unesco-temple-mount-al-aqsa
Israel

UNESCO eradicates Jews and Judaism from the history of Temple Mount

UNESCO – where the ‘E’ stands for ‘education’ and the ‘C’ for ‘culture’ – is the “intellectual agency” of the United Nations, charged with “a commitment to peace-building, mediation, conflict prevention and resolution, peace education, education for non-violence, tolerance, acceptance, mutual respect, intercultural and interfaith dialogue and reconciliation”. You’d think, therefore, that its resolutions would be moderately-worded, historically-informed, factually-accurate, politically-latitudinal and impeccably respectful of cultural difference and religious diversity. How otherwise do you foster peace and reconciliation in the minds of men and women?

Perhaps the history of Israel doesn’t matter to UNESCO: Judaism is inconvenient, especially in Jerusalem, and the Jews are a manifest hurdle to peace.

To the delight of the Palestinian Authority, a UNESCO resolution was passed which denies Jewish ties to its most holy religious sites – Temple Mount and the Western Wall. All references to the site referred to it by its Arabic name; Some 24 nations supported the resolution; six opposed (including the USA and UK). 26 nations abstained; two were absent.

Let that sink in for a moment: just six nations opposed historical revisionism; the eradication of Jews from Mount Zion; the expunging of Judaism from the holiest place of Divine presence. This is where Talmudic tradition places the creation of Adam; it is Mount Moriah where Abraham offered Isaac; the hill which the prophet Isaiah called Zion; where King Solomon, son of David, Israel’s greatest king, built his Temple; where the prophets Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi witnessed the building of the Second Temple after the Babylonian captivity. It is a 3000-year-old Jewish shrine – the Holy of Holies – settled in the Judean hills of the Jewish capital city of the Jewish State. It is where Mary and Joseph found the boy Jesus sitting in the midst of the learned, who wondered at his understanding. It is where the Jewish Messiah drove out the money-changers who had turned his Father’s house into a den of thieves.

According to the UNESCO resolution, it is the Al-Aqṣa Mosque and Al-Ḥaram Al-Sharif (‘the Noble Sanctuary’). Islamic names are adopted throughout. The Western Wall is referred to twice, in scare quotes: ‘Kotel ha-Ma’aravi’ appears nowhere. Israel is “the occupying Power” (mentioned 15 times, in case you don’t grasp the point).

Some people (Christians, indeed) think this is just a resolution concerned with “breadth of religious access”, which is a good a wholesome thing; Christian, indeed. But if you deny the Jewish connection to the Temple Mount, you deny the Christian also. Indeed, UNESCO sends a clear message to the whole world that the history of the Old City of Jerusalem is Islamic; the theology is based on the doctrine of Allah; the supreme prophethood is that of Mohammed; Abraham offered Ishmael, and so the third-holiest shrine of Islam trumps the holiest place on earth for Jews.

A couple of mentions in passing which affirm the “importance of the Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls for the three monotheistic religions” doesn’t quite cut it. “Israeli right-wing extremists and uniformed forces” are the aggressor: Palestinians are the oppressed. Israel is not only the “occupying (upper-case) Power”, the resolution associates her with “refusal.. aggression.. illegal measures.. violations.. obstruction.. blockade.. attacks on schools..” You get the picture. There is no mention of Palestinian terrorist atrocities; of Hamas rockets launched from Gaza on Israeli villages; of suicide bombers who target shopping malls and restaurants; of the mobs of Muslims who patrol Temple Mount to assault, intimidate and harass Jewish visitors.

..And among these nations shalt thou find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy foot have rest: but the LORD shall give thee there a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and sorrow of mind (Deut 28:65).

This UNESCO resolution is a demonic delusion which tarnishes every other UN body. The demand for Judaism’s holiest site to be recognised as primarily a Muslim holy site is a denial of history and the dissemination of falsehood. It is political and religious propaganda; an abomination of desolation. The Arab/Muslim claim to the Old City of Jerusalem may not be won with the bombs and bullets of intifada, but in the High Court of the United Nations the war is waged with insidious and inciteful resolutions. This is not the way to foster reconciliation, and it is not a path to the priestly blessings of peace.

  • CliveM

    Last week I wouldn’t have said this, but Israel needs to bulldoze the Mosque. Then send the bill to UNESCO.

    Then we’ll see what its resolution is worth.

    • writhledshrimp

      So Alive and full is Jerusalem with archeological evidence of Jewish and Christian history that some say it is the fifth Gospel. It will take more than UNESCO to bury it.

    • bluedog

      Onwards to the Kabaa?

      • CliveM

        Now that would be provocative!

        • bluedog

          And bulldozing the A-Aqsa mosque isn’t? Just making a helpful suggestion that aligns with the principle set in your own post.

        • Anton

          Not as provocative as the claim that Muhammad never set foot in Mecca!

          The Canadian independent scholar Dan Gibson, whose father worked out where the Garden of Eden was IMHO, has gone one better and found that, while Medina is all that Islam says it is in Islamic tradition, the “holy city” in early Islamic texts (wherever Jerusalem is not meant) is not Mecca but Petra. You are probably aware of the early Islamic tale of the compilation of the Quran from various (discrepant) versions, followed by the burning of all those versions and the issuing of a standardised Quran. That act was also an act of of politics by the Abbasids against the Ummayads, Islam’s first two dynasties who fought each other a century after their prophet. The evidence is very strong indeed that Mecca was written in to Islamic texts at that point. Enough has survived from before that time for Gibson to put it together, and the evidence points – quite literally – to Petra. Gibson has updated his best arguments from his 2011 book Quranic Geography in this film:

          167919889

          (Note: The download is not free. I do not know Gibson and I do not profit from downloads.)

          Never mind about UNESCO, that’s real revisionism!

        • Pubcrawler

          One of the Islamic State’s declared objectives, I believe. One is inclined to let them.

          • CliveM

            Really? I’ll need to look this up. Do they not believe in the hajj and the qibla?

          • Anton

            I think you are meaning to reply to my comment about Dan Gibson? Where early qiblas point to is part of his argument. The hajj would need to go to Petra not Mecca, which would put the Meccans’ noses out of joint. Nothing else need change. But more devastating is the unspoken question: if this is really the case, just how reliable is everything else?

