freediver wrote Today at 4:02pm:
Quote:So you deny the significance of the site to Islam because it's locality, not named in the Koran, was determined after the Prophet's death.
Wow. Three pages in and you have already caught up with what I posted in the OP. I should have known you were in speedy mode when you opened by telling everyone what the real point was.
The OP:
Quote:"Muhammad never made any reference at all to a mosque in modern day Israel.
First error: the Prophet (unlike Jesus who was 'God'.....) could not have known details of his own ascension (unless 'God' told him).
2nd error: Muslims built the mosque and Dome O-T-R in Jerusalem soon after the Prophet's death. The Koran had no concept of the future recreation of the then long extinct state of Israel.
Quote:Jerusalem is not mentioned anywhere in the Quran.
But the mythology surrounding the ascension (mentioned in the Koran) and the place of creation was determined to be Jerusalem after the Prophet's death.
So why are denying the site's significance to Islam?
Because it's mythology - like the 'Chosen People' and the "Promised Land"?
Quote:Muhammad never actually travelled to Jerusalem, or anywhere near Israel, other than in his mystical "night journey" referred to in Surah 17. Scholars immediately after his death debated whether Surah 17 (now taken to be a reference to the mosque) was a place in heaven or somewhere near Mecca."
And the caliph who conquered Jerusalem was soon followed by builders of the Mosque and Dome, built to establish the legitimacy of Islam's mythology re creation and the Ascension.
(In contrast with Jewish "Promised Land" mythology, and Christian mythology re Jesus' death and the empty tomb).
Your point?