Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,843 Year: 4,100/9,624 Month: 971/974 Week: 298/286 Day: 19/40 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   former custodian of the Temple Mount admits Jewish Temple existed
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 1 of 27 (321317)
06-14-2006 1:09 AM


JERUSALEM - Contradicting most of his colleagues, a former senior leader of the Waqf, the Islamic custodians of the Temple Mount, told WorldNetDaily in an exclusive interview he has come to believe the first and second Jewish Temples existed and stood at the current location of the Al Aqsa Mosque.
The leader, who was dismissed from his Waqf position after he quietly made his beliefs known, said Al Aqsa custodians passed down stories for centuries from generation to generation indicating the mosque was built at the site of the former Jewish Temples.
...
The former leader, who is well known to Al Aqsa scholars and Waqf officials, spoke on condition his name be withheld, claiming an on-the-record interview would endanger his life.
While the Islamic leader's statements may seem elementary to many in the West, especially in light of overwhelming archaeological evidence documenting the history of the Jewish temples and description of services there in the Torah, his words break with mainstream thinking in much of the Muslim world, which believes the Jewish temples never existed.
"I am mentioning historical facts," said the former leader. "I know that the traditional denial about the temple existing at the same place as Al Aqsa is more a political denial. Unfortunately our religious and political leaders chose the option of denial to fight the Jewish position and demands regarding Al Aqsa and taking back the Temple Mount compound. In my opinion we should admit the truth and abandon our traditional position."
Page not found - WND
I suppose this is progress of a sorts, but had no idea mainstream Islam denied the Jewish Temples were ever built, assuming the article is right in that assessment.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2006 1:53 AM randman has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17827
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 2 of 27 (321327)
06-14-2006 1:53 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by randman
06-14-2006 1:09 AM


Where is it documented that Muslims doubt that the Jewish Temples existed ? From what's quoted it looks more like the issue is WHERE the Jewish Temples stood.a

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by randman, posted 06-14-2006 1:09 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by randman, posted 06-14-2006 2:05 AM PaulK has replied
 Message 5 by Modulous, posted 06-14-2006 2:57 AM PaulK has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 3 of 27 (321328)
06-14-2006 2:05 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by PaulK
06-14-2006 1:53 AM


read the quotes
I wouldn't say a news article is necessarily documentation of a fact, but this is the statement:
his words break with mainstream thinking in much of the Muslim world, which believes the Jewish temples never existed
Evidently or at least according to this, mainstream thinking in much of the Muslim world "believes the Jewish temples never existed."
Also,
Muslims worldwide deny the Jewish temples ever existed
There are some comments indicating that some think the Jewish temples may have existed but at different sites, but the above statements seem pretty clear to me that the writer claims mainstream Muslim opinion, at least in much of the Muslim world, denies they ever existed at all.
Edited by randman, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2006 1:53 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2006 2:48 AM randman has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17827
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 4 of 27 (321336)
06-14-2006 2:48 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by randman
06-14-2006 2:05 AM


Re: read the quotes
So basically in support of the claims in the article, you offer the claims in the article.
However if you read the quotes in the article - from the article's unnamed source - it seems that the location may be the real issue. And given what I know of Is lam that would seem far more plausible.
I know that the traditional denial about the temple existing at the same place as Al Aqsa is more a political denial.
(emphasis mine)
emp
Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by randman, posted 06-14-2006 2:05 AM randman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2006 3:06 AM PaulK has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 5 of 27 (321338)
06-14-2006 2:57 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by PaulK
06-14-2006 1:53 AM


