Freethought & Rationalism Archive

rob117 · 10-09-2005, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by austin2

in your opening statement you write this politically biased statement, meaningless actually, as there was NO palestine at that time

"Israel" is the name of a modern state, an ancient state, and a Northwest Semitic ethnic identity. "Palestine" is the name of the ancient Roman province, the Palestinian Arab ethnic identity, the proposed Palestinian Arab political state, and the region in general. In general, archaeologists and historians use "Palestine" when referring to the region, even though it did not have that name until the Roman province in 135 CE. There's nothing political about it. The continents of the Western Hemisphere are known as "The Americas," no matter what period we're talking about, even though Amerigo Vespucci, for whom they are named, didn't live until around 1500 or so.

austin2 · 10-09-2005, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rob117

"Israel" is the name of a modern state, an ancient state, and a Northwest Semitic ethnic identity. "Palestine" is the name of the ancient Roman province, the Palestinian Arab ethnic identity, the proposed Palestinian Arab political state, and the region in general. In general, archaeologists and historians use "Palestine" when referring to the region, even though it did not have that name until the Roman province in 135 CE. There's nothing political about it. The continents of the Western Hemisphere are known as "The Americas," no matter what period we're talking about, even though Amerigo Vespucci, for whom they are named, didn't live until around 1500 or so.

the ONLY sovereign state in that area ever were Judea and Israel

http://www.mideastweb.org/isrlate.htm

here you have a timeline since the Bronze age

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/.../jerutime.html

other than Judea and Israel, this land was always a province or territory of Persia, Rome, Byzantine, Arab, Mamluke and Ottoman.

There is EVERYTHING political about calling this land palestine..which the Romans renamed Israel and Judea, when the Romans expelled the JEws.

Jesus did not know or live or preach in palestine...it did not exist

and this

Quote:

the Palestinian Arab ethnic identity, the proposed Palestinian Arab political state, and the region in general.

is ahistorical crap

pure <edit> and propaganda

austin2 · 10-09-2005, 07:25 PM

like this
http://adlusa.com/abe/jesuspal.htm

Quote:

"Jesus was a Palestinian. Yes, a Palestinian Jew, but still a Palestinian," says Dr. Naim Ateek, a canon at St. George's Anglican Cathedral in Jerusalem who describes himself as Christian, Palestinian, Arab and Israeli rolled into one.

As the new Millennium dawns, Palestinian Christians are relating the Scriptures to their own historical, geographical and social experience in a grass roots philosophy known as Palestinian Liberation Theology.

Palestinian President Yasser Arafat raised eyebrows four years ago by claiming Jesus was a Palestinian in remarks made in Bethlehem, the West Bank town which Christians revere as the place where he was born.

It came under Palestinian self-rule in 1995 after 28 years of Israeli military occupation.

"Jesus was a refugee and lived under occupation. If he's interpreted in this way he becomes a model for faith. So I can learn from him and how he coped with a life under occupation like me," says Ateek, the movement's originator and developer.

US-educated, Ateek was 11 years old in 1948 when he says his family was forced by Jewish troops to leave their home near the town of Tiberias on the shores of the Sea of Galilee.

Tens of thousands of Palestinians fled or were forced from their homes during the 1948 war which made the creation of the state of Israel possible and created the Palestinian refugee problem.

Others are wary of what they see as an effort by the 50,000 Christian Palestinians of the Holy Land to diminish Jewish links to Israel and recast Jesus's identity in their own light.

"To call Jesus a Palestinian is naked political exploitation," says David Parsons of the International Christian Embassy, a Jerusalem-based Christian Zionist umbrella group.

"Jesus was a Jew and fit within rabbinical Judaism. The term 'Palestinian' wasn't around in the first century and all it's trying to do is appeal to foreign support for the Palestinian cause."

However, the term "Palestinian" has been in use in the region dating back to the original inhabitants called "Philistines" by the Jews and "rabbinical Judaism" didn't exist in Jesus' time since it was developed after the destruction of the Second Temple in 2nd century AD.

obscene really

austin2 · 10-09-2005, 09:13 PM

the arab state in "palestine"

http://www.britishempire.co.uk/maproom/palestine.htm

Quote:

The fact that the British mandate included references to the Balfour Declaration and the establishment of a Jewish homeland was a severe blow to the Arabs.

