Trending Topics:

Video: Two prominent Israelis envision replacing Dome of the Rock with Jewish temple

Israel/Palestine
on 112 Comments

Yesterday the New York Times ran an op-ed by its regular Israeli rightwing columnist Shmuel Rosner, titled “Israel’s Irresponsible Arabs,” that accused Palestinian leaders of stirring a tense population with lies about Al Aqsa mosque, in “a deliberate attempt to make the Temple Mount a point of religious conflict.”

Yes, tensions are high. But are those leaders being irresponsible?

Here are two indications of why Palestinians are upset by Israeli statements about the religious site in the occupied Old City. First, the deputy foreign minister of Israel says that her “dream is to see the Israeli flag flying over the Temple Mount.”

Tzipi Hotovely called on the government to allow Jews to go up to the mount and pray there. The deputy foreign minister’s comments, which were disowned by the Prime Minister’s Office, came amid diplomatic attempts to quell rising.

More of Hotovely’s statement:

“I think it’s the center of Israeli sovereignty, the capital of Israel, the holiest place for the Jewish people,” Likud lawmaker and Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely said in an interview with the Knesset channel. “It’s my dream to see the Israeli flag flying on the Temple Mount.”

Some have now called for Hotovely’s resignation. One Israeli leader said that she was “messianic” and threatening a holy war.

Next, there’s the video below, featuring prominent Israelis, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s minister of Agriculture, calling for the replacement of the Dome of the Rock with the third temple. The video is two years old but was linked in an article two days ago in Haaretz by Dan Caspi on the 20th anniversary of Rabin’s assassination. The piece and the video are in Hebrew. But you can see the temple’s planned outline in blue in the video; and Cantor Michael Davis sent along a summary and partial translations:

They use slick interactive graphics to imagine destroying the Muslim shrine in order to build a Jewish temple. The first speaker is Member of Knesset and Minister of Agriculture Uri Uriel. The second is Avshalom Kor who is a state radio personality – supposedly, as apolitical as you can get. The third is an archaeologist. It seems to me that, in light of the mainstreaming of the Jewish claims on the Haram el Sharif, this is very relevant right now. It used to be just a fringe group who talked about this. But Avshalom Kor is respectable. This production is slick.

The speakers stand before the Dome of the Rock. Al Aqsa mosque is occasionally visible behind one of them. Uri Ariel says:

Hello to you from the Holy Mountain. I am Uri, Yehuda the Priest, Ariel. My ancestors were the priests who worked here in the Holy Temple. Every day in the morning, the burnt offering sacrifice ended with all the priests gathering on the steps of the Sanctuary. You can see the exact location right behind us. And here they would offer the Priestly Benediction. The source of this blessing is on the Holy Mountain. As it is written: “the Lord will bless you from Zion.” And we, the emissaries of God bless the Jewish people with love. Our ancient Rabbis teach us that the holy presence rested on the fingers of the priests when they blessed the people. The priests would utter the Divine name of God. I wish myself and all my brother priests that we will live to say this blessing in the Holy Temple.

(Raises hands)

May the Lord bless you and keep you
May the Lord cause His countenance to give you light and be gracious unto you
May the Lord raise His countenance to you and grant your peace
And they shall set my Name on the Children of Israel and I shall bless them.

Avshalom Kor– who is a linguist with a daily show on Israeli army radio— then provides lots of references to Israeli culture showing that Israeli words and idioms originate in traditional religion.

Your grandfather and mine going back 1,900 prayed with the familiar words we still use today in our prayers to rebuild the Temple, here.

The video is here:

 

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

112 Responses

  1. a blah chick
    a blah chick
    October 27, 2015, 10:13 am

    How frustrating it is for Palestinians that no matter the mounds of evidence they put forward illustrating the Israeli government’s bad faith the US just shakes its head and tells them that it’s all their minds and they need to stop logging onto Facebook.

    • JWalters
      JWalters
      October 27, 2015, 7:47 pm

      “the Israeli government’s bad faith”

      “Bad faith” is the root of Israel’s attitude, along with their Neocon and Likud Republican servants. They simply lie brazenly and continuously. One cannot believe a single word they say. They are backstabbers of the worst sort. Too many power centers in the U.S. have been taken over by this pathological, predatory crowd. A revolution is needed.

      • pmb1414
        pmb1414
        October 28, 2015, 8:42 pm

        Exactly. Someone, referring to the GOP in Congress, coined the term “Republikuds.”

    • RoHa
      RoHa
      October 28, 2015, 2:34 am

      Though it is a good idea to eschew Facebook.

  2. FreddyV
    FreddyV
    October 27, 2015, 11:03 am

    So people are now claiming to be ancestors of Levites?

    They’re becoming more unhinged by the day…

    • Marnie
      Marnie
      October 27, 2015, 11:53 am

      “So people are now claiming to be ancestors of Levites?”

      Pretty hysterical isn’t it? You know the saying about putting lipstick on a pig?

    • jon s
      jon s
      October 27, 2015, 4:45 pm

      Ancestors? Don’t you mean descendants?

      • amigo
        amigo
        October 27, 2015, 5:38 pm

        ” Ancestors? Don’t you mean descendants?”jon s

        You obviously spend far too much time with children.

    • RoHa
      RoHa
      October 27, 2015, 6:25 pm

      I’d claim to be a Levites if I thought I could get away with it. I fancy a share of all that money made from jeans.

  3. annie
    annie
    October 27, 2015, 11:59 am

    i recall the portrayed website in this video. you could use your cursor around and see inside of things. i think we did a story on it.

    • inbound39
      inbound39
      October 27, 2015, 12:35 pm

      And America still believes Netanyahu does not want to change the status Quo and does not want to bring Al Aqsa down to build a Temple and the Palestinians are causing all the incitement and that Palestinians have got it all wrong. Hotovely would make a lovely tree ornament.

      • annie
        annie
        October 27, 2015, 12:46 pm

        And America still believes

        oh i think that’s too general a statement.

      • JWalters
        JWalters
        October 27, 2015, 8:21 pm

        Signaling the religious fanatic base through one spokesperson while lying and denying it to the world through another. Despicable, as usual.

      • inbound39
        inbound39
        October 28, 2015, 12:50 am

        America’s inaction toward Israeli incitement and continued illegitimate settlement building constituting land theft and extra judicial killings shows quite clearly it is far from a general statement. Assisting and supplying Israel with the weaponry etc to carry out these crimes is an active part of the American Special Relationship with Israel. They would not do these things if they did not believe the Netanyahu diatribe. He accused the Palestinians of incitement and the House penalised the Palestinians $80 MILLION DOLLARS whilst Israel is due to get $I BILLION INCREASE for its incitement.

      • inbound39
        inbound39
        October 28, 2015, 12:57 am

        The other point to ponder here is when Obama came to power America was crippled with trillions of dollars of debt and in danger of collapsing. America is still broke yet if we look at another report that was made on Mondoweiss recently America has given trillions to Israel since its inception. Any guesses as to why America is broke? Trillions in debt…..trillions to Special case Israel.

  4. Scott
    Scott
    October 27, 2015, 1:07 pm

    Thanks for posting this. I knew this stuff was out there, but with the American media reporting 100 times an hour Netanyahu government claims to the contrary, posts like this are important and necessary.

  5. Palikari
    Palikari
    October 27, 2015, 6:25 pm

    And? Does this justify stabbing Jews for being Jews?

    • diasp0ra
      diasp0ra
      October 27, 2015, 7:26 pm

      But they aren’t stabbed for being Jews, they are stabbed because they are occupiers.

      Not to say that I’m defending the actions, but to say that the reason they were stabbed is because they were Jews is pure nonsense and trying to portray an armed to the teeth militaristic society as hapless victims of the disenfranchised population they occupy.