where's Solomon?
Where is it documented that Muslims doubt that the Jewish Temples existed ? From what's quoted it looks more like the issue is WHERE the Jewish Temples stood.
That seems to be about right.
Yassar Arafat writes:
For 34 years [the Israelis] have dug tunnels [around the Temple Mount] . they found not a single stone proving that the Temple of Solomon was there, because historically the Temple was not in Palestine [at all].
(and at another time)
Not only this, but [the Israelis] have also been trying to take over houses, shops, lanes and streets, either under the pretext of exploration or, as they recently did by closing the major gates of the mosque to conduct the so-called exploration operation of what they called the remains of the Solomon Temple when all the historical evidence, Your Majesty, proved that it was not there at all in another place far away from this spot. This is what historians had been saying
(not a neutral source)
At the end of the day, Solomon is a prophet of Islam, so I see no reason to deny a Temple existed. It's an issue of where it was, and the rights to access to holy land. Cynics would call rights to holy land as a political excuse, and I'd agree.
quote:
27.15: And certainly We gave knowledge to Dawood and Sulaiman, and they both said: Praise be to Allah, Who has made us to excel many of His believing servants.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2006 1:53 AM PaulK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by randman, posted 06-14-2006 10:26 AM Modulous has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17827
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 6 of 27 (321339)
06-14-2006 3:06 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by PaulK
06-14-2006 2:48 AM


Further investigation
http://www.templemount.org/allah.html
quote:
Since it is an historical fact that Mohammed never came to Jerusalem why is the Temple Mount considered holy to Muslims? One passage from the Koran does link Mohammed with Jerusalem and the Temple Mount. It is the seventeenth Sura, entitled "The Night Journey." In this Sura there is a dream or vision by Mohammed in which he is carried by night:
...from the sacred temple to the temple that is more remote, whose precinct we have blessed, that we might show him of our signs.
Islamic tradition identifies the first temple as Mecca and the second as Jerusalem.
http://www.islamonline.net/.../AskAboutIslamE
quote:
The first Temple of Prophet Solomon was built in Jerusalem (so it is believed), having already been chosen by Allah as a sacred city
quote:
...the first Temple of Solomon was completely destroyed in 586 BCE, with the capture of Jerusalem and the exile of the Jews to Babylon. Later, they were allowed to return and they rebuilt the Temple
It certainly seems that Muslism acknowledge the past existence of the Jewish Temples.r
Edited by AdminNWR, : shorten link

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2006 2:48 AM PaulK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by randman, posted 06-14-2006 10:33 AM PaulK has replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4987 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 7 of 27 (321352)
06-14-2006 6:41 AM


Solomon's Temple
While the Islamic leader's statements may seem elementary to many in the West, especially in light of overwhelming archaeological evidence documenting the history of the Jewish temples..
It would be nice to know what some of this 'overwhelming archaeological evidence' is. As far as I am aware, and as far as ALL the mainstream archaeological journals I have read are concerned, no one has uncovered a single stone of Solomon's Temple.
Some of the archaeological evidence would be appreciated.
Brian.

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by randman, posted 06-14-2006 10:27 AM Brian has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 8 of 27 (321400)
06-14-2006 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Modulous
06-14-2006 2:57 AM


Re: where's Solomon?
So some deny it ever existed (the article says that is the dominant opinion), and others say it was "far away" and not even "in Palestine" which seems just as bad.
What's the difference?
Where do they think it was if not somewhere in Palestine?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Modulous, posted 06-14-2006 2:57 AM Modulous has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 9 of 27 (321403)
06-14-2006 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Brian
06-14-2006 6:41 AM


Re: Solomon's Temple
It's a coffee house forum. If you want to know, email them or look it up. The evidence they mention refers to various items, not stones, and there is a reason for that as the stones were carried away on purpose except perhaps the Wailing Wall.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Brian, posted 06-14-2006 6:41 AM Brian has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 10 of 27 (321406)
06-14-2006 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by PaulK
06-14-2006 3:06 AM


Re: Further investigation
Apparently, the PLO thinks the Temple was not in Jerusalem or Palestine, and others think it never existed.
What evidence do you have that the Muslims in the Middle East believe Solomon had a Temple in Jerusalem.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2006 3:06 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2006 11:07 AM randman has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17827
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 11 of 27 (321419)
06-14-2006 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by randman
06-14-2006 10:33 AM


Re: Further investigation
quote:
Apparently, the PLO thinks the Temple was not in Jerusalem or Palestine, and others think it never existed.
Which "others" say it "never existed" ? Where's the evidence ?
quote:
What evidence do you have that the Muslims in the Middle East believe Solomon had a Temple in Jerusalem.
Why would it matter where Muslims live ? I've produced evidence that there is a Muslim tradition - a very strong one - that there was a Temple on the Temple Mount, before Muhammed. And a maanstream Muslim website also says that the Temple was bult there.
But we have seen zero evidence for your claim that mainstream Muslim thinking - in any part of the World - holds that Solomon's Temple never existed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by randman, posted 06-14-2006 10:33 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by randman, posted 06-14-2006 11:13 AM PaulK has replied
 Message 14 by jar, posted 06-14-2006 11:33 AM PaulK has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 12 of 27 (321425)
06-14-2006 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by PaulK
06-14-2006 11:07 AM


