It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Resolving the Temple Mount issue - Key to Peace in the middle east?

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Much of Jewish rabbinic literature shows that the Israelites built the First Temple in Jerusalem about 3000 years ago. It is the holiest site in Judaism, the one holy site revered by them and christians alike, except, today's Christians have yet to set eyes upon such a sight. The Temple was the central site of Jewish worship, as well as the residing place of God durring various times, according to the bible.





So far, there have been 2 temples built and destroyed. Both temples were layed waste no more than 500 years apart. Religious Jews have prayed for the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem for the last 2,000 years, since it was burned down by rome. Today, in it's place, stands a temple that is revered by only Muslim.





(A and C depict where the temples once stood. B Shows where the Dome of the Rock stands today.)


The Western Wall, known as the Wailing Wall, is the only remaining wall of the Temple Mount. For all practical purposes this wall is the holiest site in Judaism left standing today. Many Jews pray there, as well as Christians and others of similar faiths, and often leave written prayers addressed to God in the cracks of the wall.






Still today, this very ground is the most sought after piece of property in the world, as well as the most volitile. It could very well be the answer for peace or the fall of mankind as we know it.

Much of the problem for Jews and Christians is, the Holy Temple that is to be rebuilt, a prophecy needed to come to pass in order for God to again dwell with mankind, must be built on the temple mount. Unfortunatly for them, this site is already very much taken by Muslim faith and the Dome of the Rock. To have one, the other must not be.

Without the Jewish Temple, Jewish and Christian, or 'Bible' prophecy cannot be fullfilled.

Islamic Control of Temple Mount Prevents Biblical Prophecy



While talk today about Rapture predictions are increasing in regularity, some biblical prophecies affecting Christians, Muslims and Jews have stood in place for millenniums.

One such prophecy concerns the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Israel, which is said to be the site where all the nations will gather to worship when the Messiah returns.


Bill Clinton also tried to bring attantion to the Issue. He seemed to believe very deeply in the restoration of the temple as well. It's possible that he may have been catering to Israel at the time, or he could have very well been looking for a peacfull resolve



"The temple is tied with Jewish destiny," he said. "God's presence was once at the mount. It left, but it has promised to return – but it needs a temple to return to. The temple is mentioned in the Biblical prophecies as the place where all the nations will come together – even Jesus said that the temple will be a house of prayer for all people."

"If we look at the Jewish scriptures, the last nine chapters of the Book of Ezekiel say clearly that a temple will stand again in the future. They even give a description of the dimensions and give directions for rebuilding the Temple. It really can not be spiritualized away – it is a literal temple that was destroyed, and the prophecy says it will be rebuilt."



Durring the 6-day war, the holy area was given to muslims, but only if they kept the site open to all faiths that come to worship. This quickly fell through.



The Israeli government is allegedly not interested in changing the status quo on the Temple because it wants to preserve the peace, according to the professor. It was decided back in 1967 that Islamic authorities will have jurisdiction over the religious sites – but the deal was that they would allow people from other religions who had reverence for that place to come as tourists.

"The Muslims did not allow any sort of show of faith – you can not pray, or take out a Bible (at the temple.) Since 2000 they have restricted access to the principle buildings there. They do not allow anyone other than Muslims to go into the structure – while previously it was allowed. This is a violation to the status quo that was agreed to in '67," the professor explained.



Today, more is being done to insure that this site is dominated by none other than the muslim faith.

It is said now that muslim officials are moving ahead with plans to construct a minaret on the Temple Mount. This minaret will be located near the Golden Gate and will be the tallest minaret in the complex at 134 feet high. This will be the first minaret constructed in 639 years, as the other four which are there now, were built between 1278 and 1367. The prayer tower will be Jordanian in style and will cost around $700K

Here lies another BIG problem. Construction is a violation of the principle of status quo of disputed holy sites in Israel. It will be built without any archaeological supervision. This is hippocritical as, should one want to build a structure, home or building in a remote part of Israel artifacts are found to be present, then an excavation must take place. But if one wants to construct on one of the most important sites in the Holy Land, there are no such requirements. Yet, Jews and Christians are not allowed to build anywhere near, nor are they allowed to worship. If one tries, or even attempts a prayer silently while standing on the site, "all hell would break loose".


