Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is the bible the word of God or men?
Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 113 of 309 (438141)
12-02-2007 11:40 PM


There has been some crap said.Whew!
I only will give extremely short responces to a few issues. (I have a feeling that the types of posters making these claims wont be open to debating in an honest and honorable way, so I wont waste much time)
FIRST issue.
Hebrew was not the first language, and it is only a (late) development of a specific language family: Semitic (and Semitic is actually a development of an even larger family)
There are enough ancient Semitic texts from around 2500 BCE to 700 AD, and the evolution is VERY clear.
Hebrew was the result of a slow development from the West-Semitic branch of Semitic, and "Hebrew" didnt exist till around 1000 BCE (even later for "Biblical Hebrew").
Arabic (especially as used in the Koran) is actually much less-evolved from the proto-Semitic language than any other current Semitic language. (in many of the most important and common words, it is literally unchanged from the oldest form of West-Semitic)
Take the word for *SUN* (a "scientific term" according to the logic of many posting on this thread).
In Hebrew it is Shemesh. In Arabic it is Shams(u).
Go back to the early days of West-Semitic and you will see that it was Shamsu (nominative) or Shamsi (genetive or "of the sun")
As Hebrew was developing (from oher West-Semitic strains), it dropped all case endings which caused two consonants to meet at the end of the word like SHa-M-S.
Hebrew was intolerant of such and the speakers added an "e" to open the gap in the final consonants.Shams became shamesh.In many words (a class ones like Shamsh,Shemesh), the "e" also took over the first vowel as well thus Shemesh became the word for sun in hebrew.
(ALSO,the often seen shift from final *Sh* to *S* is a Canaanite sound-shift which is seen in hebrew because it is descendant Canaanite)
Add a pronominal suffix to the Hebrew words like Shemesh, and the archaic form can bee seen as it becomes Shamshi or "my sun". (like the lost case endings, they take the form in an ending)
In Arabic (which sort of still retains the case endings which Hebrew lost over 3000 years ago, Koranic Hebrew does/did), the word Shamsi will be linguistically identical to the pre-Hebrew genetive "of the sun".
It is interesting because the common Genesis 1 word 'erev (translated "evening" in the King James) dropped the genetive(IMO it is plausible and backed up by some genuine evidence) shamsi (of the sun) which in older Semitic dialects the term Erbu Samsi would mean "sinking of the sun". ('erev also semantically means "west" , infact the Arabic word for westerner is from the same root)
Creationists claim that Hebrew was the original language of God and that "sun" isnt mentioned before day 4.
Maybe their interpretation of the Bible is wrong.
Just because Creationism , a worldwide flood, and c1200 Conquest have been absolutely demonstrably falsified 100% does not mean that the Bible has been.
(I will respond to each issue in the future if time allows)
The second issue I want to briefly respond to is the 100% falsified claim that the Bible has an "accurate calendar". (and the person making this claim is a proven bold-faced liar who shouldnt even be allowed to post here)
Even fundamentalists has long noticed that the Bibles dates dont add up 100% when compared to precise and frequent Babylonian and Assyrian data.
The amount of scholarly and (yes!)*SCIENTIFIC* work done by specialists has shown that the Bibles chronology has some human-errors, and this is even the later well-documented Biblical history which is generally accepted by secular scholars as mostly accurate.
Though there have been many works done since the 1920's (Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings,Handbook of Biblical Chronology , etc.) , this was generally-understood even 90 years ago when this book (quoted below) was written by leading scholars of their day.
Cambridge Ancient Hisory
Volume 1
1923,1924
p219
There is at times an astonishing accuracy; but the oft-quoted care of Jewish scribes and copyists was AFTER the Hebrew text of the Old Testament had been fixed, though with all its errors, and was a scrupulousness which almost bordered on the superstitious.
I wish I had the time to quote many other volumes from both the recent editions and old ones. One can get a great appreciation of how difficult is was for scholars to attempt to match all the confused Monarchy period Biblical reign dates with the scientific Mesopotamian dates (which make references to Biblical events).
That is an issue that can only be discussed with honorable posters. The less-honest ones will simply ignore every last work of scholarship , and thus wont even have the ability to engage in a debate (not that I have time anyway).
A message to those with integrity; discard falsified conclusions.
It doesnt mean that certain Jewish traditions from the post-ancient world (in various periods) shouldnt be read; it only means that uncritical-swallowing of late-traditions by fundamentalist Christians should hopefully be grown out of.
Everything should be read and enjoyed. Nothing should bebelieved uncritically.
Its amazing how much stronger one will be when extremely fascile (that means short and very incomplete) research does NOT cause one to form a strong conclusion.
EXAMPLE.
There is a fundamentalist Christian archaeological organization that employees many PhD's to try and prove the Biblical Conquest happened at the end of the Late Bronze 1 Period (typically dates 1550-1400).
They based that on the 1 Kings "480 years' period from the Temple founding of Solomon to the Exodus.
I asked (on the phone a few years back) why they couldnt allow for a *possible* terminal Middle Bronze Age Conquest.The responce was simply that we shouldnt start to reject Biblical dates.I didnt mention that they already "rejected" (albeit rightly!) Biblical dates when they use "966 BCE" as the date for the temple founding.The reason is that it was arrived at by using corrected Biblical dates via Mesopotamian synchronisms. I did however mention that they were rejecting the Bibles account of giant walled-towns during the Conquest since the Late Bronze 1 period lacked such. The person on the other end of the phone gave me that point.He told me that the organization was working on a Study Bible with other Christian academics and that he would pass on the word to the contributors.
It came out about a year or so later and was called the Archaeological Study Bible.To my shock, it actually gave many honest reasons for looking at the terminal Middle Bronze period for the Conquest (though the commentary made it very clear that the end date for the Middle bronze Age was "too early" to match Joshua's supposed time).The Study Bible was very very weak in many area's but I was pleased to see honorable second guessing of the Late Bronze 1 Conquest that fundamentalists swear by uncritically.
Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by IamJoseph, posted 12-03-2007 12:56 AM Nimrod has replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 116 of 309 (438152)
12-03-2007 2:31 AM
Reply to: Message 114 by IamJoseph
12-03-2007 12:56 AM


To call your conclusions fascile would understate it!
I dont feel like taking the time to paste out your long post.
(webtv only pastes the entire page,twice!, and then it takes forever to delete the mess).
I dont know what it will take to convince you to actually *research* before posting.
Ill only cover the most absurd of your comments.
I really really want to quote your comments about Canaanites, Phoenicians, etc. not having an alphabet. LOL!
How can I put this to you gently?
LOL!
Anyway, the evolution of the alphabet is as 100% clear as the evolution of the Semitic languages.If I was an artist then I could literally draw you a picture (infact it would require several!) showing how the Canaanites alphabet evolved into the one the Hebrews finally borrowed LONG after it was invented.
Actually, I think I could draw the alphabetic characters and their evolution.
You date Moses around 1250 BCE.
Another group of Canaanites also had a seperate alphabet (this one was made up via an adaption from the Sumerians script!) even before that date.
Infact, the Greeks had their alphabet about the same time (earlier) we find Hebrew inscriptions in their current alphabet.
Your comment that there are tons of Palestinian inscriptions is simply jaw-dropping.(especially since you compare it to the amount of Sumerian inscriptions)
One can literally quote and comment on every Palestinian inscription from c1200to 550 BCE in a single 200 page booklet! (I know, I have it!)
It would take about 200,000 pages to just scratch the surface of Mesopotamian writings.
And the amount of Palestinian Iron Age writings before 700 BCE would only be a few pages (I forget but its very very small).
You simply have no clue about even the basics yet you claim to know all there is to know on this and many other subjects!
RELATED ISSUE (slightly different)
You said that a host of scientists rejected the existence of King David.
Name me one.
Most scholars however did seem to believe he existed BEFORE the Tel Dan discovery.
YES THEY BELIEVED HE EXISTED.
And even before the discovery, critical-scholars like Israel Finkeletein still believed that parts of Samuel were true. To this date, Finkelstein still holds up older evidence (like Shiloh) to support older traditions being behind some Biblical stories (Shiloh was destroyed in the 11th century and never was a significant settlement after that).
The issue isnt so much with David but whether there was a United Monarchy over all of Palestine (especially from Judah) and especially the issue of it being such a regional power.
The issue still isnt settled.
The textual and archaeological evidence can easily be used to cast doubt.Especially textual evidence (essentially nothing).
For a few hundred years after Davids time, the textual discoveries have been miniscule.
There is no egg on anybody's face.
(and this Tel Dan issue is the ONLY part of your post that wasnt 100% full of crap,and even it was 90% crap)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by IamJoseph, posted 12-03-2007 12:56 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by IamJoseph, posted 12-03-2007 4:44 AM Nimrod has replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 118 of 309 (438160)
12-03-2007 6:27 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by IamJoseph
12-03-2007 4:44 AM