  • Siree

    Why is anyone surprised? I long ago gave up expecting any impartiality or accuracy from domestic or international bodies. Appeasement is routine, and equally routinely ascribed to ‘celebrations’ of diversity and tolerance. It will of course lead to disaster, just as previous appeasement did. History holds no lessons, unless they are to prove the West and Israel in particular to be responsible for the ills of the world.

    I used to use the word despair as merely indicative of a frame of mind. No longer.

  • Anton

    The UN is a democracy of dictatorships. Bad idea.

    • weirdvisions

      Best description of the UN I’ve seen in a while.

  • The Explorer

    I’ve noticed a new term, and not sure when exactly it appeared: ‘reversion’. This applies to a Westerner who becomes a Muslim. You are not converting: you are simply returning – reverting – to the original religion.

    According to Islam, Adam was the first Muslim. Judaism and Christianity are distortions of Islam, which is why Allah had to send Muhammad to restore the original message.

    Given this narrative, it’s inevitable that Al-Aqsa should have preceded Temple Mount. It cannot be otherwise. The Islamic narrative is the most radical example of revisionist history in existence.

    • Dreadnaught

      It has always been the norm for Muslims to reject the expression ‘convert’ for the preferred ‘revert’ and thus imply the promince of Islam as the original Lie.

      • The Explorer

        Thank you. I’m behind the times.

        • Dreadnaught

          No slight intended.

          • dannybhoy

            Bet there was..
            :0)

          • Dreadnaught

            You must be desparate … Dan.

          • dannybhoy

            Well I was about to offer you a slice of cow pie..

    • dannybhoy

      Don’t do it Explorer!

    • Dude

      Tut , tut. You need to be enlightened my friend toward the truth.

      Helpfully to put the historical record straight UNESCO has recently published a new translation – via the original Arabic- of the new testament and Palestinian Bible. Here’s a few extracts :

      1).From the Palestinian Arab Islamic Bible (previously known as the Tenakh/ Hebrew Bible/Jewish Scripture/ Old Testament):

      “Lo didst into the four hundred and eightieth year after the Palestinians came out of Arabia, in the fourth year of Suliem’s reign over Palestine, he began to build the
      Al-Aksa Mosque/Al-Haram Al Sharif”

      3). And from the Palestinian Testament (previously the Christian new testament) :

      “And Lo did Isa the Palestinian Arab, went into the Al-Aksa Mosque/Al-Haram Al Sharif, and cast out all that sold and bought in the Al-Aksa Mosque/Al-Haram Al Sharif, and overthrew the tables of the Zionist Bankers, and the seats of them that sold derivative trades”.

      Revised standard UNESCO version.

      • Inspector General

        What a load of Lo!

    • bluedog

      This tendency to put belief ahead of evidence may explain the unholy matrimony of the Left and Islam.

  • Anton

    Here is the full text of this resolution:

    http://www.timesofisrael.com/full-text-of-new-unesco-resolution-on-occupied-palestine/

    It does not explicitly deny that Israel had prior association with Temple Mount; it simply never mentions it, makes reference to its Islamic-era history, and uses the Arab names for everything there.

    Yet the Bible calls this place God’s Holy Hill (Psalm 2:6) and Jesus prophesied that Jerusalem would be “trampled down by the gentiles until the era of the gentiles is fulfilled” (Luke 21:24). Thereafter it will be the site of His palace, from which He will rule the world for a thousand years. Come, Lord Jesus!

  • Anton

    There is another hill in Jerusalem, long known as the Hill of Evil Counsel. It is where the UN has its base in the city…

  • john in cheshire

    The UN is the current version of the Synagogue of satan.

  • Martin

    It’s the UN, what else did you expect?

  • Dreadnaught

    At least the UK along with US, voted against.

    • weirdvisions

      I think you mean the re-mosqification. :0)

  • David

    The UN is not fit for purpose and seems to actively plot against western and democratic nations. This historical revisionism is another illustration of what a truly wicked organisation it is.

    • PessimisticPurple

      Israel is not western or democratic.

      • bluedog

        Since when was a parliamentary democracy not democratic?

        • Anton

          It is democratic. But it is also a Jewish State. Given that there are about as many Arabs as Jews within in the borders of what was Mandatory Palestine, it might someday have to decide which.

  • TropicalAnglican

    I guess Trump isn’t going to mind if I reproduce wholesale one of his tweets:

    Donald J. Trump

    Friday, October 14th 2016, 2:25:28 am

    “I have said on numerous occasions that in a Trump Administration, the United States will recognize Jerusalem as the one true capital of Israel. The United Nations’ attempt to disconnect the State of Israel from Jerusalem is a one-sided attempt to ignore Israel’s 3,000-year bond to its capital city, and is further evidence of the enormous
    anti-Israel bias of the UN. Jerusalem is the enduring capital of the Jewish People and the overwhelming majority of Congress has voted to recognize Jerusalem as just that. Further, the decision by the Obama Administration to strike the word ‘Israel’ after the word ‘Jerusalem’ in the President’s prepared text was a capitulation to Israel’s enemies, and a posthumous embarrassment to Shimon Peres, whose memory the President was attempting to honor. In a Trump Administration, Israel will have a true, loyal and lasting friend in the United States of America.” Donald J. Trump

    • Anton

      Which might just be why he gets elected…

      • Oisín mac Fionn

        Might it? Last time I looked Clinton had a solid lead over Trump in the two states where the Jewish vote makes the most difference: New York and Florida.

        I suppose he could swing Florida, although it would take a miracle to claw back the 4 point lead Clinton currently enjoys there. But what about her 20 point lead in New York?

        The Jewish vote always goes to the Democrats. One throwaway tweet won’t change that, certainly not just weeks before the election.

        While the overall outcome of this election may be in some doubt, nobody – not even the most deluded fundamentalist “anything-but-Hillary” Trump voter – can delude himself that the Jewish vote will suddenly and miraculously do what it’s never done (not even for Reagan) and place itself behind a Republican candidate.

