Jerusalem Question?

Question

There are two main claims to Jerusalem:

1. Israel. The Jewish people of Israel claim it was given to Abraham by God, therefore it is a God-granted land and always will be.

2. Arab people claim they came across Jerusalem during Islamic conquest of the Middle-East and found it deserted. They've lived there for centuries, therefore they think it should be their's.

Currently, Jerusalem is home to historical and religious buildings for both sides dating back hundreds of years. People from both ethnicities currently occupy, neither budging to move. It is a Christianity and Islamic holy site. Both Israel and Palestine claim it as a part of their nation; both want it as a capital. Neither will budge off of claiming the entire city for it's own. So, how should this problem be solved? Who has the right to claim the city (Jews or Muslims? Israel or Palestine?)?

Please, serious answers only. Let's try to keep this as civil as possible. Also, let me know where you're from. Thanks!

Lisa- interesting take, but consider this example-

In Jerusalem there is major religious site for both parties, both on the same hill at the same spot. Originally it was the Temple Mount (967-586 BC, destroyed by Babylonians), then the Second Temple (516 BC-70 AD, destroyed by Romans). Now it is home to the Muslim Dome of the Rock (690 AD) and Al-Aqsa Mosque (710 AD). Jewish Israel claims it will destroy these mosques to re-create the original temples while Palestine claims it will keep both but allow some sort of Jewish site/memorial (no room for both).

Answer 1

Well to preserve the holy sites, I think it would be safer if Israel was in control. Throughout history, Islam would destroy other religious temples and churches and build mosques on top of them. Christians did that too although I doubt they would do that today. In Judaism they do not believe in converting people, nor destroying other religious sites and that's why when people want to convert to Judaism they traditionally get turned away three times. So I would just feel that history would be preserved better for the sake of the monotheistic world if Israel would have control.

I'm from America.

Answer 2

Actually, #2 is not true historically. Jerusalem was not "abandoned" and the Muslims started living there. Read up on the crusades for example.
Also, the city had a Jewish population for most of its history, though not at all times, and until the 19th century, it was very tiny.

And that brings us to #1.
The religious significance of Jerusalem is not that it was promised to Abraham and his descendants (that was actually the entire Israel, but I digress). It that it was the capital of the ancient state. And that it was the center of religious observance with the Temple. And that the Bible mentions it numerous times and its centrality.

As for modern times, Jerusalem has had a Jewish majority since the late 19th century. In other words, it has been well over a century with a Jewish majority. The last time it was divided was between 1948 and 1967. The East part was part of Jordan, Jews were not allowed, and holy places were denied access to.
Only after its reunification did all faiths have access to the entire city in freedom. Israel has proven itself capable in this area, more or less.

Assuming the Palestinians ever get a state, I see no reason why the capital cannot be Ramallah or another central Arab majority city in the West Bank.

Answer 3

No one should have the right to claim Jerusalem. Why don't Christians also complain about its status it is a holy land for them as well.
There are three solutions i can think of:
#1 a shared Jerusalem, split in half, one Palestinian the other Israeli.
#2 A shared regency of Jerusalem. City belongs to both state called Capital of both states and is governed by at least two if not three elected member of the 2 or 3 main religions. Like a town ruled by two mayors for example.
#3 a totally independent state like The Vatican, or Monaco belonging to nobody else but the inhabitant of the city. It would be a world city where all faith would be welcomed and accepted.
Mind you these scenario would never happen because Arabs will never make peace if they don't have Jerusalem and Jewish will never give up Jerusalem.

Answer 4

The Arabs have NEVER cared about Jerusalem. It's been a Jewish majority city since the mid-1800s, when it was a tiny poor backwater of the Ottoman Empire.

When Moslems pray on the temple mount (towards their holy city, Mecca) they stick their rear-ends up at Jerusalem.

The only reason they want it now is because the Jews have it.

Answer 5

I say the Christians should take it back, since neither can seem to share it. I think Muslims have a more legitimate claim, as they took the city at the cost of blood and held it for centuries, while the Jews claim it is their just because of mythology. By the same token, Mexicans can demand Texas back, because Quetzalcoatl claimed it was their land. And yes, I'm aware that most Mexicans are now Catholic, but I'm trying to show you how ludicrous their rationale is.

Edit: witwwats, the people who gave them the land in 1948, had no claim to the land themselves to begin with, so your argument is both moot and asinine.

Answer 6

Jerusalem should became a non-state city, policed by an international police force. Everyone from any religion should be able to go there without hassle.

Answer 7

Legally, the land belongs to the Israeli's.

It was given to them in 1948.

Any discussion that does not use the law as it's guide, is an attempt at theft and murder.

Answer 8

international city like the original mandate called for