Listening to racist propaganda I see.
So you are ignorant and racist.
Palestine wasnt named such till after the 2nd temple period ended? Its just Arab propaganda huh?
You claim that other peoples didnt have histories before the Hebrews put their stories into codex form.
You claim the Greeks never had a historical text, especially around 500 BCE.
The Canaanites didnt have a historical text?
Neither did Mesopotamians?
Lets see what William Albright had to say about the Canaanites and their historical texts.
Archaeology and the religion of Israel
pp68-71
In dealing with the Canaanites and their religious ideas we must never forget that Canaanites and Phoenicians were one people, so far as language and cultural tradition went.The Phoenicians called themselves "Canaanites" ... and their colonists , the Punic Carthaginians, still called themselves by the same name in the fifth century A.D. , as we are told by St. Augustine.
....
their ancestors had already lived in Phoenicia and Palestine long previously.
....
Not far from 100 A.D. Philo of Byblus, a native Phoenician scholar of good family, collected extensive data for a work which is variously called "Phoenician Matters" (Phoinikika) and "Phoenician History" by later Greek scholars.According to Porphy and Eusebius, Philo tranlated the books of an earlier Phoenician named Sanchuniathon, supposed to have lived at a very remote age and to have handed on matter originally collected by Hierombalus (Irembal?) under Abibal, king of Berytus, who is said to have flourished before the Trojan War.This is all very obscure; we can only say with confidence that Philo attributed his sketch of Phoenician cosmogony and mythology to Sanchunithon and apparantly mentioned Hierombalu as a source of the latter.The name Sanchuniathon appears in Phoenician as Sakkun-yaton, known from inscriptions of the Persian period.Eissfeldt has made it probable that Sanchuniathon flourished not later than the sixth century, and we may reasonably connect his activity with the renaissance of Canaanite literature about this ime which recent research has disclosed.A date between 700 and 500 B.C. is at present most reasonable fo Sanchuniathon and Hierombalus, if authentic, may have lived not long before.
The abstract of Phoenician mythology which Eusebius drew from Philo used to be regarded with suspician by many critical scholars ..... without any independent value as a source for our knowledge of Phoenician religion.This pessimistic attitude has dbeen disproved rather coompletely by the discovery and decipherment of Ugaritic mythological literature since 1930.
....
It would seem that there was little change in the content of Canaanite mythology between cir. 1400 and cir. 700 B.C.
....
...also many details of Philo's narrative are in complete agreement with Ugaritic and later Phoenician inscriptions, we are fully justified in accepting provisionally all data preserved by him,...
The leading conservative Christian scholar of all-time (perhaps the most brilliant scholar period) gives the Phoenician history credibility back to around 1500 B.C.E. and dates the document from around the 8th century BCE if not earlier (quite a transmission process).
Joseph will surely say "I dont understand your point".
My point is that the Bibles dialect is from around he 7th century BCE so this is perhaps older.
The Phoenician "history" sure the heck dates before the Hebrew scriptures were made into "book" form. (about 1000 years before).
I have a great book on my shelf called "Philo of Byblus" by Attridge and Oden (a difficult to find CBQ monograph which included all extant text) , and I am sorry to tell Joseph that it infact existed.
This will lead me to another quick point which will shoot down two false claims of IamIgnorant I mean IamJoseph.
One of the biggest critics of Biblical history was the great historian Gosta Ahlstrom.
Here is what he said about the possibility of United Monarchy , David, Solomon , etc.
Ancient Palestine
A Historical Introduction
A period completely unknown in Near Eastern texts except from the Hebrew Bible is that of the so-called unitd monarchy.No kingdom called Israel or Judah, much less an Israelite empire, is anywhere attested in the records of the non-Palestinian countries.57This may be due to the fact that the Egyptian and Assyrian powers were at a low ebb in this period; thus they had no intereaction with any kingdom in Palestine.A presentation of the history of this period, as o any other period in the histry of Palestine that lacks external evidence, will therefor be tentative.This is not to deny that there is any reliable informtion in the biblical texts, but, without the corroboration of external source material, the picture that can be presented ... will be no more than a presentation of what could have been possible.However, when this is supplemented with archeological remains, the plausibility of a kingdom in the hills has to be acknowledged.
Ahlstrom has been described among the minimalists and a member of the "rejectionist school" with regards to the Bible.
The date of this work?
1993!
Before the Tel Dan inscription.BEFORE.
IamJoseph is a liar of the worst kind.A genuinely dishonest slimeball.
But Ahlstrom goes on...
ibid
57.According to Josephus(Apion 1.112-125), the Annals of Tyre were translated into Greek and used by two Hellenistic historians, Meander of Ephesus and Dius.In these annals Solomon was supposedly mentioned.The reliability of this information may be disputed, but it is not impossible that certain records were kept in Tyre and other Phoenician cities.If so, Solomon could have beenn mntioned
I thought the Canaanites had no historical records.
I thought Joseph and others told us that scholars were super-critical of the Bible and not critical of other historical works.
Sounds to me like the scholars are open-minded and in search of historical truth, critical yet fair TREATING ALL ANCIENT CLAIMS EQUALLY!
Now that that crap is out of the way (Joseph is too dishonest to read and learn;he will surely be making the same false claims in the future as if he hadnt read my documentation, but I trust that people worth my time were reading and learning), lets move on.
Mespotamians had religious texts similar to Genesis in a complete form back before 1500BCE.Ziusudra was very similar in lay-out to Genesis 1-6. Mesopotamians had detailed historical texts as well.
But let me move on to this crap he swallowed uncritically about Palestine not being called such till after the 2nd Temple period.
It will also shoot two IamJoseph turds with one stone. (the issue of Greeks not having historical texts before the Hebrew texts were made into books in addition to IamJosephs racist crap on Palestinians)
First, the part of Philistines we all know about (being the name for the narrow strip of land on the southern coast) will be covered before I get to the actual issue of when the term was used for the entire land of Israel/Palestine.
Archaeological Encyclopedia of the Holy Land
Avraham Negev
Shimon Gibson
p391
PHILISTINES(SEA PEOPLES)
....
The Peleset of ancient Egyptian texts (recorded on the Medinet Habu temple, dating to year eight of the reign of Rameses III, c. 1185 BC) are perhaps the best known confederation of Sea Peoples.This population group has been readily identified with the Philistines known from later 7th century BC biblical sources, said to have come from Caphtor (Crete).
Changes in the archaeological record of the coastal southern Levant at the end of the Late Bronze Age (c 1200 BC) have been attributed to the arrival of a new population group, which is identified with the Philistines.This group settled on the extreme southern limits of the Levant forming an urban culture centered in five major cities,the Philistine Pentapolis.These are Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron... and Gath...
....
There is likewise evidence of changes in diet.Most important is the appearance of pig bones among the faunal remains of Philistine sites.Other novel dietary elements include beer drinking, using side-sprouted strainer jugs."
This is used in the sense that the Biblical term was used in Exodus chapter 15(the narrow strip of coastal land).Exodus chapter 15 dates BEFORE the Conquest though the grammar cant be older than around 900BCE (chapter 15 does have grammatical features that are among the oldest in the hebrew Bible including past-tense verbs and such which later Biblical Hebrew did not have exactly)
NOW THE BIG ISSUE
This issue has a huge amount to do with the modern rights of the Palestinian people (who have ethnic ancestors from ALL native peoples of the land).
This is the issue related to IamJospehs ignorant osession fueled by hatred and propaganda swallowing.
Lets see when the word (related to) "Palestine" was first mentioned as refering to the entire land of Israel/Palestine.
"Archaeological Encyclopedia of the Holy Land
Avraham Negev
Shimon Gibson
p380
PALESTINE
The earliest occurence of the name Palestine is in the Histories of Herodotus, written in Greek in the mid-5th century BC, where Palaistinae is applied to the area of the Levant between Phoenicia and Egypt (Herodotus I, 105; II, 106; III, 5;91; IV, 39; VII, 89).Josephus, the Jewish historian of the 1st century AD, is the first writer to explicity link this name to the land of the Philistines and he consistntly refers to the Philistines as the Palaistinoi in his jewish Antiquities.Doubtless, he believed that the name Palestine was a transliteration of the ancient Semitic name for the Philistines,Peleshet, and the consensus of modern opinion agrees with him on this point.However, the earliest references to Palestine in the classical literature shows that this term was generally applied to the land of Israel in the wider sense.
Curiously, in the Bible we are told that Jacob recieved the name Israel (Yisrael) because he wrestled (sarita) with the Lord (Gen 32:24-25).In the Greek Septuagint translation of this passage and also in the narrative account of this episode by the Hellenistic Jewish writer Demetritus, both probably dating from the 3rd century BC, the Greek verb used to describe this wrestling encounter is palaio.The corresponding noun for wrestler is palaistes.David Jacobson has argued that in its Greek form Palaistinae was a transliteration of a word used to describe the land of the Philistines and, at the same time, a literal translation of the name Israel.This dual interpretation would reconcile apparent contradictions in early definitions of the name Palaistin...Moreover it would help to explain the designation of the land of Israel by this name in the philosophical writings of Philo of Alexandria and other works in Greek by Jewish authors of the Second Temple period.
After the Bar Kokhba rebellion(132-135 AD) , the Roman renamed the province of Judea as Syria Palestina.This act may be seen not simply as a part of the Emperor Hadrian's aim to erase the Jewish homeland, but more specifically to retionalize the name of the new province, which was much larger than historic Judea.In their turn, the Arabs transliterated this name to Filastin, and used it for the area of the Holy Land"
Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by IamJoseph, posted 12-03-2007 4:44 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Nimrod, posted 12-03-2007 6:35 AM Nimrod has not replied
 Message 120 by IamJoseph, posted 12-03-2007 8:55 AM Nimrod has replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 119 of 309 (438161)
12-03-2007 6:35 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by Nimrod
12-03-2007 6:27 AM


When you say "Palestinian" you are saying "Israelite"!
No need for such hatred and support of genocide!
Palestinains are genetic ancestors of Jews and Canaanites (among others).
they have European and Arab blood too.
Just like Jews.
Josephus confused the old translation of Israel (the word that was a slight word-play on the participle "wrestler" which was a rough translation of "Israel") with the similar sounding Palestine.
But the word's origin came from a simple translation attempt of "Israel".
If Joseph ever read Philo of Alexandria , then he would know that Jews from BEFORE 70 AD used the term Palestine (in a slightly different form) for the ENTIRE landof Israel/Palestine.
But whats this... you mean that IamJoseph was also ignorant of the fact that Greeks had "history" books literally 500 years before the Bible was put into book form?
Infact its where we got the word for "history"!
Long before the Dead Sea *Scrolls*.
I finished talking to this ignorant punk.
I feel like taking a bath.
Peace all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Nimrod, posted 12-03-2007 6:27 AM Nimrod has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by IamJoseph, posted 12-03-2007 9:08 AM Nimrod has replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 124 of 309 (438335)
12-04-2007 5:41 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by IamJoseph
12-03-2007 9:08 AM