        • Anton

          I didn’t say that the Jewish vote in response to this statement would be responsible for electing him. Such a statement has a wider effect than upon Jews.

          • Oisín mac Fionn

            The only people other than Jews who might think of Jerusalem as a election-influencing topic are Bible-believin’ (no “g”) evangelical Christians.

            Trump’s already cornered that market. There’s no upside left in it for him, so I don’t know where all these extra votes are going to come from.

            You think Middle America gives a toss about Jerusalem being Jewish or Arab? Many of them may be Christian, but of the home town, white picket fence, K-Mart variety where faith signals tribal belonging rather than worries about the fate of Jerusalem. Tell them that Hillary Clinton will ban guns and pizza and you might get a landslide for Trump. That’s pretty much your only chance.

          • Anton

            Please don’t think that I’m longing for a Trump presidency. I’d simply rather have one than a Hillary presidency. Three weeks is a long time in politics and much dirt about Hillary might yet be to come out.

          • dannybhoy

            I’m not keen on Trump either, But if the MSM has any say in news/propaganda reporting it won’t investigate any of Hillary’s misdemeanours. The silence from a supposedly democratic truth upholding free press is truly shocking..

          • Merchantman

            Not now that Assange has had his email nobbled by Obama and his mates.

          • The Explorer

            Don’t forget that middle-American Christians believe that what happens in Jerusalem has a bearing on when the Second Coming will occur, and the Second Coming determines when the world will end. So they have a long-distance vested interest in what’s going on.

          • bluedog

            Happy to defer the Second Coming for a bit longer then.

          • Oisín mac Fionn

            Trump already has the fundamentalist religious vote. There’s no upside in it for him. He needs to win over other electorates and this he is absolutely not doing.

            Jews are massively for Hillary. So are Blacks, Hispanics and the LGBT community. She has a net majority of women on her side. If you do the maths, it’s hard to see how she can lose.

            It ain’t over till it’s over of course. But in order to turn this around by polling day, an historic last minute surge to Trump will be needed, the like of which has never been seen before. It’s not theoretically impossible, I suppose. But it seems very, very unlikely.

          • Inspector General

            Darllng Hillary for the walking wounded, what!

          • The Explorer

            Yes, I wasn’t saying about American Christians with regard to who might vote for whom. I think you’re dead right about the voting blocks. Jews are 2% of the population: significant in terms of financial backing, but not for actual numbers. Gays 3%. Blacks around 10%. The Latino vote, granted, is hugely significant, and Trump’s wall will not appeal to those who want to import more Mexicans. On paper, it’s Hillary all the way because of the American demographic shift.

            But don’t know if you saw the Paxman analysis of Trump and Clinton. The most interesting comment , in my view, was from the black commentator who said many would vote for Trump, but would keep quiet about it before the event. So I’d say the outcome is not a foregone conclusion.

          • Inspector General

            Blacks are 14% of the population, and are responsible for about 82% of violent crime. Well done them!

          • bluedog

            Punching above their weight?

          • Inspector General

            Shall we call it asserting themselves after 10,000 years of enslavement by white people…which only finished yesterday week,,,

          • bluedog

            It’s not finished yet, Bro. The patronising white liberals have taken over in a cultural and moral sense, replacing the physical imposition of serfdom with their own assumptions of superiority.

          • Inspector General

            Ain’t that the Lord’s truth! Alleluia! You get up on your two back legs, rise above, and testify to that, you blue hound. TESTIFY! And them good ol’ colored girls will start the hand clappin…

          • bluedog

            We’ll start by banning white rappers, a UN Resolution should do it. If they’re not taking the mickey out of the coloured folk they’re stealing culturally determined intellectual property. Typical of the white man.

          • Inspector General

            Right on, blood! Are you able to pogo like Archbishop Desmond Tutu? Apparently it means you havin’ a good time, you hear!

          • bluedog

            Gonna cross the River Jordan, there’s ganga on the other side.

          • Inspector General

            “comin for to carry me home!”

          • Anton

            Banning Eminem suits me fine. But complaining about “cultural appropriation” is weird: where it happens, it should be viewed as a compliment.

          • bluedog

            No complaint. Just tongue in cheek.

          • Merchantman

            Don’t know but at least they are having a stab at it.

          • CliveM

            PaddyPower are paying out on a Hilary win.

          • The Explorer

            Yes. There are other factors, too. Hillary is a woman, after a fashion, and there are more females than males who vote in the US. But the Democrats have been superb – probably their biggest achievement – at accumulating debt. There might be voters -even among welfare recipients – who’d prefer someone able to create wealth (possibly) rather than spend it.

          • Merchantman

            It seems along with the Big Lie the left is expert at taking countries by population replacement. Thank God for Brexit and the old ‘D’s and ‘E’s and God bless them.

          • Oisín mac Fionn

            “Experts” who warned about the silent majority rising up on the day of the last British general election and sweeping UKIP to power on a tide of conservative and nationalist indignation got it spectacularly wrong, didn’t they?

            Extreme conservatives and radical leftists are always convinced that everyone except a few loudmouth politicians agree with them, whereas the truth of the matter is that elections are won and lost at the centre.

            Of the two candidates, Clinton has the greatest appeal to those in the centre. Only by driving the electorate to the right could Trump hope to win, but despite trying to do this by focusing attention on immigration, Trump’s own personality has dominated his campaign and drowned out the rest of his message.

            His problem is that he polarises, and drives as many away as he attracts. The pool of Republican voters that a GOP candidate could normally count on is therefore significantly reduced, and there aren’t nearly enough Trump-friendly Democrats to replace them.

            Without venturing to predict the outcome, I just don’t see how Trump can make up the numbers he needs in order to secure a victory. It looks mathematically impossible to me, and the pundits pretty much all seem to agree. The last prediction I saw gave Clinton more than 250 electoral college votes, leaving Trump with around 170. A convincing win for Hillary by any standards and humiliation for Trump.

            We’ll see what happens on the day but if I were The Donald, I wouldn’t be holding my breath.

          • The Explorer

            The only experts I’m aware of said that Britain would vote to remain. And the experts were wrong.

