Thoughts on "What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in
the Middle East" by Bernard Lewis.
From when Islam was founded, through the end of Medieval Times
around 1500, and in many important areas, "For many centuries the world
of Islam was in the forefront of human civilization and achievement".
These areas included military, economic, and scientific.
Then things headed differently.

As Goodreads says,"Hailed in The New York Times Book Review as
"the doyen of Middle Eastern studies," Bernard Lewis is one of
the West's foremost authorities on Islamic history and culture.
In this striking volume, he offers an incisive look at the historical
relationship between the Middle East and Europe."

About partitions
This is from Bernard Lewis's book "What went wrong, the clash between
Islam and modernity in the Middle East" on page 36,
"the Muslim jurists discuss discuss at some lengths whether it is
permissible for a Muslim to live in another non-Muslim country… The
general consensus of the classical jurists is no. It is not possible
for a Muslim to live a good Muslim life in an infidel land. You must
leave home and go to some Muslim country. An even harder case was posed
by the reconquest of Spain. If a Muslim land is conquered by the
Christians may they stay under a Christian rule? The answer was again
no, they may not stay the Morrocan all watch Rassie considering the case
of Spain posed with turned out to be a purely hypothetical question if
the Christian government is tolerant and allows them to practice their
religion may they then stay his answer was there in that case it is all
a more important for them to leave because under a tolerant government
the danger of apostasy is greater.

Citations for easy reference.

What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity ...
https://www.amazon.com › What-Went-Wrong-Betwee...
What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle
East [Lewis, Bernard] on Amazon.com.
Publisher: ‎Harper Perennial (January 1, 2003)
Returns: Eligible for Return, Refund or Replac...
Rating: 4.2 · ‎199 reviews · ‎$18.89 · ‎Free delivery

What Went Wrong? : The Clash Between Islam and Modernity ...
https://www.amazon.com › What-Went-Wrong-Betwee...
What Went Wrong? : The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle
East [Lewis, Bernard] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers.
Rating: 4.4 · ‎226 reviews · ‎$13.72 · ‎In stock

Lewis, Bernard.What Went Wrong : The Clash between Islam ...
https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu › cgi › viewcontent
by C Lamb · 2008 — Lamb, Connie (2008) "Lewis, Bernard. What Went Wrong:
The Clash between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East. Nasr, Seyyed.
Hossein.

What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam & Modernity in ...
https://www.goodreads.com › book › show
After reading `What Went Wrong? : The Clash Between Islam and Modernity
in the Middle East', I was impressed with Mr. Lewis' level of detail and
clarity of ...
Rating: 3.5 · ‎3,512 votes

What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity ...
https://books.google.com › History › Middle East › General
What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle
East. Front Cover. Bernard Lewis. HarperCollins, 2002 - History - 208
pages.