Re: When you say "Palestinian" you are saying "Israelite"!
Nimrod
12-03-2007 06:35 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: When you say "Palestinian" you are saying "Israelite"!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not a political debate here. If it was, you would not prevail. I would'nt call any nation defending their right to exist in their own ancestral land as genocide.
80% of the nearly 1 million Palestinians (living in the land now called Israel) were driven from their homes,not allowed to return, and the refugees have swelled (via childbirth) to several million.
30% were Christian btw.
You arent defending anybodys right to exist in their homeland you worthless dirtbag.
jews do not come from Mars, are not born of pigs and are not hardly associated with today's palestinians, not now nor the past. The name palestinians is post '65. there are no arab-muslim zionists either: last time I checked.
That is some quite malicious crap for a man who claims to be Christian.
I shouldnt be shocked since it comes from the same "Christian" man who supports the ethnic cleansing of Christians (and Muslims) from the land where Christianity itself began.
For nearly 2000 years, Christians were always over 25% of the Holy land (you seem to hate the term "Palestine"-the specialty of small-minded bigots is obsession over simple labels), well since 1948 is has dropped to less than 5%.
Something to celebrate,huh? (!)
And my point in the previous post in defining the term PALESTINE is to show that is was simply the result of the first ever translation attempt of the word "Israel".
The worlds first ever "history" book (literally titled such) mentioned Israel and it was in the early form of the Holy-Land wide (not just Yehudah!) title PALESTINE.
450BCE!
And the same Herodotus even said the Phoenicians were the source of the alphabet WHICH HE USED! (before the DSS)
Your obsession over a single name ("Palestinian" is the gentilic description of a resident of Palestine btw) is simply pathetic.
Palestinians are descendants of early Christians, Jews, Canaanites, Samaritans , Arabs, etc.
The name factor is 100% unimportant , but it is amazing you show such obsession over a term that historically destroys your lame point in such a decisive fashion. (granted your name-obsessed ignorance its a famous and popular cannard that small-minded "Christians" swallow in the millions).
My Albright quote, which you say couldnt pre-date 1965, was from a 1940 book!
I have pre 1948 Bible Encylopedia's that show that "Palestine" was the main term use for the land (Im sure it was from a European centric perspective) till the Middle Ages when "Holy Land" was generally, but not always, used.
I checked a 1959 yearbook and it used the term "Palestinian lands" to describe Arab lands west of Jordan.
Just because westerners use the term "Arab" or "Jew" to distinguish Christians/Muslim residents of Palestine from Jews (pre-1948 or pre-1965) doesnt mean crap.
Modern day "Syria" wasnt officially called such till 1971. It was an ancient-Greek corruption of a different land (Assyria was to the east), yet the Greeks used it as a title to descrive the western lands that are today respectively Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel/Palestine.
Is the fact that Syria is named after a "misnomer" relevant to anything?
Is it an "Arab plot"?
No, it was simply a regional name for 2000+ years.
Just like Palestine.
Palestine actually isnt a mis-named nation by any stretch of the imagination (one can argue that "Syria" is though I would hope it is for intelligent reasons-something alien to you Joseph).
I have a set of 1955 encyclopedia's.World Book. The land of Palestine was covered in an entry.
Dont worry so much about 1965.
Worry about why Palestine was the worlds oldest translation of "Israel".
Worry about c500 BCE and the worlds oldest alphabetical "history".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by IamJoseph, posted 12-03-2007 9:08 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Nimrod, posted 12-04-2007 6:10 AM Nimrod has not replied
 Message 127 by IamJoseph, posted 12-04-2007 7:24 AM Nimrod has replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 125 of 309 (438337)
12-04-2007 6:10 AM
Reply to: Message 124 by Nimrod
12-04-2007 5:41 AM


Re: When you say "Palestinian" you are saying "Israelite"!
Here is a responce to your sarcastic (and ignorant ... and racist) comment about Arab "Zionists"
This is the president of the First Arab Congress, Abd-ul-Hamid Yahrawi, summing up the delegated Arab view on Jews.
"All of us, both Muslims and Christians, have the best of feelings toward the Jews. they are our brothers in race and we regard them as Syrians who were forced to leave the country at one time but whose hearts always beat together with ours. We are certain that our Jewish brothers the world over will know how to help us so that our common interests may succeed and our common country will develop both materially and morally."
-First Arab Congress, President Abd-ul-Hamid Yahrawi
Here is another historical quote.
"The Arabs, especially the educated among us, look with deepest sympathy on the Zionist movement. ...We will wish the Jews a hearty welcome home. ...We are working together for a reformed and revised Near East and our two movements complete one another. The Jewish movement is nationalist and not imperialist. Indeed, I think that neither can be a real success without the other."
-Emir Faisal letter to Harvard law professor Felix Frankfurter
March 1919
Arabs wanted to live peacefully with Zionists.It was an exciting thing to be re-united with brothers from the ancient world.Brothers in religion (yup Judaism was described as divinely inspired in the Koran)
Arabs didnt know they would be ethnically cleansed from the Palestinian region of Syria.
They thought there would be a common future for the peoples in the broader region.
Btw, do you object to the Arab use of "Syria" before 1971 when the United Arab Reublic became the "Syrian Arab Reublic"?
Should Arabs be expelled from every land that wasnt religiously called a certain title?
What are these semantic standards of yours anyway? ( Joseph)
When is it o.k. to hatefully kill somebody for their race/nationality/religion?
POST DIRECTED TO JOSEPH for responce (mistake in my reply hit)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by Nimrod, posted 12-04-2007 5:41 AM Nimrod has not replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 126 of 309 (438340)
12-04-2007 6:38 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by IamJoseph
12-03-2007 8:55 AM


Speaking of semantics.
This mentally-ill obsession with the alphabet is absolutely crazy.
I have proven every last claim of yours to be false, so you keep insisting on there being no alphabetical history before the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Guess what?
Back to Herodotus again!
Reading The Past
the Early Alphabet
John F. Healey
"The ascription of the alphabet to the Phoenicians was firmly emedded in Greek historical tradition as found in the works of the fifth-century BC Greek historian Herodotus.The letters were called phoinikeia grammata ...'Phoenician letters'
The Father of History proves Joseph wrong again!
Also, while we are on the issue of the Semitic alphabet, lest see what the leading Semitic scholar has to say on the issue of an alphabet being somehow radically different from syllabic script. (this was in the context of not having vowels)
(Gelb wrote a massive grammar on the earliest West-Semitic language attested, Amorite)
ibid
p9
It may be noted that at least one prominent scholar, I. J. Gelb, took the view that this consonantal alphabet is not in fact a true alphabet but should be regarded as a syllabary in which each sign stands for a consonant followed by any vowel.This is a defensible view ....
....
...the true alphabet in our modern sense came into existence when the Greeks, who seem to have got their idea of the alphabet AND the main letter-forms from the Phoenicians, began to use certain signs ... to represent the vowels.
Joseph doesn't seem to understand that syllabic scripts are superior to alphabetical scripts.Scholars know more about Akkadian than Hebrew because all the vowels are covered in ancient texts.Plus there are a ton of sounds that cant be represented in the Hebrew alphabet (multiple sounds were used for a single letter).
Alphabets are simpler to learn due to having far fewer signs to remember , but a native speaker/reader of Akkadian could easily learn the extra signs.
Joseph keeps moving the goal posts , and this foolish obsession on the supposed superiority of alphabetical inscriptions is his last gasp effort which has failed.
It is another completely pointless um "point" he feels we should be impressed by.
I would actually begin to be impressed if he actually began to use academic sources WITH QUOTES to at least provide proof that he isn't making sh** up.
As it stands now, he is just an ignorant bigot who is perfectly willing to lie somehow support his lame views.
I have literally never seen such an unethical and unhonorable character on these EVC forums as IamJoseph.
********************************
AbE and warning: Follow the Forum Guidelines. Debate the position, don't slander the person.
Edited by AdminPhat, : warning

Babel=nun.ki
Eridu=nun.ki
Aratta=Ararat=Eden=Urartu
Uruk=Erech

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by IamJoseph, posted 12-03-2007 8:55 AM IamJoseph has not replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 129 of 309 (438397)
12-04-2007 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by IamJoseph
12-04-2007 7:24 AM