            The Democrats realised a while back that new immigrants tend to vote Democrat. So legalise them asap, get ’em voting, and they’d keep the Democrats in power indefinitely. If the Latino vote is not definitive this time round, it will be more so with each succeeding election as the White vote shrinks. Add the electoral college system to the mix, and I think it likely that Hillary will win, despite her enormous personal unpopularity.

            But I’d say we’re not quite yet at the situation where demography is fate. So I wouldn’t personally place a bet on either party.

          • Oisín mac Fionn

            A referendum is not the same kind of electoral animal as a presidential or a general election. Single issue votes are notoriously volatile. But when it comes to deciding who’s going to govern you for the next 4 or 5 years, you tend to put a lot more thought into it.

            In any case, however the Democrats got their electoral advantage, the American political system allowed them to obtain it quite legally. And the Republicans are not blameless in the matter. Using mass immigration to fuel economic growth is standard policy for all Western economies beset by falling birth rates and the demographic bottleneck they cause.

            If Republicans want to blame it all on Democrats, they should perhaps remember that even that darling of the Right Wing – Ronald Reagan – legalised millions of undocumented immigrants, most of whom went on to become loyal Democrat voters.

            An inevitable side-effect of our economic model is the liberalisation of social and political attitudes. Immigrants vote for parties who support immigration, and those parties go on to form governments that favour immigration. It snowballs from there.

            If Hillary looks set to win, blame it on Reagan. Blame it on a Republican party that allowed the promise of economic growth to blind it to the liberalising influence of mass immigration.

            The question should not be why Democrat administrations were allowed to pursue an immigration policy so favourable to their own interests, but rather why Republican administrations didn’t do more to stop it. They had the power more than once during the Reagan and both Bush eras when they controlled the executive, legislative and/or judicial branches, but they didn’t use it. And now they’re bleating about an “unfair” Democrat advantage?

            They’ve made their own bed. Let them lie in it.

          • The Explorer

            Good points all. I agree with all you say. I agree a referendum is not the same as an election, and I did not draw a comparison. What I did say was that if one set of experts predicted a UKIP landslide, the experts I was aware of predicted a win for Remain. A valid comparison from British politics would be the BBC prediction of a win for Labour when Major got in.

            Lenin is credited with saying that the capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them. The Republicans did not oppose illegal immigration because illegals could be employed for low wages. That suited the bog corporations who financed the Republicans. The Republicans also supported the globalisation that sent five million American jobs abroad and lost the Republicans states like Ohio. Trump used Chinese steel for his buildings.

            “Immigrants vote for parties who support immigration, and those parties go on to form governments that favour immigration. It snowballs from there.” Perfectly expressed. There are now so many Latino voters for the Democrats that the recent-immigrant vote could well be the key factor in determining the outcome of the election. But Hillary being a woman is another factor, given the number of women voters.

          • Oisín mac Fionn

            To me the important point is the size of Clinton’s lead over Trump.

            If the election results mirror current polls, she’ll garner more than 300 electoral college votes, meaning her mandate will be unarguable.

            Whatever you think of her politics or even of her, her democratic legitimacy if she gains this kind of score will be unassailable.

            The Republicans however will be facing their third consecutive massive electoral defeat caused by a demographic shift that risks undermining their ability to win the presidency for a generation or more.

            Barring a catastrophe (or a miracle, depending on how you look at it) it seems to me that Clinton will be the next US president, which I personally welcome. But it ain’t over till it’s over so I make no hard and fast predictions.

          • The Explorer

            “undermining their ability to win the presidency for a generation or more.” I’d say it’s unclear if the Republican Party will exist a generation hence.

            The Republicans are the White Party. They can get away with that while wHITES

          • Oisín mac Fionn

            Ah, I see. Yellow Peril with an Hispanic accent, eh?

            What a terrible future awaits Whites in the US. If they can’t be the numerical majority, they might as well be dead, mighten’t they? I mean, what’s the point of exisiting if they can be outvoted by a bunch of sallow people who speak with funny accents?

            Don’t these people understand the concept of White Supremacy? It’s written into the very alphabet God gave us to use: AEIOU. Albae Est Imperare Orbi Universo. It is the part of the white man to rule the universe!!! (And if anybody failed to notice, that was irony, not a statement of support for any psychopathic race-based political movement…)

            I didn’t realise quite how noisome this place really was. Not only do the standard misogynistic and homophobic religious fundamentalists and assorted sociopathic Little England Brexiters hang out here, but so do Fascists and, I seem to have noticed by reading through some older comments, blatant anti-Semites.

            As cesspits go, this one really takes some beating.

          • The Explorer

            Lots of hysterical reactions to things I never said.

            Your point: the Republicans could be out of power for a generation. My point, the Republicans could be out of power indefinitely, if they continue to rely on the White vote once Whites become a minority. The Republicans are popularly seen as the White Party, and the Democrats as the Four-race Party of Whites, Blacks, Asians and Hispanics.

            A question. Do you accept that sometime between 2035 and 2040 White Americans will become the largest minority? Yes or No?

          • Merchantman

            Sadly you are mostly right. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth when the fruits of Clinton come to pass.
            Whoever would want a Clinton in the White House ever again?
            I suppose most of the people you list are out to bring the USA down to their level, so why not vote for Hillary?

        • Inspector General

          Hillary for the walking wounded, what!

  • Jon Sorensen

    Pretty sad but winners write the history non-winners will be vilified. Standard tribal/religious/nationalistic strategy, so no need to invoke demons to this matter.

    • Anton

      Yet the Jewish scriptures, the ‘Old Testament,’ consistently pans the Jews.

      • Jon Sorensen

        You should actually read the Bible. Jews were the chosen ones, “good guys”, who conqured a land where people had been living over 10000 years. Bible justifies their adventure of killings kids and women, and taking slaves, gold and land.

        All people of cities to Sodom and Gomorrah needed to be killed because they were “bad guys”. All Midianites needed to killed because of their women were “bad guys”. Egyptians were the “bad guys” worth punishing. Peaceful people of Jericho needed to be wiped out and cursed.