    • talknic
      talknic
      October 27, 2015, 8:04 pm

      @ Palikari ” Does this justify stabbing Jews for being Jews?”

      What are you babbling about? There’s no justification for stabbing Jews or anyone else here.

      Never the less thanks for demonstrating a common Ziotactic that runs counter to the basic common sense tenets of Judaism. If it doesn’t exist, no problem … bear false witness

    • eljay
      eljay
      October 27, 2015, 8:08 pm

      || Palikari: And? Does this justify stabbing Jews for being Jews? ||

      Nope. People might be justifiably stabbed for being hateful and immoral (war) criminals, oppressors and supremacists, but not simply for being Jewish.

    • JWalters
      JWalters
      October 27, 2015, 8:26 pm

      A bad faith attempt to distract attention from the core problem and the mountain of evidence on it. Pathetically feeble.

    • Antidote
      Antidote
      October 28, 2015, 1:01 am

      “And? Does this justify stabbing Jews for being Jews? ”

      No, but it would certainly justify cutting funds to the Israeli government for incitement:

      “The House Foreign Affairs Committee in the US Congress unanimously passed a resolution on Thursday condemning the Palestinians for inciting violence against Israel.

      During a committee hearing titled “Words Have Consequences: Palestinian Authority Incitement to Violence,” the lawmakers also called on the State Department to “monitor and publish information on all official incitement by the Palestinian Authority against Jews and the State of Israel.”

      The bipartisan resolution was written by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R).

      “The escalation of violence against Israelis is praised, encouraged, and even fueled by Palestinian Authority officials,” committee chairman Ed Royce (R) said upon passage of the resolution. “This resolution rightly condemns this incitement and the outbreak of violence, and expresses support for those who are working to encourage peace and cooperation between Israelis and Palestinians,” committee chairman Ed Royce (R) says upon passage of the resolution. “It is critical that we stand by our ally Israel at this challenging time.”

      Palestinian attacks on Israelis have become a daily occurrence in recent weeks, amid tensions over the Temple Mount, a Jerusalem site holy to Jews and Muslims. Driving the tensions in part have been Palestinian allegations that Israel is planning to alter the regulations at the site, which houses the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock, and allow Jews to pray there. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has himself leveled such charges, which Netanyahu vehemently denies.”

      http://www.timesofisrael.com/congressional-panel-slams-pa-for-incitement-to-violence/

      It is very difficult to believe that the deputy foreign minister of Israel makes this remark NOW, after the shit storm Netanyahu caused with his Mufti remarks etc. She either lives under a rock, is dumb as a doorpost, or deliberately incites outrage and violence. Your choice.

  6. Mooser
    Mooser
    October 27, 2015, 7:19 pm

    “And? Does this justify…”

    Ahh, “Palikari”! Glad you’re here. “Nudnik” can be such a hard word to explain, examples work better.

    • gamal
      gamal
      October 31, 2015, 12:20 am

      Mooser,

      I bet you’ve never seen anything like this, its Islam and its impossible rhythm and non-existent instruments Sain Mushtaq, there is no need to convert, just yet, check it out

      https://youtu.be/abLdOcU1ctM

      • gamal
        gamal
        October 31, 2015, 12:54 am

        of course anything a man can do…can be just as well be done…

        https://youtu.be/kQ9uEZT_r0s

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 31, 2015, 12:35 pm

        Yup, they’ve got rhythm! I’d be happy if I could somewhat master the rudiments of syncopation and a rhythmic quality (much prized by many Jews) called “swing”.

        “of course anything a man can do…can be just as well be done…”

        Yes, very well. Those big tweezers (?) never break rhythm. What are they called?

        Thanks, gamal.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 31, 2015, 5:07 pm

        Now I am interested, so I’ll Google about the instruments and music. Thanks!

    • gamal
      gamal
      November 12, 2015, 6:50 pm

      ‘rudiments of syncopation and a rhythmic quality (much prized by many Jews) called “swing”.’

      because you are our bretheren man, as soon as you drop those Aryan brothers dogging you.

      “Tweezers” i aint going to sleep tonight.

  7. Another Dave
    Another Dave
    October 28, 2015, 10:34 am

    “The priests would utter the Divine name of God. ”

    Really? I’m not Jewish, but I thought the name of god wasn’t to be spoken aloud. Or are there different rules for different people? Priests vs. everyone else.

    It sounds like a very strange idea, are these people serious about bringing back animal sacrifices? I support the local animal shelter, I’m not a member of PETA but FFS.

    • RoHa
      RoHa
      October 28, 2015, 7:03 pm

      If the Zionists make an enemy of the RSPCA, they are going to face real trouble.

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      November 12, 2015, 11:06 pm

      “Really? I’m not Jewish, but I thought the name of god wasn’t to be spoken aloud.”

      Never spoken aloud. Instead, the Chef Rabbis only used the sacred anagram “YMMV” when speaking of the Holy One.

      • eljay
        eljay
        November 13, 2015, 10:31 am

        || Mooser: … the Chef Rabbis only used the sacred anagram “YMMV” when speaking of the Holy One. ||

        I have a friend who refers to his wife as SWMNBN. From what I can gather, she is more powerful than YMMV. Well, over him, anyway… ;-)

  8. Mooser
    Mooser
    October 28, 2015, 5:34 pm

    “It sounds like a very strange idea, are these people serious about bringing back animal sacrifices?”

    I ‘chipped’ the three cats and the dog and doubled the fence back when Phil reported from Jerusalem. The frummers will never get Greta, Little Bit, Mack (the Knife!) or Dora Beatrice, Princess of Labrador, AKC, if I can help it.

  9. Xpat
    Xpat
    October 28, 2015, 7:38 pm

    Exactly right. The rules for the priests were the opposite of the rules for the people. That’s what set them apart.
    For instance, the rules of Sabbath observance did not apply in the ancient Temple. In fact, Judaism derives the prohibited categories of work on the Sabbath from what the priests did at the temple. The priests are defined as the mirror image of the people.
    Same with uttering the name of God. Wouldn’t be special if any Joe could say it whenever the mood took them.

  10. Walid
    Walid
    October 29, 2015, 12:21 am

    Putting up a flag on the Dome of the Rock is pure Zionist BS and sick Israeli propaganda, but the Jewish claim for some rights to the site containing the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, 2 separate structures is not totally without foundation.. The “rock” place was initially Jewish until taken over by the Moslems around the 7th century when it was designated as the place from which the prophet ascended on his winged horse for an evening to heaven. Until then, the rock over which the Moslem shrine was built was believed by Jews (and subsequently by Moslems) to be rock which was the altar on which Abraham intended to offer his sacrifice. It is therefore sacred to both religions; it was after all the direction to which Moslems tuned to for their twice-daily prayers during the new religion’s first 16 years or so before being instructed to shift direction to Mecca.

    As to Jewish access to the Mosque, once the occupation ends, it should be allowed provided the Jews take off their shoes and conduct their prayers silently without disrupting or disturbing others, perhaps in a designated section such as the one for women.

    • gamal
      gamal
      October 29, 2015, 1:39 pm

      there is of course the legal status of these sites, wasn’t it Jon who thought that in the interest of peace “we should keep our hands off..” because the notion of Palestinian ownership of anything whatsoever is antithetical to Zionism, after all accepting that Palestinians have either “private” or “communal” property rights could get us in to all kinds difficulty.

      “Factsheet Israeli Misappropriation Disguised as Heritage Preservation: The Cases of Hebron and Bethlehem”

      “Israel’s status in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, remains that of an occupying power with specific obligations to the local population.