Re: Further investigation
Mainstream Islam says Solomon was an Islamic prophet. You have to do better than that.
You have provided no real evidence to contradict the article.
Why?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2006 11:07 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2006 11:28 AM randman has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17827
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 13 of 27 (321434)
06-14-2006 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by randman
06-14-2006 11:13 AM


Re: Further investigation
quote:
Mainstream Islam says Solomon was an Islamic prophet. You have to do better than that.
How is this relevant ?
quote:
You have provided no real evidence to contradict the article.
Why?
Firstly my point is not to contradict the article - only to question assertion that Muslims deny that the Jewish Temples ever existed - an assertion that is not supported in the article.
I've provided evidence that there are Muslims who say that Solomon's Temple was on the Temple Mount - and even that it is part of an important tradition.
So the evidence I've found is against the article on that point and nobody has found any evidence for it.
So your question is in error. What should be questioned is why - if the article is correct - we should find so many statements from Muslims asserting that the Temples did exist - and none that they did not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by randman, posted 06-14-2006 11:13 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by randman, posted 06-14-2006 11:46 AM PaulK has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 422 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 14 of 27 (321436)
06-14-2006 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by PaulK
06-14-2006 11:07 AM


Re: Further investigation
I don't really understand what there is to even dispute in the original article. Like so many today the part that was quoted is totally ambiguous anyway. as is so often the case with reporting like that seen at Worldnetdaily, the story is a mixture of reporting and totally unsupported assertion.
Consider this quote from the article:
While the Islamic leader's statements may seem elementary to many in the West, especially in light of overwhelming archaeological evidence documenting the history of the Jewish temples and description of services there in the Torah, his words break with mainstream thinking in much of the Muslim world, which believes the Jewish temples never existed.
Here is a combination of two totally unsuported statements designed simply as propaganda.
TTBOMK there is NO archaeological evidence documenting the history of the Jewish temples and even if there was, that is not what the story is about. The story is about one very particular temple (two if you include the rebuilt temple), not Jewish Temples in general.
The second propaganda statement is "mainstream thinking in much of the Muslim world, which believes the Jewish temples never existed." That just comes out of the blue and is not supported by any of the facts in the article.
This article is just another example of the breakdown between reporting and editorializing. It is editorial comment masquerading as reporting.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2006 11:07 AM PaulK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by randman, posted 06-14-2006 11:50 AM jar has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 15 of 27 (321437)
06-14-2006 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by PaulK
06-14-2006 11:28 AM


Re: Further investigation
only to question assertion that Muslims deny that the Jewish Temples ever existed - an assertion that is not supported in the article.
Here is what the article says, contrary to your claims.
Muslims worldwide deny the Jewish temples ever existed
his words break with mainstream thinking in much of the Muslim world, which believes the Jewish temples never existed
Your quote in the article is from one individual:
I know that the traditional denial about the temple existing at the same place as Al Aqsa is more a political denial.
There are quotes on this thread from Palestinians denying Solomon's Temple was in Palestine at all, if it even existed. Apparently, there are many that deny the Temple ever existed. Others claims it may have existed but in Palestine, and some that deny that it was in the same place but could have been in Palestine.
Regardless, we have a major authority in Islam in the sense of an insider that says the insiders that keep the Mosque are taught the truth and yet continually promote a deliberate lie, asserting the Jewish Temple was never there, and moreover, that the Muslim world at least over in the Middle East believes these lies.
You find that significant or just want to quibble over which lie is the more predominant, that the Temple never existed, or that it never existed in Palestine, or that it existed but in Jerusalem or on the same spot?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2006 11:28 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by PaulK, posted 06-14-2006 12:07 PM randman has replied
 Message 18 by Modulous, posted 06-14-2006 12:07 PM randman has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024