        I wish Christians would read their Bible…

        • Anton

          I wish *you* would read it. They were told right at the start of their national life that it was not because of their supposed righteousness but the Canaanites’ evil that they were being given the land of Canaan. They are recorded as rebelling against their leaders and God on the way there. Once they were there countless prophets excoriated them for failing to keep God’s laws, until 10 of the 12 Israelite tribes were wiped out by the Assyrians and the Jews were exiled to Babylon for a lifetime. Several centuries later Jesus castigated both the pharisees and the sadducees, the former being the main theologians and the latter in charge of the Temple.

          And these are the good guys?!

          • Jon Sorensen

            Jews didn’t have it easy, but all their enemies were “bad guys” worth of genocide. Stop and think about it.

            Dehumanising your a group of people, your enemies, as “evil” is the first step of genocide. Every dictator has used this trick to convince their mindless followers to believe this. Unfortunately your own propaganda has convinced you that Canaanites were “evil” without investigating if the claim is true. The worst thing is you still keep on propagating this winner’s story to justify this taking of land, women and gold. It’s time for people to start to do their own thinking .

            Of course Jesus castigated both the pharisees and the sadducees, the establishment. He wanted influence and follower like any new cult leader. Funny how Jesus’ followers now don’t behave like good pharisees and sadducees would. Modern followers don’t follow the Law and follow a new trinitarian god concept that would have be blashemy for pharisees, sadducees and Jesus.

          • Merchantman

            Unfortunately genocide is still very much on the agenda of those wishing the eradication of the State of Israel; like Hammas, and probably a large slice of the membership of the UN and its UNESCO branch, etc.

          • TropicalAnglican

            …as spelt out and listed in Psalm 83 (“A psalm of Asaph”), where Israel’s enemies are specifically called God’s enemies:
            Ps 83:1: O God, do not keep silence; do not hold thy peace or be still, O God!
            v.2. For lo, thy enemies are in tumult; those who hate thee have raised their heads.
            v.3. They lay crafty plans against thy people; they consult together against thy protected ones.
            v.4. They say, “Come, let us wipe them out as a nation; let the name of Israel be remembered no more!”
            v.5. Yea, they conspire with one accord; against thee they make a covenant–
            v.6. the tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites, Moab and the Hagrites,
            v.7. Gebal and Ammon and Amalek, Philistia with the inhabitants of Tyre;
            v.8. Assyria also has joined them; they are the strong arm of the children of Lot. (RSV)

          • Jon Sorensen

            It’s not a surprise that religions with holy books advocating killing and genocides as God commanded right things to do keep genocide on the agendas.

          • Anton

            You are keeping up your track record of changing the subject when the going gets tricky… in the last few days you have failed to make your claim stick that Obama is Christian, ditto the Nazis, kept well off the atheist atrocities of communist Russia and China, and now you haven’t denied that the Old Testament is, as I said, intensely critical of the Jews. You are very nearly as good as Richard Dawkins at giving atheism a bad name.

            Now you assume I know nothing about the Canaanites except what the Bible says. I suggest you look up the works of Philo of Byblos, who was long regarded as making up ancient history until Ugaritic manuscripts came on the scene in the late 1920s and amply confirmed what he was saying. Check those too.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Thank you for using me and the most excellent Richard Dawkins in a same sentence. I don’t deserve that honour as he has made so much good getting rid of false beliefs and making atheism popular and almost cool. He has almost single handedly changed the course of history to better.

            But false accusations from an angry Christian keep on coming even when I already addressed your issues:

            Obama fits the dictionary decription of male, black, human, Christian etc. I said I don’t play your word redefining games. I also said the “proof” belongs to math which you ignored.

            I also answered the Nazi question. Just because you don’t like the answer it doesn’t mean it is not true. Your worldview just does not allow you to accept the true and again you try to redefine words to justify your position.

            I responded to “atrocities of communist Russia and China” and you ignored the answer of correlation/causality. You did not answer how “not believing in something” leads to doing something. Again you run away from the problem of your worldview.

            Of course OT priestly writers criticised OT lay people, but that is nothing compared to how other nations were treated with genocides. Again you did not address this and got upset.

            “Now you assume I know nothing about the Canaanites except what the Bible says”
            So let us know then what you know about Canaanites. Are they the true owners of the land. How did they become successful if they killed their kids. Were they all evil people? Let us know already.

            “Do you really think that Christians are meant to present animals for sacrifice at Jerusalem after the Crucifixion?”
            That is what Jesus’ brother James did. He (and some of his church members) walked with Jesus and James worshipped in the Temple after Jesus death. You will not get access to Temple if you claim Jesus is God or claiming that the Law is no longer applicable. Your worldview can not accept this truth.

          • Anton

            Please show me the evidence that James brought animals for sacrifice after the Crucifixion. (It is not the same as gathering in the Temple courts for worship.) St Paul explains that Christians are not under the Jewish law (1 Corinthians 9:20). Christianity from the start was intended as a global faith and it was never expected that converts living thousands of miles east in Asia would trek three times annually to Jerusalem, as Jews were commanded to do in their law.

            This website explains that extrabiblical sources *(Philo of Byblos and the Ugaritic manuscripts discovered in the 1920s) back up the Old Testament regarding the Canaanites:

            http://www.theology.edu/canaan.htm

            “Of course OT priestly writers criticised OT lay people…”

            Actually the prophets explain that the entire religious establishment of the Jews became so corrupt that God destroyed his own Temple and sent the priests (among others) into slavery.

            I responded to “atrocities of communist Russia and China” and you ignored the answer of correlation/causality.

            Where? I mentioned Nazis, communist Russia and China in our recent exchange and you picked up on only the Nazis despite my repeated raising of the others.

            You did not answer how “not believing in something” leads to doing something.

            Fine; I’ll do that now. If you don’t believe in any god then you will have only man to depend on. Now tell me: is that a good basis?

            Everybody can see form this exchange that you are unable to explain why you consider Obama a Christian.

          • Jon Sorensen

            James followed the Law what ever was required. Details have not survived as later Christians generally did not preserve opponents writings. Paul never met Jesus and he introduced new ideas to Jesus’ teaching which were clearly heretical to James who walked and talked with Jesus. Jesus was only sent for the lost sheep of Israel and Jesus did not ask James go outside Judea. It was not originally intended as a global faith. Paul just created a new version just like many other early Christian sects.

