Rockets hitting Jerusalem

[n david]

The Middle East problem is pretty simple, as this video shows:

http://youtu.be/8EDW88CBo-8

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Yeah...I don't see any reason to believe Palestinians are Ishmael's descendents.

In fact if they were they should be both Egyptian and descendents of Abraham

Israelites intermarried with everyone pretty much. Same with Paletinians.

They could be Iraqi...They could be Arabians...Or they could simply not exist anymore as a distinguishable tribe since there has been so much intermarriage

I think I may have found where the idea originated from.

I have a book entitled,"From Time Immemorial" which traces the origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict over Palestine.

I was reading an excerpt quoted from Bernard Lewis, "The Palestinians and the PLO, a Historical Approach", Commentary, January 1975, p. 32-48.

"The first Arabian use of the word Arab occurs in the ancient southern Arabian inscriptions,...dating from the late pre-Christian and early Christian centuries. In these, Arab means Bedouin, often raider, and is applied to the nomadic as distinct from the sedentary population...For Muhammad and his contemporaries the Arabs were the Bedouin of the desert, and in the Qur'an the term is used exclusively in the sense and never of the townsfolk of Mecca, Medina and other cities."

Reading in Manners and Customs of Bible Lands, Fred H. Wight, pages 14-15, "The Bedouin's home is his tent, which is made of black goat's hair....If the Bedouin Arabs live together as a tribe or a clan, as they often do,...The Bible says that some of the sons of Ismael lived in tent villages or encampments (Genesis 25:16). I see other translations say villages and encampments. The Amplified defines "encampment" as a "sheepfold", i.e, identifying the people as Bedouins.

Going back to "From Time Immemorial", page 139 and 141:

According to Bernard Lewis, an eminent authority, "The word Palestine does not occur in the OT...Palestine does not occur in the NT at all."

"The official adoption of the name Palestine in Roman usage to designate the territories of the former Jewish principality of Judea seems to date from after the suppression of the great Jewish revolt of Bar-Kokhba in the year 135 C.E.... it would seem that the name Judea was abolished ...and the country renamed Palestine or Syria Palestina, with the...intention of obliterating its historic Jewish identity. The earlier name did not entirely disappear, and as late as the 4th century C.E. we still find a Christian author, Epiphanius, referring to "Palestine, that is Judea."

"As many, including Professor Lewis, have pointed out, "From the end of the Jewish state in antiquity to the beginning of British rule, the area now designated by the name Palestine was not a country and had no frontiers, only administrative boundaries; it was a group of provincial subdivisions, by no means always the same, within a larger entity."

In other words, it appears that Palestine never was an independent nation and the Arabs never named the land to which they now claim rights. Most Arabs do not admit so candidly that "Palestinian identity" is a maneuver "only for political reasons" as did Zuheir Muhsin. But the Arab world, until recently, itself frequently negated the validity of any claim of an "age-old Palestinian Arab" identity.

The Arabs in Judah-cum-Palestine were regarded either as members of a "pan-Arab nation," as a Muslim community, or, in a tactical ploy, as "Southern Syrians." Yehoshua Porath, "Social Aspects of the Emergence of the Palestinian National Movement", in Society and Political Structure in the Arab World, M. Milson, ed. (New York, 1973), pp. 101, 107, 119.

A look at the haven where these "Palestinian" or "Judean" Jewish refugees from the Romans found sanctuary is important to understanding the "heart of the matter" in the Middle East today-the conflict between Arab and Jews.

The circumstances of the Arabian Jewish communities in the Arabian Peninsula-both before before and after the Arab Conquest- bear importantly upon relationships until this day, because the pattern that developed in Arabia established a tradition that has been followed ever since.

According to Arabist scholar Alfred Guillaume, Jews probably first settled in Arabia in connection with the fall of Samaria in 721 BC.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

The Middle East problem is pretty simple, as this video shows:

http://youtu.be/8EDW88CBo-8

Dennis Prager always does a good job explaining difficult subjects.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I think I may have found where the idea originated from.

