I don't believe the arabs who took over had quranic texts or the Quran so whatever happened on the Temple Mount had nothing to do with it.
I don't believe anything. I (just) try to understand what
they do. That's all. As I think that the Quran is more ancient that it is said (since I do not "believe" to he narrative), I wonder if it building is related to Q 2,127. I think it's possible, as the Arabs, sons of Ishmael, build a house of prayer and prosternation like in the Quran, in the place where traditionally Abraham is said to have not sacrificed Isaac and where there is an destroyed Temple.
There is no "whatever happened" there is (several) attestation of what do the Arabs, entering the city : they a house of prayer and prosternation. You cannot deny the (several) external sources, that you cites...
- Sebeos : he implies jews did it in the first place before arabs chased them away and used it for themselves.
Yes.
Arculf : he tells us arabs built the place but it doesn't really prove anything ; if Sebeos account is correct, Arculf visiting Jerusalem after the arabs took the masjid over would just acknowledge them owning it rather than the fact they actually built it,
Arculf is not 637.
Anastasius of Sinai : he mentions egyptians clearing the area called Capitol ; we know Ismael mother was egyptian as per the OT so does it refer to arabs here or people from Egypt, I don't know and we don't know what was done after clearing that area and by whom.
Anastasius of Sinai says (I did not check the text, I trust you) in fact nothing about a build, but a clearing. Never Christians would have cleared the the Temple Mount, then it is the newcomers or Jews who made it.
John Moschus : he seems to imply that this is the first thing those arabs did when entering Jerusalem
Yes.
but it doesn't mean anything because it could be in fact the first important thing that struck the mind of the writer regarding the arrival of the arabs.
See a building by Arabs in 637 in the Temple Mount means anything? What happened? This guy is crazy? Why not.
it could be in fact the first important thing that struck the mind of the writer
Therefore you do not deny that he says that : building by Arabs in 637 in the Temple Mount : end of story.
I also have issue with the rest of the narrative because there seems to be a theology angle in it
Theology is always there.
You forgot one which add to John Moschus :
The same person (Theodore) also told us this story:
The godless Saracens entered the Holy City of Christ our God, Jerusalem, with God’s permission, as punishment for our negligence, which is countless. Straightaway, hurriedly, they arrived at the place called Capitol. They took with them men, some by force, others voluntarily, in order to clean this place and build that accursed thing, reserved for their prayer, that they call a mosque (mizdgitha). Among these men was John, archdeacon of St Theodore the Martyr, because he was a marble mason by trade. He let himself be seduced by them for dishonest gain and he voluntarily went to work there. He was very good with his hands.
When the very blessed St Sophronius, whom you know, heard about this, he sent messengers to him one Friday, made him come, and asked him – as a father and as the pastor of that rational flock which had been entrusted to him by God – not to profane his hands, but to shy away from such an abominable enterprise. He made him this assurance:
“The Holy Resurrection will give you as much work as you could want, and twice the wages. Just don’t disobey my will. Don’t harm yourself: don’t get too involved in their downfall by working voluntarily on the construction of the place that Christ has cursed. Look: you’re opposing His order, when no-one is able to oppose Him. If you refuse to obey me, you may not work over there and simultaneously remain under the yoke where you have been placed: in fact, not even a layman who bears the name of Christian may go and work there.”
And his companions the deacons asked the same of him. So, at that moment, he promised – with an oath guaranteed by the force of the venerable Cross – to no longer work out there from that moment on. But two days later he was found out there, working in secret.
When the good pastor had been informed of this, his spirit was troubled by this man’s spiritual death; and, seized by the rage of Phineas, he promptly sent for him. As if with a keen-edged sword, he ran him through with the word of God and excommunicated him from the Holy Church of Christ our God. However, after having been excommunicated by the saint of God, he re-entered his church by force with the help of the Saracens.
A few days later, he was working in a monastery, called the Monastery of the Recluses, on the Holy Mountain. He was up a ladder, a man’s height from the floor. He stumbled and plummeted to the ground. He dislocated his leg; [subsequently] his skin and flesh wasted away, and he was ill for a long time—the doctors’ art being no help to him. So he confessed his negligence, saying: “Truly, this accident only befell me because I disobeyed the pontiff. Behold this merciless wrath that has come upon me.”
Concerning this, he asked one of his friends – a man who feared God; the one who told us this story – what he should do. So this [man] answered that he should go down to the saint’s tomb and light a lamp, from which he should anoint the wound and drink the rest. This he did, and he found some relief. He was able to walk with a stick. But once again he acted audaciously and forgot the favour he had received from God. He went up to the holy altar and placed a hand on the table, because he couldn’t stand up. Not long afterwards, his wound started to feel bad, and his leg was consumed up to the hip. He was beyond all help and perished, the wretch, in great distress.
See therefore, brother, that you mustn’t disobey the word of a priest, which is a blessing, whichever rank he be, and especially when it’s such a great pontiff; for it’s not him who binds, but the word that Jesus Christ has spoken: “Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven [Matthew 16:19].” This is why, with all our vigilance and all our strength, we must rush to observe the priests’ word and order, so a heavy sentence may not befall us. Not for nothing do the venerable canons condemn men like him, for it’s not [other] men they despise, but the Holy Spirit.
Georgian reproduced with French translation and commentary: Bernard Flusin, “L’esplanade du temple”, in Julian Raby and Jeremy Johns (eds.), Bayt al-Maqdis, vol. 1 (1991), pp. 17–31.
Arabs 2, Jews 1.
I hold that my theory is plausible as it is grounded by 2 sources and the Quran. That's all.
Edit : I add, moreover, that it is a Gallez idea, not mine. Of course I'm not agree with him about the frame he places it.
Topic: Qur'anic studies today