            Carthage was founded 700 years after the conquest of Canaan 3000km away from Canaan. We don’t have Carthagean text if they sacrifice children or burned children who died before or soon after birth. Modern scholars don’t agree. Dr Price had interesing podcast about this issue earlier this year. So I don’t see the relevance of this. So tell me again what Philo of Byblos said about Cananites that were killed during the conquest of Israelites.

            I might have mixed up who I wrote about Nazis. So many writers on this site bring it up. I had several discussion about this in last couple of weeks.

            “If you don’t believe in any god then you will have only man to depend on.”
            Not true. Many people believe in Karma, magic spells to gain knowleged/power and Godless Buddhist don’t depend on only man. I even met an atheist who believed in afterlife and claimed to have spirit guide.

            “Now tell me: is that a good basis?”
            What has this to with “how “not believing in something” leads to doing something”?

            “Everybody can see form this exchange that you are unable to explain why you consider Obama a Christian.”
            Everybody can read my explanation above and check it from a dictionary too.

          • Anton

            Christianity not originally intended as a global faith? Jesus’ last words in Matthew’s gospel tell the disciples to take the gospel to all nations.

            If you consider that you made a case why Obama was a Christian in your posts above, you won’t mind pasting the relevant argumentation in response to this request.

            Philo was writing centuries later but he is likely to have had accurate documents to hand, just as historians today do. What he says matches the Ugaritic manuscripts. You don’t say that today’s historians can’t write about the mediaeval era merely because they are centuries away from it, do you?

            The track record of secular nations is bloody, judging by the biggest two, Russia and China. If you think that these are exceptions to a rule about secular nations, please explain why.

          • Jon Sorensen

            “Jesus’ last words in Matthew’s gospel tell the disciples to take the gospel to all nations”
            Funny how important endocrines of last 2 verses of Matthew has the trinitarian formula that Christians before 180CE did not know or use, and great commission that early church fathers and James did not know. Interesting that we have a manuscript that does not have those in it. Also interesting that it contradicts “lost sheep of Israel” passage while so many books of the Bible has important doctrines crammed in last verses. TLDR: Paulinists put those words later in Jesus’ mouth.

            So Philo wrote 100 BCE about Carthagean religion 500 CBE and you want to pin Carthagean religious action to people who lived 1000 years before that 3000km away from the area? Even if Philo had photos, videos and “accurate documents” do you understand how stupid your argument is? Seriously?

            So tell me again what Philo of Byblos said about Cananites that were killed during the conquest of Israelites.

            So you are now running away from:
            “What has this to with “how “not believing in something” leads to doing something”?”
            after saying “Fine; I’ll do that now.”
            Don’t ask me to “explain why” if you get in intellectual trouble.

          • Anton

            Jesus also spoke in Matthew 24:9-14 of the gospel going to all nations. You may, if you wish, insist that every such forward reference in the four gospels were added later, but that would be your agenda rather than genuine scholarship.

            Even if Philo had photos, videos and “accurate documents” do you understand how stupid your argument is?

            And when did you stop beating your wife?

          • Jon Sorensen

            “but that would be your agenda rather than genuine scholarship.”
            The good thing about this is that you can check this yourself from eCatena and the manuscript that are online and compare what the scolarship says.

            “And when did you stop beating your wife?”
            Funny how you complain that I don’t address your claims, but you seem to run away when you fact-free claims are exposed.

            Just to remind you. You ran away from:
            “You did not answer how “not believing in something” leads to doing something.”
            and from your fact-free claim:
            “This website explains that extrabiblical sources *(Philo of Byblos and the Ugaritic manuscripts discovered in the 1920s) back up the Old Testament regarding the Canaanites:”

          • Anton

            “When did you stop beating your wife?” is a question which, not mattre what you reply, implies that a man is a wife-beater. I was pointing out that your question, “Even if Philo had photos, videos and “accurate documents” do you understand how stupid your argument is?” is of the same sort. I have no intention of playing your game. You can say that I am “running away” from your arguments as often as you like but that does not make it so, as the reader may verify. When are YOU going to stop ducking and (re?)post your argument why Obama is Christian?

          • Jon Sorensen

            Philo did not talk about people who where killed by Israelites. I just caught you lying about it and now you are upset….

          • Anton

            I know he didn’t. I never said he did. Philo did say that the Canaanites were a degenerate lot and that is why I mentioned him.

          • Jon Sorensen

            You are still lying.
            Philo was talking about people living 700 years after the conquest of Canaan 3000km away from Canaan. Philo was not talking about people killed by Israelites.
            Shame on you.

          • Anton

            That you say I am lying doesn’t mean it is true. And it is not (again).

            First, I said my primary source was the Ugaritic manuscripts. (If you don’t believe this, check above.) They matched what Philo said about the inhabitants. The area discussed by Philo was Phoenicia, which is Canaan and a good deal more around it. Where do you get your 3000km discrepancy from? And he was talking about the religion of those people in Phoenicia not conquered by the Israelites. Why should it have changed radically?

            PS I’m still waiting for you to post ANY reason for your claim that Obama is a Christian…

          • Jon Sorensen

            “That you say I am lying doesn’t mean it is true.”
            Typical obfuscation.

            Why don’t you already tell us what the Ugarit text and Philo say about Cananites killed in genocide. And you don’t even seem to know the religion of Cananites 3500 years ago. You are just guessing.. But you are against their religious freedom.

            I read the link which is PR for “lofty monotheism” and putting down “the gross Phoenician mythology”. LOL. W.F. Albright clearly doesn’t want people to know how Jews worshipped Yahweh and his two consort or get a fair and balanced view.

            “PS I’m still waiting for you to post ANY reason for your claim that Obama is a Christian…”
            I already responded and you just did not like my answer.

          • Anton

            Why don’t you already tell us what the Ugarit text and Philo say about Cananites

            I gave you a weblink which did that. Did you miss it?

            http://www.theology.edu/canaan.htm

            “PS I’m still waiting for you to post ANY reason for your claim that Obama is a Christian…”
            I already responded and you just did not like my answer.

