Sixties Fan
Diamond Member
- Mar 6, 2017
- 58,537
- 11,115
- 2,140
Instead of banging your head on the wall, you might want to try reading and then comparing what you have read with the narrative you post on every thread.I believe that the temple mount is not settled history and that the Zionist narrative is only possible through misinterpretation and misrepresentation.
Have you ever actually read the literature by Josephus and others regarding the size and location of Fortress Antonia?
![]()
Abi, the idea that there is NO connection between the Jewish people and the territory in question is the most absurd argument. EVER.
It is possible that Abi will never understand that Jewish history does not change. It is documented by all the invading powers to the land, and the merchants it did business with.
On the other hand, Mohammad having been in Jerusalem,
the importance of the Temple Mount and Cave of the Patriarchs to Muslims, etc is very recent.
None of that is part of the Quran, or any Muslim history book,
documents, observations, etc by any Muslims before WWI, literally - before the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate for Palestine came to be.
Until 1964, the Arabs in Palestine thought of themselves as part of Greater Syria. That is documented.
Until Israel took back the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem, the Temple Mount was of no importance to Muslims including the Arabs of Palestine, or Israel.
Some people can call one's history a narrative (story) all they want.
The proof of the pudding is always in the evidence. Recent or from the very far past.
How did Jews always feel towards the land of Israel and Jerusalem and the Temple Mount?
How did Muslims, Arab, Kurds, Turks, etc, always feel about the Land of Israel, Jerusalem and the Temple Mount?
Evidence tells which one is history, and which one is narrative.