On Monday, February 13, 2023 at 7:58:19 PM UTC-8, a425couple wrote:
> Thoughts on "What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in
> the Middle East" by Bernard Lewis.
> From when Islam was founded, through the end of Medieval Times
> around 1500, and in many important areas, "For many centuries the world
> of Islam was in the forefront of human civilization and achievement".
> These areas included military, economic, and scientific.
> Then things headed differently.
>
> As Goodreads says,"Hailed in The New York Times Book Review as
> "the doyen of Middle Eastern studies," Bernard Lewis is one of
> the West's foremost authorities on Islamic history and culture.
> In this striking volume, he offers an incisive look at the historical
> relationship between the Middle East and Europe."
>
> About partitions
> This is from Bernard Lewis's book "What went wrong, the clash between
> Islam and modernity in the Middle East" on page 36,
> "the Muslim jurists discuss discuss at some lengths whether it is
> permissible for a Muslim to live in another non-Muslim country… The
> general consensus of the classical jurists is no. It is not possible
> for a Muslim to live a good Muslim life in an infidel land. You must
> leave home and go to some Muslim country. An even harder case was posed
> by the reconquest of Spain. If a Muslim land is conquered by the
> Christians may they stay under a Christian rule? The answer was again
> no, they may not stay the Morrocan all watch Rassie considering the case
> of Spain posed with turned out to be a purely hypothetical question if
> the Christian government is tolerant and allows them to practice their
> religion may they then stay his answer was there in that case it is all
> a more important for them to leave because under a tolerant government
> the danger of apostasy is greater.
>
>
> Citations for easy reference.
>
> What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity ...
> https://www.amazon.com › What-Went-Wrong-Betwee...
> What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle
> East [Lewis, Bernard] on Amazon.com.
> Publisher: ‎Harper Perennial (January 1, 2003)
> Returns: Eligible for Return, Refund or Replac...
> Rating: 4.2 · ‎199 reviews · ‎$18.89 · ‎Free delivery
>
> What Went Wrong? : The Clash Between Islam and Modernity ...
> https://www.amazon.com › What-Went-Wrong-Betwee...
> What Went Wrong? : The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle
> East [Lewis, Bernard] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers..
> Rating: 4.4 · ‎226 reviews · ‎$13.72 · ‎In stock
>
> Lewis, Bernard.What Went Wrong : The Clash between Islam ...
> https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu › cgi › viewcontent
> by C Lamb · 2008 — Lamb, Connie (2008) "Lewis, Bernard. What Went Wrong:
> The Clash between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East. Nasr, Seyyed.
> Hossein.
>
> What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam & Modernity in ...
> https://www.goodreads.com › book › show
> After reading `What Went Wrong? : The Clash Between Islam and Modernity
> in the Middle East', I was impressed with Mr. Lewis' level of detail and
> clarity of ...
> Rating: 3.5 · ‎3,512 votes
>
>
> What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity ...
> https://books.google.com › History › Middle East › General
> What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle
> East. Front Cover. Bernard Lewis. HarperCollins, 2002 - History - 208
> pages.

https://groups.google.com/u/1/g/soc.history.early-modern/c/e75AHvR1vKQ

On 2/14/23 21:17, gggg gggg wrote:
> On Monday, February 13, 2023 at 7:58:19 PM UTC-8, a425couple wrote:
>> Thoughts on "What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in
>> the Middle East" by Bernard Lewis.
>> From when Islam was founded, through the end of Medieval Times
>> around 1500, and in many important areas, "For many centuries the world
>> of Islam was in the forefront of human civilization and achievement".
>> These areas included military, economic, and scientific.
>> Then things headed differently.
>>
>> As Goodreads says,"Hailed in The New York Times Book Review as
>> "the doyen of Middle Eastern studies," Bernard Lewis is one of
>> the West's foremost authorities on Islamic history and culture.
>> In this striking volume, he offers an incisive look at the historical
>> relationship between the Middle East and Europe."
>>
--------
>>
>> Citations for easy reference.
>>
-----
>
> https://groups.google.com/u/1/g/soc.history.early-modern/c/e75AHvR1vKQ

Either from that, or separate to that,
from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Said

"In the essay "Zionism from the Standpoint of its Victims" (1979), Said
argued in favour of the political legitimacy and philosophic
authenticity of the Zionist claims and right to a Jewish homeland; and
for the inherent right of national self-determination of the Palestinian
people.[70] Said's books about Israel and Palestine include The Question
of Palestine (1979), The Politics of Dispossession (1994), and The End
of the Peace Process (2000).

Palestinian National Council
From 1977 until 1991, Said was an independent member of the Palestinian
National Council (PNC).[71] In 1988, he was a proponent of the two-state
solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, and voted for the
establishment of the State of Palestine at a meeting of the PNC in
Algiers. In 1993, Said quit his membership in the Palestinian National
Council, to protest the internal politics that led to the signing of the
Oslo Accords (Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government
Arrangements, 1993), which he thought had unacceptable terms, and
because the terms had been rejected by the Madrid Conference of 1991.

Said disliked the Oslo Accords for not producing an independent State of
Palestine, and because they were politically inferior to a plan that
Yasir Arafat had rejected—a plan Said had presented to Arafat on behalf
of the U.S. government in the late 1970s.[72] Especially troublesome to
Said was his belief that Yasir Arafat had betrayed the right of return
of the Palestinian refugees to their houses and properties in the Green
Line territories of pre-1967 Israel, and that Arafat ignored the growing
political threat of the Israeli settlements in the occupied territories
that had been established since the conquest of Palestine in 1967.