Partly to try and mollify this disappointment, the British split the Palestine mandate into two distinct areas, using the Jordan River as a natural boundary.

The British claimed that Jewish immigration would be confined to the West of the river. The East of the river, which represented three quarters of the whole mandate area was to be reserved for the Arabs alone. The Hashemite Abdulla was to become the ruler of what was to become Transjordan. Most Arabs still felt ill at ease with this British plan. They regarded Transjordan as little more than an arid, empty desert. Besides, the principle of any Jewish homeland anywhere in Arab lands was still completely abhorrent to them.

Arab intransigence and unwillingness to work with the Jews was demonstrated almost immediately as the British tried to set up a legislative council and a constitution. The council was supposed to have ten of the seats allocated to the Arabs and only two to the Jews. The Arabs refused to cooperate on the basis that two seats for so few Jews meant that they were relatively over represented. They also resented the comments and concessions made to Zionism in the constitution. This failure meant that the British had no choice but to continue ruling Palestine directly themselves.

Over the next few years, the British made repeated attempts to include both communities in the day to day running of the mandate. Time and time again, Arab intransigence resulted in an absolute refusal to cooperate in any way. Conversely, the Jews were happy to work and cooperate with the authorities and thus gained a legitimacy and administrative experience far and above that which the size of their community merited. The best example of this was the creation of a Jewish agency in 1929. Arabs flatly refused to do the same.

and

the ONLY reason the League of NAtions gave the British the Mandate for Palestine

http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/2...b?OpenDocument

Quote:

LEAGUE OF NATIONS*

MANDATE FOR PALESTINE
The Council of the League of Nations:

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and

Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and

Whereas by the aforementioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League of Nations;

Confirming the said mandate, defines its terms as follows:

seeing as how the muslim arab people got all the rest of the Ottoman Empire

spin · 10-10-2005, 12:35 AM

Moderators, can you now give this person a camomile tea and move this into whatever non BC&H venue you fancy?

Amaleq13 · 10-10-2005, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Moderators, can you now give this person a camomile tea and move this into whatever non BC&H venue you fancy?

Yup.

austin2 · 10-10-2005, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Moderators, can you now give this person a camomile tea and move this into whatever non BC&H venue you fancy?

LOL

what malice and determined bias!

spin · 10-10-2005, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by austin2

LOL

what malice and determined bias!

Either you post about the particular forum topic or it will be moved to a more appropriate place. This topic was initially in the Biblical Criticism and History forum, but it was the wrong place for a discussion about modern Israel. To avoid a topic being moved, why not place it in the right forum to start with?

Before you accuse people of malice and bias, think before you post. And learn how things work here. You are free to post, but in the right place.

spin

jcsd · 10-10-2005, 02:31 PM

Sigh, let us ignore the foaming-at-the-mouth politics for a minute.

Palestine is and has been used as a name for the general area (roughly equivalent to Israel and the Occupied Territories) for hundred of years with no poltical connatations. The name traces it's roots further back than the Province of Syria-Palestinia, it, like the name of the province, comes from the Greek name for the region.

Also as a point of historical accuracy there have been svereal other sovereign states in the area for example Philistinia, for which the region is named.

Escaped A.I. · 10-10-2005, 03:46 PM

mark twain wrote about palestine long before it was "political" to call it palestine.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-10-2005, 12:35 AM	#5
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	Moderators, can you now give this person a camomile tea and move this into whatever non BC&H venue you fancy?

10-10-2005, 02:31 PM	#9
jcsd Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: South East UK Posts: 978	Sigh, let us ignore the foaming-at-the-mouth politics for a minute. Palestine is and has been used as a name for the general area (roughly equivalent to Israel and the Occupied Territories) for hundred of years with no poltical connatations. The name traces it's roots further back than the Province of Syria-Palestinia, it, like the name of the province, comes from the Greek name for the region. Also as a point of historical accuracy there have been svereal other sovereign states in the area for example Philistinia, for which the region is named.

10-10-2005, 03:46 PM	#10
Escaped A.I. Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Floating in cyberspace. Posts: 961	mark twain wrote about palestine long before it was "political" to call it palestine.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.