Dome of the Rock in the wrong place?

[ps49]

http://www.beholdthebeast.com/the_wrong_rock.htm

From this article I read this:-

Over the other promontory - an unusually flat stone to the north

and slightly west of as-Sakhra - a little, unimposing cupola was

constructed they aptly named "The Dome of the Spirits," or "The

Dome of the Tablets." Having no science of archaeology during

those days, guess what?


The Moslems built the Dome of the Rock on the wrong rock!1

I wonder, were the locations of the first and second temple exactly the same? I mean, the Muslims clearly knew the location of the Holy of Holies (and therefore the Temple) since they built "The Dome of the Spirits" pretty much exactly in that spot.

The Dome on the other hand appears to be specifically anti-Christian with its blasphemous inscriptions all around. Is there a Christian specific significance of the rock "as-Sakhra", over which the dome is built?

[ps49]

Isn't it wonderful to know that by permitting the temple's total

destruction, God protected His Holy of Holies from the

desecration of having a memorial to a false god, and  the  false

prophet, built over it?

But the "Dome of the Spirits" was built by the same spirit of anti-Christ as the larger Dome of the Rock - and it stands in the Holy of Holies.

[ps49]

For the first time in 2573 years the Jews

were  again  in  control  of  their  Holy  City.  Could  that  touching

moment be the historic end of, "and they [the Gentiles] will tread

under foot the Holy City for 42 months?" 42 months x 30.44 gives

us roughly 1278.5 days:1

1967AD - 1278.5 = 688.5AD ... the Dome of the Rock!

Can it be truly said though, that the Jews do have full and total control of Jerusalem? When even to this day they feel politically obliged to allow a shrine to a false prophet and a place of worship dedicated to a false god exist on The Temple Mount? And to allow Muslims access to it?

I totally agree that 1967 is extremely significant, but Jewish control does not seem complete just yet.

[PeteWaldo]

For the first time in 2573 years the Jews

were  again  in  control  of  their  Holy  City.  Could  that  touching

moment be the historic end of, "and they [the Gentiles] will tread

under foot the Holy City for 42 months?" 42 months x 30.44 gives

us roughly 1278.5 days:1

1967AD - 1278.5 = 688.5AD ... the Dome of the Rock!

Can it be truly said though, that the Jews do have full and total control of Jerusalem? When even to this day they feel politically obliged to allow a shrine to a false prophet and a place of worship dedicated to a false god exist on The Temple Mount? And to allow Muslims access to it?

I totally agree that 1967 is extremely significant, but Jewish control does not seem complete just yet.

Actually they did have control of the temple mount after the 6 day war. They  should have blown up the DoR and Al-Aqsa Mosque. They later ceded control of the temple mount to the Muslims, for one of the land in exchange for lies deals.

[ps49]

Actually they did have control of the temple mount after the 6 day war. They  should have blown up the DoR and Al-Aqsa Mosque. They later ceded control of the temple mount to the Muslims, for one of the land in exchange for lies deals.

Yes, perhaps they should have.
They could have during the Crusades too. Two missed chances!
Where can I read about the "land in exchange for lies deals?"

[PeteWaldo]

Actually they did have control of the temple mount after the 6 day war. They  should have blown up the DoR and Al-Aqsa Mosque. They later ceded control of the temple mount to the Muslims, for one of the land in exchange for lies deals.

Yes, perhaps they should have.
They could have during the Crusades too. Two missed chances!

Sadly, it is said that the Crusaders didn't destroy it because the building was too beautiful. Too bad they apparently couldn't read the blasphemy written in Arabic that adorns the eves.
Some enterprising lone wold IDF pilot would do the world - and particularly Muhammad's followers - a favor if he blew it up, along with the mosque on the temple mount, and why not swing south and nail the Kaaba while he's at it too! I would imagine doing so in the middle of the night would reduce any civilian casualties to next to nil.

Where can I read about the "land in exchange for lies deals?"

You don't need to look further than the latest "land in exchange for lies deal" of Gaza, which also happens to handily illustrate what any "two-state solution" would result in, since it already is the two states living side by side. The Muslims firing thousands of rockets into Israeli citizens, from an Islamic terrorist organization governed Gaza, as well as.......
http://historyofzionism.com/zionism_in_christianity.htm#christians_after_zionism

From WND "Christians warned: Accept Islamic law"
Christians can only continue living safely in the Gaza Strip if they accept Islamic law, including a ban on alcohol and on women roaming publicly without proper head coverings, an Islamist militant leader in Gaza told WND in an exclusive interview."

[PeteWaldo]

Adding to and bumping this, as I missed the last question asked, the last time around.

[ps49]

Thanks Pete - an interesting read. It is alarming to realise that the secular components of the anti-Zionist movement, through complete ignorance of the Bible and of true Islamic intent, blithely advance the Muslim conquest of the world. 

Regards the blowing up of the Dome, it occurred to me that perhaps that thing may stand until the return of Christ. If it were removed today (and apart from the prospect of all out war breaking loose) there would be a real risk of a third Jewish temple complete with sacrifices. I wonder then, which is the greater abomination; the Dome or such a temple?

Acts 1:6-7 sprang to mind whilst I was contemplating this:-

6 Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”  7 And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority.

