Originally posted by TheUniverse
When Facing Mecca Yes??? Because its in that direction from where they are probably?
So what if a Muslim were to pray on the other side of the Temple mount or Dome of the Rock he would be facing it; whilst facing Mecca.
I could not agree more.
Originally posted by Dr Expired
The really strange thing is why Anglo Saxons, Jutes, Normans ect give a fig about the Middle East.
Where is our God, our religion , oh yes it was crushed by the Christian Romans.
We need to wear armour against both Judaism and Islam, and know our true God/
I hope that one day Palestine rises up and smashes the ZOG machine of Israel into oblivion.
These laws do not say "being Jewish is illegal", they say things like stealing land is ilegal.
If your religion advocates stealing land from others, then I guess you can say international law does discriminate against it in some sense.
According to the Hebrew Bible, the Jebusites were a Canaanite tribe who inhabited and built Jerusalem prior to its conquest by King David; the Books of Kings state that Jerusalem was known as Jebus prior to this event. According to some Biblical chronologies, the city was conquered by King David in 1003 BC, or according to other sources 869 BC.
The Tanakh portion of the Bible contains the only surviving ancient text known to use the term Jebusite to describe the pre-Israelite inhabitants of Jerusalem; according to the Table of Nations at Genesis 10, the Jebusites are identified as a Canaanite tribe, which is listed in third place among the Canaanite groups, between the Biblical Hittites and the Amorites. Prior to modern archaeological studies, most Biblical scholars held the opinion that the Jebusites were identical to the Hittites, which continues to be the case, though less so. However, an increasingly popular view, first put forward by Edward Lipinski, professor of Oriental and Slavonic studies at the Catholic University of Leuven, is that the Jebusites were most likely an Amorite tribe; Lipinski identified them with the group referred to as Yabusi'um in a cuneiform letter found in the archive of Mari, Syria.
As Lipinski noted, however, it is entirely possible that more than one clan or tribe bore similar names, and thus that the Jebusites and Yabusi'um may have been separate people altogether. In the Amarna letters, mention is made of the contemporaneous king of Jerusalem was named Abdi-Heba, which is a theophoric name invoking a Hurrian goddess named Hebat; unless a different ethnic group occupied Jerusalem in this period, this implies that the Jebusites were Hurrians themselves, were heavily influenced by Hurrian culture, or were dominated by a Hurrian maryannu class.
Jebusites named in the Bible
According to Genesis, the ruler of Jerusalem in the time of Abraham was Melchizedek (also Melchizedeq), and that as well as being a ruler, he was also a priest. Later, Joshua is described as defeating a Jebusite king named Adonizedek. The first parts of their names mean king and lord, respectively, but though the zedek part can be translated as righteous (making the names my king is righteous and my lord is righteous), most Biblical scholars believe that it is a reference to a deity named Zedek, who was the main deity worshipped by the Jebusites (making the names my king is Zedek and my lord is Zedek). Scholars are uncertain, however, whether Melchizedek was himself intended in the Genesis account to be understood as a Jebusite, rather than a member of another group in charge of Jerusalem prior to the Jebusites - Jerusalem is referred to as Salem rather than Jebus in the passages of Genesis describing Melchizedek.
You have the Israelis saying that the history of Jerusalem began with David's conquest in 1000 B.C. We know from archaeological evidence that the city was inhabited from 3000 B.C., so to say that its history begins only when David captures it is doing injustice to the archaeological record. No doubt both sides are stretching and embroidering the fabric of history.
The major consequence of David's capture of Jerusalem is that it begins Jewish rule in the city. Judaism is [sic. merely]the first of the three major religions to be established in the city.
Most of the battles that have raged in Jerusalem in the past 4,000 years have been inspired by the desire of one or another group to establish cultural and religious hegemony over the region. The focal point of the region has always been the Temple Mount and the rock that stands upon it.
Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by TheUniverse
So kids playing soccer probably don't know any better?
Do you think Kids can 'randomly' walk into the massive courtyard where the Kaaba sits, without being kicked out by conscious authorities ie; video cameras, security guards??
The rule is this. If you consider something sacred, you treat is as sacred. You put guards around the perimeter, and if you have been to the Temple mount is by no means difficult, and you make sure that those who do come to the area are treating it with an expected level of holiness. Playing games, like soccer, or having picnics, shows the complete opposite.
Originally posted by troubleshooter
reply to post by dontreally
The distance from the Temple Mount to Mecca is 666 miles.
Daniel 3:1-5 "Nebuchadnezzar the king made an image of gold, whose height was threescore cubits, and the breadth thereof six cubits: ... That at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, and all kinds of musick, ye fall down and worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king hath set up:"
Threescore = 60 x 6 cubits x 6 instruments.
A symbol of false worship and idolatrous arrogance.
Originally posted by EmVeeFF
No. I don't know how else to say it. Just because people play soccer in an old sacred land does not mean Palestinians should be victims of genocide.