Jews have no rights on the Temple Mount

There were NO Jews in that part of Jerusalem in 1967 .. Don't you remember?

Jews have been praying at the Western Wall of Fortress Antonia since circa 1500.

 

I'm confused. If Israeli police are doing the arresting, doesn't that mean the any law preventing praying must be an Israeli law?

And who is requiring the groups to have a non-Jewish "monitor"? It seems unlikely that would be an Israeli law. What if the group just walks away from the monitor?

Are these rules part of some treaty or international agreement?

 

It began in 67 with Israel compromising the temple mount in hopes of avoiding more war. They gave the Arabs control over the temple mount as long as Jews were allowed to come and visit. The Arabs said ok, but the Jews could not pray there.

The reversal of the ban or law was in 1976. Muslims protested. The District Court upheld the Lower courts reversal of the ban. But it added, 'only if public order could be maintained' by the Ministry of Religious affairs. But that can't be done due to the protest and riots of the Arabs.

Im sure the monitor will walk with the group.

Quantrill

 

Yes, I know. That is my point.

Yes but they would like to pray at the temple mount. Just take the Mosque down and all will be solved.

Quantrill

 

It was so peaceful before the 1967 war.

There is nothing for the Jews to pray to ... Temple Mount was destroyed by Titus in 70 AD... just as Jesus predicted.

 

Oh, you think its not peaceful now, just wait.

God. God who chose the place for the temple is there for the Jews to pray to.

Yes, but the Bible is clear that there will be another temple.

Quantrill

 

Actually Revelaton says there is no temple..

They tried to rebuild the third Temple around 300 AD but it was felled by fire and earthquake.

 

Join my ignore list! Filled by people who use the Bible as an excuse/justification for being complete ********s!

 

It all depends where in Revelation you are talking about. Revelation is not the only book that speaks to the future events surrounding the Temple.

Big deal.

Quantrill

 

Good, here's not having to talk to you again.

Quantrill

 

Revelation is the LAST prophesy and corresponds with what Jesus said.

The Jews aren't going back to animal sacrifice.

 

Revelation is not the only book that speaks to the Temple and the very time period that Revelation is addressing.

The mention of there being no temple in Revelation is because Jesus Christ has come to earth to dwell and rule and there is no need for a temple. But until that time, there will be a temple in Jerusalem, in the spot that God chose for David to place the temple.

And, yes, there will be animal sacrifice in the temple again.

Which is the Temple Mount.

Quantrill

 

Revelation is written in the past tense.. referring to 40 years.. a generation after the crucifixion.

Go back and read your OT prophets.. they warned the Jews that God didn't want blood sacrifice.

 

Past tense? That is past tense from the prophetic point of view. Which is future.

Please, your dreaming. God instiuted the blood sacrifice.

Quantrill

 

According to your interpretation, then the temple and animal sacrafices should be happening now.

Point is CHrist came to replace all that. Maybe you should go back to read your bible?

 

I don't think so.. It was a pagan holdover ..

All the ancient bedouin tribes carried their gods from place to place in a box on a litter.. and they practiced blood sacrifice.

In raids on other bedouins they took captives and since they couldn't afford to feed them, they sacrificed them to their gods.

Read about azazel.. the scapegoats.

Every year the community would get together and transfer their collective sins to two goats.

One goat they would slaughter and the other they would drive into the desert by throwing rocks.

 

You are very correct, Quantrill.

There will not be peace until the Palestinians once and for all decide they love their children a lot more than that they hate the Israelis.



Just what we need ... more radical Muslims in the world! "But the freedom the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic groups want is “freedom from democracy,” and the justice they want can only be found under Islamic rule. The freedom and justice they seek by overthrowing democracy can often only be attained through violence.”

 

Various Jewish groups have threatened and plotted to blow up the ancient mosque to the God of Abraham since 1967.

 

According to the Jews faith, yes. They should be.

Christ did fulfill what the animal sacrifices pointed towards. But the Jews do not accept Christ as the Messiah. Thus when they rebuild their temple they will have the sacrifices again.

Quantrill

 

Read whatever you like. I will stay with the Bible.

Quantrill

 

Yes, Islamic and freedom are contridictions.

Quantrill

 

Quite right Margot - the good Lord was obviously displeased with the idea of rebuilding a temple with pagan roots.

Our texan trolling twit cant tell the difference betwee, 1976 and the year 2005 when Leading rabbis rule Temple Mount is off-limits to Jews

http://www.politicalforum.com/latest-world-news/203530-temple-mount.html

I'm a sort of agnostic - take bible with a large pinch of salt, subscribing to the teachings of the great George Gerswin -

"de - t'ings dat yo' li'ble
To read in de Bible,
It ain't necessarily so.

However , if those religious fanatical Jews + End Times US Christians , should succeed in their vandalistic quest to destroy the most beautiful building in J'lem and build some phoney immitation Temple,
I'll bet it'll take them a fikkin long time waiting for the second coming, . Bulls will stop - + shining , before that happens. + if it did - Jesus , will be right *issed off with the whole lot of them.


Alleluia !

...

 

Indeed...And to think that the Zionists base their foreign policy discourse on these kinds of supernatural ramblings which are deemed to trump international law.

