A shocking article in the New York Times profiling freed terrorist Zakaria Zubeidi appears to cast doubt on one of the most basic facts in all of Jewish history — that both Batei Mikdash stood on Har HaBayis.
The piece, which seeks to humanize a veteran murderer of Yidden, refers to Har HaBayis merely as “a major mosque complex… built on the site of an ancient Jewish temple,” pointedly using the singular — with no mention of the two Batei Mikdash, no reference to the kedusha of the Makom HaMikdash to Klal Yisroel, and no acknowledgment of its central place in our mesorah.
The Times doesn’t even explain why Ariel Sharon’s 2000 visit to the holiest place on earth for Am Yisroel was considered “provocative.” It simply ignores that this is the very spot where the First and Second Batei Mikdash stood, and where Avraham Avinu prepared to bring Yitzchak as an akeidah — as recorded openly in Tanach and Chazal.
This is not a matter of “belief” or “narrative.” As Professor Lawrence Schiffman of NYU said in response to the article: “There is zero debate that two temples stood in that place in scholarly literature… To omit that is to distort history.”
Professor Steven Fine of Yeshiva University likewise called it “an historical fact” backed by overwhelming evidence, with archaeological work blocked only because the Muslim Waqf refuses to permit it.
HonestReporting condemned the article as part of a broader pattern in which Palestinian terrorists are whitewashed while Israeli Jews are vilified: “Time and again, the most brutal attacks on innocent Jews are framed as a noble struggle. The Times profile of convicted murderer Zakaria Zubeidi is a textbook example.”
Zubeidi, a former Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades commander with decades of blood on his hands, was freed in a Hamas prisoner deal despite his role in murderous shooting attacks in 2018 and 2019. Yet the Times chose to treat him as an artist and a symbol — while subtly undermining the very history of the Makom HaMikdash.
(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
2 Responses
A couple of points about the problematic NYT article:
(1) As I have stated publicly for more than two decades, of course the current 150,000 sq.m. trapezoid platform at the edge of the Old City of Jerusalem was the site of the First (circa 976 to 587 bc) and Second Temples (516 bc to 70 ace). This is an undeniable historical fact. (I should know… I am descended patrilineally from David via Solomon. 100% proven geneology back to 1795, end of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, + a DNA Test)
(2) The State of Israel is not the sovereign or owner of the Temple Mount/Haram al Sharif-Al Aqsa 🕌. e.g. It does not have the “Title Deed”. The correct zoning for the site is actually: “Crown land that is reserved for a special crown 👑”
(3) Regarding the Title Deed issue. Well, I am 100% sure that 2 Samuel 24:18-25 in the Tanach where King David pays Araunah the Jebusite over the odds for the threshing floor site in Jerusalem, the site of the First and Second Temples, is true. (David made sure to pay more than what Araunah requested so that he could never be accused of being stingy or of being a thief regarding the purchase of the site chosen to house the Ark of the Covenant. He wanted to make it a pure, clean, unimpeachable purchase in keeping with the future sanctity of the site.) The sale between them was probably concluded using a paper document and an actual stone tablet/stele, as was the custom in those ancient times. This tablet served as the contract, “Deed of Title” for the sale. I am sure it was closely held in the Royal Court for decades and centuries until at one point, probably in the late First Temple Era, circa 600 bce, it was either lost, broken, damaged or stolen. (It could easily have been the target of succession claims to the Davidic throne. Think of how messy some contested Wills are in families). Thus it disappeared from history and is not extant today. Can and should a new Title Deed be written for the Temple Mount/Haram al Sharif-Al Aqsa 🕌? Yes! What will be in it? Written by and for whom? Who will have that right? We will see…
(4) Many people don’t realise it, but for their information there is no prophetic mandate anywhere in the Tanach for the “Third Temple” to be a copy-paste replica of the First or Second Temples.
Zero. Nada. Zilch!
Thus the model of a “Third Temple” that has lodged in the minds of many people, including millions of Christian Evangelicals, i.e. A replica of the Second Temple, that you see trotted out in marketing by groups like: The Temple Institute, The Temple Mount Faithful and High on the Har, and that is pictured in this YWN article, is not prescribed anywhere in the Tanach. (The same model/design is in the covered waiting area at the foot of the Mughrabi Bridge-Ramp. It was created and placed there by the Usual Suspects for more venal and opportunistic “Branding” – “Reinforcement” reasons). Groups like The Temple Institute knew decades ago that they needed a model to sell to punters. i.e. A concrete and graphic example/hook that would inspire people to give them money.
“Repetition in advertising is the process of repeating a message multiple times in order to increase brand awareness and consumer recall.”
What design G-d/الله really has in mind for the site is very interesting. (I’m blessed to know what this is.)
Stay Tuned…
שַׁבָּת שָׁלוֹם
😎
Adam Neira
Founder of World Peace 2050
Founded in April 2000
Paris – Jerusalem – Melbourne
P.S. Ezekial 43 has been pinned by many people as the future design of the “Third Temple”. This is also incorrect. His vision, circa 587 bce, was not about the Messianic Era.
“The Times doesn’t even explain why Ariel Sharon’s 2000 visit to the holiest place on earth for Am Yisroel was considered “provocative.””
They don’t have to explain that, because it is obvious. That Zionist leader was a (Zionist) heretic, as were the others. Therefore, it makes no sense for one who disbelieves in Judaism to then visit its holiest site.
Moreover, the provocation is obvious, anyways, given the immense Zionist hisgarus baUmos that already has lit the region in flames.