            You said that he fulfilled the dictionary definition and gave the dictionary definition as somebody who follows Christianity. That’s a circular argument. But if you think you gave any genuine reason, you won’t mind pasting it into your reply, will you?

          • Jon Sorensen

            That link does not have the Ugarit text. Please link to the actual text that would support your claim.

            You don’t even understand what a circular argument is. I gave a definition and applied it to Obama. That is not a circular argument.

          • Anton

            Then repaste your argument. If you can.

  • CliveM

    Its being reported that UNESCO’s Executive Board is going to reexamine the resolution passed last week. This didn’t amount to much as it was passed today.

    The Christian Broadcasting Network.

  • Anton

    So UNESCO joins Ionesco in the Theatre of the Absurd.

  • PessimisticPurple

    Perhaps UNESCO consider the mosque to be a fact on the ground.

    • dannybhoy

      It’s a fact on the current ground level, but underneath is the Israel of the Old Testament. Having had the privilege of seeing some of the excavations, it becomes obvious why the Israelis are so keen to uncover their past..

      2 Chronicles 6>
      “1Then spoke Solomon: The LORD hath said that He would dwell in the thick darkness.
      2But I have built Thee a house of habitation, And a place for Thee to dwell in for ever.

      3And the king turned his face, and blessed all the congregation of Israel; and all the congregation of Israel stood. 4And he said: ‘Blessed be the LORD, the God of Israel, who spoke with His mouth unto David my father, and hath with His hands fulfilled it, saying: the day that I brought forth My people out of the land of Egypt, I chose no city out of all the tribes of Israel to build a house in, that My name might be there; neither chose I any man to be prince over My people Israel; 6but I have chosen Jerusalem, that My name might be there; and have chosen David to be over My people Israel.”

  • len

    The false Muslim claims to the Temple Mount is a vain attempt to supplant Judaism with Islam as the ‘rightful heirs’ of Abraham.

    It really is that simple…

    • Dominic Stockford

      Yes, it is.

    • Anton

      Just as they rewrote Genesis 22 into sura 37 of the quran (verses 100-113) to make it Ishmael rather than Isaac whom Abraham was willing to sacrifice. (Ishmael is not mentioned by name but sura 37 states that Isaac is yet to be born and that the son whom Abraham nearly sacrificed was his firstborn – whom Jews and Muslims agree was Ishmael).

  • six opposed (including the USA and UK)

    As Islamization proceeds on its merry way, it is only a matter of time before the West acquires new rulers who are hostile to Israel and will vote accordingly, and if Western hostility is limited to votes at the United Nations, Israel will be extremely lucky.

    Jews, in identifying Christianity as the fount of anti-Semitism and choreographing the Muslim immigration which is intended to wipe Western Christianity off the map, may have stabbed Israel through the heart. Is the Jewish hatred of Christianity ‘so ancient and so deep’ that Jews may consider the loss of Israel a price worth paying?

    ‘Clearly, it is futile for the Church to try to mollify a hatred so ancient and so deep as the Jewish animus against Christianity. Despite all the sentimental rhetoric to the contrary—such as pious nonsense about “the Judaeo-Christian tradition”—Judaism and Christianity are radically opposed over the most important thing of all: Jesus Christ, who commands us to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves, and to love our enemies, which does not mean mistaking them for friends.’—Joseph Sobran

    • The Explorer

      The Muslim expansion into Europe will not only impact on the policies of European nations towards Israel. It could also affect the viability of Jews in Europe. Jews in France and Sweden have already been affected, with resultant emigration to Israel. The Jewish population of Malmo has apparently already halved.

      • Anton

        Has he?

        • The Explorer

          Evidently. it might yet come to that. Jews are already warned to exercise extreme caution when venturing around southern Sweden.

          • Inspector General

            Might be worth extending that warning to Swedish girls. And no, ‘Swedish girls’ does not encompass those hijab females there…

      • @ The Explorer—In his review of Chapter 14 of Two Hundred Years Together, Kevin MacDonald mentions a passage where Solzhenitsyn quotes G Landau: ‘Jewish participation in the Russian turmoil had astonishingly suicidal overtones in it; I am referring not only to their role in Bolshevism, but to their involvement in the whole thing.’

        MacDonald continues: ‘This aspect of Jewish behavior bears pondering. Many people have noted that Jewish involvement in promoting massive non-White immigration may be bad for the Jews in the long run. Most famously, Stephen Steinlight [here] has called attention to the danger to Jews of Muslim immigration, and Abe Foxman [former head of the Anti-Defamation League] has agonized about the fact that Latinos are unlikely to be deeply attached to Jewish issues, such as the Holocaust and Israel…By any measure, Jewish behavior during the revolutionary period in Russia and in pursuing their ethnic aims in the US and throughout the West has been aggressive—far different, for example from the behavior of the Overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia. Indeed, aggression is one of the four critical features of Jewish activism in general.’

    • bluedog

      ‘and if Western hostility is limited to votes at the United Nations, Israel will be extremely lucky.’

      Sadly, a valid point.

  • dannybhoy

    We live in momentous times. Maybe not the end times, but certainly times in which the world order most of us grew up in is passing, and giving way to new realities. America too is on the wane. The values that held it together and inspired that nation are being challenged and corroded..
    Judges 2>
    6 “When Joshua dismissed the people, the people of Israel went each to his inheritance to take possession of the land. 7 And the people served the Lord all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders who outlived Joshua, who had seen all the great work that the Lord had done for Israel. 8 And Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, died at the age of 110 years. 9 And they buried him within the boundaries of his inheritance in Timnath-heres, in the hill country of Ephraim, north of the mountain of Gaash. 10 And all that generation also were gathered to their fathers. And there arose another generation after them who did not know the Lord or the work that he had done for Israel…”

    Although I may argue the theology, I find myself more convinced that God’s overarching plan for our world is moving along, and we Christians should exercise our freedoms of speech whilst seeking our God in our devotions, so that we may be ready when He calls on us.

