It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Who really had the lands of Jerusalem first?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
d1k

posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 12:01 AM
link   
All the fighting over the past 2000+ years over the lands of Jerusalem, who really "owned" it first? Arabs, Christians, Jews or someone else? And who actually built Jerusalem?

If it was someone else who out of the Arabs and Jews had it first.

I'm ignorant on this subject, I read all the posts here on ATS, I've seen movies on the matter but I have heard no definitive answer on who really had the land first. I always assumed it was Jewish land even before Christ showed up but now seeing the movie Kingdom of Heaven it pretty much stated that it was the Arabs land first.

So whats the real story here?

[edit on 12-6-2006 by d1k]




posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 12:57 AM
link   
Many believe Jerusalem was founded by Eber and Shem who are somehow related to the biblical Abraham, though I'm not sure how. In that regard, I suppose the Jews/Hebrews(?) were first to have claim to that land. But that's speaking strictly from a biblical perspective...

More credible sources indicate the Canaanites inhabited the area centuries before the Israelites had even shown up.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:00 AM
link   
Recently:
In order to purchase land for the resettlement of Jews in their ancient homeland, the Fifth Zionist Congress (1901) created a private charitable organization called the Jewish National Fund (JNF). Before the State of Israel was established in 1948, land purchased by the JNF was not resold but was instead leased out on a long-term basis to create kibbutzim and other forms of Jewish settlement.

After 1948 state-owned lands formerly in the possession of British Mandatory Authorities, together with property abandoned by Arab refugees, passed into the control of the new Israeli government. Some of this land was sold by the government to the JNF, which had developed expertise in reclaiming and developing waste and barren lands and making them productive.

In 1960 under Basic Law: Israel Lands, JNF-owned land and government-owned land were together defined as "Israel lands," and the principle was laid down that such land would be leased rather than sold. The JNF retained ownership of its land, but administrative responsibility for the JNF land, and also for government-owned land, passed to a newly created agency called the Israel Land Administration or ILA.

Of the total land in Israel in 1997, the Israel Government Press Office statistics say 79.5% is owned by the government, 14% is privately owned by the JNF, and the rest, around 6.5%, is evenly divided between private Arab and Jewish owners. Thus, the ILA administers 93.5% of the land in Israel.

------------------
However, before the Jews resettled in Israel, it sill was not an Arab state.

At no time in modern history did the Palestinians have legal control over their land until the creation of the Palestinian Authority in 1994. Now their representatives have control of land ownership in the territories from which Israel has withdrawn; that is, zones A and B (30% of the West Bank and 70% of Gaza). This new power is far from insignificant, considering that control of the land has always been and still remains at the centre of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

From the 16th century on the Palestinians were ruled by others. Up to 1917 they were part of the Ottoman Empire; then Great Britain governed Palestine until 1948, when the State of Israel came into being. The Zionist movement laid the foundations of the state on land purchase which began in the 19th century. The fact that the native Palestinians failed to understand in time what was taking place before their eyes and could not prevent the colonial authorities from putting a stop to such sales was key to the Zionist movement’s success in creating the State of Israel. For the new colonisers who came to power in 1948 were already the owners of at least part of the land.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by firebat
More credible sources indicate the Canaanites inhabited the area centuries before the Israelites had even shown up.


Remember God helped the Israelites conquer and destroy the canaanites when Israel was settled in palestine according to the bible.

now to true christians, it is a well known fact that modern day jews do not represent the nation of israel. In the Old Testament God decided to move the nation of Israel, (captivity) to which Israel would becomne a strong and powerful nation elsewhere.

Modern day jews represnt a small fraction of the nation of Israel (the biblical nation).

some argue that the Jews were never part of Israel except in a bastardized sort of way.

I will say that modern day jews only represent a very small portion of Israel....

where are the rest? well thats hard to say really as there are many theories on this

however it is commonly believed that they were absorbed by the asyrians to the north and thus continued north into europe and russia after their captivity. This is supported by a mix of hebrew anb phoenician headstones in that region and by the scriptures.

there was also tribes in africa and india that have been found as well.....



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 09:38 PM
link   
There is a good book by Pearl S Buck called Peoney about a jewish tribe that settled in China.

This Jewish tribe question is a very good topic to debate, and many of the tribes of Israel have been bred out all over the world. I believe the current nation of Israel is representative of the Old Testiment Israel is because many members of many different tribes have returned to Israel to participate in their government. Furthermore, there are elements of Israel (jewish Israel) that never left the land of Palestine. The book "A New Concise History of the Crusades" covers allot of history about the Jews who remained in Israel throughout the Roman and Ottoman Empires.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Shouldn't the real question be, "who won the last war there?" I mean, if you're wondering about who "owns" that land?