A map of the West Bank and Gaza strip highlighting administrative
domains of the Palestinian authority in red.
The administrative domains of the Palestinian Authority (red)
In 1995, in response to Said's political criticisms, the Palestinian
Authority (PA) banned the sale of Said's books; however, the PA lifted
the book ban when Said publicly praised Yasir Arafat for rejecting Prime
Minister Ehud Barak's offers at the Middle East Peace Summit at Camp
David (2000) in the U.S.[73][74]

In the mid-1990s, Said wrote the foreword to the history book Jewish
History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years (1994), by
Israel Shahak, about Jewish fundamentalism, which presents the cultural
proposition that Israel's mistreatment of the Palestinians is rooted in
a Judaic requirement (of permission) for Jews to commit crimes,
including murder, against Gentiles (non-Jews). In his foreword, Said
said that Jewish History, Jewish Religion is "nothing less than a
concise history of classic and modern Judaism, insofar as these are
relevant to the understanding of modern Israel"; and praised the
historian Shahak for describing contemporary Israel as a nation subsumed
in a "Judeo–Nazi" cultural ambiance that allowed the dehumanization of
the Palestinian Other:[75]

In all my works, I remained fundamentally critical of a gloating and
uncritical nationalism. . . . My view of Palestine . . . remains the
same today: I expressed all sorts of reservations about the insouciant
nativism, and militant militarism of the nationalist consensus; I
suggested, instead, a critical look at the Arab environment, Palestinian
history, and the Israeli realities, with the explicit conclusion that
only a negotiated settlement, between the two communities of suffering,
Arab and Jewish, would provide respite from the unending war.[76]

In 2003, Haidar Abdel-Shafi, Ibrahim Dakak, Mustafa Barghouti, and Said
established Al-Mubadara (The Palestinian National Initiative), headed by
Dr. Mustafa Barghouti, a third-party reformist, democratic party meant
to be an alternative to the usual two-party politics of Palestine

(Boy!!! They sure did & do need an alternative!!!)

On 24 September 2003, after enduring a 12-year sickness with chronic
lymphocytic leukemia, Said died, at 67 years of age, in New York City.

On 2/14/23 21:17, gggg gggg wrote:

> On Monday, February 13, 2023 at 7:58:19 PM UTC-8, a425couple wrote:
>> Thoughts on "What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in
>> the Middle East" by Bernard Lewis.
>> From when Islam was founded, through the end of Medieval Times
>> around 1500, and in many important areas, "For many centuries the world
>> of Islam was in the forefront of human civilization and achievement".
>> These areas included military, economic, and scientific.
>> Then things headed differently.
>>
------------
>
> https://groups.google.com/u/1/g/soc.history.early-modern/c/e75AHvR1vKQ

Historian Bernard Lewis received the American Enterprise Institute’s
Irving Kristol Award for 2007. He delivered the Irving Kristol Lecture
at the Institute’s annual dinner on the topic of “Europe and Islam.”
Topics included the lessons of history, the end of European influence in
the Middle East, al Qaeda, the 14-century struggle between Christianity
and Islam, the sequence of events leading up to the September 11
attacks, and Muslim immigrants living in Europe.

Uncorrected transcript (a425 has added para breaks)

EVENING. ALL I CAN SAY IS THANK YOU. THANK YOU AGAIN. [APPLAUSE] TIME IS
SHORT AND I'M SURE YOU ARE HUNGRY SO I WILL GET DOWN TO BUSINESS.