      Israel’s military occupation of Palestinian territory is inherently temporary and does not give the occupying power (Israel) sovereignty or title over the occupied territory. The seminal principle in international law is reflected in Article 43 of the Hague Regulations which requires the occupying power to re-establish and maintain public order and civil life for the benefit of the occupied population, and to respect existing laws and institutions in the occupied territory. The only exception to this is military necessity, which is to be narrowly construed. Therefore, Israel cannot act for its own population’s economic or social benefit to the detriment of the Palestinians. Nor can Israel legislate for the occupied territory in the way it does for its own national legal system.

      In addition, Article 56 of the Hague Regulations provides that “institutions dedicated to religion … even when [involving] State property, shall be treated as private property.” Article 46 prescribes that private property must be respected and cannot be confiscated. Similar obligations and commitments are also found in UNESCO agreements, including the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and the Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property (1970). For example, Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict require Israel (which is a signatory to the Convention) to respect and protect cultural property in the occupied territory and refrain from all activity in the site except out of “military necessity”.”

      http://www.alzaytouna.net/en/resources/selections/selected-reports-studies/111989-israeli-misappropriation-disguised-as-heritage-preservation-the-cases-of-hebron-and-bethlehem.html

    • lyn117
      lyn117
      October 31, 2015, 3:49 pm

      The whole of Jerusalem was ruled by Christians prior to the Muslim rule. It was not Jewish.

      It doesn’t matter whether Jews ruled the rock before the Christians, the vast majority of those Jews had by then converted to Christianity. Granted, the Byzantinian Christians practiced forced conversion as had previous Jewish rulers – unlike the Roman (pagan) and Greek rulers however oppressive they may have been, besides which, most Jews had already voluntarily adopted Christianity. The conversion of the people to Islam followed the Muslim conquest, slowly – the Muslims mostly didn’t practice forced conversion especially in that area. Jerusalem and surrounding towns remained largely Christian for centuries following the first Muslim conquest.

      Yeah, I know, Zionists will make the argument that because some Jews unrelated to them owned a certain piece of real estate 2000 years ago, the real estate doesn’t belong to the descendants of those people who have been living in or praying on that real estate since, but instead, to themselves, because they like it so much they worship it.

  11. zaid
    zaid
    October 29, 2015, 2:00 am

    “but the Jewish claim for some rights to the site containing the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, 2 separate structures is not totally without foundation.”

    Factually incorrect statement.

    It is without any historical foundation . There are no mention of particular rock (as big as the Alaqsa rock) as being part of the Jewish temple ( it is a newly made up thing).

    And the Alaqsa mosque is the entire plaza (Haram) ,and what you called Alaqsa mosque is actually named Marwani Prayer area.

    “The “rock” place was initially Jewish until taken over by the Moslems around the 7th century”

    Another factually incorrect statement.

    The area was deserted when the Muslims came and before that it was a temple for the God Jupitor, before that the history of the place and particularly the rock is unknown.

    Actually the dimension of the rock is too big to fit in the temple of Solomon.

    ” Until then, the rock over which the Moslem shrine was built was believed by Jews (and subsequently by Moslems) to be rock which was the altar on which Abraham intended to offer his sacrifice.”

    Third factually incorrect statement.

    Muslims believe Abraham attempted to sacrifice his son Ishmael in Mecca and not Issac in Palestine.

    Also,There isn’t any Jewish, Christian or any other book that mentions the rock in the mount at all, and the word alter does not mean rock , and a stone is not the same as a rock.

    ” It is therefore sacred to both religions; ”

    Forth Factually incorrect statement.

    Zionists only gave it attention after they found Muslims venerating it, the Idea of a Rock of sacrifice/foundation is Newly made up thing.

    (They are really struggling to justify the huge size of the rock compared to the Temple ).

    They did the same for the Tomb of Joseph in Nablus, who in reality is a Muslim Saint (Wali) named Yousef Dwaikat (died 176 Yrs ago) .they just assumed that since Muslims venerate it it must be holly to them and they characterised it as to be Joseph (bibical) tomb.

    “it was after all the direction to which Moslems tuned to for their twice-daily prayers during the new religion’s first 16 years or so before being instructed to shift direction to Mecca.”

    Fifth factually incorrect statement .The 5 compulsory prayers was from the early years of islam.

    “As to Jewish access to the Mosque, once the occupation ends, it should be allowed provided the Jews take off their shoes and conduct their prayers silently without disrupting or disturbing others,”

    Who are you to tell us what we should or should not do.
    the Mosque was built by Muslims for Muslims, Period.

    The structure should only serve the purpose which it was intended for when it was built and no one have the right to impose himself on it.

    ” perhaps in a designated section such as the one for women.”

    Sixth factually incorrect statement, there are no place designated for women in the mount.
    Currently The Marwani mosque is for men, and the dome of the rock is for women.

    I suggest building the Solomon temple in Florida.

    “Putting up a flag on the Dome of the Rock is pure Zionist BS and sick Israeli propaganda,”

    Your comment is also a cheap form of propaganda.

    ” when it was designated as the place from which the prophet ascended on his winged horse for an evening to heaven.”

    I think you should also ascend to another website and go spread your nonsense there.
    Cause here , you dont have a good chance in succeeding .

    • echinococcus
      echinococcus
      October 29, 2015, 3:05 am

      Zaid,

      I really liked your wording of the situation with the Rock.
      The Florida proposal sounds real good.
      If would bring tremendous sales in Disney World.

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        October 29, 2015, 4:53 pm

        Hey, I live in Florida–I don’t want my tax dollars going to build and maintain the Solomon temple here!

      • gamal
        gamal
        October 30, 2015, 7:39 pm

        “Oh, my gawd. That poor man”

        Listen man you and I are mature if you have the stomach check the full horror of Muhammad’s situation

        Honey I mean Honey?

        The Prophet Keeps Away From His Wives For a Month

        http://www.questionsonislam.com/article/prophet-keeps-away-his-wives-month

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 30, 2015, 11:06 pm

        Thanks for the link, Gamal. So his wives gave the Prophet the old “Why don’t you do right, like some other men do, get out of here and bring me some money too” routine.
        I mean, we all get it, but he had to hear it from a whole chorus!

    • Walid
      Walid
      October 29, 2015, 2:21 pm

      “Sixth factually incorrect statement…” (Zaid)

      Zaid, no need to get into insulting those that you don’t agree with. It’s obvious that you know little about Islam’s early history, especially in regards to the Jews and most probably unaware that the prophet (PBUH) had 1 Coptic Christian and 2 Jewish wives.

      For a while, Moslems celebrated some of the Jews’ religious holidays with them, prayed twice a day like them and faced Jerusalem to pray like them. They also celebrated Yom Kippur for the Jews’ deliverance from Egypt, for contemplation and atonement and fasted on Asor, which was the 10th day of the 7th month that in Arabic is known as Ashura, both Hebrew and Arabic words meaning the 10th. You’re probably saying to yourself that I don’t know that Ashura is a Shia commemoration of the death of Imam Hussein at Kerbala, this year falling 6 days ago last Saturday; Hussein was killed on the 10th of Muharram, which happened to be the day of Ashura already commanded to be celebrated and is still commanded by the Quran. Some Sunni still celebrate the initial Jewish-like Ashura, especially in Pakistan.

      It’s only after about 16 years when the prophet realized that the Jews would never accept him as their prophet that he started putting a distance between Islam and the Jews. The Ashura fasting was turned into a full month of fasting (Ramadan), daily prayers were hiked up to 5 times and the qiblah direction was shifted from Jerusalem, where the Abraham rock or stone was located to another stone of the more celestial kind in Mecca . There is an annex to the al-Aqsa mosque for women on the Western Wall.

