View Full Version : History of Israel and Judah
zakelwe
05-05-05, 02:10 AM
IMO the Jewish people have not lived since time immemorial in Palestine / Israel as claimed, if Jews are taken to be people who only believe in one God ( YHWH ) then the time they have lived in the old lands of Judah and Israel is from well after the 10th century BCE.
Regards
Andy
Time immemorial is a long time :)
Hebrews have lived on the lands longer than anyone else according to the history books.
Not sure what your point is here.
The LAND has been know as a variation of the anglicized Palestine for a very long time.
zakelwe
05-05-05, 02:21 AM
Time immemorial is a long time :)
Hebrews have lived on the lands longer than anyone else according to the history books.
Not sure what your point is here.
The LAND has been know as a variation of the anglicized Palestine for a very long time.
Yes, but it's measurable, so it is not time immemorial. Point is that using words to get your point across should also be upholdable to scrutiny on whether they hold true or not.
Regards
Andy
Different people have different points of view.
If you frame your argument or point in a particular manner, that will render it more defensible and biased or sympathetic to your point of view.
I disagree with bknblk's assertion wrt right of the land concerning the formation of Israel post WWII but I do not disagree with the timeline of residence because that is fact.
zakelwe
05-05-05, 02:29 AM
Different people have different points of view.
If you frame your argument or point in a particular manner, that will render it more defensible and biased or sympathetic to your point of view.
I disagree with bknblk's assertion wrt right of the land concerning the formation of Israel post WWII but I do not disagree with the timeline of residence because that is fact.
Fair point in the first paragraph, however if it does not stand up to scrutiny then either modify it or defend why it should.
In regards to your second point and your earlier point on timeline of residence and also that history books show that Hebrews have lived their the longest period of time, have you any proof ? When did Hebrews first started living there and how long have they lived there since ( by taking into account the exile to Babylon and then Egypt etc ) ?
Regards
Andy
Son Goku
05-05-05, 02:32 AM
Besides (and this is better in it's own thread), I might have my views wrt the Palistinians and having a country of their own, among other things (this has also been discussed in time past); but I see no reason to hound bkn about his sig everytime he posts...
Keep in mind what saz said about people having their own points of view. He's also entitled to his own. It is what he honestly believes, and he has a right to believe it, even if others (including myself) might have a slightly different view wrt more recent times...
Fair point in the first paragraph, however if it does not stand up to scrutiny then either modify it or defend why it should.
In regards to your second point and your earlier point on timeline of residence and also that history books show that Hebrews have lived their the longest period of time, have you any proof ? When did Hebrews first started living there and how long have they lived there since ( by taking into account the exile to Babylon and then Egypt etc ) ?
Regards
Andy
Andy, let me ask you this instead. Is there any proof the hebrews do not have one of the longest tenures on that patch of land?
zakelwe
05-05-05, 02:40 AM
but I see no reason to hound bkn about his sig everytime he posts...
For the umpteenth million time stop exaggerating ! :D
I see your point though, I hope he can come on this thread and clarify his standpoint, maybe with some details and facts and figures.
Regards
Andy
but I see no reason to hound bkn about his sig everytime he posts...
He does nothing of the sort. He has mentioned it a couple of times, hardly a hounding.
I see your point though, I hope he can come on this thread and clarify his standpoint, maybe with some details and facts and figures.
Facts and figures can be presented in a manner to support any side of the argument though :)
That's why it is not so easy to say one's position is the best.
My sig btw is absolutely true and factual and holds up to scrutiny, hence why no one has been able to disprove it :D
zakelwe
05-05-05, 02:53 AM
Andy, let me ask you this instead. Is there any proof the hebrews do not have one of the longest tenures on that patch of land?
I haven't got the exact figures on me at present, I'd have to go home, but assuming that the start was the monotheistic worship of YHWH came into being in 8th or 7thC BCE and taking into account the 70 years away in Babylon and finally ending with the Disporia in AD 70 and retun since 1947 ?? then the total time the land was mainly inhabited by Jews is a maximum of 800 years.
Since 600AD, neglecting the Crusaders control which might be 100 years, then Muslims have been the main inhabitants until 1947 so that is over 1200 years.
I would imagine the ancient Canaanites lived in this region for longer than 800 years as well.
The problem here is that people are mixing up Jews with the ancient Israelites who did not have a monotheistic belief in YHWH and so were not Jews.
