Holy Land and the Jews

[beerisit]

It's been provided. The DNA

Who's DNA? Abraham's? Really?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Who's DNA? Abraham's? Really?

Their DNA proves the Levantine ancestry of the Jews. Don't please don't be a nitpicking **** ant.

 

[JacobEzra.]

Why are you lying to us?

Hahahaha Maybe he just doesn't know what he is talking about?

 

[arthra]

A Robert Stockman suggested that mathematically you could say the following on the descent from Abraham:

Everyone has 2 parents, 4 grandparents, 8 great grandparents, etc.; how many ancestors does one have 3,700 years earlier? If one assumes 3 generations per century, that's 37 x 3 = 111 generations:

# generations ago # ancestors
1 2
2 4
3 8
4 16
5 32
6 64
7 128
8 256
9 512
10 1024 (now I'm going
to round down a bit)
20 1 million (it's
actually 1024 times 1024)
30 1 billion (=1000
years ago)
40 1 trillion
50 1 quadrillion
110
1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
111
2,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

As you can see I have simplified to make the calculation easier; 1024 times 1024 is not 1,000,000, but 1,048,576. But the smaller number still makes my point:

that after 1,000 years, one's ancestors is already equal to the total human population of the earth (which was less than a billion, 1,000 years ago). After 111 generations one's ancestors number almost a billion billion billion times MORE than the total human population.

CONCLUSION: Everyone in nineteenth century Iran is very likely descended from Abraham. For that matter, all modern Iranians are descended from Him, as is everyone in the Middle East (unless they just migrated there from an isolated aboriginal reserve in Australia, or some other very remote population that was isolated from the rest of humanity until a hundred years ago).
That's another reason I say the genealogy is probably symbolically important, not materially important.

 

[beerisit]

A Robert Stockman suggested that mathematically you could say the following on the descent from Abraham:

Everyone has 2 parents, 4 grandparents, 8 great grandparents, etc.; how many ancestors does one have 3,700 years earlier? If one assumes 3 generations per century, that's 37 x 3 = 111 generations:

# generations ago # ancestors
1 2
2 4
3 8
4 16
5 32
6 64
7 128
8 256
9 512
10 1024 (now I'm going
to round down a bit)
20 1 million (it's
actually 1024 times 1024)
30 1 billion (=1000
years ago)
40 1 trillion
50 1 quadrillion
110
1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
111
2,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

As you can see I have simplified to make the calculation easier; 1024 times 1024 is not 1,000,000, but 1,048,576. But the smaller number still makes my point:

that after 1,000 years, one's ancestors is already equal to the total human population of the earth (which was less than a billion, 1,000 years ago). After 111 generations one's ancestors number almost a billion billion billion times MORE than the total human population.

CONCLUSION: Everyone in nineteenth century Iran is very likely descended from Abraham. For that matter, all modern Iranians are descended from Him, as is everyone in the Middle East (unless they just migrated there from an isolated aboriginal reserve in Australia, or some other very remote population that was isolated from the rest of humanity until a hundred years ago).
That's another reason I say the genealogy is probably symbolically important, not materially important.

I didn't see Abraham's DNA mentioned, or in fact any evidence (other than ONE book written? a long time after he supposedly existed) so maybe you could try again? I don't know?

 

[Poisonshady313]

Defend and then expand right? :sleep:

The Israelis didn't ask the Palestinians to flee their homes so that the Arab armies could come in, destroy Israel, and have the Palestinians move back after the Arabs won. The Arabs did. They didn't expect Israel to win.

And when Israel won, it offered to let the Palestinians back into their homes, on the condition that they do so peacefully. The Palestinians refused. And for a while, Israel was forbidden by its own government to annex the land, because there was a chance that the Palestinians would change their mind.

I am not sure why couldn't just answer with a: No i don't belief there is such verse.

Because there is no right way to answer a loaded question except to point out that it's a loaded question.

I also said you can name it whatever you want twice just name it ''The Establishment of Israel'' is that justified in the Torah?

There might not be a verse to explicitly say anything one way or the other... that doesn't mean that the establishment of Israel was unjust.