MY TOPIC THIS EVENING IS EUROPE AND ISLAM. LET ME BEGIN WITH THE WORD OF
PERSONAL EXPLANATION. YOU ARE ACCUSTOMED TO THE MOST PART TO HEARING
FROM PEOPLE INVOLVED IN MILITARY AND INTELLIGENCE MATTERS. WITH DIRECT
PRACTICAL INVOLVEMENT. I AM AFRAID I CANNOT OFFER YOU THAT. MIGHT DIRECT
INVOLVEMENT WITH MILITARY AND INTELLIGENCE MATTERS AND DID QUITE A LONG
TIME AGO TO BE PRECISE, ON THE 31ST OF AUGUST, 1945. WHEN I LEFT HIS
MAJESTY'S SERVICE AND RETURNED TO THE UNIVERSITY TO JOIN WITH COLLEAGUES
AND TRYING TO COPE WITH A SIX YEAR BACKLOG OF BATTLE SCARRED
UNDERGRADUATES. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THIS EVENING IS SOMETHING OF
THE LESSONS OF HISTORY. AND HERE AGAIN I MUST BEGIN WITH A SECOND THIS
OF ALL. IT IS SOMETIMES THAT THE BUSINESS OF HISTORY, THE BUSINESS OF
THE STORY IS THE PAST, NOT THE FUTURE. I REMEMBER ONCE AT A MEETING IN
ROME AT AN INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF HISTORIANS, A GROUP OF US WERE
SITTING IN DISCUSSING ASSURED HISTORIANS ATTEMPT TO PREDICT THE FUTURE.
WE BETTER THIS BACK-AND-FORTH. THIS WAS IN THE DAYS WHEN THE SOVIET
UNION WAS STILL ALIVE AND WELL. ONE OF OUR SOVIET COLLEAGUES FINALLY
INTERVENED AND SAID, IN THE SOVIET UNION THE MOST DIFFICULT TASK OF THE
HISTORIAN IS TO PREDICT THE PAST. [LAUGHTER]

I DON'T INTEND TO OFFER ANY PREDICTIONS OF THE FUTURE IN EUROPE OR THE
MIDDLE EAST OR WHAT I THINK CAN LEGITIMATELY BE EXPECTED OF THE STORY IN
IS TO IDENTIFY TRENDS, IDENTIFY PAST HISTORIES, TO LOOK AT THE TRENDS IN
THE PAST, WHAT IS CONTINUING IN THE PRESENT AND THEREFORE TO SEE THE
POSSIBILITIES AND THE CHOICES, WHICH WILL FACE US IN THE FUTURE. ONE
OTHER INTRODUCTORY WORD. MY FAVORITE THEME OF THE HISTORIAN, AS YOU SURE
ENOUGH, IS. THE STATION, DIVIDING HISTORY INTO PERIODS. DAILINESS
STATION IS MOSTLY CONVENIENCE OF THE HISTORIAN THE PURPOSES OF WRITING
OR TEACHER. NEVERTHELESS, THERE ARE TIMES IN THE LONG HISTORY OF THE
HUMAN ADVENTURE, WHEN WE HAVE A REAL TURNING POINT, A MAJOR CHANGE, THE
END OF AN ERA, THE BEGINNING OF A NEW ERA AND I AM BECOMING MORE AND
MORE CONVINCED THAT WE ARE IN SUCH AN AGE AT THE PRESENT TIME. A CHANGE
IN HISTORY COMPARABLE WITH SUCH EVENTS AS THE FALL OF ROME, THE
DISCOVERY OF AMERICA AND THE LIKE. I WILL TRY TO EXPLAIN THAT.

CONVENTIONALLY, THE MODERN HISTORY OF THE MIDDLE EAST BEGINS AT THE END
OF THE 18TH-CENTURY, WHEN A SMALL FRENCH EXPEDITIONARY FORCE COMMANDED
BY YONGE GENERAL NAPOLEON BONAPARTE, WAS ABLE TO CONQUER EGYPT AND
CORRELATE WITH IMPUNITY, A TERRIBLE SHOCK, ONE OF THE HEARTLANDS OF
ISLAM WHICH COULD BE INVADED, OCCUPIED AND RULED WITH VIRTUALLY NO
RESISTANCE, NO EFFECTIVE RESISTANCE.