If this is what we rely on for peace, we seem to be in hella hot water.




So my friends.. I ask. What would be a "solution" here for peace? How would you handle the issue with all 3 faiths and this holy site?


No Trolls, Flamers, Spammers or Smartasses - Please keep it civil. This is a logical descussion about a specific issue. Nothing else is needed to be filled in here. I am aware that many dont believe in any of this. These are not the ones that I am looking for a responce from. Please refrain unless you have something that you can honestly contribute to this discussion - thanx!






posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
The saying that possession is 9/10th the law comes to mind.

Since any group of peoples could come forth claiming religious rights to the area then it must be left up to whomever possess ownership at the current time.

If I were put in charge of coming up with a solution I would put it to vote, but only Muslims get to vote, since they hold ownership.

After all, if God wants some other religious sect to have ownership of the area I'm sure he's capable of making it so.



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 11:59 AM
link   
"So the Lord sent a plague on Israel from that morning until . . ."
"When the angel stretched out his hand to destroy Jerusalem, the Lord was grieved"
"The angel of the Lord was then at the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite."
"David saw the angel who was striking down the people"
"Go up and build an altar to the Lord on the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite.”
"Here are oxen for the burnt offering, and here are threshing sledges and ox yokes for the wood."

This is all very highly stylized but you can imagine what is now called Zion was a place for cattle, and this was what later Isaiah thought it had been turned back into, which the huge numbers of animals brought through it for offerings.
Then it got ruined, then later rebuilt and by the time Jesus came to it, it was right back to where it was, a place for cattle, then it got ruined again.
Maybe we should best restrain ourselves from ever making it again a place for cattle.



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


I "think" I grasp what you're saying. What I'm confused about though, the cattle were the burnt offerings. The sacrifice they had to take part in often to appease God. This they had to do because of their past transgressions.


If it's a metaphore, I can kinda understand what you're saying, but the cattle was indeed nessissary.



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   
There is nothing in scripture that says the New Temple has to be above ground. There are many many tunnels under Jerusalem. Perhaps the Temple has already been rebuilt?



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamschist
 


I never thought of it that way. Good point. Though, I would think that building such a temple would be noticed by someone. I also read some years ago that there were people under the structures digging up and destroying artifacts to keep anyone from proving that the land that this dome was on was indeed artifacts and structures from jewish history. They wanted to take away all possibility of claim. In effect, they ended up doing terrible foundation damage that could cause this dome to eventually collaps. From what I've read recently, there is news and word of the structural damage of the dome that needs immediate repairs.

Perhaps this will come to pass which would possibly leave this place open for a new rebuilding of the temple.


I remember something many years ago, also, that sits in the back of my mind, but I'm not sure where it came from or originated. Maybe someone here can assist.


Anyone know of a cituation that is - If Israel builds the temple in one spot, war will come, if they build in another, peace will come?

Some say this dome does not sit where the temple once sat. Some say it does.

I can believe very much that this temple twice stood. Where exactly, is another story. Though, the "yard" in which the dome sits, looks very much like the description of the place where the temple once stood. It would make sense.



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   
I don't think the site of the Dome of the Rock is the real hindrance to peace.
It's just a side issue.
The issue is that one side of the conflict is dedicated to the annihilation of the other, in doctrine, in Scripture and in practice. Peace cannot exist where one side has the "divine commandment" to destroy the other.

This is not to suggest that Israel is blameless - but I *am* suggesting that irregardless of what Israel brings to the table, she will never have peace with Islam.



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Awen24
 

I don't think the site of the Dome of the Rock is the real hindrance to peace.

Do you think the Muslims are going to allow the Jews to maintain sheep pins and cattle stockades on the grounds of their mosque?



