Posted on 12/04/2005 6:58:07 PM PST by SJackson
Companion thread: The Truth about Islamic Crusades and Imperialism
..........................................
They have claim on EVERYTHING.
Once they've visited, they do make that claim.
bump for publicity
Christians do not claim control or ownership over Jerusalem. Never have, never will.
Islam's militant and mystical claim on Jerusalem falls short. This religion comes too late in history to assert ownership over the sacred city. Military victories are fleeting, so they are insufficient by themselves. And non-empirical revelations that lay claim over a city, but never mention the city by name, are also shaky and suspectand they would be such even if they did name the city. Muhammad never set foot in Jerusalem in a down-to-earth way. Revelations should not trump verifiable and ancient historical facts. So Islam is on the wrong side of history.
____This is a pretty arrogant comment on someone else's religion...it is not for Christians to judge whether or not Islam's theological claims are valid. Whatever the history, three faiths claim Jerusalmen and there is validity to all three claims.
Mohammed was never in Jerusalem, although he claims to have visited there in a kind of dream transportation--where the "Seven Heavens" came from.
Yeah, those Christians, an arrogant bunch. First they put up Christmas Trees, next they want Jerusalem.
Of course it's "dream transportation", he was riding a winged horse. A shame he didn't market them.
Mohammed was never in Jerusalem, although he claims to have visited there in a kind of dream transportation--where the "Seven Heavens" came from.Mohammed never even claimed to have visited Jerusalem in a dream. Surat Al-Isra 1, the verse used by Muslims to justify their claim to Jerusalem states that "Glory to (Allah) Who did take His servant for a Journey by night from the Sacred Mosque to the farthest Mosque, whose precincts We did bless." The "farthest Mosque" was a poetic term referring to Heaven or some metaphorical place. The "farthest Mosque" was not associated with the Temple Mount until 715 or so, a hundred years after Mohammed died.
The title ought to read "Islam's mythical claim on Jerusalem".
Actually, they did. The first Crusade attacked and took Jerusalem because of that. Much of it was launched at the request of the Eastern Roman Empire, but disagreements between the Emperor and the Crusaders led to separate kindoms instead of winning back the Holy Land for the Romans.
The 4th Century developed a bunch of historical "relics" and pilgrimage sites in the Holy lands. Contantinius Magnus sent his mother, with some court officials to research it and decide on the "right" locations.
Pilgrimage was their tourism. Like tourism, it is tremendously lucrative, and businessmen can charge Capital prices for trips to the provinces and back country swamps.
One major advantage that Islam had over Christianity was the more central position of pilgrimage in its pseudo-theology.
The second major advantage that Islam has is, being invented by an aspiring caravan raider and pedophile, it has plenty of exceptions to any moral precept. The exceptions are calibrated to allow any pirate, bandit, or robber to do what ever he wants, so long as he pays his skim. Very convenient.
What are you smoking?! The ENTIRE article shows that there is no factual basis for an Islamazi claim on Jerusalem...that in true Islamazi fashion, they lay claim to anything they want first, then justify it with ephemeral (non-proveable for you in Rio Linda) and specious claims and arguments!
Yet it's Dhimmis like you that buy into their "moral equivalency" crap!
Hey, sahib...note this section from the above article...
Muhammad died of a fever in 632. Later Muslims learned well from the example of their founder. In 634, Muslim armies stormed out of the Arabian Peninsula and began the conquest of Palestine (and other regions). In 638, Muslims conquered Jerusalem. Fifty years later, in 688, they began the construction of the Dome of the Rock. In 692, they finished the building project.
(snip)
It is a fact that Muhammad never entered Jerusalem in a down-to-earth way, with boots on the ground, as it were. It is also a fact that the Quran never mentions Jerusalem once.
So this claim to Jerusalem is....what? Based on an acid trip/made up story by Muhammed (MHNBC!)?
Because Islamazi DENY that there ever was a Jewish presence on the Temple Mount...and have excavated and DESTROYED archeological proof of Israeli ownership...so, again in true Islamazi fashion...they LIE!
So...whatcha got to refute this?
So does that mean that WW IV officially started in 630?
(2) they may become Muslims and pay a forced charity tax, the zakat; or
(3) the Jews and Christians may keep their faith and pay a jizya tax. There was little hope for polytheists and their religious freedom under Islam.
I love the freedom of choice......
"Mystical" is a good word for illegitimate claims on Jerusalem. Mysticism in non-Judaic religions allows for endless, colorful rhetoric to rebut the facts of history established by original documents.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.