THE SECOND SHOCK CAME AT KIWI YEARS LATER WITH THE DEPARTURE OF THE
FRENCH. WHICH IS BROUGHT ABOUT NOT BY THE EGYPTIANS, NOR BY THE ASSESSOR
RAINS THE TURKS, BUT BY A SMALL SQUADRON OF THE 180, COMMANDED BY YONGE
EBERLE RACHAEL NELSON, WHO DROVE THE FRENCH OUT AND BACK TO FRANCE. THIS
IS OF SYMBOLIC IMPORTANCE AT THE END OF THE 18TH AND BEGINNING OF THE
19TH CENTURY, FROM THEN ON WORDS THE HEARTLANDS OF ISLAM WERE NO LONGER
CONTROLLED BY THE RULERS OF THIS LONG. THEY WERE UNDER DIRECT OR
INDIRECT INFLUENCE OR CONTROL FROM OUTSIDE AND THE DOMINATING FORCES IN
THE ISLAMIC WORLD WORK OUTSIDE FORCES, WHAT SHAPE THEIR LIVES IS WESTERN
INFLUENCE, WHICH EVEN CHOICES WAS WESTERN RIVALRIES.

THE POLITICAL GAIN THEY COULD PLAY, THE ONLY ONE OPEN TO THEM, WAS TO
TRY AND PROFIT FROM THE RIVALRIES BETWEEN THE OUTSIDE POWERS, TO TRY TO
USE THEM AGAINST ONE ANOTHER. WE SAID THAT AGAIN AGAIN IN THE COURSE OF
THE 19TH, 20TH AND EVEN TO THE BEGINNING OF THE 21ST CENTURY. WE SEE
HOW, FOR EXAMPLE IN THE WAR BETWEEN COME IN THE FIRST WORLD WAR, THE
SECOND WORLD WAR AND THE COLD WAR, MIDDLE EASTERN GOVERNMENTS LEADERS
TRYING TO PLAY THIS GAME WITH VARYING DEGREES OF SUCCESS. THAT GAME IS
NOW OVER. THE ERA THAT WAS INAUGURATED BY NAPOLEON WAS TERMINATED BY THE
REAGAN AND GORBACHEV.

AND THE MIDDLE EAST IS NO LONGER CONTROLLED OR ROLLED OR DOMINATED BY
THE OUTSIDE POWERS. THEY'RE HAVING SOME DIFFICULTY ADJUSTING TO THIS NEW
SITUATION. THEY'RE TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS, THEIR
OWN SITUATIONS AND SO ONE, BUT THEY'RE BEGINNING AND THIS HAS BEEN
EXPRESSED WITH HIS USUAL CLARITY AND ELOQUENCE BY OSAMA BIN LADEN. WE
SEE WITH THE ENDING OF THE ERA OF OUTSIDE DOMINATION THE REEMERGENCE OF
CERTAIN OLDER TRENDS, OLDER, DEEPER CURRENTS IN THE MIDDLE EASTERN
HISTORY, WHICH HAVE BEEN SUBMERGED OR AT LEAST OBSCURED DURING THIS
CENTURY OF WESTERN DOMINATION. NOW THEY'RE COMING BACK AGAIN. ONE OF
THEM I WOULD CALL THE INTERNAL STRUGGLES. ETHNIC, SECTARIAN, REGIONAL,
BETWEEN DIFFERENT FORCES WITHIN THE MIDDLE EAST. THESE HAVE OF COURSE
CONTINUED WITH LESS IMPORTANCE IN THE IMPERIAL ERA. THEY'RE COMING OUT
AGAIN NOW AND KEATING FORCE AS WE SEE FOR EXAMPLE FROM THE CURRENT CLASH
BETWEEN SUNI AND SHIA ISLAM, SOMETHING WITHOUT PRECEDENCE FOR CENTURIES.

THE OTHER THING MORE DIRECTLY RELEVANT TO MY THEME THIS EVENING IS SIGNS
OF A RETURN AMONG MUSLIMS TO WHAT THEY PERCEIVE AS THE COSMIC STRUGGLE
FOR WORLD DOMINATION BETWEEN THE TWO MAIN FAITHS, CHRISTIANITY AND
ISLAM. THERE ARE MANY RELIGIONS IN THE WORLD BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW THERE
ARE ONLY TWO THAT WILL CLING TO THEIR TRUTHS, MODERN-DAY UNIVERSAL OR
RELIGIONS CLAIM THAT BUT EXCLUSIVE. THEY, THE CHRISTIANS IN THE ONE
CASE, THE MUSLIMS ON THE OTHER, ARE THE FORTUNATE RECIPIENTS OF GOD'S
FINAL MESSAGE TO HUMANITY, WHICH IS THEIR DUTY NOT TO KEEP SELFISHLY TO
THEMSELVES LIKE THE JEWS OR THE HINDUS, BUT TO BRING TO THE REST OF
HUMANITY REMOVING WHATEVER OBSTACLES THERE MAY BE ON THE WAY. THIS SELF
PERCEPTION SHARED BETWEEN CHRISTIANS AND ISLAM LED TO THE LONG STRUGGLE
THAT IS NOW BEEN GOING ON FOR MORE THAN 14 CENTURIES BETWEEN THE TWO.
AND WHICH IS NOW ENTERING A NEW PHASE.

