Myths and facts about Jerusalem and Temple Mount

[Saigon]

iRosie -

The thing is - you must realise yourself that Roudy is both completely dishonest, and has absolutely no idea about the topic.

Hence - why do you listen to him?

Purely and simply because you want to hear the same old myths and lies repeated?

You can do better than that, surely?

 

[Saigon]

btw---I reviewed roudy's post-----I see no "LIES"

Then you don't WANT to see them.

I pointed out two, and gave you details you can confirm anywhere.

 

[Roudy]

btw---I reviewed roudy's post-----I see no "LIES"

Then you don't WANT to see them.

I pointed out two, and gave you details you can confirm anywhere.

You pointed out your own stupidity and ignorance, quite successfully.

 

[Saigon]

Roudy -

Which is why you will not even attempt to sensibly address the points raised.

You know you are lying with all of this Nazi propaganda - and the funny thing is Rosie knows it too.

Watching you two try and trick each other into believing more and more and more unlikely horseshit is like watching two teletubbies cuddling.

 

[Roudy]

Roudy -

Which is why you will not even attempt to sensibly address the points raised.

You know you are lying with all of this Nazi propaganda - and the funny thing is Rosie knows it too.

Watching you two try and trick each other into believing more and more and more unlikely horseshit is like watching two teletubbies cuddling.

Nazi propaganda is the crap that comes out of you.

 

[Saigon]

Roidy -

No, asking you to post honestly is not Nazi. Asking Holston to post honestly is not Nazi.

It is the two of you competing as to who can trick the most people with lies and deception that embody the spirit on Nazism. You empower each other, feed each other, and justify each other.

 

[Roudy]

Roidy -

No, asking you to post honestly is not Nazi. Asking Holston to post honestly is not Nazi.

It is the two of you competing as to who can trick the most people with lies and deception that embody the spirit on Nazism. You empower each other, feed each other, and justify each other.

You didn't prove anything untrue about my posts, nor is it "only the two of us" that agrees or believes in those facts. Maybe in your dreams.

 

[irosie91]

what are you calling "ARAB PEOPLE" saigon? a "race"? a culture?
a religion? a language? -----a SELF IDENTIFICATION? Are you suggesting
that there was a community of people in Jerusalem-----who identified themselves
CULTURALLY and LINQUISTICALLY and BY RELIGION and myths of origin---
with the desert dwellers of arabia?
Did they seek each other out for marriage? Did the arabs of
Jerusalem talk about their first cousins living in the arabian penninsula?
DID they travel to spend time with family? OR did the arabs of jerusalem
make PILGRIMAGES TO MECCA some time around 1500 BC?
how do you know??-----did they leave evidence of this INTERESTING
NATIONALITY?
I am fascinated I have wondered about the
PRE ISLAMIC ARABIAN CULTURE-----especially their LEGAL SYSTEM-----obviously
they all had the same LEGAL SYSTEM since they shared a common nationality
--------could you describe it for me? How is it that they were spread so far and
wide and encountered people who had the concept of writing---but failed to
develope a system of their own until 300 AD?
That feature of the "ARABIAN" people is a bit odd

 

[Saigon]

You didn't prove anything untrue about my posts

Really?

You complain that there was no mosque in Jerusalem in 635.

Why did you not mention that even the great mosque in Mecca (Masjid al Haram) was not open at that time either?

 

[Saigon]

iRosie -

I consider the Palestinian people to exist in the same way I consider the Italian, Canadian and German people to exist.

Austrian people speak German - but are not German. The Swiss speak French and German, but are not French or German.

It isn't difficult stuff really. You just have to strip out the politics and use some common sense.

 

[irosie91]

iRosie -

The thing is - you must realise yourself that Roudy is both completely dishonest, and has absolutely no idea about the topic.

Hence - why do you listen to him?

Purely and simply because you want to hear the same old myths and lies repeated?

You can do better than that, surely?