I have a book entitled,"From Time Immemorial" which traces the origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict over Palestine.

I was reading an excerpt quoted from Bernard Lewis, "The Palestinians and the PLO, a Historical Approach", Commentary, January 1975, p. 32-48.

"The first Arabian use of the word Arab occurs in the ancient southern Arabian inscriptions,...dating from the late pre-Christian and early Christian centuries. In these, Arab means Bedouin, often raider, and is applied to the nomadic as distinct from the sedentary population...For Muhammad and his contemporaries the Arabs were the Bedouin of the desert, and in the Qur'an the term is used exclusively in the sense and never of the townsfolk of Mecca, Medina and other cities."

Reading in Manners and Customs of Bible Lands, Fred H. Wight, pages 14-15, "The Bedouin's home is his tent, which is made of black goat's hair....If the Bedouin Arabs live together as a tribe or a clan, as they often do,...The Bible says that some of the sons of Ismael lived in tent villages or encampments (Genesis 25:16). I see other translations say villages and encampments. The Amplified defines "encampment" as a "sheepfold", i.e, identifying the people as Bedouins.

Going back to "From Time Immemorial", page 139 and 141:

According to Bernard Lewis, an eminent authority, "The word Palestine does not occur in the OT...Palestine does not occur in the NT at all."

"The official adoption of the name Palestine in Roman usage to designate the territories of the former Jewish principality of Judea seems to date from after the suppression of the great Jewish revolt of Bar-Kokhba in the year 135 C.E.... it would seem that the name Judea was abolished ...and the country renamed Palestine or Syria Palestina, with the...intention of obliterating its historic Jewish identity. The earlier name did not entirely disappear, and as late as the 4th century C.E. we still find a Christian author, Epiphanius, referring to "Palestine, that is Judea."

"As many, including Professor Lewis, have pointed out, "From the end of the Jewish state in antiquity to the beginning of British rule, the area now designated by the name Palestine was not a country and had no frontiers, only administrative boundaries; it was a group of provincial subdivisions, by no means always the same, within a larger entity."

In other words, it appears that Palestine never was an independent nation and the Arabs never named the land to which they now claim rights. Most Arabs do not admit so candidly that "Palestinian identity" is a maneuver "only for political reasons" as did Zuheir Muhsin. But the Arab world, until recently, itself frequently negated the validity of any claim of an "age-old Palestinian Arab" identity.

The Arabs in Judah-cum-Palestine were regarded either as members of a "pan-Arab nation," as a Muslim community, or, in a tactical ploy, as "Southern Syrians." Yehoshua Porath, "Social Aspects of the Emergence of the Palestinian National Movement", in Society and Political Structure in the Arab World, M. Milson, ed. (New York, 1973), pp. 101, 107, 119.

A look at the haven where these "Palestinian" or "Judean" Jewish refugees from the Romans found sanctuary is important to understanding the "heart of the matter" in the Middle East today-the conflict between Arab and Jews.

The circumstances of the Arabian Jewish communities in the Arabian Peninsula-both before before and after the Arab Conquest- bear importantly upon relationships until this day, because the pattern that developed in Arabia established a tradition that has been followed ever since.

According to Arabist scholar Alfred Guillaume, Jews probably first settled in Arabia in connection with the fall of Samaria in 721 BC.

Palestinians are not Arabs. They are only Arabs in language, culture and religion because Muhammed and his marauding band of merry men forced it on everyone

However, to be sure, you can probably find genetic code from Arabs in then...like you can find genetic code from a LOT of different tribes and people in most of us

Because there was a lot of intermarriages. Also invading forces had a tendency to rape the women

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Palestinians are not Arabs. They are only Arabs in language, culture and religion because Muhammed and his marauding band of merry men forced it on everyone

However, to be sure, you can probably find genetic code from Arabs in then...like you can find genetic code from a LOT of different tribes and people in most of us

Because there was a lot of intermarriages. Also invading forces had a tendency to rape the women

Right, I am sure. Because, it is probably and generally the same peoples living in the same area for centuries.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Right, I am sure. Because, it is probably and generally the same peoples living in the same area for centuries.

