makerowner

Europeans drove American Indians out of their homelands a paltry 400 to 100 years ago, so surely the American Indians have the right to forcibly expel the Europeans and live in their homelands?

martini

by incorrect pronouns? by plural prophets instead of singular people? by referring to something explicitly NOT crucifixion yet still supposedly MEANING crucifixion? what sort of double-think is this?

Arnoldo, if that makes for "prophecy" in your mind, i have to wonder what could NOT be magically turned into this sort of "prophecy"!
"obviously" is a bit of an exaggeration, to be sure, given the wide berth used in "interpreting" these supposed Christian prophecies that were nothing of the sort in Jewish history.

can you cite ANY prophecy earlier in the Tanach which, at some time, came to pass as recorded by later authors in this so-called double-prophecy paradigm? is there even ONE "double-prophecy" that was both given AND experienced within the entirety of the Tanach? you will find, much to your dismay, that NO ONE speaks of "double-prophecy" until Christian apologists made their way onto the scene. NOT even ONE, Arnoldo. is that not even the slightest bit disheartening?

martini

the Greeks and the Romans oversaw this land but allowed the inhabitants to live there without interruption, though not without occasional incidence -- instigated by the Jews or not.

so tell me: what caused the mean wicked Romans to suddenly decide they should drive these amazingly wonderful and peaceful Jewish people out of their "homeland"? what EXACTLY took place in the first and second century to cause this?

arnoldo

Maybe the Roman desecrated the temple in Jerusalem and this caused a religious uprising?

Sheshonq

What about the Arabs who have been living their for over a thousand years? Do "historical reasons" apply to them as well?

Not to mention the people that the Hebrews (allegedly) drove out in the first place - how about them?

Sheshonq

And how does that equate to being "driven out", which was your claim?

martini

per wiki, Josephus reports that "the revolt began in 66 in Caesarea, provoked by Greeks sacrificing birds in front of a local synagogue."

SACRIFICING BIRDS in front of -- in FRONT OF -- a local synagogue. not in. not on. in FRONT of. the Jews began a series of retaliatory measures and, not surprisingly, their overseers would have none of it. this led to the destruction of the Jewish temple and the enslavement, dispersion, and death of many Jews in 70.

there was the Kitos War in 115 brought about by the Jews of the Diaspora. they failed and, as per the typical Roman retaliation, many of them were killed for this second revolt.

the third Jewish revolt ... because two shows of Roman strength was apparently not enough ... took place in 135. it, too, was quelled and many more Jews and Romans lost their lives. do not forget that these wars claimed deaths on both sides.

note how these are called "Jewish REVOLTS". given that they had every choice in the matter, exactly HOW do you propose this be anything but tit-for-tat by the Romans? remember when you said: it was because they were REVOLTING against the Romans, not because they were being too kind and cordial.

exactly what would you have them do against ANY group attempting to usurp Roman authority and control? use harsh language?

arnoldo

I don't know how you can argue with history. It's a fact that the Roman Empire conquered Israel almost two thousand years ago and drove the Jews out. It's also a fact that the Jews returned to Israel in 1948 under the plan of the United Nations. Did the United Nations make a mistake?

Sheshonq

By knowing history?

No, it is not a fact. It's a misconception common among christians who feel some obligation to support Israel. Here are the facts:


The Diaspora grew large after 70, when the Romans destroyed the Temple of Jerusalem and deported many Jews to Syria and Italy (more). However, others remained in Judaea, where rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai founded the Academy of Javneh. Maybe more then the Temple had ever been, this was the spiritual center of Judaism: after all, the communities in the Diaspora had not always maintained the same practices as in Jerusalem, but they were more willing to listen to 'Javneh' (or its successor academies, Sepphoris and Tiberias). An indication that the diasporic Jews were more willing to look for guidance in Judaea, is the increase of burials from diasporic Jews in the land of Israel.

Jewish immigration / land acquisition started almost a century earlier, actually.

Yes.

Johnny Skeptic

No, God lied because he promised to give Abraham and his descendants ALL of the land of ancient Canaan as an EVERLASTING covenant. The partition of Palestine in 1948 failed on both counts, thereby discrediting the Bible. Logically, the word "everlasting" implies that the writer believed that Jews would always occupy the ancient land of Canaan from the time that they first occupied it. Obviously, that did not happen. There is no other rational explanation for the word "everlasting."

Genesis 17:8 says "And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God." Now Arnoldo, you are aware that God was speaking to Abraham, aren't you? If you are aware of that, which I assume that you are, then you also know that the "everlasting" part of the verse started with Abraham occupying the land of ancient Canaan, certainly not with the failed partition of Palestine in 1948.

Scriptures that mention the scattering of the Jews and the eventual restoration of the Jewish homeland contradict Genesis 17:8, which indicates that Abraham and his descendants would always occupy ALL of the ancient land of Canaan as an everlasting covenant starting with Abraham and his group. When it became obvious during Old Testament times that the writer of Genesis 17:8 was mistaken since the Jews were driven out of parts or all of Palestine, that is when coverup Scriptures were made up that claimed that the Jews would be scattered, and would eventually return to their homeland.

If the God of the Bible does not exist, there are reasonable secular explanations for the history of the Jewish people. All that it takes to occupy land is power. There is nothing odd about the U.S. and Britain giving military and financial aid to the Jews in order to help them gain control of parts of Palestine. In one of the Arab/Jewish wars, the Jews were close to losing. Golda Meir contacted President Nixon and asked him for help. Nixon sent help, without with the Jews would probably have been defeated. It is important to note that if the Jews had been defeated, just like they had been defeated on many other occasions, you would have many other excuses to make, and you would still be a Christian. Isn't that right?