It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: DarkPalSFO
before that most arabs were polytheistic. as a matter of fact in the arabian peninsula Christianity was the dominant faith.
originally posted by: DarkPalSFO
a reply to: Gothmog
You are right that it belongs to Islam. But before 1947 the land was called Palestine. When the British ruled the land of was called Palestine. The Temple Mount belonged to Palestine. As much as you would like to erase the history you can't deny facts.
Until about the fourth century, almost all Arabs practised polytheistic religions. Although significant Jewish and Christian minorities developed, polytheism remained the dominant belief system in pre-Islamic Arabia. The religious beliefs and practices of the nomadic Bedouin were distinct from those of the settled tribes of towns such as Mecca. Nomadic religious belief systems and practices are believed to have included fetishism, totemism and veneration of the dead but were connected principally with immediate concerns and problems and did not consider larger philosophical questions such as the afterlife. Settled urban Arabs, on the other hand, are thought to have believed in a more complex pantheon of deities. While the Meccans and the other settled inhabitants of the Hejaz worshiped their gods at permanent shrines in towns and oases, the Bedouin practised their religion on the move.
Religion in pre-Islamic Arabia
The Hanafi (Arabic: حنفي Ḥanafī) school is one of the four religious Sunni Islamic schools of jurisprudence (fiqh). It is named after the scholar Abū Ḥanīfa an-Nu‘man ibn Thābit (d. 767), a tabi‘i whose legal views were preserved primarily by his two most important disciples, Abu Yusuf and Muhammad al-Shaybani. The other major schools of Sharia in Sunni Islam are Maliki, Shafi`i and Hanbali.
After a week of protests characterized by some remarkable Palestinian grassroots nonviolent mobilization, and covered extensively by the international media, Netanyahu backed down. The police commander ordered the metal detectors removed, while the Israeli authorities discuss installing in their place enhanced security cameras with facial recognition technology. Palestinians say this, too, is unacceptable. At first they continued protesting and refused to enter al-Aqsa compound, but ultimately they decided to end their campaign. Palestinians are once again entering the Haram al-Sharif, although Israel threatened to restrict access to women and to men older than fifty.
Now there are three narratives about the events of the past two weeks. There is the version that characterizes this as a Palestinian victory won with impressively organized non-violent action. Another version holds that Netanyahu’s having backed down is evidence that he is not the strong leader Israel needs in the face of Palestinian terrorism. And the third version, which one could call the Israeli mainstream view, holds that the prime minister behaved stupidly and rashly in an effort to save his own skin, thereby undermining Israel’s diplomatic relations with friendly Muslim countries and risking yet another round of military confrontation with the Palestinians.