Re: An Acceptable Loss (of Place)

Dan:

O’Donovan would definitely agree with your application, and I he even goes into the difference between the OT and the NT in this regard in more detail.

On the other hand, I’d want to emphasize one thing: you are able to take such a stance on the Temple Mount only because you are a Christian, and not a Muslim or a (certain kind of) Jew. You have made a theological judgment that renders the Temple Mount insignificant, and can therefore see that the many deaths over it are for nothing, really.

But consider the significance of this comment to a Muslim: to say that intense concern over that hill is stupid is to, in effect, say that an aspect of Islam is stupid (and a fairly important one at that: the al-Aqsa mosque/Dome of the Rock is the third holiest place in the world for Muslims, if my memory serves me right).

I’m not disagreeing with you that violence in the name of securing the Temple Mount is useless and extremely sad, given what Jesus came to do. I guess I’m just trying to point out how religion is inevitably involved in disputes over this place; concern is stupid for some people and eminently pious for others, depending on their religious (or irreligious) background.