View the Trailer

An Outrageous Assault on Biblical History

email Email
Jerusalem, Israel Old City cityscape at the Temple Mount and Dome of the Rock.

The New York Times has earned a well-deserved reputation for anti-Israel bias in its reporting on the Middle East, but a report contesting the universally accepted history of Jerusalem’s Temple Mount marks a new low. The headline declares “Historical Certainty Proves Elusive at Jerusalem’s Holiest Place” and questions whether either the first or second Temples described in the Bible actually stood on the Temple Mount.  The report respectfully cites “many Palestinians” who “increasingly expressed doubt that the temples ever existed – at least in that location.” But the article all but ignores the surviving Western Wall, built at the edge of the Temple Compound by King Herod in the first century BC, or the ancient steps to the south that still lead up to the Temple Mount, or Robinson’s Arch, that connected the holy site to the street at the time of Christ.

During the Crusades, Christian knights took possession of Al Aqsa Mosque and called themselves “Templars” because the Mosque had been known to have been built on the ruins of Solomon’s Temple. As recently as 1923, the Islamic religious authorities, the Waqf, published a guidebook for Christian tourists describing the Temple Mount as the location of both ancient Temples. No other conclusion makes sense: the Temple Mount is a 39 acre site, flattened by human effort and supported by massive retaining walls that were built at least 600 years before the Moslems erected Al Aqsa and The Dome of the Rock. If this huge platform wasn’t the site of the Holy Temples, as nearly 100 generations have believed, what in heaven’s name was it?

But the New York Times is willing to neglect literally thousands of years of textual and archaeological evidence, specific references in both the Old and the New Testament, and even elements of Muslim and Crusader tradition, out of respect to Palestinian propagandists who “doubt” that these monumental structures ever existed. Their scurrilous article, by reporter Rick Gladstone, is an insult to intelligence, to decency, and to common sense.

email Email

Comments (7)

Leave a comment
  1. Rob Welch  •  Oct 16, 2015 at 4:15 pm

    What else would you expect from a corrupt, liberal, near satanic newspaper?

  2. Tom  •  Oct 16, 2015 at 5:39 pm

    What would you expect from the ” father of lies”, “The evil one” SATAN is the first Liar in the universe. Eve believed him then, and the NY Times Reporter Rick Gladstone believe the lies of the Palestinians NOW. The truth is in the pages of history and the Bible. Look it up in the Old Testament.

  3. Bill Hargin  •  Oct 16, 2015 at 7:24 pm

    Maybe they should rename the NY Times “Pravda.” To someone who knows anything about history or Jerusalem, there aren’t a heckuva lot of options for where it could be. You’ve got about 1 square mile to choose from. Both Jewish and Roman history document the existence of the temple. Possibly Babylonian and Persian history too. More and more, it seems that liberal writers/thinkers are willing to twist and ignore facts and history to suit their purposes. I often wonder if it’s intentional or a form of delusion.

  4. Martin Middleton  •  Oct 17, 2015 at 5:45 pm

    Oh, look. They have changed the article and added a note (probably to Michael M).

    Editors’ Note: October 13, 2015
    An article on Thursday, with the headline “Historical Certainty Proves Elusive at Jerusalem’s Holiest Place,” examined the scholarly debate about two ancient Jewish temples on the Temple Mount, a site sacred to Jews, Muslims and Christians. While the article laid out the history of the Jewish temples and the archaeological and historical evidence about them, the headline and a passage in the initial version of the article implied incorrectly that questions among scholars about the location of the temples potentially affected Jewish claims to the site and Israel’s broader assertion of sovereignty over Jerusalem. In fact, as the article was later corrected to clarify, the scholarly debate is a narrower one, focused on the precise location on the Temple Mount where the long destroyed temples once stood. All versions of the article should have made clear that the archaeological and historical uncertainties about the site — unlike assertions by some Palestinians that the temples never existed — do not directly challenge Jewish claims to the Temple Mount.

  5. Jimbo  •  Oct 20, 2015 at 1:30 pm

    If you ever want to experience a good dose of insanity, read the comments on a new york times story on the web. So many of them are literally crazy. It is like they have zero critical thinking ability. And you can read a story that is very far removed from politics and has nothing to do with partisanship and there will be a comment like, well the republicans are horrible people. When I read them I laugh at the insanity, but I am sad inside because I know these people are probably well educated and they vote.

  6. nikolaos  •  Oct 20, 2015 at 4:25 pm

    God bless the New York Times that a paper has the guts to print honestly despite the reputation that New York has for being the OTHER Jewish state (aside of Israel). Since when does the USA have to put in with the Zionist occupation at all times? We are not obligated to accept nor promote the jewish claim of exclusivity in all matters. Zionism IS racist: it presents the jews as being Gods chosen (read: supreme) people over all others, and those are fighting words, so I don’t blame the Palestinians for issuing the Israelis some payback

    • Mike  •  Nov 9, 2015 at 1:58 pm

      Not too many years ago a soon to be First Lady famously stated “Barrack knows we have to change our history.” Whether it’s who actually ended slavery, who voted for and against the civil rights act, the legacy of Ronald Reagan, or the history of the Temple Mount, liberals will never stop the lies. It’s all they have.

Tell Us What You Think

All fields required. The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this website you agree to accept our Terms of Use.

Medhead - Michael Medved's Premium Content

Login Join
Advertise with us Advertisement

Follow Michael

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Get Medved weekly movie reviews, columns, and special offers delivered to your inbox.


The Michael Medved Show - Mobile App

Download from App Store Get it on Google play
Michael Medved's History Store Also available on TuneIn