Did Jerusalem Ever Belong to Palestine?

a reply to: WilltellHebrew אדם ('adam) meaning "to be red", referring to the ruddy colour of human skin Noah and his three sons....was a direct descendant of Adam.
Noah's wife was black.....

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: GokuVsSuperman0

The answer is no.

The Muslims built their mosques on top of Jewish religious sites...and Christian.

Destroy the evidence of the original owners.

At least the Jews allow all three religions to flourish. The Muslims? Not in a million years.

Based on that reality, alone, even if the Muslims were first, I'd support the Jews.

And Christians and Jews built their houses of worship on Pagan sites

What's your point

That was then...this is now. That's the point...nice try.

originally posted by: Plotus
I can pose a scripture for you. Old Testament.

"Now the Lord had said to Abraham: Get out of your country, your father’s house, To a land (Israel) that I will show you. I will make you a great nation; I will bless you And make your name great; And you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed". (Jesus will rule out of Jerusalem)

Shalom-

Would You agree that a follower of the Jewish faith would use a "Holy Book" written for the Jewish faith? It was "The Creator" who exiled the Jewish people and any 'homelands' MUST be restored by "The Creator" When did this happen?

www.truetorahjews.org...

www.nkusa.org...

www.nkusa.org...

a reply to: GokuVsSuperman0


If Y'all are going to argue about "Noah" You can go all the way back when He was known as "Gilgamesh"

www.icr.org...

time.com...

a reply to: JimNasium

Talmudic Sources Saying that Jews Are Forbidden to Return from Exile on Their Own and Create a State

Tractate Kesubos 111a
The Biblical book Song of Songs says: “I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, by the gazelles or the deer of the field, not to arouse or awaken the love before it is desired.” This oath occurs three times in the Song of Songs (2:7, 3:5 and 8:4). The Talmud interprets this metaphorical language to mean as follows: the speaker here is G-d, and the “daughters of Jerusalem” are the Jewish people and the nations of the world. During the Jewish exile, which began with the destruction of the Temple in the year 69 CE, G-d placed three oaths upon the world, two upon the Jewish people and one upon the nations. The Jewish people were foresworn not to immigrate as a wall (i.e. en masse) to the Holy Land, and not to rebel against the other nations. The nations were foresworn not to afflict the Jews too much.

a reply to: GokuVsSuperman0

Jews were the first ones there. Ever heard of King Cyrus, well his Kingdom is buried underneath, much older than anything Muslim. The Muslims have no claim to it, they just want it just to piss off the Jews and decided to build their Islamic mos on top of it.

a reply to: Plotus

I do believe that some of the native american tribes also have legends where their god gave me their land, or better put, set them up to be the stewards of the land...

if it's legends and myths that are the predominant factor over who should have control of what land, then we should be handing a whole bunch of land over to the tribes, including Onondaga Lake and the surrounding lands, including syracuse, ny.
the palestinians originally referred to those who inhabited the lands that included what we now see as isreal..
they included groups of christians, jews, and muslim..
it was the early part of the 1900's that the christian religion in europe and america decided that God needed assistance to fullfill bible prophecy and began urging and helping the european and american jews to relocate in the holy lands. the churches also played a role in the scapegoating of the european jews by spreading rumors amoung the people such as "the jews are sacrificing christian children on their alters". and, I do believe I remember reading some claims that the pope was actually supporting hitler through much of the world war... where so many of the european jews were rounded up and murdered..... which, led to such a level of guilt in the world that well, we just had to take from the palestinians and give to the jews and establish the nation of isreal... even though the nation of isreal fell in 722 to the Assyrian Empire and many of them eventually made their way into the european countries. The Nation of Judah fell to the babylonians in 586 BC and were led in captivity into babylon. some returned later after babylon fell and their decendents very well may have been some of those palestinians that have been removed to make way for the european Isrealites!

so, my question would be...
why should we acknowledge the rights of those "Jews" that immigrated from Europe and north american who's ancestry has occupied europe for so many generations but refuse to acknowledge the land ownership of the native americans, even when there are treaties written and recorded acknowledging their ownership of that land that aren't more than a hundred or two years old???

Somebody should just do the world a favor and nuke the whole area. Then God can choose who he wants to live there by making them immune to the radiation.

To tell you the truth, in today’s modern world we haven’t changed much from the savages of ancient times conquering and raping each other.


It was wrong and barbaric then and is wrong and barbaric now, despite some using religion to justify their savagery and I BELIEVE altering scriptures to justify their claim to some divine right to rob, rape and pillage.

