Jude 2

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

God.

Mike Vande wrote:God.

You know Mike. I posted the same message about an hour ago and then deleted it, becuase I thought people would take it as too smart alec (coming from me).

But that is it, isnt it?

God owns it. God decides what happens to it (or whether it is even important at all).

Gerald Creasy wrote:

Mike Vande wrote:God.

You know Mike. I posted the same message about an hour ago and then deleted it, becuase I thought people would take it as too smart alec (coming from me).

But that is it, isnt it?

God owns it. God decides what happens to it (or whether it is even important at all).

fine.

no comments on the Jewish/Muslim issues of current and not ultimate ownership? interesting.

I'm interested in the whole thing, but I don't care, either. Does that make sense?? To discuss it, it's intriguing, but I don't really think it matters in the big picture. If it does, the whole thing's wrapped up inside a mystery/riddle/enigma enchilada, and I just don't have that particular appetite much these days.

RamboPreacher wrote: No comments on the Jewish/Muslim issues of current and not ultimate ownership?

No.

RamboPreacher wrote: interesting.

Why?

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.

That location probably started out as a desert nomad type region, where various descendents of Noah's son, Ham set up temporary tent homes.
Years later, Abraham was led to that region and in time, that hill (Mt. Moriah) to sacrifice Isaac.
There is really no man's claim to the land at that time, but God did tell Abraham that it would be his descendents. Prophecy tells enough to merit true ownership through Isaac, but the muslims will tell you that it was Ishmael that inherited the land. Only problem is, there is no proof of this but plenty to prove Isaacs claim.
Since the area had some natural springs, it grew in numbers of people and slowly became a city named Jebus, land of the Jebusites - known today as Jerusalem. The Jebusites lived there while the Israelites were in Egypt. Note: The Jebusite people do not exist today so they can not be given the property even if that was an issue.
As the Israelites came back into the Promised Land under Joshua, Jerusalem stayed in Jebusite control until it was captured a bit later by King David during the nations 'cleansing' campaign.
Now, although the Jebusites had lost the city in that famous 'through the water tunnel' battle, David did actually purchase the threshing floor of Araunauh (also known as Ornan) the Jebusite, which is considered to be Mount Moriah, place of sacrifices and the future temple site (see 2 Sam 24:21-25).
We know that Solomon built the Temple on Mt. Moriah, and for many years it remained under Hebrew/Jewish ownership.
However, in judgments of Israel, the property has changed hands a few times because of various invasions from other nations, but there is little doubt that the Hebrews/Jews are the ones that set up the first temple there and that they always came back to possess their land. The most recent of these mass returns happened during or around WWII when the Jews had no where else to go but home.
Muslims are in extreme denial to say that it is their land, and I believe it is only a matter of time before something happens to cause it to change hands once again to God's chosen, rightful owners - the Jews.

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.

Full Quiver wrote: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.

Hoo boy, be careful there, brah. I remember a verse that says "I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you"...

I don't think it matters a hill of beans who owns that hill.


I believe God is through with any temple structure, Unless you make scripture a liar.

Act 17:24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;

1Cr 6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost [which is] in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

Gerald Creasy wrote:I don't think it matters a hill of beans who owns that hill.

I think it only matters in that the Temple mount figures prominently in end times prophecy.

PastorDaniel wrote: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

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.

DaJudge wrote:I think it only matters in that the Temple mount figures prominently in end times prophecy.

According to whom?