should the people practicing the faith of Islam have the unique right of access to their most Holy Place and to our most Holy Place? Shouldn't Holy Places be shared? Why or why not?

 

[Phoenall]

...
So are you trying to argue that the new testament nullified all the promises and covenants given to the Jews, in the eyes of the christians? ...

Yes; I believe this is traditional Christian dogma.

And this in turn was nullified by islamic dogma, and the muslims now claim that God gave them the world and they have to murder and pillage until they make it come true.

THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE SUPPORTING AND DEFENDING, WHOLESALE ISLAMONAZI SLAUGHTER AND MURDER OF THE INNOCENTS THAT REFUSE TO CINVERT.

 

[Phoenall]

Jerusalem is not a sole and exclusive place for Jews.

Really? Why not?

I have already answered this question.

No you deflected away from the question

 

[Phoenall]

Shusha, et al,

Somethings are meant, within the human fabric of belief, to be shared.

Jerusalem is not a sole and exclusive place for Jews.

Really? Why not?

Ah. I think my comment may have been interpreted as a belief that Jerusalem and the Temple Mount should be an exclusive place for Jews. That was not at all my intent. My intent was a trap for Eloy who seems to have a problem with the Temple Mount being an exclusive place for Jews yet no problem with the Temple Mount being an exclusive place for Muslims. I was just going to point out his hypocrisy. ...

Perhaps when posting, instead of trying to trap other people, you were to write what you mean, you will not come across as someone who believes in the superiority of your religion over others' with unique rights.

Setting traps to show the other persons real views is a valid procedure . And you were caught proving that you dont want to allow the Jews to exist anywhere. You are denying their human, civil, religious and legal rights because of your nazi dogma and cant see that you have been brainwashed by a succession of contollers

 

[rylah]

...
So are you trying to argue that the new testament nullified all the promises and covenants given to the Jews, in the eyes of the christians? ...

Yes; I believe this is traditional Christian dogma.

It's simple, for the "second coming" to happen, Jews have to govern Jerusalem.
The christian bible changed the text that was taken from the Tanakh, however they still decided to include those passages that gave clear title of the land to the Jews (as shown before).

Anyway, it's the muslims that demand the ancient Jewish scrolls, and the Koran too gives the title of the land to the Jews.

 

[Eloy]

Perhaps when posting, instead of trying to trap other people, you were to write what you mean, you will not come across as someone who believes in the superiority of your religion over others' with unique rights.

I have never written anything which even remotely, even the tiniest bit, suggests the superiority of my religion over another's. Ever. I know this for certain because I do not believe that my religion is superior to other religious faiths. (Though obviously I find great value for myself, personally, in my faith).

So clearly, your idea that I believe my religion is superior to other's comes from elsewhere and not from my own statements of beliefs. I would suggest that it comes from a longstanding anti-semitic canard.

Should we talk about unique rights? Well, of course we should, but you will avoid it just as you have avoided all my other questions.

Why should the people practicing the faith of Islam have the unique right of access to their most Holy Place and to our most Holy Place? Shouldn't Holy Places be shared? Why or why not?

I have already told you that the status quo will be honored by the religious as well as the political Israeli authorities. In this instance I think ethics has prevailed.

 

[Shusha]

I have already told you that the status quo will be honored by the religious as well as the political Israeli authorities. In this instance I think ethics has prevailed.

How is it ethical for only ONE religion to have access to the Temple Mount which is, at best, a shared sacred site and at worst, a stolen sacred site?

How it is the status quo in any way ethical?