      BTW, did you know that your namesake “Zaid” has a historic sense in Islam in regards to why it is forbidden for Moslems to adopt a child? History tends to separate fact from folklore. Don’t be offended, I’m like this with all religions.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 29, 2015, 4:10 pm

        “most probably unaware that the prophet (PBUH) had 1 Coptic Christian and 2 Jewish wives.”

        Oh, my gawd. That poor man. What is the relevance of all this to the article? Are you expecting a new era of Muslim-Jewish peace and understanding based on this?

      • zaid
        zaid
        October 29, 2015, 7:14 pm

        ” especially in regards to the Jews and most probably unaware that the prophet (PBUH) had 1 Coptic Christian and 2 Jewish wives.”

        7th factually incorrect statement.

        All Muhammad wife’s were Muslims.
        Jewishness for the Jews in Arabia was a religion and not an ethnicity, and a lot of Arabs even during the era of Muhammad converted to Judaism.

        “prayed twice a day like them and faced Jerusalem to pray like them.”

        8th factually incorrect statement.
        There was no 2 compulsory prayers Before the 5 compulsory prayers were introduced.

        “which happened to be the day of” Ashura already commanded to be celebrated and is still commanded by the Quran”

        9th factually incorrect statement.
        There is nothing in the Quraan about Ashura.

        “Some Sunni still celebrate the initial Jewish-like Ashura, especially in Pakistan.”

        Why only Pakistan, do they know Islam more than the rest of us, or are you being disingenuous.

        “The Ashura fasting was turned into a full month of fasting (Ramadan)”

        10th factually incorrect statement.
        Fasting were introduced before Ashura, actually Ashura is not metioned in the Quraan nor it is required .

        ” daily prayers were hiked up to 5 times”

        11th factually incorrect statement.
        the 5 prayers were introduced in Mecca early in Islam , before Muhammad immigrated to Madina and interacted with the Jews.

        The two prayers turned into five is a joke that you read in a third rate website .

        ” and the qiblah direction was shifted from Jerusalem”

        12th factually incorrect statement.
        Muhammaed used to pray towards Jerusalem but he would put the Kaaba in between, and after he relocated to Madina he couldnot do that so shortly after arriving to Madina he changed that.It has nothing to do with his relationship with the Arab Jews.

        ” where the Abraham rock or stone was located to another stone of the more celestial kind in Mecca ”

        There are no evidence that the rock in al Aqsa is the jewish stone.
        Actually the Dome of the Rock’s Rock is two huge to be classified as a stone. and the dimension of the rock is in conflict with the temple dimensions mentioned in the bible/historians.

        ” There is an annex to the al-Aqsa mosque for women on the Western Wall”

        No there isn’t.
        Qibly/Marwani Mosque is for men, and the Dome of the rock is for women.

        “BTW, did you know that your namesake “Zaid” has a historic sense in Islam in regards to why it is forbidden for Moslems to adopt a child?”

        14th factually incorrect statement.
        Islam didnot ban adopting children , but it forbade giving your name to the child.
        you are confusing the word tabanni (giving our name) and Kafala (adobt/Suport/Raise)

        “History tends to separate fact from folklore. Don’t be offended, I’m like this with all religions.”

        Me too, but i always make sure i get my facts straight first.

        I am not religious, and i have my skepticism but i dont like bullshit.

        i am not the kind of a person who reads an article or one book and then considers himself an expert and goes to embarrass himself like you did.

        ” It’s obvious that you know little about Islam’s early history”

        15th factually incorrect statement.

      • gamal
        gamal
        October 29, 2015, 8:35 pm

        “11th factually incorrect statement.
        the 5 prayers were introduced in Mecca early in Islam , before Muhammad immigrated to Madina and interacted with the Jews.”

        This is of course entirely correct crisis in Mecca, night journey, 5 daily prayers, prior to the Hijra.

        As to the wives I guess Ibn al-Kathir would agree with Zaid.

        http://www.islamawareness.net/Muhammed/ibn_kathir_wives.html

        when they asked the early scholar Sh’abi “Whats the government been paying you for all these years” He replied “La adri, I dont know, for saying “I dont know” about matters which in fact i do not know”

        Publically admitted fallibility is the very quintessence of sunnism,

        “Between the Muslim and Jew: The Problem of Symbiosis under early Islam”

        https://books.google.ie/books?id=I0oABAAAQBAJ&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&dq=wasserstrom+between+muslim+and+jew&source=bl&ots=ww62cVhTC9&sig=BNSYfL1ANJ6nXnDXHNpUJNrKQsg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDkQ6AEwBmoVChMIs5rl2r7oyAIVhSkPCh3dTwuB#v=onepage&q=wasserstrom%20between%20muslim%20and%20jew&f=false

        By Steve Wasserstrom, is a fun and critical text, Walid its all bit simplistic and you are burdening Muhammad with later and not really Muslim concerns. The symbiosis idea currently dominates Judeo-Arabic studies, I am not into any inter-sect/faith/whathaveyou squabbles, Steve has I think interesting grounds for attacking such ideas in toto, but he also knows a bit, thats thing Walid you dont come across as having given this much thought, other than to express an opinion, anyway I don’t know. Read some stuff.

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 30, 2015, 1:54 am

        “I am not religious” (Zaid)

        You could have fooled me. Try Google, it’s very simple.

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 30, 2015, 6:50 pm

        “… Walid its all bit simplistic and you are burdening Muhammad with later and not really Muslim concerns. …” (gamal)

        What are these concerns, gamal, that we keep believing that religion of Jews and Christians have absolutely nothing to do with the forming of the prophet’s new religion?

        In one Hadith, it was described how God had instructed the prophet that Moslems pray 50 times each day and how it was Moses that coached him in negotiating the number down to 5 daily prayers. In another it was described how the prophet discovered the fasting of Jews for Yom Kippur and instituted a like fasting and celebration with a slight twist that became Ashura. Which of the Ahadith are authentic and which are not? What is your opinion on the 14th factually incorrect statement that involves adoption?

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 30, 2015, 6:54 pm

        “Are you expecting a new era of Muslim-Jewish peace and understanding based on this? (Mooser)

        Of course not, we’re simply discussing historical fact and fiction.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 30, 2015, 7:08 pm

        “Of course not, we’re simply discussing historical fact and fiction.”

        Very true, and I’ve learned a lot reading the discussion. Thanks
        But just one minor thing, they are not “horns” or “bumpers”, they are “palmate antlers”. Act as stabilizers in thin high-altitude air.

      • gamal
        gamal
        October 30, 2015, 7:30 pm

        Walid,

        “That we keep believing..” man no Islam is the opposite of that, we have in fairness never believed that the “religion of Jews and Christians have absolutely nothing to do with the forming of the prophet’s” and always believed its precise opposite, “new religion” categorically not new, primordial hence the ability of Islam to integrate with Indic and African religion.

        As to your history, come on man, I know the material, the vast and varied views of that vast literature, I really in all honesty have no idea what you are trying to prove, what do you mean in one hadith? so? you know the satanic verses would have made more sense than he wanted anything from the Jews, the Jews were not a big force in Arabia. The Muhammad of the ahadith famously insisted on judging Jewish issues according to Jewish law, its the whole origin of the they have changed the words discourse, here everyone who has a modicum of humanity would sympathize with the Jews as did many Muslim scholars and aped their practice of obviating the severe punishments of religious law, and its a long story.

        Where did you study Islam?

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 30, 2015, 8:34 pm

        “As to the wives I guess Ibn al-Kathir would agree with Zaid. link to islamawareness.net -” (gamal)

        Not really, gamal, your man Ibn al-Kathir clearly spells out that the prophet’s wife Safiyya was Jewish. He also talks about “Maria the Coptic”. He fails to discuss his other Jewish wife, Rayhana. It goes without saying that these women converted to Islam, but they continued being referred to by the people as “Jews” and “Christians. You are telling me to check out a link that you obviously did not read yourself.