Re: When you say "Palestinian" you are saying "Israelite"!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: When you say "Palestinian" you are saying "Israelite"!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-IamJoseph-
I offered to debate this in a non-science program, and on the basis it is not seen as personal, for it is not so from my POV.
When do you ever "debate"?
You dont provide any sources or anything at all.
You simply ignore data that demolishes your soundbites and obsessions.
Honestly, why are you on a Bible Accuracy forum when you object to the use of "Palestine" to describe the land of Israel as a regional name?
Any scholarly treatment of the subject from the past 2000 years will use the term "Palestine" to describe the entire land.You would know that if you ever read any scholars.
Anyway the reason you objected is because un-critical fundamentalists, who hold dispensationalist views (an invention from the 1800's), have a vested interest in seeing wars with Muslims & non-Jewish Palestinians because their invented prophecy scenarios DEMAND war and hatred from all sides.
They have made up this claim that the Palestinians "are a fictional people" and that the term "Palestine" was some Roman plot to attack Jews after the Second Temple Period ended.
You choose to accept this claim un-critically (that means without checking ALL data avaliable from ancient and modern archives), because to question it would be something that would potentially crush a major pillar of your dispensationalist views.
You just cant accept the possibility that a major obsession of your was built on a house of lies.
NOW THE DATA COE IN VIA ME!
I present proof that the term "Palestine" is as old as our oldest "history" books.
I present proof that the most scholarly of Ancient Jews (ie Philo of Alexandria) used it to describe the ENTIRE land of Israel even before Paul's ministry.
I even showed you that is is a Palestine is a TRANSLATION of the word Israel!
How many modern Jewish scholars do I need to quote to completely disprove your obsession? The encyclopedia I quoted from was from leaders in their field.
Honestly, drop this obsession.
A major belief of yours has been shattered rather completely.
Infact, this opens a new window of opportunity for you.Ill explain. Now that you know the truth , you can easily figure out what to think of some joker who tells you that old crap that "palestine wasnt ever as a term for the land of Israel used till Hadrian".
You will know those clowns are fools who will likely say alot of other crap that is completely 100% false.
Now you know how to get a good idea of the amount of research these "prophecy expert" jokers have performed. You can give them a quick quiz on "palestine" and then you can quickly get an idea if they pass or fail the pop-test once they anwser.
If they say the tired old crap that "palestine" wasnt used for the entire land till after Christ's time, then you know they are simply idiots.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Nimrod-
80% of the nearly 1 million Palestinians (living in the land now called Israel) were driven from their homes,not allowed to return, and the refugees have swelled (via childbirth) to several million.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-IamJoseph-
I will not clap hands, because you failed to complete your statement, and are clearly wrong in your figures. It was less than 700,000, and the UN archives state the jewish refugees from Arab lands was greater than the combined arab displacements; further, the Jews were massacred, their properties and businees confiscated - and no muslims cry for equal compensation. Secondly, you also omit that unlike the case of the jews being displaced and pogromed in Arab lands -
since you have been proven wrong on nearly every claim you have ever made PLUS provided no documentation for you claims, I think its safe to say you have little credibility when making bold historical claims.
NEXT!
-IamJoseph-
the Arabs in palestine left by themselves, with the goal of returning to grab all the booty - after they were all drowned into the sea.
Stop and think man.
A bunch of hard-working and diverse people over an 8,000 square mile area (mostly rural), simply decided to skip town all at once (telepathy?) , in soem grand scheme to magically get-rich quick.
With one accord?
A single Arab made a comment about driving people into the sea (a rather tame comment during war if I might add), and the United States media never ceases to repeat it endlessly.
Ive seen "Christians" say all Arabs should be expelled from the land.High ranking congressmen too.
Ive seen Israeli public-opinion polls show that most jews support expelling all Arabs from Palestine/Israel.
Ask Palestinians if they want Jews expelled. (they dont!)
I can even talk to Palestinian-American friends who saw their families survive Israeli slaughters of civilians in their village only because they had enough money to buy off the soldiers.
Do you care to actually research your claims?
-IamJoseph-
This was the declared goal of genocide of the multiple arab states when they attacked, unprovoked, upon the UN re-established state of israel.
"unprovoked"?
The British were driven out and fighting broke out, and the Israeli's had tens of thousands of trainned soldiers many of which were generals.
My Palestinian friend (whose mother was yound at the time there and barely survived) said that there were tons of Russian Israeli soldiers who were very skilled and brutal.
The Arab armies that came in were ot nearly as well-trainned and their equipment was very inferior.
It wasnt a well-planned invasion, and it wasnt something that anybody relished at from the Arab side.
-IamJoseph-
The arabs perpertrated this genocidal attack even after voting in the UN Motion: I have this footage if you wish to see it - Israel prevailed despite the overwhelming Islamic states.
You mean "genocidal" in the same way you accused me of wanting Jews dead?
Considering your track record of "research" and "honestly" , Im glad I dont need to take your cheap talk seriously.
HOWEVER, since you mentioned enocidal acts...
It was European Christians that attempted to kill all Jews in the 40's not Arabs.
You also forgot to mentioned this was Jewish ancestral land. You should know, Jews have never stolen any other peoples' lands in all their 4000 year history - despite being the world's most dispersed peoples. How many Arab and European cities did the jews steal? How many other peoples lands did Muslim steal? How many omission in one statement can you make? Significantly, you have today's Al Uqsa only because its control was given to you by Israel, but we know what would be the case if the Arabs won!
You havnt got the slightest clue what you are talking about.
Typical.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Nimrod-
30% were Christian btw.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-IamJoseph-
I doubt you are concerned about the christians - they are persecuted in Arabia today, specially so in Lebanon, gaza and the west bank, where their population has been reduced to negligible numbers.
Talk to any(or many) Lebanese Christians , Palestinian Christians, etc. and then after critically-LISTENING form your conclusion.
Try it once.
You might learn something.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Nimrod-
You arent defending anybodys right to exist in their homeland you worthless dirtbag.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-IamJoseph-
name calling with get you where you are, but it does not equate with facts and truths.
Do you support the right of ALL Palestinians, Israelis, and Jews to return to their homeland?
I support a full *Right Of Return* for all!
Do you?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-IamJoeph-
jews do not come from Mars, are not born of pigs and are not hardly associated with today's palestinians, not now nor the past. The name palestinians is post '65. there are no arab-muslim zionists either: last time I checked.
Nimrod-
That is some quite malicious crap for a man who claims to be Christian.
I shouldnt be shocked since it comes from the same "Christian" man who supports the ethnic cleansing of Christians (and Muslims) from the land where Christianity itself began.
For nearly 2000 years, Christians were always over 25% of the Holy land (you seem to hate the term "Palestine"-the specialty of small-minded bigots is obsession over simple labels), well since 1948 is has dropped to less than 5%.
Something to celebrate,huh? (!)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-IamJoseph-
I don't hate the term Palestinians, I just see its use by Muslims as one of the greatest hoaxes in the world today: its exactly like calling muslims as Zionists, then claiming that Israel is doing bad things to the muslim zionists. I gave you a history of this name, and it should be seen as an insult for muslims to wear it - it is a derogatory name since 1000s of years, and has absolutely no connections with any semites or arabians or jews. You can have it if you so desire it, but it will not change falsehoods to truth.
You repeated retarded propaganda , which I met with solid historical facts.
I responded with 100% demonstrable proof that your claims were false.
Now you repeated them again just NOW!
AGAIN... Ill give you another chance (but see my past posts for the documentation)
REALITY CHECK;
The name "Palestine" is the worlds oldest translation of the word Israel and is was used for the entire land of Israel by diverse historians/scholars from the "Father Of History" Herodotus (c.500 BCE) all the way to Philo of Alexandria (Christs time) and constantly till today bt scholars of all stripes.
Why dont you study history?
You might learn something!
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Nimrod-
And my point in the previous post in defining the term PALESTINE is to show that is was simply the result of the first ever translation attempt of the word "Israel".
The worlds first ever "history" book (literally titled such) mentioned Israel and it was in the early form of the Holy-Land wide (not just Yehudah!) title PALESTINE.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-IamJoseph-
I've no idea what your referring to, except that any such suggestion of srael is not subject to your opinion. FYI, the world's first history book is the OT: how could you have forgotten!
(rolls eyes)
Gee, you would never let your unresearched "opinion" get in the way of facts, would you?
You make the Dark Ages seem like periods of great learning among he masses!
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Nimrod-
Palestinians are descendants of early Christians, Jews, Canaanites, Samaritans , Arabs, etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-IamJoseph-
No - this is false. The name was placed exclusively on jews by Rome, and was referred to as such till 1965: that is why you cannot evidence any muslims in Palestine or the Middle-east, attaching this name to them pre '65.
Good point!
There were no Muslims in the Middle-East;never was and never were!
Great point!
-IamJoseph-
And you cannot even connect Canaanites to Arabs, because there were no arabs at this time. The first emergence of arabs as an identifiable ethnic group came after 500 BCE. This also means, there is no direct connection of the Arabs with Abraham or Ishmael, aside from all middle-eastern peoples being in the same region. Nor did the pre-islamic arabs follow the beliefs of Abraham or Moses for 2500 years till islam emerged. I am quoting history and facts here:
I must have missed your quotes. Which of your 700 posts covered quotes from academic sources?
Anyway, the Arabs came to Palestine after 700 AD FYI.
But even the term "Arab" is misleading because their genetic ancestry is made up of many peoples;including Canaanites and Jews.
They have in their blood ALL ancient peoples from the land of Palestine.
the assumptions of islam were unilaterally imposed, and never countenanced by christians or jews who were in the same area and know first hand what occured. Only muslims believe what muslims are saying, and the islamic version of history and datings is not condoned by any sector.
I have no idea what you are talking about. (Palestine, Arabia, mars?)
And the funny thing is that you dont either.
What have I said about "Muslim versions of history" (or whatever)?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Nimrod-
My Albright quote, which you say couldnt pre-date 1965, was from a 1940 book!
I have pre 1948 Bible Encylopedia's that show that "Palestine" was the main term use for the land (Im sure it was from a European centric perspective) till the Middle Ages when "Holy Land" was generally, but not always, used.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-IamJoseph-
What I said was, these statements are retrospective, and this stands, whether '65 or 40. There were no muslim palestinians before '65; only jews were referred to as palestinians - today's Jerusalem Post was called The palestinian Post for 100s of years, then this was negated when muslims started to use the name in the 60s. Here, the arab muslims started exploiting the name of the land, which they horded to when it was cleansed of malaria swamps and it started to blossom again. Most of the palestinians today are from Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia and other surrounding states. Arafat was an egyptian.
You know next to nothing about the name "Palestine" and its history (I think you have proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt!), and honestly it doesnt matter that much-except to show how bloody ignorant you are.
I know Palestinians that have many indisputable records proving they owned land in Jerusalem 1000 years ago (these happen to be Christians though).
Palestine is the name that the land has been called for 2500 years.Its no shock that it would be called that actually.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Nimrod-
I checked a 1959 yearbook and it used the term "Palestinian lands" to describe Arab lands west of Jordan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-IamJoseph-
But you should correct them: arabs know better than anyone who's land this was. The land was called palestine, and thus your guys exploited the name by calling yourselves this name: but show us some muslim arabs calling themselves as such before 60 years? If you claim to this to be your ancestral homeland, you should have 100s of evidences - like coins, calendars, independence day, national anthems, kings, Presidents - everthing common to a land's citizens. Where is it? How come almost every two months this land yields relics dating 1000s of years - all in hebrew, aramaic or greek, with only evidence of israel: what happened to the muslim palestinians?
In English, "PalestinIAN" has the gentilic ending meaning "of Palestine".Since the land was called palestine for so long, it is impossible to not refer to residents *of* Palestine as just that!
Aso, lease think a little (a tall task it seems).
The modern nation-state wasnt reflective of the situation throughout history-especially in desert regions.
Read on Crusader history and you will see that Muslims did infact live there, and they did infact want to stay there.
This isnt too complicated.
A people really did live in the land the Romans called Syria-Palestine.
Even Muslims.
And there are records of it from over 1000 years ago : Public and private.
The problem is that you want those same people cleansed of the land.Thats the actual issue honestly.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Nimrod-
Just because westerners use the term "Arab" or "Jew" to distinguish Christians/Muslim residents of Palestine from Jews (pre-1948 or pre-1965) doesnt mean crap.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-IamJoseph-
It does mean a lot - they have contemporary documents and archives, dating back to before the arab race existed, and before arabic writings emerged. It was an arab who discovered the dead sea scrolls: are these crap? It says nothing about muslim palestinians.
My point is that you clearly only read English (and dont even begin to exaust all the avaliable English sources-especially scholarly ones which you never read at all), and you really have no clue what Arabs or any other people called themselves.
Im not saying that others dont know,Im just saying you really havnt got a clue.
And, if you actually did begin to do a little research, you would stop without getting a broad understanding and represenitive sample.
(also, you missed my point)
(also, you need to research better because even your most accurate comments are about 80% off)
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Nimrod-
Modern day "Syria" wasnt officially called such till 1971. It was an ancient-Greek corruption of a different land (Assyria was to the east), yet the Greeks used it as a title to descrive the western lands that are today respectively Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel/Palestine.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-IamJoseph-
Jordan did not acceot the name palestine: guess why!
WOW!
WHAT A GREAT POINT!
A people living outside of Palestine didnt end up being called Palestine!
That proves so much!
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Nimrod-
Palestine actually isnt a mis-named nation by any stretch of the imagination (one can argue that "Syria" is though I would hope it is for intelligent reasons-something alien to you Joseph).
I have a set of 1955 encyclopedia's.World Book. The land of Palestine was covered in an entry.
Dont worry so much about 1965.
Worry about why Palestine was the worlds oldest translation of "Israel".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-IamJoseph-
The oldest hard copy relic of this name is the Egyptian stella, over 3000 years old, and mentions israel. The second is from the tel Dan find, dated 2900 years old.Muslims receved great knowledge and experience from jews, and Jews never did any wrongs to them. Because of a big ego problem, the Muslims cannot acknowledge the gifts of Israel. history shows, the Arab peoples fell into great decline when the jews left Arab lands, despite the new found wealth of oil. The muslims need not any more lands, nor the hijacking of historical names as political tools: its propostrous to assume a name of another peoples and cry how much you are connected to it. It can cause psychological problems and not worth any gains here. But unfortunately, there is a theological reason for the obsessive collecting of lands and the anxst another religion can exist in Arabia - I believe this is a doctrine in the Quran.
Do you know the difference between a translation, transliteration, or transcription?
The Herodotus term "Palestine" was a translation of Israel.It was an attempt at bringing the definition out in his native language.
The Merenptah quote was simply a transliteration.It took the word Irsael and spelled it exactly the same in Egyptian.No definition.
Also, I thought you were obsessed over a term only being used of a small part of the land.
The Merenptah "Israel" was only a sliver of what would later be Israel.
The Herodotus quote "Palestine" was in reference to the name Israel and it was used of the entire land by other Greek authors including Jews like Philo.
But you dont even accept the plain facts of history, even when documented , so any historical discussion with you will be pointless till you demonstrate the ability to accept truth in plain sight and to reject b.s. (as evidenced by the above quote, it clearly hasnt happened yet-not by a LONGGGGGGGGG shot)
-IamJoseph-
Cheers.
I offered to debate this in a non-science program, and on the basis it is not seen as personal, for it is not so from my POV.
Educate yourself first.
Debate later.
And, you are on the wrong site if your personal obsessions get in the way of researching history.To disrupt a discussion because you cant stand the 2500 year old historical name of "Palestine" being used for the land of Israel shows that you dont belong here.Maybe you would be better off on some board for 1st graders who debate Three Little Pigs or something like that.
Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by IamJoseph, posted 12-04-2007 7:24 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by bluescat48, posted 12-04-2007 2:30 PM Nimrod has replied
 Message 133 by IamJoseph, posted 12-04-2007 10:33 PM Nimrod has replied
 Message 134 by IamJoseph, posted 12-04-2007 11:25 PM Nimrod has not replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 135 of 309 (438507)
12-05-2007 1:55 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by bluescat48
12-04-2007 2:30 PM