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Awen24
 

I don't think the site of the Dome of the Rock is the real hindrance to peace.

Do you think the Muslims are going to allow the Jews to maintain sheep pins and cattle stockades on the grounds of their mosque?


not at all - but as I said, I think that this is a byproduct of the conflict, not the heart of it...
the real issue in terms of peace is more than a struggle over land, it's an ideological conflict. If it were anything other than ideological, the Islamic nations surrounding Israel would have accepted the peace terms offered to them at any of a number of meetings over the past 70 years.

The fact that peace terms have been consistently refused by the nations of Islam show that this isn't an issue of land (much less the tiny plot of land on which the Dome stands) - it's an existential and ideological issue.



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Awen24
 


I am liking this thread, we are actually having calm discussions.

imho the conflict goes back to Hagar, and Ishmael. This is why it is so impossible to fix now. It has been added to over the century's each side contributing to the fight..until without the fight there is no relationship.



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Awen24
 

. . . I think that this is a byproduct of the conflict, not the heart of it...

According to the Prophets of the God recognized by the Jews, it is, and it would be for the Christians who saw Jesus punishing the commerce of the temple, and to the God of the Muslims it would be an abomination.
So, let's see, one, two, three, Gods say No, and to me that would override a bunch of talk between people.
edit on 28-1-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Awen24
 

The fact that peace terms have been consistently refused by the nations of Islam show that . . .

They are going to agree to cease to exist, is that it?
The Israelis are in some sort of Disneyworld and should go back home to Russia.
They are the Gog and Magog.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Awen24
 

The fact that peace terms have been consistently refused by the nations of Islam show that . . .

They are going to agree to cease to exist, is that it?
The Israelis are in some sort of Disneyworld and should go back home to Russia.
They are the Gog and Magog.


Why would they cease to exist??

You may not be understanding this peace process. Israel just wants to stop the madness. WE, the US have pushed Israel to give up those lands, and we're still doing so today. Israel says... SURE, BUT STOP THE ATTACKS! Babysteps even, but even that is thrown out. Every single time Israel goes to work on this process, the opposition refuses and have done so for MANY years now. They even admit, they will NOT recognise Israel EVEN with the 60's borders. So how is it that Jews should go back to russia when they lived in Israel for most of their history?

We as americans should give natives their land back, right? Why should we not do the same in this case? It is for the Jews. History and archeology prove this.

Sure they took it from someone else 4k years ago, but thats a lil far back to go on, the only information we know of this is from the bible that most people refute, and further more, those people no longer exist.

Look, both people know they are related and are from the same father, yet they fight constantly for this land. I understand the attrocities of the past but this is now. Same as the US/Native cituation.

Send them back to russia? How do you think Russia would like that?



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by theRhenn
 

I didn't say "send", I said they should go back, on their own, which they would, if they decided to start all over with one county, Palestine, and stop recognizing the legitimacy of an internal enemy state (Israel). Then they might come to the conclusion that the homes they live in actually belong to someone else and they may be in danger if they try to stay there.
I find it weird that you think Russia could not take back their Jews when you think the Palestinians should die for the sake of people claiming to be returning with nothing but a book of fables in their hand.
edit on 29-1-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by theRhenn
 


The key to peace in the middle east is in God's hands.

How can we be sure the Temple referred to in Jewish prophesy is to stand on the site of the Dome? I've been reading the Lost Books of the Bible, www.thelostbooks.com... and came across this from a section entitled;

The Report of Pontius Pilate to Tiberius


Synagogues That Were Against Jesus Destroyed

And one synagogue was left in Jerusalem, since all those synagogues that had
been against Jesus were engulphed.


Was the surviving synagogue/temple situated at the Dome site?



