Jesus was 'Palestinian messenger,' role model

Merry Christmas to all.

Listen to Jesus Christ,
and superposed it in what your leaders commands.

 

Muslims have similar beliefs as Christians do when it comes to god and jesus as both religions evolved from the same base religion

http://www.islam-guide.com/ch3-10.htm


.

 

This thread was just a pretense for someone who hates not just Israelis but all Jews to repeat her message using the cover of Jesus and Christmas to do it.

She summarizes everything wrong with people-a need to use religion as a cover to engage in the expression of hatred.

Jesus was born in the land of Canaan or Judea. Trying to revise history to call it Palestine is pointless.

Jesus was not a Palestinian. That is a word that came from the Greeks and Romans. That is not what the natives called this area. They referred to it as Canaan and then Judea and Somaria.

You want to exploit and misappropriate the Christian religion for use as a weapon against Israel on Christmas day, knock yourself out.

To some of us its just another day of hatred and we stand on guard at our posts as we have for thousands of years.

The war and conflicts will not end as long as people such as the originator of this thread use religion as a weapon.

For those of you who want to join in on her hate fest on Christmas go ahead and do try not to choke on your ham or turkey or whatever with your words of righteousness.

 

The ridiculous beginning of your link debunks the whole article.

Read its beginning:

"The prevailing opinion today is that the Israelites, who eventually evolved into modern Jews and Samaritans,"

I will ask, how in the world the Israelites (which is the name given to the twelve tribes, according to the twelve sons of Jacob who's name was changed by "Israel") "evolved" (ha ha ha) into modern Jews...and Samaritans?

I have no idea about the intentions of the author of such article, but surely this individual or is an ignorant, or an evolutionist fanatic, or just an out of touch with reality person.

There is not a single scientific, neither social clue of such a process of Israelites "evolving" into Jews. Get out of here.

The DNA samples must be compared to the historical moments described in the Bible, which is the best history book relating with complete accuracy the life and confrontations of the Isrealites in the FORMER land of Canaan.

Every time we see that enemies conquered the kingdom of Israel or the kingdom of Judea (The whole kingdom of Israel was divided by two by internal affairs after the death of Salomon, called "taxation without representation") then we know that the Isrealite women were raped. This is a corollary in any ancient war. There you have the "mixing" of the blood of Israelites with the blood of other peoples. Not every woman was raped, but surely lots of them were raped and ended having children from that war consequence. To obtain a DNA result having such mixture is not because Israelites were descendants of other peoples but that that mixing of blood happened in some occasions by certain circumstances.

I can tell that the DNA solely can give you the geographical data, but DNA can't give you chronological data by any means. Only the ignorant and fanatics are pushing the idea that you can reconstruct history by using DNA samples... such is a complete nonsense.

The article in the link, even when it sounds "scientific", is nothing but garbage to the square by the stupid arguments and conclusions found in it. Such a link is at the same level of the first message in this thread, saying that Jesus was a Palestinian messenger... the work of people with an agenda of hatred, revenge, anything but the truth.

 

Well said , but one cant ignore the fact that Zionist Jews have + are going to extreme lengths and great expense by funding and carrying out such elaborate reports in order to support/justify their political agenda in Palestine.

I'm sure you're of the difference between politics and truth. (wink)


The first post reads " Jesus was 'Palestinian messenger,' role model


The land was a province of the Roman Empire - and was known as "Palestina "

Under Roman Law 2,000 years ago, all Roman citizens in Palestine were subject to the protection and process of Pontius Pilate, while non-Roman citizens were under the Jewish civil and religious courts.

It sounds to me that , Jesus ,had to be brought before Pilate, by law. If he was not Roman citizen then he'd have been subject to Jewish law., the Sadducee High Priests could have had him killed any day of the week.

===

wiki says :

"the name Palestine, and cognates such as Filastin and Palaestina, through the various time periods of the region.

The term Peleset (transliterated from hieroglyphs as P-r-s-t) is found in numerous Egyptian documents referring to a neighboring people or land starting from c.1150 BCE during the Twentieth dynasty of Egypt.