Two Issues.
Wikipedia isnt the best source for complicated scholarly matters.
The 700 pages Archaeological Encyclopedia is edited by two of the leading experts in their field (plus the articles have many contributors who are leaders in their field.Though they arent named, I can easily tell who wrote many of the articles regardless)
Shimon Gibson (of Britain) was featured as an expert in the Jesus Tomb documentary.
I would pay far more attention to academic sources than wikipedia (though your wikipedia article has much mroe credibility than the crap IamJoseph is pulling from the net)
ISSUES!
Anyway, I am well aware that the word that our modern "Palestine" is cognate with is the word for the coastal strip ie Biblical Philistia.
The far-superior academic encyclopedia I referenced made that clear.
The *complicated* issue involved is that the word similar to "Palestine" -which was used to describe the entire land- was a translation of the Hebrew Israel (actually Israel was an Amorite word) and was used first by Herodotus.
It may have led to some confusion and corruption of the exact spelling-not to mention definition , but that is actually quite common with ancient names. (the orign of many commonly-used ancient place names is debated and has been debated for housands of years)
The real ironic issue, is that non of this matters ( the issue of a regional/national title).The issue is that modern day Palestinians DO HAVE roots in the land with ancestry that leads to ALL peoples who ever lived there (including Jewish converts to Islam or christianity!).
Take the founder of Christianity for a quite illustration;
Jesus had a larger faimily of ethnic-Jewish conerts to what would become(or was) Christianity.100 years later, its obvious non of the Christian descndants would consider themselves "Jewish" if they even knew they had ancestors who were.
The descendants are called "Arabs" (or heaven forbid "Palestinians"!) today and people like IamJoseph are arguing for their extermination from the land.
However, a very similar word was used

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by bluescat48, posted 12-04-2007 2:30 PM bluescat48 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by IamJoseph, posted 12-05-2007 4:32 AM Nimrod has not replied
 Message 139 by IamJoseph, posted 12-05-2007 5:06 AM Nimrod has replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 136 of 309 (438510)
12-05-2007 2:41 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by IamJoseph
12-04-2007 10:33 PM


-Nimrod-
Any scholarly treatment of the subject from the past 2000 years will use the term "Palestine" to describe the entire land.You would know that if you ever read any scholars.
-Joseph-
A true scholarly report will show that all arab muslims hated the name Palestine exactly as they do with zionist today. I can produce loads of evidence and links of this.
Scholars form critical-conclusions and the internet sources you use are from un-critical clowns like Joseph Farrah, a right-wing conspiracy freak who runs the racist and discredited WorldNetDaily website. (but discredit doesnt stop clowns from using it)
I comb scholarly sources, and I can tell you that there is very little on the net to be found.You might find some o.k. amateur stuff (once every blue-moon), but the complicated matters rarely get the coverage from the wide-angles they deserve.
Please do present an academic source JUST ONCE backing up your claims.
-IamJoseph-
They hated it because it was used exclusively to denote Jews the last 2000 years.
Then present the academic source.
You said there were tons!
-Iamjoseph-
This was never a palestinian state, and no peoples ever declared Jerusalem their capital except the Jews.
Define capital?
Jerusalem was the largest population center in Palestine throughout the last 1300 years as far as I know.
But even if it doesnt meet your arbitrary standards , then does that mean the "Arabs" should be expelled?
Do you ever use logic? No wonder fundamentalist "Christians" are generally considered ignorant dorks-because there is a large but of just those types of people who are most vocal (such as yourself).
-Iamjoseph-
You are choosing words, and the placebos are also not true. Judea, Hebron, Samaria and Jerusalem are hebrew names, recorded in the OT as such. .... and the Jerusalem temple is a zionist myth: really - do you believe this open lie?
I am choosing words???!!!!
You have ignored dozens of actual issue responces I have given TO DIRECTLY REEPOND TO YOUR CLAIMS , and instead YOU IGNORE MY RESPONCES yet just keep on bring up idiotic crap which I keep shooting down.
The only reason this whole "Palestine" issue started because you were in shock-and-awe when you saw my quotes of mainstream academic literature and its constant use of the term "Palestine" universally used to denote the entire land of Israel/Palestine.
My quotes were in responces to other unresearched lies of yours (ie scholars were close-minded on davids existence and considered him "mythological" ) which I shot down rather completely.
That was in addition to many other lies of yours that I proved 100% wrong with academic documentation.
You then chose to IGNORE THE ACTUAL ISSUES THEN went on rants on the "Palestine" obsession by claiming that it was a bunch of "Muslim propaganda" and that my scholarly quotes couldnt have dated before 1965.
You even responded to a quote I made of William F. Albright (while I was responding to another dishonest claim of yours) and WHILE YOU QUOTED A SENTENCE OF HIS, you very boldly claimed that it couldnt have been published before 1965.
It was a 1940 book and much of it was based on academic lectures he gave in 1939!
-IamJoseph-
the Jerusalem temple is a zionist myth: really - do you believe this open lie?
Tell you what IamJoseph.
Im going to request that the Mods either ban you (I doubt they will want to listen) or force you to actually respond to the issues I brought up earlier before you take this on 1000 more rabbit trails.
You rudely ignore the dozens of other issues that I DIRECTLY RESPONDED TO-with well researched academic quoations from the literature- yet have the audacity to make up a bunch of other phantom issues just on a whim.
This Temple Mount issue has *NOTHING* to do with the issue of Palestinians having ancestry in the land, and it is a rabbit trail that fundamentalist "Christians" (dispensationalist bigots who arent fundamental followers of anything the Bible says actually, but fundamental American nationalists that follow 1800's AD inventions) use to confuse the actual issues.
You attribution of this phantom issue TO THIS POSTER is offensive, because I consider it a genuinely retarded issue to debate. I would go to the fundie sperm-banks on the web if I wanted to debate whether "Coke or Pepsi is the best flavor" as the question that determines the future of western civilization.
I have no problem with people debating the fact that there really is no proof Solomon built the Temple (nor when it was built), but I do have a problem with clowns like you falsely taking the academic debate out of context.
And I have a problem with you putting false words in my mouth-especially to avoid discussing the implications of the numerous other sources I quoted (which destroy your false and un-researched charges).
Heck, if we werent on thsi rabbit trail, then I could literally respond to dozens of other crapola comments you constantly make (ie "Genesis 1-11 has place-names in a language 4500-5000 years old" plus your claim that Jerusalem was a Hebrew-originated word)
The Jerusalem issue cant be debated with you PERIOD because my academic quotations will be in the context of populations centers being described "IN PALESTINE" during a said age (and it will document the falseness of the claim you made above-SEE QUOTE- that Jews were the only people to ever have it as a capital).You will go off on some rabit trail and ignore the fact that I rather completely destroyed another ignorant lie of yours.
Go read Three Littel Pigs and debate it on some Hal Lindsey site.
Let me handle the sites,like EVC, that have (or did!)reasonable standards of historic credibility, honestly, and integrity.
The former is your cup of tea, the latter is an alien world which you simply cant associate with. (whether this is due to your poor character , mental limitations, or both is another issue)
Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by IamJoseph, posted 12-04-2007 10:33 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by IamJoseph, posted 12-05-2007 4:11 AM Nimrod has replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 140 of 309 (438688)
12-05-2007 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by IamJoseph
12-05-2007 4:11 AM


