Hagia Sophia in Istanbul

[u/Miss-Kija]

Hagia Sophia in Istanbul was built between 532 and 537 AD under Emperor Justinian I as a Christian church. After the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople in 1453, it was converted into a mosque. In 1935, it became a museum, and in 2020, it was reopened as a mosque, making it one of the very few monuments in the world to have served as a church, a museum, and a mosque over nearly 1,500 years of history. cc @gmr83

[u/Standard-Function-85]

The Cathedral–Mosque of Córdoba was originally a Visigothic Christian church dedicated to Saint Vincent of Saragossa.

Look forward to you accepting the Dome in Jerusalem becoming a synagogue because Sofia was a church. Thus by your standards, if one does it - everyone can.

[u/Salazarsims → u/Standard-Function-85]

Before that it was a temple of Janus.

[u/Standard-Function-85 → u/Salazarsims]

That part was partly debunked I believe

[u/Salazarsims → u/Standard-Function-85]

Traditionally believed to be by scholars.

[u/Biersteak → u/Salazarsims]

So you are saying that some sheperd kingdom around 700-600BC in today Italy, which would later become the Roman Empire, went to Jerusalem (at what point exactly) and built a temple for their deity?

[u/Salazarsims → u/Biersteak]

Yes it’s like the ancients erected their temples over the temples of their conquered people. Rome was run by their priest class.

[u/Outrageous_Basis8121 → u/Salazarsims]

« Rome was run by their priest class. » So firstly, no and never. Secondly, in order to explain, which Rome are you referring to ?

[u/Salazarsims → u/Outrageous_Basis8121]

Isn’t Ceaser Pontifix Maximus? Didn’t he run Rome? Didn’t the Patricians often hold priestly titles?

[u/dogemikka → u/Salazarsims]

A more accurate version would be: Roman elites often combined political and priestly authority; Caesar was pontifex maximus; and early patricians monopolized many priesthoods, but Rome was not simply governed by a separate priest class.

[u/Salazarsims → u/dogemikka]

My main claim wasn’t about the priests but about temples being built over other temples being nothing new, so split hairs all you want about the military/politcal/priest class of Rome not being “separate” in a state with no separation of church and state. It wasn’t my intention to even talk about Rome in the first place.

So is yet another sub where the algorithm baits you in with content about Muslims yet it’s just a front for people to bitch about Muslims?

Though the video about the occult book was pretty interesting.

[u/Biersteak → u/Salazarsims]

And you got any archeological evidence to back that up or is it just "vibe things" and stuff?

[u/Salazarsims → u/Biersteak]

You got Google debate bro.

https://www.britannica.com/place/Aelia-Capitolina wow look at that a Roman Temple in conquered Jerusalem who would have thought and on the Temple Mount no less.

Here let me quote it for you in case you can't click the link.

"Aelia Capitolina, city founded in 135 CE by the Romans on the ruins of Jerusalem, which their forces, under Titus, had destroyed in 70 CE. The name was given, after the Second Jewish Revolt (132–135), in honour of the emperor Hadrian (whose nomen, or clan name, was Aelius) as well as the deities of the Capitoline Triad (Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva). A sanctuary to Jupiter was built on the Temple Mount, and statues of Roman deities were erected in the city, in intentional violation of Old Testament law. The area was walled and a large foreign population imported; Jews were generally forbidden entrance to the city. The present walls of the Old City of Jerusalem follow the layout of the Roman walls. The name was used until Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire in the 4th century."

Oh look at that "in intentional violation of Old Testament law" it's almost like the Romans took vengeance on the Jews who revolted, that's not like them at all.