The first mention is thought to be in texts of the temple at Medinet Habu which record a people called the Peleset among the Sea Peoples who invaded Egypt in Ramesses III's reign,[1] and subsequently on Padiiset's Statue.

The Assyrians called the same region Palashtu or Pilistu, beginning with Adad-nirari III in the Nimrud Slab in c.800 BCE through to emperor Sargon II in his Annals approximately a century later.[ Neither the Egyptian nor the Assyrian sources provided clear regional boundaries for the term.

The first clear use of the term Palestine to refer to the entire area between Phoenicia and Egypt was in 5th century BC Ancient Greece. Herodotus wrote of a 'district of Syria, called Palaistinê" in The Histories, the first historical work clearly defining the region, which included the Judean mountains and the Jordan Rift Valley

] Approximately a century later, Aristotle used a similar definition in Meteorology, writing "Again if, as is fabled, there is a lake in Palestine, such that if you bind a man or beast and throw it in it floats and does not sink, this would bear out what we have said. They say that this lake is so bitter and salt that no fish live in it and that if you soak clothes in it and shake them it cleans them," understood by scholars to be a reference to the Dead Sea.[13]

Later writers such as Polemon and Pausanias also used the term to refer to the same region. This usage was followed by Roman writers such as Ovid, Tibullus, Pomponius Mela, Pliny the Elder, Dio Chrysostom, Statius, Plutarch as well as Roman Judean writers Philo of Alexandria and Josephus Other writers, such as Strabo, a prominent Roman-era geographer (although he wrote in Greek), referred to the region as Coele-Syria ("all Syria") around 10-20 CE]

[Biblical scholars often trace the Hebrew name Peleshet (פלשת Pəlésheth), from the Semitic root p-l-sh (Hebrew: פלש&#8206

----

 

Two choices: Support the Muslim cause and become part of the Islamist plan to destroy Israel or revert to their Christian roots and face Muslim wrath.

 

Sorry, but this sounds like a very angry, hateful comment to me!

 

Well, we have posters who've called Hitler a great guy, some from the UK stating they fought on the wrong side of WWII, another who said the wrong Jews got killed, someone who said we dropped nuclear bombs on Egypt and that Obama is a Neo-Con. Welcome to PF.com!

 

Thanks. . .but I think I've been here longer than you. . . so I do know about the incongruities of PF!

And, it is not because there are LOTS of extreme, stupid comments, that one with a more balanced view can't express an opinion, is it?

 

I liked your post but can you quit hogging the caps, us others need them to start our sentences with.

 

Except that a few years previous to this the Romans had taken away from Jewish courts the death penalty. This is even mentioned in the Talmud as well as John 18:31 - "Pilate said, "Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law." "But we have no right to execute anyone," they objected." So the only way they could execute him is by appealing to Pilate to declare He was inciting sedition against the Roman Empire, something the Romans would happily execute anyone for. Nice try.

 

Too bad the Palestinians spit on the memory of Jesus, by committing acts of violence and forcing out Christians.

 

It was written not only without using caps lock, but also without a single comma - like Old Testament in hebrew was.

 

OMG that would suck! When the Rabbi would read from the OT he would be yelling at everybody in caps lock.

But they would all be thankful of course as they were Jews and, home in what is now Israel, their ancestral home from time immemorial.

 

He wouldn't, just because there are no letter case in hebrew.

 

Oh, sorry, I see what I missed. So rather than yelling it would be run on Yiddish.

 

That's alright, you took the first and most important step already - admitting you are ignorant to Israeli/Jewish history,

Start here: if you have any questions about any phase in the below diagram - please ask and you shall be answered.

 

Stop being ridiculous. If 'God' exiles Jews from their country he clearly was showing they were not his chosen ones

If 'God' allowed Jews to be persecuted in the West, they clearly were not his chosen people.

If 'God' allowed them to be the people in largest numbers killed in the holocaust, they clearly were not his chosen people.