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by d1k
All the fighting over the past 2000+ years over the lands of Jerusalem, who really "owned" it first?


Does it really matter?

Who's there now and why can't they share it?

If you want to apply the principle your post seems premised upon does that mean that you are ready to leave North America and "give it back" to the Native Amerindians?

If you go back far enough in time, lots of people will have to get off the land they are on.

Nobody really "owns" it. We rent it while we are alive and we should tend to it and nuture the gift and get along whith whoever we happen to share the space with.
.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Who had Jerusalem first?

It was ET.

And since Spielberg told us about it, and he is a Jew, I think Jews should have it.



[edit on 13-6-2006 by mr conspiracy]



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gools

Originally posted by d1k
All the fighting over the past 2000+ years over the lands of Jerusalem, who really "owned" it first?





Nobody really "owns" it. We rent it while we are alive and we should tend to it and nuture the gift and get along whith whoever we happen to share the space with.
.


Well...if you were not a mod, I would vote you way above for that statement alone.....



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 07:08 PM
link   
The bible even says that Jerusalem was taken by the Israelites from its native inhabitants. So really, the people who really have a right to live in Israel were wiped out millenia ago by the Israelites.

Interesting that one of the first records of genocide in history comes from the bible, the perps being "gods chosen people".



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Belgium was owned by France, Germany, Holland, the Romans and a whole flurry of other country's and civilizations in its history.

In 1830 we declared independance from the then owner of belgium, holland and became a kingdom.

Why am I saying this?

It doesn't matter who at one or the other time in the past owned the land or lived there.

What does matter is that now, you have 2 people living there that just plain can't stand the sight of eachother.
There are no solutions to the problem other then the complete removal of one of the 2 party's or a global enlightenment where people learn to live together no matter what color, descent or religion they have.

The later is highly unlikely to happen any time soon in Israel (or any other part of the world for that matter) so all thats left is that they finaly stop screwing around over there trying to poke eachothers eyes out with chopsticks and one way or the other come to the decision who stays and who goes.

If need be with all out war, so be it, there seems to be no other way out of this anymore, but thats better then the # thats been going on over there for so damn long.

I can't believe any of the bastards here and anywhere else in the world that think one or the other has more right to be there thinks he or she will ever get into the heaven they are living their lives for. Selfrightious ignorance and blind faith are not the way god and Jesus wanted things to be, they wanted harmony and love for your fellow man, no matter what color or religion.

He gave us morals and free will to make sure that noone would be so retarded that they would wage wars over the Millionth interpretation of whats writen in 2000 year old texts but think for ourselves and decide whats right and wrong for ourselves.

Best of all that is that I'm an atheist to the core which makes it even more rediculous watching how religious groups fight among eachother while the religions they are part of have not only the same roots, but in cases of all the different Christian, Muslim and Jewish factions who also fight and bikker among themselves, eventhough they are all either christians, jewish or muslim, are only different in the interpretation of what was writen by people millenia ago.

Stop the stuppid fighting over religion, the fact you are negates your chance to ever get into heaven. The fact your killing for it and with people not directly involved WILLING TO KILL FOR IT and yeah, I'm talking about all the religious people on here and everywhere else in the world that think its ok for the israelians to kill palestinians and palestinians to kill israeli's over this #, it gives you a straight up 1 way ticket to HELL and thats where you belong if you think a religion gives you the right to kill someone over anything.

[edit on 13/6/06 by thematrix]



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 07:51 PM
link   
If one goes back far enough, you will become aware that the present
area of Palestine in which modern Israel has become the recognized
state.

Was populated with many Neanderthal sites & encampments
across millenia...Israel and Jordan and Iraq have an uncommon
array of sites that were peopled by both Cro-Magnon & Neanderthal
groups that virtually lived as neighbors for several thousands of years

but in historical times, the progenitor of the tribes of Israel actually bought the
threasing floor of a wheat/grain enterprise from the then current
owners who were Cannanite or Palestinian...(kindly research Jewish Traditions)

according to scripture and Jewish mystics (et al)
that threashing floor...in what became Jerusalem-arising from a tiny windswept village...
was eventually the 'foundation stone' for the 1st Temple AKA Solomons' Temple

there is something in the Koran, about the early Israelites & Jews
getting title to that significant piece of land from the owners/inhabitants

this is from the top of my fuzzy memory, so don't quote any of the above on a term paper or thesis you'll someday write



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by St Udio
owners who were Cannanite or Palestinian...(kindly research Jewish Traditions)


The Cannanites were completely wiped out, they are a dead race. The name Palestine wasn't even given to the region until thousands of years later by the Ottoman Empire. Furthermore, the Palestinians (non-jewish inhabitants of palestine) were all nomadic and moved in an out of the region with the cycles of the season. It wasn't until the 17-1800s when Jews started buying the land in bulk, farming it and making it arable that the "Palestinians" started to settle down there permanetly.