 

[arthra]

I didn't see Abraham's DNA mentioned, or in fact any evidence (other than ONE book written? a long time after he supposedly existed) so maybe you could try again? I don't know?

No I wasn't addressing your need for DNA, and I'm not really trying to coinvince you either...!

 

[beerisit]

Their DNA proves the Levantine ancestry of the Jews. Don't please don't be a nitpicking **** ant.

Cyn (if I may call you that) there are people in this thread and another who are claiming the right to occupy Palestine/Israel by virtue of their genetic link to a character mentioned in two books, one written hundreds of years after his alleged life and another written thousands of years after. Since there isn't even any evidence of this characters existence such claims are as valid as me claiming to be the son of spiderman. Both sides need to learn what there respective god's allegedly teach and try to get along with other people. Just my 2cts worth.Rant over:thud:

 

[beerisit]

No I wasn't addressing your need for DNA, and I'm not really trying to coinvince you either...!

See post# 148

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The Israelis didn't ask the Palestinians to flee their homes so that the Arab armies could come in, destroy Israel, and have the Palestinians move back after the Arabs won. The Arabs did. They didn't expect Israel to win.

The truth is far, far less one-sided and attractive. You may wish to avail yourself of a more honest narrative.

The myth of blameless Israeli vs. evil Arab is as baseless as it is naive and harmful.

 

[Poisonshady313]

The truth is far, far less one-sided and attractive. You may wish to avail yourself of a more honest narrative.

The myth of blameless Israeli vs. evil Arab is as baseless as it is naive and harmful.

I haven't taken that position, Jay. I've never claimed that israel is blameless. In the course of struggle and hostilities, I know that Israel took over a few towns, killed a few people, did some bad things... But I also know that the Arab armies told the Palestinians to leave so they wouldn't be in the way when those armies rolled in to take out Israel.

The myth of blameless Arab vs evil Israeli is also baseless, naïve and harmful.

Just because I'm arguing against that myth doesn't mean I'm taking the polar opposite position.

It wouldn't hurt you to not jump to conclusions. Not everybody is dishonest, naïve, and one-sided just because you think they might be.

Insulting someone for having a view they don't have is bad form. You're smarter than that, Jay.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I haven't taken that position, Jay. I've never claimed that israel is blameless. In the course of struggle and hostilities, I know that Israel took over a few towns, killed a few people, did some bad things... But ...

The Israelis didn't ask the Palestinians to flee their homes so that the Arab armies could come in, destroy Israel, and have the Palestinians move back after the Arabs won. The Arabs did. ... And when Israel won, it offered to let the Palestinians back into their homes, on the condition that they do so peacefully. The Palestinians refused.

A couple of options:

• Non-fiction:
  A History of Israel: From the Rise of Zionism to Our Time ​
• Fiction:
  Lemon Tree: An Arab, a Jew, and the Heart of the Middle East ​

Read them (or at least the first one) and let me know what you think.

 

[Shermana]

The truth is far, far less one-sided and attractive. You may wish to avail yourself of a more honest narrative.

The myth of blameless Israeli vs. evil Arab is as baseless as it is naive and harmful.

Perhaps you'd like to explain specifically, in detail where Poisonshady was wrong exactly on the issue of the Arabs "fleeing" in 1948 rather than just making generalities?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Cyn (if I may call you that) there are people in this thread and another who are claiming the right to occupy Palestine/Israel by virtue of their genetic link to a character mentioned in two books, one written hundreds of years after his alleged life and another written thousands of years after. Since there isn't even any evidence of this characters existence such claims are as valid as me claiming to be the son of spiderman. Both sides need to learn what there respective god's allegedly teach and try to get along with other people. Just my 2cts worth.Rant over:thud:

No you may not call me Cyn. The OP said that the Jews weren't Semites. I gave proof they were. If you can't keep up with what is going on in a thread perhaps it is best if you keep out of a thread.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Perhaps you'd like to explain specifically, ...

I'll be more than happy to discuss the history with him. Thanks for your concern.

 

[Shermana]

I'll be more than happy to discuss the history with him. Thanks for your concern.