If 'God' allowed them to take over the land of Palestine by force and continue to take the land by force....then they certainly are not his chosen people because he promised dire consequences for any who should do such.

 

Nothing is ever as simple as some people believe it to be , especially in biblical "history". All information indicates that the Pharisees /Sadducees wanted Jesus dead.

I found the following article most interesting :.

In the time of Christ, the social milieu included super-legalistic Pharisees, power-hungry Sadducees, favor-seeking Herodians, Jewish priests, and Roman rulers maintaining a precarious order. In all of their history together, these groups may have agreed on only one thing: Jesus had to die.



The Pharisees valued religion. They studied, memorized, and debated the Law of Moses, and when that wasn't enough, they added more laws. Their middle-class position situated them close to the people, but their legalism put them in conflict with Jesus. They heard Jesus clearly saying (in a culturally understood way) that He was God and the Son of God. They might have dismissed Jesus as a madman except those who had been burdened by their teachings were now finding freedom in Jesus (Matthew 11:2.

In addition, Jesus taught that the Pharisees were hypocrites and false teachers (Matthew 23:11). Jesus was a threat to the Pharisees' beliefs, social position, and power—but they were unable to kill Him outright. Although the Jews could execute someone for religious reasons (see Stephen's stoning in Acts 7),

if the Pharisees had personally killed Jesus, they would have faced an angry populace and lost even more influence (Luke 20:19).

Unable to get rid of Jesus themselves, the Pharisees had to find political justification for an execution. Then Rome could do the dirty work.

The middle men between the Jews and the Romans were the Sadducees. Sadducees were upper class. They held the majority of the positions in the Sanhedrin and the most political power. They were also Hellenists, which means they welcomed the influence of Greek culture and philosophy.

But because the Pharisees were so influential among the people, the Sadducees often had to bow to the will of the Pharisees in the Sanhedrin.

It was simple for the Pharisees to convince the Sadducees that, if Jesus were allowed to live, He would inspire a revolt and bring the wrath of Rome on all of Israel. As much as the Sadducees longed for the day when they could rule without foreign interference, they knew that any revolt had to be absolutely successful or Israel would be destroyed (as it was in A.D. 70).

Meanwhile, the Roman rulers in Palestine were charged with keeping the peace. If violence erupted (which it did occasionally), Caesar would come down hard on both the Jews and the appointed Roman leaders.

The Pharisees lit the fire. They pounced on the fact that the people of Jerusalem called Jesus a king during the triumphal entry (Luke 19:2. The Pharisees, with the Sadducees on their side, began to accuse Jesus of plotting to overthrow Rome, as if He were a rabble-rouser of the first degree. Ironically, this is probably the exact opposite reason that Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus (Mark 14:10).

It's likely that Judas was hoping for the overthrow of Rome, and when he realized that Jesus was not interested in a political coup, he became treacherously disillusioned.

The Jewish leaders took their trumped-up charge against Jesus to the Roman ruler Pilate. Pilate knew the allegations were bogus, but he couldn't control the crowd—a crowd that was incited to clamor for Jesus' death (Mark 15:11). Fear became a strong motivation for Pilate. If the people rioted, Rome would declare him an ineffective leader and he'd be ruined politically.

So, the Pharisees wanted Jesus dead because He pointed out their sin and undermined their influence. Judas wanted Jesus dead because He was not the political champion Judas had hoped.

The Sadducees wanted Jesus dead to ensure the stability of their political position. Pilate didn't want Jesus dead, but he feared a riot. God used all of this to get His Son to the cross to die for our sins. Ultimately, it wasn't Jews or Romans or Pilate or Judas who put Jesus on the cross; it was greed, fear, jealousy and selfishness. Jesus died because of sin and through His death justified us and saved us from God's wrath (Romans 5:9). "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree'" (Galatians 3:13).