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 30, 2015, 8:59 pm

        “Walid you dont come across as having given this much thought, other than to express an opinion, anyway I don’t know. Read some stuff. ” (gamal)

        Gamal, where do you think I come out with this stuff, from a vivid imagination? I don’t read “stuff” but I do read history. My faith is not that strong to make me accept anything and everything told to me about religion. The 3 Abrahamic religions are based on myth and folklore.

      • gamal
        gamal
        October 30, 2015, 9:12 pm

        “your man ibn al kathir” eh?

        you jest?

        I swear in all honesty I have no idea what you are arguing or why you can’t read, Raythana, really.

        one of the things frankly that has always pissed me off about f*king Muslims is that they might read some bullsh*t summary of primary sources, often written by non-Muslims, and never, ever consult the commentary, the vast complex commentaries. I was born into religion in some ways its all i have ever done, I mean you know as a Muslim you feel Muhammad tried to get the Jews on side and when he failed he “distanced” himself from them? are you insane? no Muslim says that nor does any Muslim source, you have a time machine or a subscription to the unimpeachable source? are you actually a Muslim and do you know any other Muslims?

        where and with whom have you studied Islam, I was for forty years a reluctant acolyte and student (bastard beat me three games of chess night before he died, in front of my wife) of Dr. M.A.Z Badawi, amongst others, he was the senior Sunni in Europe for 20 odd years, cool guy.

        http://www.theguardian.com/news/2006/jan/25/guardianobituaries.religion

      • gamal
        gamal
        October 30, 2015, 9:42 pm

        Walid we are talking at cross purposes this here is what i think of islam, I dont give a shit about what anyone thinks the Prophet did. etc, please,

        so i have experienced Islam as, and check him out man he comes to Canada as this video attests (white people love it)

        https://youtu.be/BFb74Th1yDI

      • gamal
        gamal
        October 30, 2015, 10:38 pm

        you remember Islam

        ya Muhammad

        https://youtu.be/Znm4jDZcKtc

      • Keith
        Keith
        October 31, 2015, 12:33 am

        WALID- “The 3 Abrahamic religions are based on myth and folklore.”

        Amen, brother, amen.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        October 31, 2015, 12:42 am

        ” beat me three games of chess night before he died”

        Way to go, Dr. Badawi.

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 31, 2015, 7:48 am

        “… was for forty years a reluctant acolyte and student (bastard beat me three games of chess night before he died, in front of my wife) of Dr. M.A.Z Badawi, amongst others, he was the senior Sunni in Europe for 20 odd years, …” (gamal)

        gamal, there is no doubt about you being a very learned Moslem. What’s your opinion on the child adoption issue?

      • zaid
        zaid
        October 31, 2015, 8:32 pm

        Walid

        “but they continued being referred to by the people as “Jews” and “Christians”

        15th Factually incorrect statement.

        “He fails to discuss his other Jewish wife, Rayhana”

        Whether or not Rayhana was a wife of Muhammad is disputed and most scholars says no.
        (The graves of Muhammad wifes in Al Baqie shows only nine , so probably she was not).

        And here is the Quranic Verse about the so called adobtion ban in Islam:

        “Call them by [the names of] their fathers; it is more just in the sight of Allah . But if you do not know their fathers – then they are [still] your brothers in religion and those entrusted to you. And there is no blame upon you for that in which you have erred but [only for] what your hearts intended. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.”

        http://quran.com/33

        People can see that whenever i exposed your mischaracterizations and questioned your assumptions, instead of actually addressing the accuracy of your statements or mine , you opted to changing the subject of discussion to a completely unrelated issues like what my name Zaid means, and how many Jewish wife did Muhammad have.

        I tried to push you into a deeper understanding and to look into what a “Jew in Madina” actually meant during that time, and what was the definition of Jewishness back then, but instead you became obsessed of how many of them he actually had and what kind of horn did the flying horse had.

        That is why you managed to run like a chicken and change the subject of discussion from the Rock under the golden dome to what is Islam position on adoption.

        To sum up what is wrong with your understanding:

        -The chronology of events in the life of Muhammad doesnot fit with your theory .

        Examples: The timing of Al Isra & Miraj and the actual time when Fasting and praying were introduced.

        -Some of the things you claimed never actually happened.

        Example: The two prayers thing.

        -You seem to have an Issue with understanding the exact meaning of Quraanic/Hadith Words.

        Example: Tabanni vs Kafala ,Coptic vs Christian and Bani Israel vs Yahud (Jewish).

        -You dont seem to have full knowledge about the subject you write about.

        Example: The wife’s of Muhammad.

        -You overemphasize the Hadith (Secondary Source) and Ignores the Quraan (Primary Source) which is a sign of weakness in your approach.

        -You abuse the use of Hadith by not differentiating between authentic and falsified ones.

        -You have knowledge of Islam , but it is never a complete one, thats why you keep giving extravaganza claims and then i correct you and you retreat to a lesser claim and so on.

        -You are worse than an ignorant, you are suffering from the illusion of knowledge.

        The idea of the creep of Jewish,christian and pagan ideas into Islam is open for discussion,same of whether Muhammad learned things from the Jews or not.But the importance of the jewish role in the life of Muhammad is exaggerated by you and the theory that he changed the religion based on their rejection of him is a joke that does not fit with the facts.

        Same goes for linking the Muslim holy cities of Jerusalem to Judaism.

      • Walid
        Walid
        November 1, 2015, 2:34 am

        “but they (the wives) continued being referred to by the people as “Jews” and “Christians” 15th Factually incorrect statement
        (Zaid)

        That should have been error number 16, Zaid, number 15 is already given out. The story about the horns on the horse was in jest; Mooser corrected me by saying that these were “palmate antlers” that act as stabilizers in thin high altitude air. Check out the link that Mooser posted of the flying horse and you’ll see what this is all about. Relax an stop taking this discussion so seriously.

        Wife Rayhana, number 8 may or may not have been one of the official wives. After a monogamous 25-year life with wife number 1 and she died, the prophet had a series of about 20 wives, concubines and slaves, some of which were married to him in name only but most of the official wives had been widows that he wanted to help out. Rayhana was probably floating somewhere among these groups, which may have caused the confusion. Rayhana bint Zaid ibn Amar was a captured Jewish slave of the Banu Qurayza Jewish tribe that the Prophet defeated in battle. Wiki sums up opinions on her by Ibn Ishaq, al-Tabari and Ibn Saad via European writers as follows:

        “Her (Rayhana) first husband was one of the 600-900 Qurayza men whom Muhammad beheaded in April 627. He enslaved all the women and selected Rayhana for himself because she was the most beautiful. When she refused to marry him, he kept her as a concubine instead. ”

        As to the adoption story that I didn’t really want to get into, back then there was a religious law that prevented a man from marrying his daughter-in-law, even if she became divorced from his son, which in this story happened to involve an actually adopted son. A new celestial revelation to the father-in-law told him to abolish adoption , which he did, and made it retroactive thereby annulling his adoption of the son. Thereafter, the adopted son was no longer a son of any kind by virtue of the retro-law and his wife was free to marry her former father-in-law and the 3 went forward with a good relationship. The adopted son’s name was Zaid and the infatuating wife was Zeinab bint Jahsh that became wife number 7. And that’s how adoption became a no-no.

        This discussion bound to take a bad turn which none of us want, so we should end it.

      • zaid
        zaid
        November 1, 2015, 11:03 am

        “his discussion bound to take a bad turn which none of us want, so we should end it.”