Why discuss it with just him? You publicly disagreed with his public assessment of the 1948 "Arab exodus" with what was a condescending "nuh uh". You made a comment, and I'm asking you to publicly clarify. The Arabs mostly fled on their own leader's authorization and their own initiative, you took the focus on the specifics to some attack on him for having a "naive" view of Israel's history. Things like that make one wonder if you forgot to study basic history in all that time reading Finkelstein.

 

[Shermana]

WHY DID THE ARABS FLEE IN 1948?

The Arab commanders were the ones mostly responsible for the Arab Exodus of 1948, to say otherwise is not having an 'Honest narrative" in the slightest.

1948 War aim of Arab armies

The 1948 war aim of the six Arab armies was broadcast in advance and was certainly well known to the small Jewish community in Israel. Israelis already understood from the German example that genocide was a realizable objective. Many had been rescued from the death camps of Europe by the advancing allies.

Now, from the day of its birth, the new state of Israel faced a coalition of Arab nations which lusted for a walkover of killing, looting and rapine. Against Jews who had no army, no military culture for over 2,000 years. Extermination was to be the Arab punishment for having the temerity to declare their statehood following a legally approved UN resolution.

"Like the Mongolian massacres"

Azam Pasha, Arab League Secretary General, proudly proclaimed the war aim of the Arabs, May 15, 1948. (Quoted in "New Dimensions" Jan. '91)

"This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the crusades."

(For additional relevant quotes see numbers 1 and 2 in Appendix below.)

The Arab threats were genuine enough to instill fear. So why didn't the 650,000 Jews of the newborn state of Israel flee? By sea. By air. Why didn't they hide in the hills, forests and caves? Why did they gird their loins to fight the invaders against overwhelming odds?

Arab leaders command them to get out

The second reason for the flight of the Arabs was the call by their leaders to get out and allow their armies to make short shrift of the Jews. This however, is still strongly denied by the Palestinians.

To admit they fled voluntarily would have brought into question their attachment to Palestine. It would also have hurt their international strategy since they wanted to be seen as victims of Israel, not of the mistakes of their leaders.

Abu Mazen tells why Arabs fled

Nevertheless, the historical record is replete with numerous references attesting the truth. Here is one from the then PLO Spokesman Mahmud Abbas (Abu Mazen) Falastin aThaura, (March 1976).

"The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but, instead, they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live."

(Additional relevant quotes are given in the Appendix below. See numbers 3 to 5.)

Why didn't the Jews flee?

After 2,000 years of exile the Jews had returned home. Despite vicissitudes their nationhood and attachment to their homeland was intact. They were determined to hold on to their nascent state, achieved at such dear cost in lives.

The Arabs fled because, unlike the Jews, they had no genuine attachment to the land. Most had entered as work seekers and were now returning to the bosom of their compatriots in the surrounding Arab countries.​

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Why discuss it with just him?

Because I know that discussing it with you is worthless.

 

[Shermana]

Because I know that discussing it with you is worthless.

Your opinions are worthless, so you're right. Also, you wouldn't be able to control yourself from resorting to nothing but insults when you are requested to actually substantiate your claims. It's as if you think so highly of your own opinions that you feel insulted to even be questioned about them when you make statements on a public form. Such an attitude renders one's worthless opinions even more worthless, and I appreciate you demonstrating this. If you're not prepared to defend your own claims, being on a debate forum is worthless.

Clearly, your understanding of even recent 20th century history is weak, it's as if you only read Finkelstein when it comes to Israeli history. Why don't you just be honest for a change and admit that your own attempt to condescendingly deny what Poisonshady said (which is otherwise correct and backed as I presented in the article) is just a smokescreen to cover your own blatant ignorance, dishonesty, and bias on the Subject that you try to project onto others who dare disagree with you or question? That would be a step in the right direction.

Now if anyone else would like to address the actual specifics such as in the article I posted above about the Arab commanders being responsible for the Exodus, that'd be great.

Otherwise, feel free to insult away instead of actually replying anything remotely worthy.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Things like that make one wonder if you forgot to study basic history in all that time reading Finkelstein.

Clearly, your understanding of even recent 20th century history is weak, it's as if you only read Finkelstein when it comes to Israeli history.

There's nothing quite so silly as being Finkelstein-bated by a self-styled Old-Israelite Nazarene.