Not only that, but any arable land that was being used in the Palestinian region during the reign of the Ottoman empire was being used by a very small group of Turks, Christians and Jews. With the exception of the specifically mentioned Holy cities, Islam had no interest or stake in the region until after Jews started making the land arable.



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 11:10 AM
link   
My understanding of the history of the area is the both the Palestinians and the Jews were nomadic tribes. The origin of the Jews was from the land of Chaldea in modern day Iraq. They wandered, for various reasons, all over the Middle East and since the Romans expelled them they went also to Europe and Africa and East Asia. Because of different political conditions the Palestinians have been able to remain in the area continuously. The modern day Palestinians are decended from the biblical Philistines. Both Jews and Palestinians have inter-married with other local populations other than their own. When you refer to 'ownership' of lands I presume that you are refering to title deeds and such. I don't know too much about the original 'owners' as opposed to residents but the more recent 'owners' were rich European Jews who bought title deeds from rich Turkish feudal overlords . The Palestinians were the workforce and tennant farmers of the rich Turkish landlords who lived elsewhere for the most part. Poor Jews were imported mostly after ww2 to work the land of the rich Jews but some came earlier.



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Animals lived there first. Just like everywhere else. And plants, too. If we REALLY wanted to give it back to the rightful owners, we'd turn it all into a nature preserve.


d1k

posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by money order
My understanding of the history of the area is the both the Palestinians and the Jews were nomadic tribes. The origin of the Jews was from the land of Chaldea in modern day Iraq. They wandered, for various reasons, all over the Middle East and since the Romans expelled them they went also to Europe and Africa and East Asia. Because of different political conditions the Palestinians have been able to remain in the area continuously. The modern day Palestinians are decended from the biblical Philistines. Both Jews and Palestinians have inter-married with other local populations other than their own. When you refer to 'ownership' of lands I presume that you are refering to title deeds and such. I don't know too much about the original 'owners' as opposed to residents but the more recent 'owners' were rich European Jews who bought title deeds from rich Turkish feudal overlords . The Palestinians were the workforce and tennant farmers of the rich Turkish landlords who lived elsewhere for the most part. Poor Jews were imported mostly after ww2 to work the land of the rich Jews but some came earlier.


No, I didn't mean actual deeds and such. Your post pretty much answered my question if it is correct. Thanks.



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Also there have been tribes and occupiers other than the Palestinians and Jews who lived and live in the area such as Bedouin, Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Phoenician, Turkish, Assyrians, Arabs and many others who passed through. The original kingdom of Israel and Judea was established about 1,000 BC and lasted for about 200 years. Even though most Jews were expelled from the area by the Romans just after the death of Jesus (because they were cranky with them because they had rebelled against the Romans) there were still a few Jewish families who returned to live there. When Turkey lost the First world war their empire was divided between Britain and France. France had the Lebanon and Britain had Egypt and Palestine. In the lead up to the second world war Britain made deals with the local Palestinians promising them independence after the war if they supported them (or at least did not oppose them) against Germany. Access to middle eastern oil was neccesary even then for both sides. Germany had the Romanian oil fields. However, Britain also made a promise that there would be a Jewish homeland established in the same area (Balfour Declaration) to Zionist Jews. Zionism was a political movement concerned with establishing a Jewish homeland. Palestine was not the only place considered. Other places seriously considered for settlement were in Africa (Uganda), in the Kimberly region in Australia and the Patagonia region in Argentina as well as other places.



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Thank you Seifist for your explanation of the jewish state. Some people just don't want to see around the fact that there never was a "Palestine". The state never existed, but was called that by the ottomons to give name to a province of their empire. Now whether or not that just because they were not actually a country it is ok to move them out for the settlements that would become Israel is questionable. In history Israel was settled by jews as the promis land, then from them rose christianity, and also from them rose Islam. Islam was founded thousands of years after the jews founded their religion, so should muslims have rites to lands such of the dom of the rock over temple mount? Not many would agree that we should destroy the mousqe and rebuild a temple there, so why is it logical to say that we should move an entire population again, to give back to arabs? In my opinion, though it is only an opinion the jews hold the rites to this land more so then anyone else, they ahve continuously lived there for thousands of years, even when christians and muslims desicrated their city, they still lived there. Now the deispora of jews finally are together and have a place to call their own after thousands of years of being a scapecoat for anything that goes wrong, murdered, brutalized for no reason, having their religion outlawed, anti semitsm, and of course the holocaust. If anyone deserved to have their own nation I would have to say it is these people. But that is only my opinion, people differ greatly on this topic.