 

Op-Ed: Response to Rabbi Shmuel Rabinowitz and the Kotel Renovations
Truly Renewing the Old

By: Yosef Rabin

In his article, “Renewing the Old”, Rabbi Shmuel Rabinowitz States as follows:”Since the destruction of the Temple and since thehalachic decision that due to our ritual impurity we can view the site from afar but must not go up to it, the Western Wall was made sacred by generations of pilgrims who came to pour out their prayers in front of its ancient stones.” What I am about to write, I write with trepidation, but yet with determination. Admittedly, I am not a great Torah scholar, but I have no idea what the honorable Rabbi is taking about!

It is very clear from halachic literature that not only is it permitted to ascend the Temple Mount in our times, but that one even fulfills a religious command by doing so! When a Jew walks on the permissible areas of the Temple Mount, he is actually fulfilling the positive commandment of morah mikdash or showing reverence to the place of the Temple. Rabbi Moshe Ben Mimon (Rambam) clearly writes that this command applies even when the Temple is not standing, and that we should fulfill it by entering into the permitted areas of the Temple Mount. The Rambam writes in the “Laws of the Chosen House” the following: “Even though the Temple is destroyed due to our sins, one must show reverence, as was customary when the Temple was standing. One should enter into the permitted areas (of the Mount), but must not sit in the Temple courtyard nor act frivolously in the direction of the eastern gate, as it is written: “My Sabbath you shall guard, and my Temple shall revere” (Leviticus 19:30). Just like Sabbath is eternal, reverence for the Temple is eternal as well (ch.7, 7). Later in the “Laws of the Chosen House” theRambam uses forceful language in stressing the relevance of ascending the Temple Mount in our times, he writes: ”One is permitted to bring a dead body onto the Temple Mount and thus there is no need to mention that a person impure from contact with a dead body can enter (7, 15).” So from where do we find a “halachic decision” which is forcing us to only “view the site from afar, but not go up to it”?

To make the above question even stronger, there is a famous dispute between the Rambam and Rabbi Avraham Ben David of Posquières (Ra’avad) if there is any sanctity on the Temple Mount in the post Temple area. In his commentary on the Rambam’s“Laws of the Chosen House”, the Ra’avd strongly disagrees with the Rambam’s assertion that sanctity of the Temple Mount is eternal, and thus states that the punishment of Karet, the harsh Torah punishment imposed on those who step into the Temple courtyard, is not in force today. Being that all modern day rabbinic authorities side with the Rambam and not the Ra’avad, I find it strange that while they accept the Rambam’s ruling that there is sanctity on the Mount, they simultaneously reject the Rambam’s ruling to ascend the Mount. If the Rambam is correct, and the sanctity of the Mount is eternal, one must honor it’s sanctity by ascending to the Mount within Torah guidelines! If the Ra’avad is correct and there is no sanctity on the Mount today, one could walk freely on the Temple Mount without any special halachic perpetrations, and there would be no reason for any rabbi to oppose ascent.

In addition, to all those who discourage pilgrimage to the Mount in our times, I have yet another question. If there is so much concern over the spiritual punishment of karet on the Temple Mount, perhaps there should also be concern over marriage. The halachic laws of “family purity” are very complex and are similar in nature to the halachic laws governing ones ascent to the Temple Mount, and both carry the spiritual punishment of karet. Perhaps the same rabbis, who warn against ascending the Mount, should warn against the institution of marriage! Of course what I am suggesting is absurd! Every new bride and groom is taught the laws of “Family Purity” before their union, and we trust that God fearing people will faithfully follow the right path. The same approach should apply to those ascending the Temple Mount as well!

I certainly agree with Rabbi Shmuel Rabinowitz that the Western Wall was only made sacred “by generations of pilgrims who came to pour out their prayers”, unlike the Temple Mount which was sanctified by the Almighty. In his book titled “The Temple Mount “, Former Chief Rabbi of Israel, Shlomo Goren points out that Jews have only been using the Western Wall as a place of prayer for about 400 years or so. Rabbi Goren describes how Jews only began to pray at the Western Wall when it became too dangerous to pray at the Eastern Gate of the Temple Mount, which was a preferred place of prayer for many years prior. In addition, anyone who took a tour of the “Western Wall Tunnels” knows that in the times of the Temple a market ran alongside the Western Wall and the wall was not considered holy at that time.

Yes it is certainly time for a “Renewing the Old”; it is time to renew the Temple Mount as the central place of prayer for the Jewish Nation. At the Western Wall during the British area, Jews were not allowed to use chairs, tables, mechitzas and were even forbidden from blowing a shofar, but at least the British allowed them to pray! At the very least we should expect that the State of Israel grant us on the Temple Mount what the British granted us at the Western Wall! It cannot be that the policy of the Jewish State towards Jewish prayer is worse than that of the British!

Let us hope that the Israeli Government will take at least some of the money set aside for renovations at the Western Wall and use it instead for the creation of a proper Jewish prayer area on the Temple Mount. The arrangement on the Mount could be patterned after the arrangement in the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron. The Tomb has been split since 1967 to facilitate for both Jewish and Muslim prayer. In this way we might see the fulfillment of the prophetic vision of Isaiah: “And they shall prostrate themselves before the Lord on the holy mountain in Jerusalem”.

 

I agree that god should have nothing to do with it, on either side.