Kharakov

Isn't ability to claim land simply based on power?

Clarification: If I had the military power to take over the middle east, wouldn't I then be able to "claim" the land?

Toto

Your claim needs some sort of legitimacy. If you used your power to hire poets and story tellers and prophets to create this legitimacy and convince others to believe in it, you could claim the land.

As to Israel's claim to its territory, it is based on international treaties and UN resolutions and historical claims going back to the Balfour Declaration of 1917.

We know that the Balfour Declaration was based in part on the Bible (See Bible and Sword: England and Palestine from the Bronze Age to Balfour (or via: amazon.co.uk), but not so much on the idea of a land grant given by YHWH to the Jews as on the idea that the Jews had to return to Isreal before the Second Coming.

From a review:

judge

Ok, thanks , I can understand the concept. I can't believe you are suggesting (if you are) that by joining a religious sect anyone should have landrights in palestine.

judge

No, but they are over the major hurdle.

apatura_iris

Some people with Kohen or Levitical surnames are likely descendants of the Khazars who converted en masse in the 8th/9th centry and took on either Kohen or Levite surnames. They assumed Kohen and Levitical titles because they converted en masse in response to a need for diplomacy between Christians and Muslims (whom they lived in-between). Since Judaism was recognized on some level by both religions, they chose that in an effort toward neutrality. Because they converted "on their own" they did not understand that the assumption of Kohen and Levitial status is forbidden for converts. In fact, when they first made contact with Talmudic scholars, they refused to recognize the Talmud as legitimate, since Talmudic doctrine is not expressly mentioned in the Torah. (The Khazars are not to be confused with the Karaites (who do not recognize the Talmud), who do not have roots in a converted society.)

There was also a genetic study done years ago comparing Ashkenazi and Sephardic Levites which indicated 30% of the Ashkenaz men had an identical Y Chromosome marker that the Sephardic men lacked (indicating a mass conversion *after* the geographical diferentiation of the 2 groups). I think this study was printed in Nature.

The fact that Khazars assumed Kohen and Levite titles, IMO, betrays a Christian influence on their initial conversion. While taking on such titles would be anathema to either Talmudists or Karaites, it is part of Christian doctrine, namely that believers (whether Jewish or gentile) assume kohen status through their adhesion to Christ (Heb 7:24, 1Pe 2:5, 1Pe 2:9). Also of note is the Talmudic quip that a gentile who studies Torah, even if in the context of a non-Jewish religion, has the status of a high priest (Baba Kama 38).

This would not be the first time that a society introduced to Christianity opted for the “Old Testament” religion over the Christian one. In the present day this has happened in several missionized communities in Africa and elsewhere, and in a more dilluted form this occurs among western Zionist Evangelicals who, for example, often support the death penalty based on “Old Testament laws” (take GW Bush, for instance).

Kharakov

I see ability to claim as simply the ability to hold or take a piece of land. Of course, if other's have an excuse to attack your claim and use this as a rallying point.... don't leave another heir.


Nice.

Anat

I'm just saying that if one accepts a whole lot of premises the concept is logically consistent.

Newfie

Sounds like the original conquest of Canaan by Joshua, or maybe even Manifest Destiny.

davidbach

Am I the only one to see a supreme irony here?

If land "ownership" is to be based on who was there first, then the bible tells us that the Israelites were the invaders led by Joshua.

So the land belongs to the descendents of the Canaanites. The bible/torah tells us that the Israelites/Jews have no claim at all!

Yes, I know. We can no longer define the Canaanites - any more than we can define the Jews (by descent anyway). Quite likely the Palestinians are much more "Israelite" than the modern Jews.

As has been noted, a state and the hegemony over it's territory is based on international recognition. It is almost impossible to correct any wrongs visited on people several generations ago. The best policy for the Palestinians (Inuit, Aborigines, Celts...........) is to forget it and get on with their lives.

David.

Newfie

The Inuit here in Canada were able to claim their own territory nearly three times as big as Texas. Nunavut isn't independant, but it's pretty much Inuit controlled.