IT IS INTERESTING, BOTH SIDES FOR QUITE A LONG TIME REFUSED TO RECOGNIZE
THIS STRUGGLE. IT IS INTERESTING THAT ON BOTH SIDES, THE NAME TO EACH
OTHER BY NONRELIGIOUS TERMS. THE CHRISTIAN WORLD CALLED THE MUSLIMS
MOORS, CITIZENS, TARTARS, TURKS AND EVEN A CONVERT SOURCE SAID TO HAVE
TURNED TURNER. THE MUSLIMS FOR THEIR PART CALLED THE WEST CHRISTIAN
WORLD, ROMANS, FRANCS, SLAVS AND THE LIKE. IT WAS ONLY SLOWLY AND
RELUCTANTLY THEY BEGAN TO GIVE THEM RELIGIOUS DESIGNATIONS AND THEN
THESE WERE, FOR THE MOST PART, DEMEANING AND INACCURATE. AND THE WORST
IT WAS CUSTOMARY TO CALL MUSLIMS, WHICH THEY NEVER USE THEMSELVES BASED
ON THE TOTALLY FORCED ASSUMPTION THAT MUSLIMS WORSHIP MOHAMMUD IN THE
WAKE CHRISTIANS WORSHIP CHRIST. THE MUSLIM TERM FOR QUESTION WAS NEVER
IN THE US FROM ECONOMY AND THE LOCAL CULTS OF A PLACE CALLED NAZARETH
AND PALESTINE. THE DECLARATION OF LAW BEGINS RIGHT AT THE VERY BEGINNING
IN ISLAM. THERE CERTAIN LETTERS REPORTED TO HAVE BEEN WRITTEN BY THE
PROPHET MOHAMMED, RETURN TO THE CHRISTIAN EMPEROR COM-ED THE EMPEROR OF
PERSIAN AND VARIOUS OTHER RULERS, SAYING I HAVE NOW BROUGHT GOD'S FINAL
MESSAGE, YOUR TIME HAS PASSED. ACCEPT MY MISSION AND MY FAITH OR RESIGN
OR SUBMIT, YOU ARE FINISHED. THE MESSAGE IS CLEAR AND AUTHENTIC IN THE
SENSE THAT IT DOES REPRESENT THE DOMINANT VIEW AS OF THE ISLAMIC WORLD.

A LITTLE LATER WE HAVE HARD EVIDENCE, AND I MEAN HARD IN THE MOST
LITERAL SENSE, INSCRIPTIONS'. MANY OF YOU I SHOULD THINK HAVE BEEN TO
JERUSALEM. YOU HAVE PROBABLY VISITED THE TERM OF THE ROCK AND REMARKABLE
BUILDING. IT IS VERY SIGNIFICANT. IT IS BUILT ON A SACRED TO THE
JUDEO-CHRISTIAN RELIGION. ITS ARCHITECTURAL STYLE IS THAT OF THE
EARLIEST CHRISTIAN CHURCHES. IT DATES FROM THE END OF THE SEVENTH
CENTURY AND WAS BUILT BY ONE OF THE EARLY CALIPHS AND WHAT IS COME
CLEARLY SIGNET IS THE MESSAGE IN INSCRIPTION'S INSIDE THE DOME. HE IS
GOD, HIS ONE, HE IS NO COMPANION, HE DOES NOT GET, HE IS NOT BE GOTTEN.
THIS IS CLEARLY A DIRECT CHALLENGE TO CERTAIN PRINCIPLES OF THE
CHRISTIAN FAITH.