Truth in History
The biggest difference between IamJoseph and myself is that I think all peoples are Gods children and nobody should be exterminated or driven from their homes.I literally follow Christ and Pauls teachings that race isnt an issue and all are worthy of human dignity.
Joseph rejects the teachings of Christ
and instead follows the right-wing fascist model of nationalism brought by (first) the Roman Empire and later all other "Christian" church/state rulers.
The right-wing "Christianity" of IamJoseph left a pool of blood (literally) as it attempted to kill every last Jew and Muslim in Christian run lands.It has taken a far far worse turn since the advent of the dispensationalist movement of the post 1800's.
It (dispensationalism)teaches that Jews are a special race and that Palestinians have no humanity at all becaue they,as Arabs, are not of the "chosen bloodline".Plus it combines hateful (not to mention unscholarly inventions) "Biblical prophetic" views which further wars in as many Middle Eastern lands as possible.
These hateful teachings cause small-minded "fundamentalists" like IamJoseph to deny "Arabs" (ie Palestinains) their humanity and he justifies it by racial arguments that demand Jews and Palestinains are a seperate people (thus IamJoseph denys the teachings of the New Testament which says all are Gods children).
With honsety, honor and sincerity, I continue the debate...
-Nimrod-
Scholars form critical-conclusions and the internet sources you use are from un-critical clowns like Joseph Farrah, a right-wing conspiracy freak who runs the racist and discredited WorldNetDaily website. (but discredit doesnt stop clowns from using it)
-IamJoseph-
Nothing wrong in being right wing, nor is WND incorrect: you did not respond to its factors.
OK., then I will.But, unlike you, I will present the EVIDENCE based on endless U.S. court decision's which
featured extremely critical U.S. Judges and U.S. Congression decisions DECIDING ON WHETHER SYRIANS & PALESTINIANS ARE DESCENDANTS OF JEWISH CONVERTS TO CHRISTIANITY OR ISLAM!
The multitudes of decisions were based on every last scholarly and scientific piece of evidence presented too.
Re: When you say "Palestinian" you are saying "Israelite"!
-Nimrod-
A major belief of yours has been shattered rather completely.
-IamJoseph
I do not go by belief, and let historical facts rule
Here is the quote Joseph present as facts (right-wing dirtbag and liar Joseph Farah in action!)
Palestine has never existed...as an autonomous entity. There is no language known as Palestinian. There is no distinct Palestinian culture. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, etc.
....
From Myths of the Middle East, Joseph Farah, Arab-American editor and journalist, WorldNetDaily, 11 October 2000
This is the racist lie which dispensationalists MUST promote in order for their "fundamentalist" theology of dispensationalism which is the racist movement known as "biblical prophecy" that Hal Lindsey, Jack Van Impe, John Hagee and other servents of Satan propagate 24/7.
ie. "Palestinains are just Arabs ... and as we dispensationalist know verywell, Arabs arent humans"
ie "jews are the chosen race because they have the chosen bloodline .... Arabs are a seperate race"
Disgusting theology but they feel it is "Christianity" in its fundamental form.
The New Testament rejects race as a concept all-together , so this racial business is biblically incorrect to say the least.
BUT
Lets look at the evidence though.
Are Arabs a seperate breed of humanity who have no ancestors from the ancient Jewish people?
Specifically, "Syrians" which up till recently was a geographic/political term including modern day Syrians, Palestinians, Lebanese, and Jordanians.
Here is what the 1910/1911 Encyclopedia Britannica said the scholarly and historical facts show(which havnt changed).
The Encyclopedia britannica
Eleventh edition
Vol 2
AND To AUS
ARABS
p283-284
The name, to-day the collective term for the overwhelming majority of the surviving Semitic peoples, was originally restricted to he nomad tribes who ranged the north of the peninsula east of .. the Syro-Arabian desert...it had come to include all the inhabitants of the penninsula.
The arabs to-day occupy, besides Arabia ...
The finest type of the race is found in south Arabia...
The peoples of Syria and Palestine are hybrdis of Arab, Phoenician and Jewish descent.
This absoluetly kills the racist views of IamJoseph and "biblical propechy" which demands seperate races among Jews and Palestinians.
The term Syria was the historicly broad term which includes Palestinians and Lebanese.
Here is a 1995 book which covers a slightly narrower definition of Syria (essentially the modern nation-state), and it is important to show that one cant just shoe-horn a single ancient people (race) into a modern peoples bloodline (which dispensationalists like IamJoseph MUST DO to maintain their ignorant theology!)
Cultures Of The World
Syria
by
Coleman South
1995
published by
Marshall Cavendish
Times Books International
p45
Syria may have the most diverse ethnic mix of any Arab country. Most Syrians are a mixture of ancient Phoenician , Babylonian,and Assyrian and more modern french and turkish.Most consider themselves to be Arabs.
although the majority of the people have olive-toned skin, dark brown eyes, and black hair, there is suprising variety in physical attributes. They range from blonde hair and very pale skin to a dark brown skin color with jet black hair. Quite a few Syrians have blue or pale gray eyes, usually wit dark hair.Red hair and medium brown hair are also common-sometimes accompanied by pale, freckled skin and brown eyes.
....
Although there is no violent racism, there seems to be a general feeling of superiority among lighter-kinned Syrians.Blacks are not generally liked or respected, nor are bedouins , even though they are the original Arabs whose ancient cultural elements are still a big part of modern Arabia.
....
There is little socializing between upper and lower classes...
World Book Encyclopedia
1988
SYRIA
....
More than 90% of all Syrians speak Arabic ... and consider themseles to be Arabic.Most of them are descended from people called Semites who settled in ancient Syria.
....
Unidentifed peoples lived in northern Syria before 4500 B.C.. However, the first knon settlers in Syria were Semites who probably arrived about 3500 B.C.
Arabs arived in 638 B.CE. and they clearly arent the major bloodline among Syrians.
Historically "Syrian" (for reasons I will cover later) has-for 2000 years- refered not just to the peoples of modern day "Syria" but also Palestine, Lebanon and also Jordan.
IamJoseph and other dispensationalists surely dont know this, but U.S. Courts have been forced to make dozens of decisions which prove that syrians are not Arabs but are infact largely descendant of Jew's!
As well as the U.S. congress.
Here is a link detailing the history of legal decisions involved...
(the issue centered around our racist immigration laws which discriminated against non-whites , thus it became an issue what ones ancestry was among people who were non-European)
http://www.aaiusa.org/foundation/355/not-quite-white
(snip from above link)
Smilar case occured in subsequent years, each resulting in the ultimate granting of the Syrian petition, until 1914 when a Judge in South Carolina reopened the wound of ineligibility.In this case , the judge ruled ... Syrians ... were not "that particular free white person to whom the act of Congress (1790) had donated the privilege of citizenship" .... Once again the nascent Syrian institutions ... provided lengthy arguments, both historical and cultural ... which was refuted by the Judge who clung to ... "any mixture of blood" disqualified one from the white race. The case was appealed in 1915 which time the court accepted the findings of the Dillingham Report of the Immigration Commission that physically the modern Syrians are of mixed Syrian , Arabian, and even Jewish blood
Whew!
Those "majestic laws" sure make you sick, but the clsoe examanation of cultural ancestry in thousands of hours of razor-sharp examanation INDIRECTLY PROVE THAT SYRIANS ARE PART JEWISH.
(The larger issue was whether Syrians were Arab, Asian, or "white" and being part-Jewish wasnt the larger issue but the Jewish ancestry helped their case because Jews were considered/judged "white" already)
Remember that "Syrians" included Palestinians.
How does this effect IamJosephs racist "prophecy views"?
It kills them!
So not only does the New testament testify against racial prophecy but so does the very bloodline of the peoples themselves!
There truely is neither Jew nor Gentile!
We are all one and the same!
So why cant we "Christians" follow the Bible and offer peace to the world and not war?
I say we let Jews and Palestinians live together in peace.Let Palestinians return to their homes.
Pray for the peace of Israel (and remember the definition of Palestine? ---Israel!!!)
-IamJoseph-
They hated it because it was used exclusively to denote Jews the last 2000 years.
-Nimrod-
Then present the academic source.
-IamJoseph-
I did. Even of arab muslim archived sources. In return, I asked you for any evidence whatsoever, to show that muslims used the name Palestinian prior to the 60s: you should have 100s of such evidences if this was the land of muslim palestinians.The fact is, this name was hijacked.
You said the term Palestine was never used till around 100A.D. and then never used till 1965 A.D. by "Arab" residents of Palestine.You said it was a Palestinian plot to "hijack" the Palestinan name which you claimed they stole for malicious reasons.You claimed the Palestinians didnt exit in the land till after the 1800s.
You only presented cheap-internet quotes of un-researched right-wing liars who made charges but without evidence. (I can find 1 trillion of those)
The only comments you found from Palestinians were comments that said that they didnt like the nation-state divisions of historic Syria all-together.It (your quotes of Palestinians) said nothing about them not having lived in Palestine.
You are so ignorant of history.
"Palestine" has been used for 2500 years as the name for the entire land.
Though it was part of historic Syria-Palestine , the small strip of land we call "Israel" was always called Palestine by Arab residents!
When the Arabs arrives,it was called Palestine from 600 AD to 2007 AD today!
By Arabs!
And it was called that for over 1000 years before
(I already covered this once, but Ill show you alot more academic sources to educate you even more)
Harpers Bible Dictionary
p740-746
Palestine
....
a designation for the southern coastal strip...
Palestine became the name of the entire region.The ancient Greek historian Herodotus was the first to use Palaistine, the Hellenistic form of Philistia, in the inclusive sense.
After the supression of the bar-kochba revolt in A.D. 135 the Roman emperor Hadrian expunged the name Provincia Judea and substituted Provincia Syria Palaestina or simply Palaestina(Palestine).By AD 400 three provinces had been established with the designations Palaestina prima and secunda, west of the Jordan River, and Palestina tertia, east of the Jordan and north of the Arnon River.The main part of the province of palestine was in cisjordan, meaning east of the Jordan, also belonged to the province of Palestine.
Zondervan Pictoral Encyclopedia Of The Bible
Tenney ed.
1976
Volume 3
564-587
Palestine
.....Application of the name to the wider region lying inland from this coastline was the work of classical writers, so that by the time of the Rom. occupation it could be understood in its modern sense,embodied in the Rom. province of Palestina.
....
Under the rule of Arab and Ottoman, Pal. was but a part of the larger, Syrian, unit of government, and it was really only with the breakup of the Turkish empire at the end of the first world war that the name Pal. again took on any precise significance.
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
1981
Volume P
p6-23
Palestine
....
The earliest known use of the name Palestine occurs in Herodotus...
....
Josephus also ued the expression "Palestine Syria" (Ant. viii.10.3 -260),... but did not speciy what he inclued in the term.In CAp i.22 (171) he spoke of the Jews as "inhabitants of Palestine"; but since this occurs in a discussion of Herodotus, it is noe clear how Josephus was using the term.Jerome ... said that this usage became offical in the Roman and Byzantine Chancellery...
Dictionary of the Ancient Near East
edited by Piotr Bienkowski and Alan Millard
Philo used it as a synonym for biblical Canaan, while Josephus used it to refer to the ancient land of Philistia.
After AD 135, the Roman Emperor Hadrian ... with Provincia Syria Palaestina, which was shortened to Palaestina.The Arabs used the name Filistin for territory on the west sde of the Jordan river, but ninteenth-century Europeans spoke about Western Palestine and Eastern Palestine,which were seperated by Jordan.Under the British mandate,, the term Palestine was used for territory west of the river, as opposed to Transjordan.The United Nations 1948 partition of western Paestine was supposed to create Israel and a modern Arab state of Palestine
Seventh day Adventist Bible Commentary
pp821-830
Palestine
....
The familar name "Palestine" goes back to Greek times....
Somehow this name became more popular than any other name and is now almost universally used.Since the creation of the State of Israel in 1948 the Jews call this country Eretz CIsrael, "Land of Israel" , while the Arabs continue to call it palestine, and its Arab inhabitants, Palestinians or Palestinian Arabs.
The fact is that Arabs continued to call it the same name the Father of History called it 2500 years ago.(more recent scholarship shows it probably was a translation of Israel-see my earlier references to 2003 Encyclpedias with world-class scholars)