I do not get my information from ROUDY-----do you think he taught me the
history I already know? You claim he "LIED" what was the lie?
You have claimed "ARABS LIVED IN JERUSALEM SINCE THE STONE AGE"
what are you calling "arabs" Your statement is meaningless.
HOW are the residents of the city which is jerusalem ----"ARABS IN THE STONE
AGE"? You are beginning to seem a bit insane

Ok I got it-----way back 2000 BC there were people in Jerusalem
calling themselves "ARABS" presumably speaking arabic---and
having shared religion and customs with the desert dwelling,
arabic speaking people of the arabian penninsula----<<< that
is your claim-------sure ok fine with me. Can you tell me
if they considered arabia their LAND OF ORIGIN? All nations
have an origin-----part real and part myth what was theirs?

 

[Roudy]

You didn't prove anything untrue about my posts

Really?

You complain that there was no mosque in Jerusalem in 635.

Why did you not mention that even the great mosque in Mecca (Masjid al Haram) was not open at that time either?

Eh, why don't you find someone with your IQ level (about 70 to 75, I estimate) to argue with? You missed the whole point of it, which is the religious significance of Jerusalem as "holy to Muslims and Islam" are all based on LIES.

Here's part of the article I posted:

2) The Islamic claim to Jerusalem is false - There were no mosques in Jerusalem in 632 c.e. at the death of Muhammad... Jerusalem was [then] a Christian-occupied city. The muslim "claim" to Jerusalem is allegedly based on what is written in the koran, which although does not mention Jerusalem even once, nevertheless talks of the "furthest mosque" (in Sura 17:1) Is there any foundation to the muslim argument that this "furthest mosque" (al-masujidi al-aqsa) refers to what is today called the Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem? The answer is, NO!

And here is the rest:

In the days of Muhammad, who died in 632 of the Common Era, Jerusalem was a Christian-occupied city within the Byzantine Empire. Jerusalem was captured by caliph Omar only in 638 c.e., six years after Muhammad's death. Throughout all this time there were only churches in Jerusalem, and a church stood on the Temple Mount, called the Church of Saint Mary of Justinian, built in the Byzantine architectural style. The Aqsa mosque was built 20 years after the Dome of the Rock, which was built in 691-692 by caliph Abd el-Malik. The name "Omar mosque" is therefore false. In or around 711, about 80 years after Muhammad died, Malik's son, Abd el-Wahd &#8210;who ruled in 705-715&#8210; reconstructed the Christian-Byzantine Church of St. Mary and converted it into a mosque. He left the structure as it was, a typical Byzantine "basilica" structure with a row of pillars on either side of the rectangular "ship" in the centre. All he added was an onion-like dome on top of the building to make it look like a mosque. He then named it El-Aqsa, so it would sound like the one mentioned in the koran.
Consequently, it is crystal clear that Muhammad could never have had this mosque in mind when he wrote the koran (if he did so), since it did not exist for another three generations after his death. Rather, as many scholars long ago established, it is logical that Muhammad intended the mosque in Mecca as the "sacred mosque", and the mosque in Medina as the "furthest mosque". So much for the muslim claim based on the Aqsa mosque.
With this understood, it is no wonder that Muhammad issued a strict prohibition against facing Jerusalem in prayer, a practice that had been tolerated only for some months in order to lure Jews to convert to Islam. When that effort failed, Muhammad put an abrupt stop to it on February 624. Jerusalem simply never held any sanctity for the muslims themselves, but only for the Jews in their domain.

So, which part of this article, was the author "wrong"? NONE. Your response was: "Arabs have lived in Jerusalem since the Stone Ages". You are pathetic.

Now run along before I kick your ass some more.

 

[Saigon]

You claim he "LIED" what was the lie?

For instance, Roudy claims that there were no mosques in Jerusalem in 635, but neglects to mention that the forefathers of today's Palestinians had lived in Jersualem since the Bronze Age.