Regards
Andy
Son Goku
05-05-05, 02:58 AM
He does nothing of the sort. He has mentioned it a couple of times, hardly a hounding.
I seem to remember more then a coupla times, though I don't care to do a forum search right about now to find all references... Yes, I did exagerate a bit, but hmm... Besides, as long as a person's sig is within forum guidlines and isn't meant to be offensive, like saying "another member, blah, blah, blah..." It's own thread though does seem better.
We have discussed this in time past (as you might remember), probably well enough that many of us know where we stand... But all said, his belief is honest, and he is being true to himself...
No offense but as of late you have been leaning towards simply pointing out things and exaggerating where it really serves no purpose.
I am sure it is likely going to be just as annoying for yourself if everyone picked apart everyone of your posts/comments and made similar statements.
Son Goku
05-05-05, 03:13 AM
Honestly saz, I did exagerate a bit, though not on as serious a note as some might read, but I did think another, well see this thread
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=50113
concerning a sig was uneeded... Untrue in some people's mind and view, but not others. I had both a reason and a purpose to mention this...
Your whole point and thread is stupid. BK's point is not who lived there the longest or who belongs there and who doesn't. His point is that the PLO's lie that it was Palestinian land is a LIE and it is. There was NEVER a state of Palestine. There was a region called Palestine that we was rulled by many invaders and such.
BK's point is that the land the PLO call their was actually Jordan's until the war. It did not belong to a group of people or a nation called Palestine. It belonged to the King of Jordan and they were Jordanians.
A former terrorist said "why is it that one day I was a Jordanian and the next day I was a Palestinian?"
Your whole premis is BS and you come in as usual with a tiny portion of fact and make a whole case around it that is false. Your points are easily defeated and yet you keep arguing them.
The new guy
05-05-05, 10:52 AM
:clap: Right on UDawg.
saturnotaku
05-05-05, 10:56 AM
:clap: Right on UDawg.
:werd:
BK doesn't need to come in here and debate anything because there is nothing to debate. He can certainly provide some education on this history, but I have a feeling it will simply be ignored.
And btw, when referring to the region, it's Judea, not Judah.
I haven't got the exact figures on me at present, I'd have to go home, but assuming that the start was the monotheistic worship of YHWH came into being in 8th or 7thC BCE and taking into account the 70 years away in Babylon and finally ending with the Disporia in AD 70 and retun since 1947 ?? then the total time the land was mainly inhabited by Jews is a maximum of 800 years.
Since 600AD, neglecting the Crusaders control which might be 100 years, then Muslims have been the main inhabitants until 1947 so that is over 1200 years.
I would imagine the ancient Canaanites lived in this region for longer than 800 years as well.
The problem here is that people are mixing up Jews with the ancient Israelites who did not have a monotheistic belief in YHWH and so were not Jews.
Regards
Andy
This one post goes a long way towards proving my signature quote as being accurate. The land has been inhabited to whatever degree, by my people for as long as recorded history. We have been invaded and occupied by many peoples over that period, but always had a contingent living and thriving on those lands. It even states this point in my thread. Time immemorial=for as long as there is a record or recollection. That term certainly stands the test against your argument.
I, personally believe that you have issue with the situation that exists today and that is what chaps your hide, not my current signature. Your posts wrt the region in the past bear this theory out to some degree.
CybrSage
05-05-05, 11:04 AM
I haven't got the exact figures on me at present, I'd have to go home, but assuming that the start was the monotheistic worship of YHWH came into being in 8th or 7thC BCE and taking into account the 70 years away in Babylon and finally ending with the Disporia in AD 70 and retun since 1947 ?? then the total time the land was mainly inhabited by Jews is a maximum of 800 years.
Since 600AD, neglecting the Crusaders control which might be 100 years, then Muslims have been the main inhabitants until 1947 so that is over 1200 years.
I would imagine the ancient Canaanites lived in this region for longer than 800 years as well.
The problem here is that people are mixing up Jews with the ancient Israelites who did not have a monotheistic belief in YHWH and so were not Jews.
Regards
Andy
Easy one first, the Crusaders had a kingdom in the region for almost 400 years. When the Mongols invaded, the crusaders and muslims fought together to repel the Mongols. When the Mongols left (due to political infighting back home) the muslims took the opportunity to finally remove the last crusader kingdom.