Read more: http://www.compellingtruth.org/why-did-Jesus-have-to-die.html#ixzz2oaALWmMm

quote :

"I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the Synagogue of Satan." mn Revelation 2:9


And also :

Of the best-known prophecies in the Hebrew Scriptures concerning the death of Messiah, Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53 certainly stand out. Psalm 22 is especially amazing since it predicted numerous separate elements about Jesus’ crucifixion a thousand years before Jesus was crucified. Here are some examples. Messiah will have His hands and His feet “pierced” through (Psalm 22:16; John 20:25). The Messiah’s bones will not be broken (a person’s legs were usually broken after being crucified to speed up their death) (Psalm 22:17; John 19:33). Men will cast lots for Messiah’s clothing (Psalm 22:18; Matthew 27:35).

Isaiah 53, the classic messianic prophecy known as the “Suffering Servant” prophecy, also details the death of Messiah for the sins of His people. More than 700 years before Jesus was even born,

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/death-resurrection-Messiah.html#ixzz2oaDxEmmh

http://www.gotquestions.org/death-resurrection-Messiah.html

-------

I'm not a believer - wouldn't swear to any of it , , just pointing out biblical stories are far more complex than some believe it to be . (wink)

 

Support their own homeland which they have always done with their neigbours.

http://www.kairospalestine.ps/

Israel originally thought the Christian's would turn their backs on the Muslims and her battle would be only against them. This did not happen. Perhaps the greatest unity between Muslims and Christians in the ME is in Palestine.

Unfortunately Christians outside Palestine have been slow to come forth and protect their people and ancient sites and rights of worship.

http://www.churchofscotland.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/14050/The_Inheritance_of_Abraham.pdf

Now if you want to look further you will find a long line of killings and violence against Christians from Israel sometimes claimed to be by extremists but often according to Palestinian Christian's with the full knowledge of leading politicians.

Palestine is not a war of religions but one of colonisation.

 

Pure Islamic Dawa propaganda, Islam denies everything that Christians believe about Jesus IE they deny the trinity, they deny his divinity, and they deny the crucifixion, it would be like saying that I believe in Mohammad and the Koran except that Mohammad was not the final prophet and the Koran is not the direct and perfect word of god through the archangel Gabriel.

 

No it doesn't in the slightest your commentary makes absolutely no sense.

The same way that Canaanites are the ancestors of the Israelites who adopted monotheism, the bible is a fictional narrative.

The beginning article is not about genetic evolution it is about the cultural evolution of the indigenous inhabitants of the Levant IE from Pagan Canaanites to the monotheistic Israelites which all archaeological and genetic testing shows are one in the same peoples.

Except for the archaeological and genetic record.

Abject nonsense, the bible is a work of fiction not a history book.

There is always going to be genetic admixture due to interbreeding with surrounding populations but that in no way negates the fact that the overwhelming majority of modern Jews can trace their lineage directly to the neolithic Levant.

Only a delusional religious nut job would believe that the bible is a literal historical document.

Yes we know the numerous peer reviewed scientific studies all pointing to the Levantine neolithic origins of the vast majority of modern Jews is all garbage in the minds of the indoctrinated Khazar conspiracy theorists.

 

they believe in the virgin birth of Jesus, they believe in the crucifixion, they just say god made another to look like Jesus and Jesus himself was never crucified

 

A) The Amarna Tablets do not contain even the root cuneiform word for Palestine or Palestinians because that word referred to the Philistines who did not enter the Levant until more than a century after they were written.

B) The term Palestine was not actually used until Herodotus in the 5th century.

C) The root word for the term Palestine did not refer to the Canaanites who are the ancestors of the Israelites.

D) The Philistines were not Arab, Arabs did not make it to the Levant until less than 2 thousand years ago with the Islamic conquests.

The 5th century BC is long after the establishment of Israel and Judea the two Israelite kingdoms, and referred not to the lands of modern day Israel but rather to a single district of Syria called Philistia IE the lands of the Israelites sworn enemies not the lands of the Northern or Southern Kingdom of the Jews IE not the entire lands between Phoenicia and Egypt and; furthermore, genetic testing proves conclusively that Arabs who call themselves Palestinians are not the descendants of the Phillistines but rather did not leave the Arabian Peninsula until the Islamic conquests within the last 2 thousand years.