And Arabs seemed to be historically consistent in 1948 when they only wanted it to cover the land west of Jordan (not trans-Jordan!)which is how they seemed to use the term for 1300 years.
Though "Syria/Palestine" was the larger description for the land of Syria (in its historic sense which included Lebanon and Palestine), and often simply calling Palestine "syria" would be correct.
The Arabs had genuine historic integrety in 1948 when they choose the exact names for the emerging natinons!
Simply amazing accuracy and devotion to historicly consistent geography and regional titles.(!)
Let the truth shine!
-IamJoseph
The fact is, this name "was hijacked, as was the OT and the site where the al uqsa now stands. The same was done in India with the babri mosque. It is a tradition with Islamic history to dump mosques on the known sacred sites of other peoples. The issue is, what if this is true?
Lets see what is truth in history then,shall we?
I will be heavily quoting from the conservative Christian publishers series Baker Studies in Biblical Archaeology; specifically the Jerusalem Through the Ages volume.All quotes will be from pages 60-80 roughly.
Hereafter, I might be simply using the name "Pfeiffer" to label his work mentioned above; I will also be quoting from the Anchor Bible Dictionary (hereafter ABD?) , and perhaps another book or 2.
Enter 638 AD/CE
HISTORICAL NOTE:Remember that the Christians of Palestine, Egypt and Syria were being killed by the East Roman Empire at this time.Typically Monophysite's are well know to mainstream historians (like the various & dozens of groups of Gnostics who were slaughtered a few hundred years back)-infact A&E's History Of Christianity pointed out that they didnt fight the Muslims when the Arab Armies arrived at their gates (there was a weak imperial army that fought).A&E rightly pointed out that Christians had "religious freedom for the first time under their new Muslim masters" when the Arab armies conquered them.
I will be starting Pfeiffers great work in 638 AD after 2 legions of Aramaic Christians joined the Arab armies in freeing Christians and Jews (well there werent any Jews left by 638 AD really) from the religious right Byzantium Empire (East Roman) and taking Palestine.
Jerusalem Through the Ages
Charles Pfeiffer
Baker Book House
The Christians, Monophysite in faith, and hence unsympathetic with the emperor's religious policy, swung the tide of battle.Omar defeated the Byzantine army and he was able to move into Syria and Palestine without further trouble.
....
Jerusalem...Islams third sacred city....
...the veneration due to the city ... made Omar and his generals anxious to avoid battle if at all possible.
The Arab commander addressed a letter to Sophronius ...The Christians were urged to surrender...Omar made the journey and the Caliph and the Patriarch met on the Mount of Olives.The terms of surrender were as generous as any in the long history of Jerusalem.
....
The Caliph was anxious to see the Temple area....
Christians had sought to insult the Jews by making the ruins of the Temple area a municipal garbage dump.
....
Omar ordered his attendants to clear away the refuse and he determined to build a mosque on the site.
....
Jews were allowed to return to Jerusalem ...the GAONIM, who constituted the highest religious authority in Palestine, moved from Tiberias to Jerusalem where they remained until the eleventh century.Jews... had their own synagogues.Thy went to the Wailing Wall...
....
Christians maintained ther churches and holy places ... thrughout the Muslim world.
....
...pilgrims from France, Britain, Germany, and Italy became more numerous
....
By 1009 a complete flake came to power (right wing liars try to portray this guy as a typical "Muslim").He was a ruler who had a Muslim father and Christian mother.
Anchor Bible Dictionary
Jerusalem
Philip King
p.757
The ecentric Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim persecuted Jews and Christians, and ordered the destruction of Christian shrines, including the church of the Holy Sepulchre
Jerusalem Through the Ages
Pfeiffer
In the year 1016 Hakim completely reversed himself.He removed the ordinances against Chrstians and permitted them to observe their fath without hindrance.At the same time, Hakim announced to him people that he was Allah-the god they had been worshipping.His own name was to be substituted for that of Allah in the sacred writings of Islam, and in all prayers ...
He would then issue an edict forbidding Muslims from making the pilgrimage to Mecca.
He was overthrown and probably killed.
The "Christian" leaders in Europe used propaganda of Hakim to issue the Crusades in the coming decades.
Enter the Crusades!
just before 1100
ibid
In marching through Europe the Crusaders had wreaked havoc.Jews were slaughtered in their Rhineland communities on the pre-text that the Crusaders were avenging the death of Jesus
Then they took Jerusalem where 3 faiths lived in peace for 461 years!
Anchor Bible Dictionary
Jerusalem
After a five week siege, including the a massacre of Jews and Muslims, the Christians under Godfrey de Bouillon conquered Jerusalem in 1099.
....
In 1187, the Crusaders surrended Jerusalem to the formidable Kurdish general Saladin...
....
... Jews and Eastern Christians were allowed to reside in Jerusalem.
Saladin made sure that the rebuilt Church of Holy Sepulchre wasnt destroyed again and he reminded Muslims of the kind spirit of Omar.
Later battles of Saladin against Crusaders...
Jerusalem Through The Ages
Pfeiffer
Following a battle at Jaffa, in which a the small Crusader force fought valiantly against Saladins larger army, a truce was arranged.
....
The idea that Muslim, Christian, and Jew could co-exist in the Holy Land was something of a revolutionary idea.While Richards truce was soon forgotten, the precedent had been set and Chritian churches and Muslim mosques began to dot the cities of Palestine and the majority of the people of both faiths were content to accept one another.
Europe continued to send Crusaders and actually controlled Jerusalem briefly for short periods in 1229 and 1241.
Out of Persia came the Khwarizman tribe of Turks and threatened Muslims and Christians in the Middle east.
Ibid
The Khwarizmians were one of the peoples that suffered as a result of mongol invasions led by Ghingiz Khan.Having been driven out of their own country ...moved into Syria and Palestine.The Egyptian calif seem to have encouraged them to take Jerusalem with the idea they would finally drive the Christians out.The result was a massacre .... After three years of bloodshed even the Egyptians had to turn against the Kwarizmians to stop the pillage that had spead from christian to Muslim cities.
The result was that the last Crusader strongholds were finally gone as well as the Crusaders!
Thank God.
About 10,000 Christians and Muslims would remain in Jerusalem and would be forever in peace with one another. the numbers never dropped below 10,000.
(Outside of Palestine, the Turks would slaughter other Christians around 1910 however)
Anchor Bible Dictionary
Jerusalem
From 1517, when the Ottoman Turks began to rule Jerusalem from Istanbul after a peaceful takeover.
....
Between 1537 and 1541 Suleiman I (the Magnificant) rewalled Jerusalem...
Suleiman adopted those policies of governing the religous groups within his empire that re still practised throughout the Middle East. ....he encouraged both Jews and Christians to take positions of responsibility.Suffering the pogroms of Europe, man Jews made their way into the Turkish Empire...
Jews and Christians were permitted to persue their religious activities in comparative peace.
....
A fresh threat to the peace ... came in ... Napoleon...
....
Muhammad Ali ... in Egypt .... revolted against the Sultan, declairing his independence .... ruled both Egypt and the Holy Land...
....he opened up the country to Western travelers and provied for their protection, a policy which was continued by the Ottomans.
....
...the Jewish population of Jerusalem increased greatly.In 1827 there were but 1,500 Jews in the city, but by 1873 the Jewish population had risen to 10,600.They formed the majoriy of teh population for the first time since ... 70 A.D.
The Arab population (ie Muslims and Christians) of Palestinians was about 10,000 from 1517 to 1830.The Jewish population around 1,000.
Still not a small population for a land (Palestine) that was only a few hundred thousand.
My 1955 World book encyclopedia said of the "Old City" of Jerusalem
World Book Encyclopedia 1955
Jerusalem
The OLD CITY is built on the site of ancient Jerusalem.it is surrounded by high stone walls.The life along its, narrow, crooked streets has remained much the same for hundreds of years
Guess there is another solid witness that the town was going strong for 300 years-which destroys Josephs un-critical swallowing of Mark Twain comment. (I never read it, and frankly Ill take solid historical records over somebody lost in the desert 50 miles from town lol)
Its true that peoples increased during the 1800's but that is just a testament to the peaceful nature of Jerusalem's Musilm masters and the Palestinian people!
Here is more evidnce of the peaceful relations between the mUslim rulers and Christian Palestinians.
from the same 1955 book
World Book Encyclopedia
ibid.
About two-thirds of the old City people are Moslems. The rest are Christians.
Earlier in the same article it stated "until 1948 there was also a Jewish section".
Before 1948, here is my honest view of the historical situation describing the rulers of Jerusalem/palestine...
Muslims never killed Jews and Jews never killed Muslims.christians (right-wing Europeans) slaughtered both!
Infact christians slaughtered Chistians.
There was that lunatic Hakim from 1009-1016 but Muslims suffered from him too.
That displaced Turkish tribe came in several hundred eyars later but the Crusaders has already made the situation a potential mess before.
-IamJoseph-
IOW, you have to also state if your position is false. I freely accept that if what you say of muslims being Palestinians, and that these peoples are derived from Jews who converted to islam [your grotesque statement!], or that this land was yours - then Israel should be dismantled and erased. If what you say is false, do you agree that the muslims should vacate, along with their mosque - to a holier site in Mecca? You cannot hold both positions.
I dont play your right-wing "christian" game that somebody has to be the enemy!
I want all people to continue to live in love and harmony as happened when Muslims ruled.AND ONLY WHEN MUSLIM PALESTINIANS RULED!
Your racist comments are disgusting too.
o yea.
Im a non-Arab, non-Muslim too.Next time you make crap up, do a better job ..um actually HOW ABOUT YOU JUST DECIDE TO BE AN HONEST PERSON???
-Nimrod-
Define capital?
-IamJoseph-
Why - are you confused?
How many people have to live somewhere for the people themselves to be considered human.
The town was big by Palestinian standards.
Also, quote my entire context next time.My point has been that you want to impose some arbitrary standard to make some lame, and dishonest, point.
Readsomething useful for a change.
Afraid the facts might shock you?
-Nimrod-
Jerusalem was the largest population center in Palestine throughout the last 1300 years as far as I know.
-IamJoseph-
Not true. Jerusalem was a barren, desolate, malaria infested swamp, never attended by muslims, till the return of Jews from Europe and Arab lands. Mark Twain's description in the 1800s says there was not a man for a 100 miles in any direction.
Thie problem is that your version of history doesnt match history's version of history.
Its a persistent problem.
-IamJoseph-
Also, the notion of third holyiest muslim site is a post quran improvisation to justify robbery. Do you at least accept that knowingly erecting a mosque in another peoples' most sacred site is 'WRONG'?! That forbidding its original owners from worship here is grotesque, and signs such as DOGS & JEWS FORBIDDEN, making jewish graveyards as donkey stables, and using tomb stones as tiles to walk upon - is as far from Gdliness and any morality as is possible?
Read the Pfeiffer book I quoted. (read the parts I didnt quote)
He is a conservative Christian.
When the European christians controlled Jerusalem till from c323 to 638, they ended up desecrating the Temple and using it as a trash dump.
When Muslims (under Omar) got there, Jews werent left and Christians desecrated the site.The Jews were allowed to return after 500+ years of persecution.Christians had religious freedom for the first time ever.
There was 461 years of complete peace.
Jews and even European Christians were allowed to come in from everywhere at times.
Also, the Crusaders didnt consider the Dome Of The Rock to be anything but "Solomons Temple".Thats the only name they ever called it.
Nobody but you and opportunistic right-wing bigots even care about this.
Im pissed about the garbage dump though.The Temple is dead to my heart and its all the more reasons why the Muslims were the best caretakers Jerusalem and palestien ever had!
Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.
Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.
Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.
Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.
Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.
Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by IamJoseph, posted 12-05-2007 4:11 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by jar, posted 12-05-2007 7:06 PM Nimrod has replied
 Message 145 by IamJoseph, posted 12-06-2007 12:40 AM Nimrod has not replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 142 of 309 (438694)
12-05-2007 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by jar
12-05-2007 7:06 PM