He also forgets to inform you that even the great mosque in Mecca wasn't built in 635.

The reat expansion in mosque building came a little later, closer to 700.

 

[Saigon]

the religious significance of Jerusalem as "holy to Muslims and Islam" are all based on LIES.

And here you go again with the lies...

Al Aqsa is one of the oldest mosques on the world - and:

Muslims believe that Muhammad was transported from the Sacred Mosque in Mecca to al-Aqsa during the Night Journey. Islamic tradition holds that Muhammad led prayers towards this site until the seventeenth month after the emigration, when God directed him to turn towards the Ka'aba.

Al-Aqsa Mosque - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Roudy]

You claim he "LIED" what was the lie?

For instance, Roudy claims that there were no mosques in Jerusalem in 635, but neglects to mention that the forefathers of today's Palestinians had lived in Jersualem since the Bronze Age.

He also forgets to inform you that even the great mosque in Mecca wasn't built in 635.

The reat expansion in mosque building came a little later, closer to 700.

Which is exactly why Jerusalem could not have been "holy" to Muslims. There were no Mosques in Jerusalem. Ha ha ha. What a fuckin' moron.

 

[Saigon]

1) The Islamic claim to the Temple Mount is very recent - Jerusalem's role as "The Third Holiest Site in Islam" in mainstream Islamic writings does not precede the 1930s. It was created by the grand mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini.

This is also a lie.

Later medieval scripts, as well as modern-day political tracts, tend to classify al-Aqsa Mosque as the third holiest site in Islam.[71] For example, Sahih Bukhari quotes Abu al-Dardaa as saying: "the Prophet of God Muhammad said a prayer in the Sacred Mosque (in Mecca) is worth 100,000 prayers; a prayer in my mosque (in Medina) is worth 10,000 prayers; and a prayer in al-Aqsa Mosque is worth 1,000 prayers", more than in any other mosque. .

Al-Aqsa Mosque - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anyone see any reference to the 1930's there?

No, it was from the Medieval period....Roudy must have 'forgotten' that.

 

[Saigon]

Which is exactly why Jerusalem could not have been "holy" to Muslims. There were no Mosques in Jerusalem. Ha ha ha. What a fuckin' moron.

So Mecca is not holy to Muslims?

Beause there were no mosques there in 635 either.

Jesus wept....

 

[Roudy]

the religious significance of Jerusalem as "holy to Muslims and Islam" are all based on LIES.

And here you go again with the lies...

Al Aqsa is one of the oldest mosques on the world - and:

Muslims believe that Muhammad was transported from the Sacred Mosque in Mecca to al-Aqsa during the Night Journey. Islamic tradition holds that Muhammad led prayers towards this site until the seventeenth month after the emigration, when God directed him to turn towards the Ka'aba.

Al-Aqsa Mosque - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Actually you fuckin' ignorant moron, shows how much you really know, or rather don't, because Mohammad clearly gave Jerusalem to the Jews:

"And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".

- Qur'an 17:104 -

 

[Roudy]

You claim he "LIED" what was the lie?

For instance, Roudy claims that there were no mosques in Jerusalem in 635, but neglects to mention that the forefathers of today's Palestinians had lived in Jersualem since the Bronze Age.

He also forgets to inform you that even the great mosque in Mecca wasn't built in 635.

The reat expansion in mosque building came a little later, closer to 700.

Reading comprehension problems?

"With this understood, it is no wonder that Muhammad issued a strict prohibition against facing Jerusalem in prayer, a practice that had been tolerated only for some months in order to lure Jews to convert to Islam. When that effort failed, Muhammad put an abrupt stop to it on February 624. Jerusalem simply never held any sanctity for the Muslims themselves, but only for the Jews in their domain."

 

[Saigon]

Roudy -

Perhaps go back and own up to a couple of the lies you posted, correct them, and move on.

Try to avoid repeating them tomorrow.

Changing the topic isn't likely to fool anyone.