Palestine is more a Roman invention, later used by the British when they divided up the place. There is no real Palestine unless you count the Arabs and Jews who were living together in that area when it was given that name. The Arabs living there are mostly of the modern era as it went vastly uninhabited up until modern times. The refuges of Palestine could be easily cared for by the surrounding Arab countries but that would solve the problem and they want the problem to keep the anti-Israel sentiment alive. No one really wanted the land of Israel until the Jews wanted it, thus they sold the land to many Jews for inflated prices. Now those who hate Jews have made it their mission in life and in the lives of their children to destroy them. Peace is only a humble heart away. Pride and hate keep the area dangerous . . . .Revision of history stirs the pot; I say, live in the present and let it go . . .that would solve the whole mess. However it is to late, the minds of the children have been poisoned by hate and murder. The populace has convinced itself of inflicted cruelty. It will not stop until the conclusion, the conflict which is shown in the scriptures. Perhaps a pause in hostility in the future but then it will all collapse inward and outward. Not sure of a pause at this point.
As I understand it, Jerusalem was outside the Jewish borders as laid out in 1947, but then won back by the Jews in the following conflicts. For peace they gave back large areas of land from those they defeated, but peace didn't last. However they kept the holy city.

a reply to: GokuVsSuperman0

originally posted by: GokuVsSuperman0

My question is has there ever been an actual independent Palestinian government that ruled over all of Jerusalem?

Maybe back when that area was considered Canaan and occupied/ruled by then canaanites.

Canaanites who are possibly ancestors of the Palestinian.

Before it was labeled the Promised land to the Israelites. Possibly the ancestors of modern Jews in that region...

The Twelve Spies (Hebrew: שנים עשר המרגלים), as recorded in the Book of Numbers, were a group of Israelite chieftains, one from each of the Twelve Tribes, who were dispatched by Moses to scout out the Land of Canaan for 40 days[1] as a future home for the Israelite people, during the time when the Israelites were in the wilderness following their Exodus from Ancient Egypt. The account is found in Numbers 13:1-33.

God had promised Abraham that there would be a Promised Land for the nations to come out of his son, Isaac. The land of Canaan which the spies were to explore was the same Promised Land. Moses asked for an assessment of the geographical features of the land, the strength and numbers of the population, the agricultural potential and actual performance of the land, civic organization (whether their cities were like camps or strongholds), and forestry conditions. He also asked them to be positive in their outlook and to return with samples of local produce.

When ten of the twelve spies showed little faith in the doom and gloom report they gave about the land, they were slandering what they believed God had promised them. They did not believe that God could help them, and the people as a whole were persuaded that it was not possible to take the land. As a result, the entire nation was made to wander in the desert for 40 years, until almost the entire generation of men had died.[2] Joshua and Caleb were the two spies who brought back a good report and believed that God would help them succeed. They were the only men from their generation permitted to go into the Promised Land after the time of wandering.[3]

a reply to: JimNasium

😂 That alters perception a bit for some

It seems El - YHWH or ANUNNAKI LORD ENLIL was the GOD interacting there.

en.m.wikipedia.org...(deity)

Sumerian god, Anu, the “supreme Lord of the Sky”, the currently reigning titular head of the Sumerian Family Tree, had two sons. They were Enki (Ea), Lord of the Earth and Waters (whose mother was Antu), and Enlil (Ilu),


Lord of the Air and Lord of the Command.

www.halexandria.org...

ISis RA EL?

a reply to: GokuVsSuperman0

It sure as christ has never belonged to the jews either but as usual they claim ownership and enforce it by squeezing the nuts of all western governments who cry out in support as a result.

The Balfour declaration of 1917 was a proclamation that Brittain would favor the creation of a Jewish Homeland in Palestine. In Januari 1919 the Arab kind Feisal accorded a treaty with the Zionist organization for the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine.

The treaty of San Remo and Sevres confirmed the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine including Trans Jordania. However, considering other objectives by Arab groups and the disordely nature of the region, Brittain chose to neglect it's obligations and tranfered their administration to Hussein.

This issue, the agreement between Emir Feisal and the Jewish organisation and the British intention to create a Jewish national state in which Jews could immigrate en masse with protection of the already present locals, was kicked down the road and made more murky. In 1921 transJordan under Hussein was declared as a state, recognized in 1922 by the league of Nations. This is a clear violation of the previous agreed upon intentions, primarily by the guarantor Briitain.

After 30 years and another world war, the invasion of the Hussein Arab armies into Palestine and trans Jordan, the Jewish state was unilaterally declared. Based on international law and the aforementioned treaty with Feisal, it was completely within the bounds of intention. To force the issue, the Jewish state was declared. As have the Arabs done in Trans Jordan. However, the Arab revolt against the Turks, the rise of Arab nationalism, the envy of not being able to establish it's own state as they wished have left many wanting and aroused. Enter into the mix strong beliefs on all sides as to historical claims.

Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish state is not a matter of contention. Not even the agreement that the Mohammedan Holy site in Jerusalem would remain under Mohammedan administration. The Jordan annexation of East Jerusalem and the subsequent expulsion of Jordan administration constitute new realities in an ever ongoing drama to execute the basic agreement between Jews ans Arabs to establish a Jewish national State.

The former high level representation is not a nitty gritty review. Much has taken place as two groups of people acting on their own fears and hopes did stupid things, just to make a point.