Invaders from Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome, Philistine, Egypt and Arabia make it impossible for there to be a discernible "Descendent of Ishmael"

Also these "Palestinians" are all living in Israel according to the Ancient borders

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Invaders from Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome, Philistine, Egypt and Arabia make it impossible for there to be a discernible "Descendent of Ishmael"

Also these "Palestinians" are all living in Israel according to the Ancient borders

Specifically looking at Ishmael and his sons. Twelve tribes who inhabited mainly the Middle East. Ishmael dies in what is now Saudi Arabia.

Ishmael's sons, specifically:

Kedar — the Arab tribe, El Khedeyre, on the coast of Hedgar.

Abdeel — Abdilla, the name of a tribe in Yemen. - Southern part of Saudi Arabia

Adbeel - The name Adbeel is associated with the personal name and northwest tribe in Arabia known as Idiba’ilu, whom Tiglath-Pileser conquered in the 8th century BCE. (Kenneth A. Mathews, 2005, p. 361)

Mibsam - One of Ishmael's twelve sons, and head of an Arab tribe. Easton's Bible Dictionary

Mishma - founder of an Arab tribe.

Dumah, Tema - Dumah — Dumah and Tema, the great Arab tribes of Beni Teman. Thus this writer [Historical Geography of Arabia] traces the names of all the heads of the twelve tribes of Ishmael as perpetuated in the clans or tribes of the Arabs in the present day. - JFB

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Uh...huh? What is your point?

my point, is that the state of Israel is a construct, and although we associate it with Jews, that pov has been carefully inculcated in us, and does not tell the whole picture. I don't think there is a conspiracy, Prax; I know beyond a doubt that the truth is hidden in plain sight. One need only follow the money, and the trail of tears here. The whole situation exists to reveal your premises, which is all God cares about. what is in your heart.

Yes, Hamas is evil. But generalizations--which i am admittedly doing myself--can be very deceiving. One must believe that elements of Hamas will be among the accepted (as far-fetched as that may sound), for the simple reason that their premises are not hypocritical--they were ignorant and unread, and trusted an evil Imam; or droned into insanity, or whatever.

See that your premises are revealed by your responses to...anything. 'The situation in the Gaza Strip' is just the one of the moment. While it is the hardest thing to apply to oneself--and we have developed quite the high doctrine for self-absolution, here--we are evil. You are evil, they are evil, and I cannot admit to being less evil. People are evil--Christ even called His Apostles evil. Yet we justify applying those verses to others, and not ourselves. After all, we're 'saved,' right?

the worst deception is to deceive yourself.

[shazeep]

ok, and i don't care what Webster defines Nation as, as opposed to Country--when i say "Nation," i mean like "Cherokee Nation;" the people, disregarding any arbitrary lines drawn on a map. So, sorry for being unclear there.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

It does not seem that way at all. You seem mired in them.

hmm. well, i'll have to take a look at that. i merely meant to present them as very possible alternatives. Anyone may decide for themselves about the Rothschild's ("child of wrath") grip, and simply recognizing that satan must have some mechanism for running the world, might cause one to connect the two. They openly finance both sides of any war you could name in the modern era. They publicly--as in the newspapers of the day--threatened Lincoln, when he refused to rescind Greenbacks. They killed Kennedy after he threatened to "Reveal the cabal," and printed United states Notes.

The sad part is, it is way worse than most people would believe. I have come to regard it as just business as usual. The world will remain like this until believers start passing the premise test; it's as simple as that.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

So how do you decide which conspiracy theory to choose from?

Personally, i do my best to choose "Get out of the world," and supercede them all. But don't let me kid you, it is a lonely road. I just assume that the truth is prolly much worse than the worst conspiracy theory going on a matter--satan has us totally whipped in the 'evil' dept.