If UNESCO has their way, they might very well take down the sign shown here. Instead, they seem intent on putting up a plaque that would look something like the following:
"On this site in 638 C.E. Islamic armies took control of Jerusalem."
"On this site in 691 C.E. Muslim Caliph Abd el-Malik built a shrine called the Dome of the Rock."
" On this site in 820 C.E., Caliph al-Mamun removed the name of Caliph Abd el-Malik from the dedication plate and inserted his own name instead."
"On this site in 1187, Muslims
"On this site in 2016, UNESCO decided the Temple Mount has always been a Muslim holy site and has no importance to Jewish history."
There's no question that the Temple Mount has historical significance, both to Jews and to Christians. Those of the Jewish religion tend to overlook the part of the history where Jesus said quite clearly, the day before the Jews executed him, "Your house (temple) is abandoned to you." (Matt. 23:38) This has always reminded me of the time when the announcer at a venue in Louisiana told 10,000 fans screaming for an encore from Elvis, "Elvis has left the building."
The Temple Mount, Mount Zion, is historical, yes. But Christians shouldn't think of it as sacred. Paul told Christians living in Jerusalem there was a far more important 'Mount Zion' for them to focus on: “You have approached a Mount Zion and a city of the living God, heavenly Jerusalem, and myriads of angels in general assembly, and the congregation of the firstborn who have been enrolled in the heavens.” (Hebrews 12:22, 23)
Feel free to leave a polite comment. To return to the home page, click here.
Check out my latest novel:


No comments:
Post a Comment