So no, based on agreements it has never been, never was a Palestinian issue. Those now called Palestinians were not considered to be a separate nation, but prospected citizens as part of the to be established Jewish state under the provision they would enjoy rights and privileges as mentioned in the agreement with Feisal.

This agreement may also turn out the basis of the current entente between the state of Israel and Saudi-Arabia en the secret cooperation between the two countries of the last 70 years.

Westbank, Gaza were NOT intended as Palestinian homelands. However, deprivation of private property is NOT part of the agreement. But it serves as an impetus for an ongoing rise of feelings of mistreatment and neglect. All parties involved have acted in a way to murky the waters, committed atrocities and violations of human rights.

Basically, by treating not all people equally under law, gives rise to a Gordian knot, not easily untied.

The 1967 "borders" are merely armistice lines in an ongoing battle between warring faction bringing to the table new demands. The growth of population numbers also gives rise to another issue. What to do with those who were born of displaced refugees?

Consider this: a large group of Syrians take up refuge in say Germany, the population of Syrians grows in 70 years and runs in the millions and now start to demand to have their own state within the current borders of Germany .... It is easy to see how this will cause friction and contention. The demands then are supported by acts of war by groups of agitated firm believers, the German national government responds by trying to curb the rise of "terrorism" and what do you get?

Simply read the Versailles Treaty on Alsace Lotharingen. It was conceded to Germany in 1871, although Von Bismark had the foresight to heavily argue against this political move which basically was inspired by greed of several powerful industrialist on the wings of Holy Roman Empire German nationalism. For all intends and purposes, the region had been part of that empire and annexed by France. However, after WO I, it again switched to France in 1919, but is considered to be French as of 1914, again for the same reasons but now from French nationalistic perspective. You can see how the question of what to do with the individual people is a messy affair. The articles are many,and very detailed. And yet, after so much time has passed since, still a contentious issue.

If this is clear for an already established state, what about a state to be established?

It is not an easy subject, and the basic rule that every people has the right to self-determination flies in the face of established status quo.

Interestingly, with regards to Catalonia, the same debate is taking place. And throughout our history of the last 100 years of League of Nations and UN, things have been quite murky. Also, it is not yet clear what a state exactly is, since it comprises several ideas:
- it can comprise of a single nation
- it can comprise multiple nations in a certain territory
- it can fluctuate between the two over time
- it can disappear and reappear.

Some particulars to a state are: government, taxes, money units, police, military, courts, etc. But the question remains whether all particulars of the farthest extend of statehood need apply before a state can be recognized? It is interesting to ponder the definition of statehood and how these have been used and abused, denied and neglected over the last 100 years, effectively abrogating the power of individuals to unite and take their future in their own hands.

And also: ponder what actually United Nations should mean. Currently it is a misnomer as it functions as a Union of States, not a union of nations.

a reply to: Ophiuchus 13



It reads more like a question doesn't it?

Is Ra El?

a reply to: GokuVsSuperman0

I never really understood why Palestine has a claim over east Jerusalem or all of Jerusalem.

Denial of history beyond 70 years ago is why. That and constant repetitive conditioning thru media church and education.

Palestine? Whats that?

a reply to: Willtell

Ancient Jerusalem was part of the land of a people called the Canaanites. IT WAS NOT ALWAYS IN THE POSSEION OF JEWS! The Israelis under David conquered the city and stole it from the Canaanites. Then the Jewish religion didn’t even exist at that time.

All of this (and many other things) happened long long before the invention of Islam.
So I guess if we want to be fair, we should start searching for the original Canaanites descendants.

a reply to: mekhanics

Palestinian was well organized before the Illegal Aliens stole their land!!!!

The whole point is, you can consider those who lived there in 1896 as "Illegal Aliens" who stole this land from someone else.
How long back should we go to find the "legal" owners of Jerusalem?

originally posted by: JimNasium
a reply to: JimNasium

Talmudic Sources Saying that Jews Are Forbidden to Return from Exile on Their Own and Create a State

Tractate Kesubos 111a
The Biblical book Song of Songs says: “I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, by the gazelles or the deer of the field, not to arouse or awaken the love before it is desired.” This oath occurs three times in the Song of Songs (2:7, 3:5 and 8:4). The Talmud interprets this metaphorical language to mean as follows: the speaker here is G-d, and the “daughters of Jerusalem” are the Jewish people and the nations of the world. During the Jewish exile, which began with the destruction of the Temple in the year 69 CE, G-d placed three oaths upon the world, two upon the Jewish people and one upon the nations. The Jewish people were foresworn not to immigrate as a wall (i.e. en masse) to the Holy Land, and not to rebel against the other nations. The nations were foresworn not to afflict the Jews too much.

That passage not withstanding, Israelis/Jews merit a home. As long as Jordan and Syria hold control over land that was 'Palestinian', I see no merit in arguing against Israel. None.