        Yes we should,
        I dont want to keep correcting you.I am tired.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        November 1, 2015, 12:49 pm

        “I dont want to keep correcting you.I am tired.”

        Thanks, “zaid”for what you have done thus far, and the corrections you have supplied.

        Thanks to you, too, “gamal”!

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      October 29, 2015, 4:05 pm

      “when it was designated as the place from which the prophet ascended on his winged… horse?

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 30, 2015, 5:44 pm

        ““when it was designated as the place from which the prophet ascended on his winged… horse? (Mooser)

        Those horns on the horses look like bumpers.

  12. MaxNarr
    MaxNarr
    October 29, 2015, 1:03 pm

    It’s not a bad idea to have some Jewish place of worship on the Temple Mount. This is the most holy site in Judaism. The right to pray is a universal human right.

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      October 29, 2015, 4:15 pm

      ” The right to pray is a universal human right.”

      Just like the right to pimp your religion of your choice for whatever you can get out of it.

      And the “right to pray” you just invented doesn’t give us property rights. But I don’t get it. Aren’t you just a little ashamed to use religion this way?

    • Walid
      Walid
      October 29, 2015, 5:17 pm

      “It’s not a bad idea to have some Jewish place of worship on the Temple Mount. ” (Max)

      Not at all a bad idea. But with the Zionists in control, you give them an inch and they will want a foot, so it becomes a bad idea. The Zionists want it for their colonizing enterprise, not because it’s Judaism’s most holy site.

    • RoHa
      RoHa
      October 29, 2015, 7:17 pm

      “The right to pray is a universal human right.”

      I’m not sure that it is, but I’ll happily listen to arguments on the topic.

      But even if it is a right, it is surely not a right to pray in any manner in any place. I am far from persuaded that I have the right to go into a synagogue, set up an image of Ganesh, and conduct noisy prayer ceremonies. Or even simply do a bit of ” Hare Krishna” chanting.

      I’m fairly sure that the administration of the Haram ash-Sharif would take dim view of enthusiasts for the old religion conducting prayer services next to the Dome, even though a temple of Jupiter stood there for quite a few years.

    • talknic
      talknic
      October 29, 2015, 7:32 pm

      @ MaxNarr “It’s not a bad idea to have some Jewish place of worship on the Temple Mount”

      Without a facility to house a Torah that place is not sanctified. Like the stupid notion that Palestinians in Gaza destroyed a Synagogue. However, the Torahs had been removed. What was once a Synagogue reverted to being just a building, as it was before the Torah placed in it.

      ” The right to pray is a universal human right.”

      Odd thatIsraeli law forbids women the right to carry their Torah so they may sanctify the place they are praying, at the wall and; the State of Israel often prevents Muslims from praying in their mosque

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 29, 2015, 7:45 pm

        “Odd that Israeli law forbids women the right to carry their Torah so they may sanctify the place they are praying, at the wall and; the State of Israel often prevents Muslims from praying in their mosque”

        “Talknic” this MaxNarr is a true squelcher if ever I saw one. And he’s the best kind; a double-foot squelcher, both feet right in it.

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976
        October 29, 2015, 7:51 pm

        There is a right not to be forbidden to exercise – more strictly, forbidden all rreasonable forms of exercise of – one’s religion,,moreover not to be forbidden reasonable demonstrations of atheism. Exercise of religion does not mean doing things which override the rights of others, so I can’t murder my political opponents and say that it is a sacrifice pleasing to a deity. Likewise I can’t enter another’s property to enact a ritual or to proclaim the alleged truth of atheism or generally to deprive that other of the full control of every part of his or her rightful property that is deserved. The Haram in Jerusalem is the recognised property of a Muslim organisation. I think that it is almost certain that other religions have been practised there in the past but that fact creates no rights in the present.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        October 29, 2015, 8:06 pm

        “I can’t murder my political opponents and say that it is a sacrifice pleasing to a deity.”

        Damn!

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 30, 2015, 12:11 pm

        “I can’t murder my political opponents and say that it is a sacrifice pleasing to a deity.”

        I’m telling you, “RoHa”, this world is going to Hillel in a hambasket.

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 30, 2015, 7:34 pm

        Segregation at places of prayers is not exclusive to Moslems with their special section for women. Until not too long ago, Christian men sat on one side of aisle in Church while the women sat together on the other side. Some Christian churches even had a screen mesh running down the middle aisle separating the male side of the church from the female one to prevent one side from seeing the other. The Coptic Orthodox Church still has separate sections for men and women.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 30, 2015, 7:46 pm

        “Segregation at places of prayers is not exclusive to Moslems with their special section for women. Until not too long ago, Christian men sat on one side of aisle in Church while the women sat together on the other side.”

        They’ll never find out what “diddy-wah-diddy” means that way.

    • Kris
      Kris
      October 29, 2015, 8:39 pm

      @MaxNarr: “The right to pray is a universal human right.”

      No one is stopping anyone from praying. You can pray anywhere you can legally be, as long as you aren’t interfering with someone else.

      You just can’t go onto someone else’s property without permission. To pray or to do anything else. (Obviously, to respond to an emergency would be an exception.)

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 30, 2015, 12:37 am

        Aren’t Moslems welcomed in churches and synagogues as long as they behave themselves and don’t try to take over the place? For Moslems, Christians and Jews are “People of the Book” deserving a better treatment than others. Too bad the feeling is not reciprocal. Moslem men can marry Christian or Jewish women without their need to convert to Islam and they can continue practicing their religion but this favour is not granted to Moslem women as they are not allowed to marry a Christian or a Jew unless they first convert to Islam. Orthodox Christian men and women cannot marry outside their faith unless the others first convert. Roman Catholics are more lax on this issue. I think Jews also require conversion to Judaism.

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976
        October 30, 2015, 5:33 am

        Up to a point, Walid – I’m sure Muslims are welcome to visit Church of England churches and to pray there in their hearts. But the Church of St.John’s Waterloo (London) has just got into trouble for allowing a Muslim group, called the Inclusive Mosque, to hold a service on its premises, led by a woman, the Vicar participating as a Christian. St. John’s a ‘high’ Church, with plenty of images of Jesus and the Virgin Mary and these were covered for the duration of the Muslim event, which caused great trouble (it troubles me, ‘liberal’ CofE person that I am) and the Bishop has forbidden any further events on those terms.
        I’m visiting London today via Waterloo station – maybe I should drop into St.John’s for a word with the Almighty.
        I’ve had a look at the Bordeaux Pligrim Journey of 333 CE and find it difficult to read except on the assumption that Christians and Jews of that time regarded the Temple Mount as the former Temple site.

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 30, 2015, 6:53 am

        “with plenty of images of Jesus and the Virgin Mary and these were covered for the duration of the Muslim event ” (MHughes)

        The church people had reason to be upset; I would have thrown those Moslems out the minute they mentioned anything about covering Christian images and so on. Some Moslems are ignorant to the point of believing that Christians actually adore the statues and images rather than what they represent. Just so Zaid doesn’t feel targeted about wrongful adorations, Christians went through their own iconoclastic controversy in the 8th and 9th centuries. The Feast of Orthodoxy symbolizing the restoration of icons is still celebrated during Lent.

      • Kris
        Kris
        October 30, 2015, 11:20 am

        @Walid: “The church people had reason to be upset; I would have thrown those Moslems out the minute they mentioned anything about covering Christian images and so on.”

        As a Christian, I don’t understand why anyone would care if Christian images were covered up during a Muslim service. The Muslims were there to hold a Muslim service with the church’s permission, and the Christian images were presumably not damaged.

