Who do YOU think "own's" the Temple Mount?

[PastorDaniel]

Okay...I'll take the bait.

I believe that biblically the Jewish people have the rights to it. It is prophesied that there will be a new Temple....so Israel will inevitably end up back on it.

However, I've always been told that possession is 9 tenths of the law...so right now the Philistines own it.

Pastor Daniel what you have been told is actually a misquote. The original saying was that "property is nine points of the law" - although over the years the phrase "nine-tenths of the law" has become more commonplace. The original saying was by Lord Mansfield in 1774, however he never bothers to tell us how many points of the law there are. The meaning is that physical possession is the best leverage and that it is more difficult to try to recover something than hold on to it. With that in mind I would have to say that the Israelis own it, as they occupy and control Jerusalem.


TW

What I was quoting is actually a childhood slang statement about one child taking another childs toy then sarcastically stating that "possession is 9 tenths of the law"

I had no idea about the statement your referring to and was actually being sarcastic myself...thus the smile....anyway, thanks for your clarification.

[forestwalker]

Fullquiver wrote

If anything a group of wealthy Jews owns it and they are renting it out to the Muslims, pumping up the drama, which will increase the value and cause their investment to skyrocket.

Wow, anti-semitism, very befitting a good christian man. I'm sure you mean it in the best possible light.

Don't be silly.

[forestwalker]

lots of discussion on other sites, just thought I would ask you all for your opinions.

What do you think Rambo? And why's it important?

[CantBCoy]

forestwalker wrote

Don't be silly.

How is that silly and in what way is it not anti-semitic?

[forestwalker]

Suggesting that valuable land in Israel is owned by Jews is hardly a controversial statement. You could argue that suggesting wealthy land owners would intentionally flame conflict in order to increase the return on their investment reveals an anti-Capitalist bias, but it takes a pretty uncharitable reading to claim it's an anti-Jew bias (though given the historical claims of anti-Semites I can of course see where you're coming from).

Anyway, while I don't suspect him of anti-Semitism I do suspect he's wrong. I'd be very surprised if the land is privately owned.

[MacUser]

whoa.

[forestwalker]

How is that silly?

Oops. Missed this part.

Sorry. I shouldn't have dismissed what you're saying so glibly. The 'anti-Semite' label is just used too quickly (like 'racist' is sometimes used by lefties). Unless you know more about him than the post revealed, FullQuiver didn't deserve it.

[CantBCoy]

I didn't call him an anti-semite, I said the remark was antisemitic.

[forestwalker]

Semantics. I'll restate:

Sorry. I shouldn't have dismissed what you're saying so glibly. The 'antisemitic' label is just used too quickly (like 'racist' is sometimes used by lefties). Unless you know more about him than the post revealed, FullQuiver's remark didn't deserve it.

[Full Quiver]

Fullquiver wrote

Quote:
If anything a group of wealthy Jews owns it and they are renting it out to the Muslims, pumping up the drama, which will increase the value and cause their investment to skyrocket.


Wow, anti-semitism, very befitting a good christian man. I'm sure you mean it in the best possible light.

Judgement! An even more Christian like trait don't ya think?

I was in a sense applauding Jewish investors. Such a scenario would be wise. They could hide their talent or increase it.


Mike, the verse you refer to speaks directly of Abraham and not Israel. I know so many especially in the Pentecostal world lay that promise to Israel but God was not talking to Israel.

[CantBCoy]

Judgement? I didn't pass sentence nor did I pronounce a verdict. I simply stated a fact. Your statement was anti-semitic.

I was in a sense applauding Jewish investors.

What a farce. You were playing on the stereotype that all jews were greedy and taking advantage of others. Come on man. You know better than to say certain things about other races, why use such blatant language against jewish people?

If I said that Virgnians were all inbred, even as a joke I didn't mean, doesn't make the statement any less offensive. Even if I covered it up by saying, "I was in a sense applauding Virginians for their breeding practices." Get real.

[one love]

God owns the cattle on a thousand hills but not that one. If anything a group of wealthy Jews owns it and they are renting it out to the Muslims, pumping up the drama, which will increase the value and cause their investment to skyrocket.

I like that. I do believe the jewish people have all spirtual ownership as well. It was all promised to them By GOD which in all reality makes it there's.

Yet call me crazy if you would like but I feel the Jewsih people in America are the backbone of our economy. They own so much in this nation and many have prospered which trickles down to each of us. Sorry to jump off topic

[one love]

I didn't call him an anti-semite, I said the remark was antisemitic.

Brother what is anti-semitic about that? I may have missed something here. PLease describe what you are insinuating. I feel that the jewish people are very prosperous and by saying anything of the such is a complement, but I feel I have missed something here.
Any buiness man would look at someone having possesions of any certain item or property would want nothing less then a profitable return. That is good buisness not an insult. Jewish people are excellent buiness owners and investor's. This is the way I percieved Full Quiver's comment. But if I missed something, Please show me. I would not applaud something I felt was insulting the Jewish people.

[RamboPreacher]

lots of discussion on other sites, just thought I would ask you all for your opinions.

What do you think Rambo? And why's it important?

sorry to get back so late. but Joey had hit the nail squarly on the head with what I could have said.

Ultimately it's all "God's". but if we apply that logic to everything else, then nobody owns anything. and we would have anarchy in our current kosmos/system.

I believe that teh current state of affairs with the Muslims owninnig (allowed to own?!) the area, I don't have a real problem there. but when they deny any significance (to others) whether sacred, or archaeological, then I have an issue. when they deny that there is any Jewish context at the site at all, then I say they have crossed the line, adn something should be done to disallow that practice.