for one thing.
It can show how men mis-interpret the Bible and history.
(Im off work for a week or so btw)
Plus,people like Joseph should be responded to in every way.
I have no problem taking to time to show what others wont.
I only wish I could cover these topics in much more detail.
I LOVE to show how "prophecy" has been twisted (full of relevant New testament quotations) but that would take too much time.
Anyway, if people want to bit*h about racism and wars and such, then TRUST ME- we better start attacking the root of them.
The root of all wars are ignorance, hatred, lies and racism.
Expose them!
Now let me show Joseph how it was Muslims who stopped Christians from desecrating the Temple Mount. (Christians killed all Jews and used the Temple Mount as a garbage dump till the Muslims stopped it!)
I am going to quote a historian/scholar just a conservative as Albright on this one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by jar, posted 12-05-2007 7:06 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by sidelined, posted 12-05-2007 7:44 PM Nimrod has replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 144 of 309 (438703)
12-05-2007 8:05 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by sidelined
12-05-2007 7:44 PM


Re: for one thing.
If you can get the Mods to import the ENTIRE discussion of Joseph and myself to a new thread , then I will leave this thread.
First, let me finish editing my post (Im doing other things like moving snow right now)on THIS thread.
Again, get the MODs to double every last one of my posts (and Josephs posts chronologically in-between) to a new thread , and I will be happy then.
I only ask that my post #140 gets left here so i dont loose my typing while editing it because it is gone by the time I hit "enter"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by sidelined, posted 12-05-2007 7:44 PM sidelined has not replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 147 of 309 (438738)
12-06-2007 2:09 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by arachnophilia
12-06-2007 1:27 AM


IamJoseph responded to a strawman.
What he says has little to nothing to do with anything people say to him.
Nothing he said even remotely addresses a single issue I raised.
You can tell him something about history and he will rant about Coke and Pepsi and then put words in your mouth.
Ive never seen anybody simply ignore 100% of everything a person says.
And Ive seen some serious retards in my internet days too.
Actually, there might be 1 other like Joseph that I have seen.
Amazing the both were fundamentalists. (I dont entirely subscribe to the view that all idiots are fundamentalists though, but this IS something I must take note of).
I dont even think I will respond to him anymore, because he simply wont consider a single fact.
(Im realy really shocked at this-honestly damn it he ignored 100% and used my name/posts as a pure straw man)
(stll shocked)I suppose I should just comfort myself and my hopes for humanity by assuring myself that this guy is only 1 in 10,000 in his mental-limitations.
I honestly fear that im way to optimistic.
His last post was the first one where he ignored a full 100% of the content. (and I have been shocked when he ignored 95%-98%)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by arachnophilia, posted 12-06-2007 1:27 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 148 by arachnophilia, posted 12-06-2007 2:11 AM Nimrod has not replied

Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 156 of 309 (439007)
12-07-2007 2:01 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by IamJoseph
12-06-2007 3:54 AM


One little issue at a time
Maybe if just one issue at a time is covered then maybe we can get somewhere (it will still require a significant movment toward honesty and integrity on Josephs part,which may not be a realistic hope on *MY* part).
-IamJoseph-
Jesus is a Pal [that's the result of Nimrod's assertions], and Moses a Muslim
I never said anything about Moses being a Muslim though "Musilm" simply means "one who submits" (to God).I assume your problem is that Muslims (which I am not!) consider the religion known as "Islam" to be a record of Gods revelation from Adam to c600 AD/CE prophets.
If you disagree with their religion then fine.
It really has nothing to do with this topic(and especially with anything I said).
As for the "...Jesus is a Pal[estinian]..." accusation of yours, let me explain the issue here.
You claim that all Koran or New Testament believers (Muslims and Christians respectively) are not worthy of rights in the land of Israel/Palestine.
Since Israel, as a modern nation, labels all Christians and Muslims as "Arabs" (which is also their official designation of Palestinians- simply "Arabs") , then my question to you is WHAT would you call Christians (which Jesus's converted family members's descendants were) in the land today called Israel?
The entire word would call them "Palestinians".
And the masterful Bob Brier in his 48 CD/cassette tape lecture series "The History Of Ancient Egypt" also pointed out that the modern day Muslims and Christian of Palestine (ie "Palestinians") are probably converts who once were Jewish.
(Bob Brier is the great expert on mummies who proposed the theory that King Tut was murdered-popular for so long).
CONCLUSION
(IamJoseph, listen up man!)
So its by YOUR exclusionary logic that Jesus and his family were "Palestinians" (ie non-Israelites).
MY VIEW is that all peoples are equal and I really dont care what labels (whether it be Canaan, Terra Sancta, Filastin,Israel, etc.) people place on them.
I would be happy for the land to be called "Israel" by official world bodies forever.
I dont care what race somebody is becasue the teachings of Romans, Galations, etc. teach us that ones Jewish ancestry isnt an issue.
But AGAIN, its by *your* logic, that all Christian (or Muslim) converts (in the land of Israel from times past) are no longer "Jewish" , thus they cant be considered "Israelites".
The label is "Palestinian".
By YOUR logic!
(Im happy with the teachings of Galatians 3:28 and Romans 10:12 however, so I will gladly call them Israelites instead)
Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by IamJoseph, posted 12-06-2007 3:54 AM IamJoseph has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024