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 30, 2015, 7:13 pm

        “As a Christian, I don’t understand why anyone would care if Christian images were covered up during a Muslim service. ” (Kris)

        The church people were kind to let them use the church. Covering the Christians’ religious symbols are signs of disrespect and ingratitude. The Inclusive Mosque Initiative was initiated about 4 years ago by a couple of London Moslem ladies frustrated at the lack of special female sections in UK mosques. They are into mixed prayers in mosques and strive at creating interfaith harmony among all religions.

        Covering the Christians’ religious statues and pictures in the Christians’ own church is absurd and very far from the interfaith mumbo-jumbo they are preaching. They should have held their prayer session at a gas station.

      • Kris
        Kris
        October 30, 2015, 7:24 pm

        @Walid: “Covering the Christians’ religious symbols are signs of disrespect and ingratitude.”

        Are you a Christian? I am, and I don’t find this disrespectful or ungrateful at all. Symbols are only symbols.

        The symbols were not damaged by being covered up. Is there some reason to think that these worshipers intended to offend their hosts?

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 30, 2015, 7:39 pm

        “As a Christian, I don’t understand why anyone would care if Christian images were covered up during a Muslim service.”

        They might very well have thought it was the correct respectful thing to do, or perhaps they simply found the images distracting. A Mosque is usually pretty austere.

      • W.Jones
        W.Jones
        October 30, 2015, 7:41 pm

        Ancient Jewish and Christian synagogues and churches have been found in the NEar East from the first two centuries AD with images inside them of saints or angels. So having images in churches is not idolatry and shouldn’t be covered up. I think that the Jewish community has come to discourage images in houses of worship more since that time though. Maybe it has to do with the influence of Islamic iconoclasm.

        Islam indeed is iconoclastic, even though theologically they appear to be a variety of Christianity, since Islam teaches the virgin birth and Jesus’ Messiahship as “al – Masih”. And as Walid says, the Christian community has rejected iconoclasm.

      • Kris
        Kris
        October 30, 2015, 7:48 pm

        The Inclusive Mosque Initiative sounds like a very good thing:

        In addition to such religious services and practices, IMI organizes regular social events and discussions, which take up contemporary themes and facilitates discussion. In addition to its ongoing interest and commitment to eco-Islam, IMI’s working themes seem to be threefold; (1) gender and sexuality, (2) disability and mental health, and (3) interfaith, intrafaith and commonalities amongst humans.

        IMI events usually feature a respected speaker, religious scholar, or specialist on the topic, and allows for informal exchange of ideas and experiences in an intentionally safe space. They also actively welcome non-Muslims to their spaces, which distinguishes IMI from many other mosques, and have held interfaith prayers and events in spaces rented from other faith-groups (such as St Johns Church, London). In practice IMI further proactively works towards welcoming and respecting everybody who attends their events, and promoting acceptance on both the inter-faith, and intra-faith levels.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusive_Mosque_Initiative

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 30, 2015, 7:57 pm

        “Is there some reason to think that these worshipers intended to offend their hosts? ” (Kris)

        I’m sure that this was not their intent. It was most likely their feeble attempt at creating some form of interfaith mood in the church by covering up symbols of a specific religion. But holding a solely Moslem prayer session is in itself contrary to their vocation of creating interfaith harmony, somewhat of a Baha’i concept of all religions meeting as one. What these Moslem innovators are doing is faux drama, and a bit on the circus side.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 30, 2015, 8:14 pm

        “The church people were kind to let them use the church. Covering the Christians’ religious symbols are signs of disrespect and ingratitude.” Walid 7:13

        “I’m sure that this was not their intent.” Walid 7:52

        And then you go on to slam them some more.

      • Keith
        Keith
        October 31, 2015, 1:08 am

        WALID- “Moslem men can marry Christian or Jewish women without their need to convert to Islam and they can continue practicing their religion but this favour is not granted to Moslem women as they are not allowed to marry a Christian or a Jew unless they first convert to Islam.”

        This whole marriage business is confusing and divisive. Perhaps it would be better if we could all be just friends! With benefits!!!!!!!

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 31, 2015, 2:20 am

        “And then you go on to slam them some more.”(Mooser)

        Cant hide anything from you, Mooser, can I? Like mostly all religious fanatics, their intentions are honourable; it’s their actions that are not justifiable. The road to hell… and all that jazz.

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 31, 2015, 2:33 am

        “A Mosque is usually pretty austere.” (Mooser)

        Maybe little local ones, but some the newer mega-mosques in European cities, like Rome and Moscow, Strasbourg and so on could put some of the Vegas structures to shame. The planned Barcelona multi-purpose religious center in the Plaza de Torros that can hold 25,000 is going to be very special. There’s an ongoing race involving Saudia, Qatar and the UAE as which can build the biggest and most expensive mosque in Europe. Saudia is reported to have earmarked a huge sum for Berlin because of the sudden influx of refugees needing a place to pray. They wonder why…

      • Kris
        Kris
        October 31, 2015, 12:53 pm

        @Walid: ” It was most likely their feeble attempt at creating some form of interfaith mood in the church by covering up symbols of a specific religion. But holding a solely Moslem prayer session is in itself contrary to their vocation of creating interfaith harmony, somewhat of a Baha’i concept of all religions meeting as one.”

        I hope you will read about the Inclusive Mosque Initiative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusive_Mosque_Initiative . They do not seem to be trying for “somewhat of a Baha’i concept” at all. They seem to be welcoming non-Muslims to Muslim prayer, and sometimes holding interfaith prayers.

        According to http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/prayer/mosque.shtml ,

        The main hall of a mosque is a bare room largely devoid of furniture. There are no pictures or statues. Muslims believe these are blasphemous, since there can be no image of Allah, who is wholly spirit.

        So it makes sense that they would cover the Christian images when holding Muslim prayers in a church. It is better not to take offense when none is intended.

        I’m grateful for this discussion, because I did not know what mosques look like on the inside, and now I have seen pictures on the internet of the interiors of many very beautiful mosques, and have read about the Inclusive Mosque Initiative.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 31, 2015, 12:55 pm

        “Like mostly all religious fanatics…”

        So the “Inclusive Mosque Initiative” is the work of “religious fanatics”? What ‘fanatical’ things do they do? Cover the Christian images?

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 31, 2015, 4:58 pm

        “It is better not to take offense when none is intended. -” (Kris)

        Looks like I get easily offended. I’m also enjoying this discussion, it’s a refreshing break from talking about bad Zionists. From your description of the simplicity you liked about mosques, you’d probably like getting more familiar with the Baha’i concept. Their temples are also very bare; they are nine sided or have nine doors, one for each of the world’s more important religions. People of different faiths enter through their specific religion’s door and everybody meets at the center as one people under a dome that has only one inscription in Arabic “Allah”. All their temples have beautifully kept gardens.

        Those “Initiative” people are not at all welcoming of other faiths since they cannot accept the trappings of the Christian church that had let them use the church, a gracious act and acceptance of the “other” which was way much more into interfaith than the Initiative pretenders.

        About Moslems not accepting any images or statues, this is borrowed from the Jews in compliance to God’ first commandment. As to mosques being bare, this is true but in some of the larger ones the cash value of the carpeting and the giant chandeliers could feed thousands for many years.

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 31, 2015, 5:13 pm

        “What ‘fanatical’ things do they do? ” (Mooser)

        From the Wiki description describing that it started as a women’s movement frustrated in not having segregated women’s section in UK mosques so they started a movement to have men and women pray together in their own mosques. They remind me of bra-burners from a while back.

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 31, 2015, 5:33 pm

        “This whole marriage business is confusing and divisive. ” (Keith)

        If you think marriage is a lot of brouhaha, you should take a peek at Moslem inheritance laws that have different rules for Sunni and Shia, especially concerning female members of the family. Shia females get their full share but Sunni get half of what males get.