And Mark 13:32-37:-

32 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.  33 Take heed, watch and pray; for you do not know when the time is.  34 It is like a man going to a far country, who left his house and gave authority to his servants, and to each his work, and commanded the doorkeeper to watch.  35 Watch therefore, for you do not know when the master of the house is coming—in the evening, at midnight, at the crowing of the rooster, or in the morning—  36 lest, coming suddenly, he find you sleeping.  37 And what I say to you, I say to all: Watch!”

[PeteWaldo]

Thanks Pete - an interesting read. It is alarming to realise that the secular components of the anti-Zionist movement, through complete ignorance of the Bible and of true Islamic intent, blithely advance the Muslim conquest of the world.

It is amazing how blind and downright anti-semitic some self-described Christians can be:
http://www.gracecentered.com/christian_forums/end-times-forum/zionism-and-anti-zionism/msg1055005473/#msg1055005473

Regards the blowing up of the Dome, it occurred to me that perhaps that thing may stand until the return of Christ. If it were removed today (and apart from the prospect of all out war breaking loose) there would be a real risk of a third Jewish temple complete with sacrifices. I wonder then, which is the greater abomination; the Dome or such a temple?

I'll chalk that up to a rushed reply. Your post is kinda saying Judaism is the equivalent of Islam - or worse. Or saying the abomination of the DoR has more right to God's footstool, than a rebuilt Jewish temple would.
Besides which it shouldn't be a surprise that some Jews that may remain blind to the Gospel, would have an interest in building another temple. Would the Lord allow it? I think you and I would agree that is unlikely.

Acts 1:6-7 sprang to mind whilst I was contemplating this:-

6 Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”  7 And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority.

And Mark 13:32-37:-

32 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.  33 Take heed, watch and pray; for you do not know when the time is.  34 It is like a man going to a far country, who left his house and gave authority to his servants, and to each his work, and commanded the doorkeeper to watch.  35 Watch therefore, for you do not know when the master of the house is coming—in the evening, at midnight, at the crowing of the rooster, or in the morning—  36 lest, coming suddenly, he find you sleeping.  37 And what I say to you, I say to all: Watch!”

[ps49]

Your post is kinda saying Judaism is the equivalent of Islam

You mean in the sense that both doctrines reject the atoning Blood of Christ?

Or saying the abomination of the DoR has more right to God's footstool, than a rebuilt Jewish temple would.

No, it's nothing to do with having more right but I am suggesting that it is there for a reason. A block perhaps? A reminder to those who crucified Christ perhaps?

Besides which it shouldn't be a surprise that some Jews that may remain blind to the Gospel, would have an interest in building another temple

Precisely!

[PeteWaldo]

Your post is kinda saying Judaism is the equivalent of Islam

You mean in the sense that both doctrines reject the atoning Blood of Christ?

And again I would ask, is some faithful Jew perhaps being blinded to the blood of Christ by God Himself, the equivalent of a Muslim's rejection of the blood of Christ purely because THE false prophet Muhammad denied He was crucified?
http://www.israelinbibleprophecy.com/spirit_of_slumber.htm#spirit_slumber

I consider faithful Jews Old Testament that could be described as follows, as my brethren:

1Corinthians 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and [that] no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

While I believe that Muslims are compelled by Satan's messenger to DISbelieve, DENY and REJECT, the whole subject of the Gospel, the exact opposite of brethren. Particularly the orthodox Muslims that are out there slaughtering Christians and Jews.

Or saying the abomination of the DoR has more right to God's footstool, than a rebuilt Jewish temple would.

No, it's nothing to do with having more right but I am suggesting that it is there for a reason. A block perhaps?

That could, and may likely, be. God has sometimes used His enemies in the cause of His own.

A reminder to those who crucified Christ perhaps?

I don't blame Jews or Roman soldiers for crucifying Christ. It was the sinful nature of mankind that crucified Christ - the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. It was myself that crucified Christ.

Besides which it shouldn't be a surprise that some Jews that may remain blind to the Gospel, would have an interest in building another temple

Precisely!

[ps49]

And again I would ask, is some faithful Jew perhaps being blinded to the blood of Christ by God Himself, the equivalent of a Muslim's rejection of the blood of Christ purely because THE false prophet Muhammad denied He was crucified?

It seems fair to say that Muslims and those Jews who rejected Christ did so for apparently different reasons. But nonetheless, there is no other way than Christ.  Why some see this and others do not is a matter for God only. That said, one has to wonder if a Jew who rejects Christ is faithful in the first place? The light of Christ reveals.

I consider faithful Jews Old Testament that could be described as follows, as my brethren:

Yes, but we are not talking about faithful Jews of the Old Testament. We are talking about those rebelious Jews who were so out of touch with God that they failed to recognise their own Messiah. You wouldn't call such brethren would you?

I don't blame Jews or Roman soldiers for crucifying Christ. It was the sinful nature of mankind that crucified Christ - the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. It was myself that crucified Christ.

Agreed and good point. We all deserve the wrath of God and it would be so if it were not for the grace of God shown to us through Christ Jesus.

Essentially, I see no use for a third Jewish temple since there is no need to offer sacrifices since the Blood of Christ. In fact, I think it would be just as blasphemous as the Dome if sacrifices were resumed.