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 12:31 PM
link   
I agree that Jews should have a home of their own but you do not solve homelessness by taking someone elses home away from them. I am sure that the Armenians and the Kurds would like their own state also. Where will Gypsies live? The indigenous americans probably have something to say about the new arrivals from Britain, Spain, France and Portugal. At the end of the day we live on one planet and need to live to together in harmony. The nation state is going the way of the feudal state.



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gools

Originally posted by d1k
All the fighting over the past 2000+ years over the lands of Jerusalem, who really "owned" it first?


If you want to apply the principle your post seems premised upon does that mean that you are ready to leave North America and "give it back" to the Native Amerindians?


But this is not a true reflection of the matter in Israel.

It would be like the Indian Populations demanding Statehood, aside the U.S. of A.

Maybe a Natural Border like the Mississippi, would be the Deviding Line.

Everything East, would be the Whiteman's and everything West, would belong to the Original Inhabitants.

Oh, and they need to have a Portion of D.C. for their Capitol.

As for who should it be given to?

It belongs to those who "Tend" is, as in a Stewardship of the Land. Those that make it a productive, viable and useful are the one's who care for it, so it should be titled to those parties.

At all times, in the Ancient Past, Israel has been an area, that sustained habitation, and nutured peoples. Except of course, during the timeframe running from around 70AD till 1948. During this period, those habitating this region ignored and abused the land. They should be embarased by their efforts to look after something, they now claim as their own.

The Phonicians had it. The Assyria controled parts of it. The Cainanites lived there.
Despite the Outcome of events, these peoples did a Good enough Job to make it the Land of Milk and Honey.

2000 Years of Arab squatting, and it's a wasteland.

50 - 60 years of the return of Israel, and it once again, is blossoming, "Like a Rose".

Who deserves it?? Phonicians are long Dead. The Assyrians still hold their own lands, and the Cananites are lost, due to extinction or "Blending" into Israel when they conquered it.

So the Last One's who actually gave a crap that inhabited the Area, should be given complete title outright.

As for who own's the Land, of course, it is God's. Who did he give it to? I think that was also noted previously.

Just my view, but I know it's not perfect. I know Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Lebenon would not like to absorb BACK, those squatting in the West Bank and Gaza Strip today.



Originally posted by SkaditheEvilElf
Interesting that one of the first records of genocide in history comes from the bible, the perps being "gods chosen people".


I think the first, could be look upon as the Flood, since it wiped clean a majority of the "known world". This of course was due to the Worship of the Fallen and the Intermingling of the Fallen with the Daugthers of man. Everyone from Noah's area was drowned outright, along with a majority of the Nephilium.

I would think the second, maybe considered by the event that occured in Sodom and it's 'Brother' City. This of course was due to the Sexual Appetites and Immoral Practises of those that inhabited those cities.

The Conquest of Israel Proper, was a continuation of a cleansing. What is it the Spies of Israel returned to advise Aron and Moses they found? Giants in a Baal Worshipping society. Obviously, as noted in Genesis 6, this area did not get flooded to the point these "Things" (for lack of a better term) did not get taken, but survived. This is just cleaning up leftovers.



: Originally posted by seifist
The name Palestine wasn't even given to the region until thousands of years later by the Ottoman Empire. Furthermore, the Palestinians (non-jewish inhabitants of palestine) were all nomadic and moved in an out of the region with the cycles of the season.


Actually, Palestine is the Romanized Slanderous Name to the Region, who's origin comes from the bastardiztion of the Philistines, who where Israel's most difficult opposition in the Field of Battle.

A Clerk or Researcher of Rome, was asked who fought Israel the hardest in the Past, and Philistinia, I think was the remark. Since it's inception, Palestine has always refered to the Jewish or Israeli.

We can thank the All Mighty, U.N. (yes the United Nations) for spinning Palestine into a term with a new meaning. First, in the 50's, they noted the Arabs as being the Palestine Refugees, and this has now become just the Palestinians, whoring the Slanderous Name given in 70AD to refer to the Jewish or Israelis to now be applied to a completely different population. That cheeky Roman who choose Philistinia is likely rolling around in his grave today.


And the Following site maybe a bit blunt about the topic, but it reflects FACTS alone.
www.masada2000.org...

Of course, those who are sympathetic to the Arabs Sqatters, may find it unsavoury.


Ciao

Shane



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join