As for the length of time the Jews worshipped God, if you believe the Bible it was from the very beginning of Mankind. They were not Jews yet, but they are direct descendants of those who walked side by side with God Himself. If you do not believe the Bible, then Judaism has no meaning and is irrelevant.
Also, can you define BCE, my calendars have BC and AD on them, so I do not know what you mean.
Thanks!
This one post goes a long way towards proving my signature quote as being accurate. The land has been inhabited to whatever degree, by my people for as long as recorded history. We have been invaded and occupied by many peoples over that period, but always had a contingent living and thriving on those lands. It even states this point in my thread. Time immemorial=for as long as there is a record or recollection. That term certainly stands the test against your argument.
I, personally believe that you have issue with the situation that exists today and that is what chaps your hide, not my current signature. Your posts wrt the region in the past bear this theory out to some degree.
By the contention of continuous living, you will find records that purportedly show that canaanites and their descendents too have resided there for the same period would it not? This might be what Zak is pointing out in your sig because it can be looked at in many different ways, and none would really be wrong.
The contention for a modern day nation of Palestine v/s the history of the land called Palestine are two different topics imo and I share your contention on one while disagreeing on the other.
Jews have as much right to that land as any other peoples from an ancestral point of view, I simply don't buy the argument that this was land given to them by god for obvious reasons :)
Israel's existence is beyond question because the country DOES exist and there can be no argument that Israel did not lay the smackdown on the nations in the neighborhood when it came to a "my pen0s is bigger than yours" discussion.
And we are both in agreement (I think) in hoping that with the new dynamics post Arafat that there is a little more of a glimmer of hope than before. At the rate things are moving might take a lot longer but the Israeli's under Sharon over the past year have surprised me in their openess and their concessions, both carried out and suggested.
Easy one first, the Crusaders had a kingdom in the region for almost 400 years. When the Mongols invaded, the crusaders and muslims fought together to repel the Mongols. When the Mongols left (due to political infighting back home) the muslims took the opportunity to finally remove the last crusader kingdom.
As for the length of time the Jews worshipped God, if you believe the Bible it was from the very beginning of Mankind. They were not Jews yet, but they are direct descendants of those who walked side by side with God Himself. If you do not believe the Bible, then Judaism has no meaning and is irrelevant.
Also, can you define BCE, my calendars have BC and AD on them, so I do not know what you mean.
Thanks!
Historians do not refer to AD and BC typically nowadays. That is used in common/everyday terminology primarily because we grew up with it. The dates do not change, simply the terminology.
CE == Common Era.
BCE == Before Common Era.
Historians do not refer to AD and BC typically nowadays. That is used in common/everyday terminology primarily because we grew up with it. The dates do not change, simply the terminology.
CE == Common Era.
BCE == Before Common Era.
Gee, I wonder why they changed it from AD and BC? /rolls his eyes. I will refer to them as AD and BC. I don't buy this PC crap.
Riptide
05-05-05, 01:22 PM
Neither do I. It's just a bunch of crap because people don't like Christianity. That's the only reason they want it changed. They don't like references to Jesus.
CE and BCE do not have to be used if you don't want to. It is a COMMON term referring to the period. Time frames have not changed and the letter C is still commonly seen to refer to Christ so I personally don't see much of a problem here.
History did not begin with Jesus nor is it primarily restricted to the Middle East and Roman era's. A common function seems like a decent idea and it is not a pervasive idea either. I grew up with AD and BC and personally have no problems with that. If people indeed did not like Christianity or a reference to Jesus, why bother with keeping the same timeline as from Yeshua's time?
Riptide
05-05-05, 01:37 PM
Tell me why AD/BC wasn't good enough. It was good enough for you and I, we grew up with it... It was used elsehwere heavily for a long time. What was the point to making it BCE except to remove the obvious reference to Christ?
It was not used heavily everywhere, it was used heavily in the predominantly western soceity.
The change to a more common term is a logical step I would think since 2/3rd's of the worlds population is NOT Christian.
I did not make the change and as I pointed out, the change does not modify the timelines nor does it force people to change from AD/BC to CE/BCE.
It is only as big a deal as one wishes to make it.
I grew up with Celsius and Centigrade, but now I measure things in Kelvins, except when I watch the weather forecasts where everything is measured in the retarded Fahrenheit scale. These things occur.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.