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by theRhenn
 

I didn't say "send", I said they should go back, on their own, which they would, if they decided to start all over with one county, Palestine, and stop recognizing the legitimacy of an internal enemy state (Israel). Then they might come to the conclusion that the homes they live in actually belong to someone else and they may be in danger if they try to stay there.
I find it weird that you think Russia could not take back their Jews when you think the Palestinians should die for the sake of people claiming to be returning with nothing but a book of fables in their hand.
edit on 29-1-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)


So you deny that the jews ever ruled israel? I dont understand why they should give up their land, even if others think their books of "fairy tales" are the only thing they have in hand. There is unavoidable proof that they lived and ruled on this land for centuries. Those books of fairy tales seem to be the only thing they have left of their heratiage. Why dis someone on their beliefs? That's the same as telling an athiest that he or she is going to hell.

If everyone gives up the land they took, I dont know many cultures that would have a home. At what point does it become "no take backs!"?



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by teapot
reply to post by theRhenn
 


The key to peace in the middle east is in God's hands.

How can we be sure the Temple referred to in Jewish prophesy is to stand on the site of the Dome? I've been reading the Lost Books of the Bible, www.thelostbooks.com... and came across this from a section entitled;

The Report of Pontius Pilate to Tiberius

Synagogues That Were Against Jesus Destroyed
Was the surviving synagogue/temple situated at the Dome site?

And one synagogue was left in Jerusalem, since all those synagogues that had
been against Jesus were engulphed.





I agree 100%. This conflict it at a point where nothing done here by us can change it.

Im not sure I understand your question.

There was an account of where the temples were built. I think for the most part, today, it's speculation since we dont have specific locations that I 'know of' of where the temples were, other than the "temple mount". What was left over from the last temple, or what is thought to be, is all that is left of the western wall. Though, the layout of the land would suggest that the temple could be no where else unless it was outside of the city, and that doesnt jive. I dont know if the dome is on the very same spot, but I think it's more less in the middle, making it impossible to put the temple in that square again.

Why it has to be there again? I'm not sure. I think it's manditory that it has to be upon a certain area. I understood prophecy somehow dictated it, but I really dont know the answer to this, my friend. It's been sooooo many years since I remember reading about that very topic, it's very hazey. I remember something about it, but what, I'm not really sure other than loose details of why the temple had to be on that spot.

Anyone else able to shed light on it?



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bleeeeep
The saying that possession is 9/10th the law comes to mind.

Since any group of peoples could come forth claiming religious rights to the area then it must be left up to whomever possess ownership at the current time.

If I were put in charge of coming up with a solution I would put it to vote, but only Muslims get to vote, since they hold ownership.

After all, if God wants some other religious sect to have ownership of the area I'm sure he's capable of making it so.


I dont agree with you but I do appreciate your view. The last line I do agree with though. I think that's basicly is what is to happen. Maybe a way of saying, "Man cannot fix this, only God can, thus a reason and purpose for his return". This is a guess but I do believe only God will be able to do just that.


Sorry for the delay, I totaly looked over your post, not on purpose.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by theRhenn
 

Why dis someone on their beliefs?

When their belief is in killing people to steal their land because you identify yourself with characters in a myth about some long lost civilization.
There are facts about people from Babylon moving into the area during the time of the Persian Empire, and taking up the officiating over religious ceremonies on an ancient holy site. These were the people who called themselves the Jews. Those people should be distinguished from the regular people who lived on the land and who we would call in today's terminology, the citizens, who were of mixed heritage.

If everyone gives up the land they took, I dont know many cultures that would have a home. At what point does it become "no take backs!"?
At the time of the taking being done by Israel, there were international laws that govern such things, against conquering territory and displacing its inhabitants to be replaced by their own people, from another country. So they are in violation of all laws and treaties and norms of civilized society and are a criminal, rouge, pirate nation which is completely illegitimate.

edit on 29-1-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by theRhenn
 


Bro, if they call the Messiah he will return and drive their enemies back. This is what he is waiting on. The day they repent and seek Christ's face he will show himself. Until that day comes he will allow things to get worse and worse until they finally do repent of their stiffnecked pride and call him.

The Rabbinic law of the Talmud placed a curse on the book of Daniel, that anyone who would read that book would suffer all manner of curses and they did this because Daniel tells them who their Messiah is.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join