  • Inspector General

    Chin up Cranmer! It’s not as bad as it seems you know. History is whatever the victor says it is. It’s always been like that. That’s how it is. Everyone accepts it as that. So, what happens when those who have not shared in the victory have a go at writing it on behalf of the losers. Not a lot. A small amount of confusion at worst, if you are daft enough to view the world through UN eyes that is; but the main result is that the UN continues to be held in pitiful ribaldry. Business as usual then.

    Excellent final paragraph you’ve come up, by the way. They ought to pin that onto the end of their whatever…a rider of sorts.

    Tally ho!

    • Anton

      Are you Boris Johnson?

  • Inspector General

    I say fellows. Here’s some meaty fare from Wiki…
    …………………………………
    In 2011, Palestine became a UNESCO member following a vote in which 107 member states supported and 14 opposed.[37][38] Laws passed in the United States in 1990 and 1994 mean that it cannot contribute financially to any UN organisation that accepts Palestine as a full member. As a result, it withdrew its funding which accounted for about 22% of UNESCO’s budget.[39] Israel also reacted to Palestine’s admittance to UNESCO by freezing Israel payments to the UNESCO and imposing sanctions to the Palestinian Authority,[40] claiming that Palestine’s admittance would be detrimental “to potential peace talks”.[41] Two years after they stopped paying their dues to UNESCO, US and Israel lost UNESCO voting rights in 2013.[42]
    ………………………………………………………..
    One more thing. UNESCO, like churches, celebrate feast days, for want of a better word…Look what’s coming up!

    29 November
    International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People

    How super, what! Must get some firework rockets to launch at the neighbours on the day…

    • weirdvisions

      Thank God I’m an agnostic.

      • Inspector General

        Whatever you do, don’t believe in man. He’s a pitiful blighter…

        • weirdvisions

          You may have something there. Femiloons are more pitiful those.

          • Inspector General

            Ah yes. Our gentle uncomplaining lezzer community. A credit to the nation, probably…

          • weirdvisions

            And a discredit to female kind in particular. I have no time for them but then I’m just a normal wife and mother so what would I know? :0)

          • Inspector General

            Good girl! One hopes you have your husband’s permission to be here tonight…

          • weirdvisions

            Oh, absolutely…not. 😀

            Sorry for the delay in replying.

          • Inspector General

            That’s the spirit. Feigning passive agreement. Well done, madam!

  • chefofsinners

    Psalm 2:
    Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying “Let is break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.”
    He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall He speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in His sore displeasure.
    Yet I have set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten Thee.
    Ask of me and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.
    Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
    Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

    • Anton

      It feels a little presumptuous to uptick the word of God…

      • dannybhoy

        You’re upticking the poor blind man with the bouffant hairstyle and the Dali moustache is all.

      • chefofsinners

        Tricky. The only thing worse would be not upticking it.

  • Inspector General

    The Inspector feels a pilgrimage coming on, to UNESCO. To deliver unto them the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch, that thine enemies be blown into small pieces. Whom will go with him!

    • IanCad

      I had to click on it Inspector. It was actually very funny.

      • Inspector General

        Getting into UNESCO should be no problem, Ian. We could all go dressed as pre-op trannys wimpering about rights and nowhere to piss, apart from the disabled toilets…

        • You’ll get VIP treatment even. Lol.

        • Anton

          Please call them toilets for the disabled.

    • David

      Hilarious ! Gave my morning a good start !

  • Kevill Davies

    I wonder whether Blake would have written his wonderful hymn if aware that Jerusalem had only scant ties with the Christian and Jewish tradition. Would we want to build UNESCO’s vision on England’s green and pleasant land or will it be forced upon us.

    • dannybhoy

      Raise the drawbridges!

    • The Explorer

      ‘Jerusalem’, for Blake, meant the state of sexual freedom.

      • Anton

        That’s certainly been built in England’s green and pleasant land since the 1960s, and it’s rapidly making it less pleasant.

        • The Explorer

          Those thinking ‘Jerusalem’ means a city need to explain the arrows of desire. Desire for what?

  • weirdvisions

    Unesco isn’t the first body to try and wipe out the historical Hebrew link to Jerusalem. I recall the BBC listing all the countries and their capital cities who had athletes competing in the 2012 Olympics. Palestine was listed as having East Jerusalem as its capital. Apparently, IIRC, Israel didn’t have a capital. The shameless BBC was forced to backtrack.

  • IanCad

    Totally off-topic but – Come On!! Guys and Gals! Cough Up! Dig Deep! Although this blog creates a lot of hot air it does not pay the bills.

    HG is entirely too polite, meek, humble, and perhaps, too proud to ask his flock to help pay for what they daily obtain in their portion of enlightenment, disputataion and plain old enjoyment.

    The thermometer on the donations tab has barely budged. As we freely receive, so we should freely give. There are those who can’t; those who can should bear that in mind.

    It’s up there! On the home page – in purple – Donatations!! Click and pay. This blog is too precious a thing to lose. Don’t be a freeloader!

    • dannybhoy

      It’s good to be reminded Ian, thank you.

  • Anton

    Apologies in turn.

    Tom Holland’s book “In the shadow of the sword” is willing to contemplate revision, but never went so far as to suggest that Muhammad didn’t exist.

    ISIS is funded in part by the Saudis. I regard it as protection money. If ISIS regard veneration of the black stone set in the Kaaba as idolatry then I agree with them about that.

    • CliveM

      I’ve not read his book. I was thinking of reports on a Channel 4 documentary he made on the subject and the response of Muslims. But you’re probably right, he more asked the question.

    • CliveM

      Actually reading Wikipedia on this gives a good summary and confirms what you say.

  • There are no ‘Holy Sites.’ All the world belongs to God and the sooner we all realise that the better.
    ‘The earth is the LORD’s, and the fullness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.
    For He hath founded it upon the seas, and established it upon the floods’
    (Psalm 24:1-2).
    Fighting over ‘holy’ bits of real estate is futile and gives religion a bad name.

  • av4tar

    I don’t like having to support the UN, EU, BBC through my taxes when they have so many daft ideas. It’s a shame we can’t tick a box to have our portion donated to something sensible.