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 31, 2015, 5:36 pm

        “And then you go on to slam them some more.” (Mooser)

        You’re not a closet Mooooselim, are you?

      • Walid
        Walid
        October 31, 2015, 6:01 pm

        “Islam indeed is iconoclastic” (W Jones)

        Not all od Islam, W Jones, but only a minority. The West became aware of them with the Bamyan Buddhas and did nothing about them. They went on to destroy artifacts in Iraq and now in Syria. But they have also been working in the shadows for decades. In fact Wahhabi fundamentalists for years have been into the destroying of vestiges of ancient of Moslem centuries like the house where the prophet lived, his companions; homes tombs in Saudia and so on al on the premise it’s to prevent the faithful from turning these places into objects of adoration

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 31, 2015, 6:04 pm

        “You’re not a closet Mooooselim, are you?”

        Very funny. The word, I believe is “Muslim”. Do you have a problem spelling it? And I haven’t the slightest idea what a “closet Muslim” is supposed to be. “Closet” anything is a term I would never use. You know my Dad (poor Dad)? Mama hung him in the closet, and I’m feeling so sad.

        Do you have any idea what you are trying to do?

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 31, 2015, 6:09 pm

        Walid “iconoclasm” has do do with destroying your own idols. Destroying somebody else’s religious symbols is not “iconoclasm” it’s just destruction.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 31, 2015, 6:50 pm

        “They remind me of bra-burners from a while back.”

        Sorry “Walid”, I’m not familiar with your religious terminology. What is a “bra-burner”?

        I don’t know what that is. I do think I’m pretty good at spotting ringers. Well, except you’re more of a dull thud. None of it rings true.

      • just
        just
        October 31, 2015, 7:02 pm

        “Do you have any idea what you are trying to do?”

        I’m uncomfortably curious, too.

        (In the words of US government spokespersons, it’s certainly not helpful)

      • Kris
        Kris
        October 31, 2015, 7:23 pm

        @Walid: “They remind me of bra-burners from a while back.”

        Bra burning was a bad thing?

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 31, 2015, 7:52 pm

        “Bra burning was a bad thing?”

        Look, I thought bra-burning was a bad thing, too. Had several bad experiences. But after a while I learned not to set it alight while I was wearing it.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 31, 2015, 10:54 pm

        Okay, Walid, I get it. This Mosque Initiative women are fanatics, for wanting to find a way to pray which suits them, with no violence, no money, no force, and no harm to others.

        So if those ladies are fanatics (“like bra-burners” Oh, those scary bra-burning babes!) Walid, without ever laying a finger on anybody, or blowing anything up, or taking anything from anyone, what are Zionists?
        Even the most liberal Zionist is closer to a fanatic than the IMI.

        “Aren’t Moslems welcomed in churches and synagogues”

        Nobody has a religious ID in the US. There’s no way to know the religion of anybody at a church or temple service.

      • Walid
        Walid
        November 1, 2015, 3:01 pm

        “Bra burning was a bad thing?” (Kris)

        Of course not, Kris. I sarcastically used the term for its 60s symbolism of women’s rights to describe my impression of this religious movement that I had never heard of until it was mentioned here and read about. A more up-to-date symbolism I should have perhaps used was the Femen (topless) movement that in early September disrupted a controversial conference near Paris on the role of Muslim women. It doesn’t bother me if Moslem men and women pray together in the same room. I took off on a tangent with this sect about having covered Christian objects in a Christian church that had graciously let them use the church, that’s all.

    • eljay
      eljay
      October 29, 2015, 9:05 pm

      || MaxNarr: It’s not a bad idea to have some Jewish place of worship on the Temple Mount. … ||

      A much better idea is to dismantle Temple Mount, remove to Israel and Palestine what belongs in each country and build a nice “Park of Peace” on the site of Temple Mount in the Free City of Jerusalem.

      || … The right to pray is a universal human right. ||

      But it does not entitle you to pray anywhere you want. (Just as my universal human right to live doesn’t mean I can take over your house and live in it.)

  13. hophmi
    hophmi
    October 30, 2015, 1:11 pm

    So, again, we all recognize that Israelis have multiple views on topics like these, but where is the evidence that these views represent anything more than a small minority, or that this stuff actually has a real chance of happening? In the United States, there are elected representatives and major Presidential candidates who advocate expelling millions of undocumented immigrants, criminalizing homosexuality, and various forms of Islamophobia. In the Palestinian Authority, the President denies basic facts of Jewish history on the Temple Mount.

    And also, I’m really not clear. Do you support religious freedom, or don’t you? Religious freedom would suggest, at a minimum, that Jews who want to pray on the Temple Mount should be permitted to do so, regardless of what it means politically. Do you support excluding them from doing so, and if you do, how does that square with any notion of religious freedom?

    • annie
      annie
      October 30, 2015, 4:38 pm

      basic facts of Jewish history on the Temple Mount.

      are you referencing information in biblical documents. for example, is the presence of jesus now a “basic fact of history”? al aqsa is on a specific location, that is a fact. Jews believe this is the location of their past (and future) temple, that is also a fact.

      however, jewish history strongly suggests jews are not even supposed to enter the area of this future temple until after the arrival of their messiah. so how does supporting this relatively new trend for jews to counter their own history of worship square with “support for religious freedom”?

      and what if zionist christians, en mass, decided that they were the original jews and in this capacity demanded equal rights to pray and hold services in the oldest and largest synagogues in the US or any place in the world they may reside, under the mantel of “religious freedom”. Do you support religious freedom, or don’t you? would you support this. let’s say on saturdays jews could worship in the synagogues but on sundays christian services would be held. would you support this? or what about the Karaite Synagogue or Belz Great Synagogue both in jerusalem.

      now this may seem outrageous idea, but what if the desire grew and grew and 20 years from now it was mainstream? would you support this idea under the mantel of religious freedom supported by a ‘basic fact’ of christian history even though history doesn’t really support the idea of christians worshiping in this way?

      and what if my religious freedom drove me to invade and conquer some place on the globe some dna test proved my ancestors originated from. would you support it? what if my religious freedom demanded i rule paris for example. where i don’t even speak french. i could make up a new language and change all the road signs.

      • Xpat
        Xpat
        November 1, 2015, 2:15 pm

        Annie – +1
        And what if Christians in any majority Christian country could demonstrate that the site of a mosque was once a church 1,000 years ago. And then White supremacists demanded access to the mosque using hophmi’s argument of freedom of religion.
        Would he support the Christian supremacist claim? And if the site were now a synagogue?
        Context is everything.

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      October 31, 2015, 8:01 pm

      “Do you support religious freedom, or don’t you?”

      Annie, we will just have to face the fact that “Hophmi’s” life won’t be complete until he strangles a dove with his own hands on the Temple Mount.

    • talknic
      talknic
      November 1, 2015, 11:30 pm

      hophmi “In the United States, there are elected representatives and major Presidential candidates who advocate expelling millions of undocumented immigrants….”

      You don’t want to go there …. They’d be US representatives in the US. The undocumented immigrants, i.e., illegal immigrants, aren’t US citizens. The Israeli capitol is not in Israel, the undocumented immigrants,i.e., illegal settlers, are not Palestinian citizens.

      ” Religious freedom would suggest, at a minimum, that Jews who want to pray on the Temple Mount should be permitted to do so, regardless of what it means politically”

      Is there any country in the world that allows people to illegally enter their territory to pray ?

      “Do you support excluding them from doing so, and if you do, how does that square with any notion of religious freedom?”

      Palestinian legislation on freedom of religion is for Palestinians. Israelis are not Palestinians. Israelis in Palestinian territory are there illegally

Leave a Reply