• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Isreal VS Palestine: Who AreThe Biblical Land Owners?

C

CaliNORML

Active member
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
250
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Abraham is the father of both Jewish and Muslim religous leaders, leaving the legacy of the war we see today from God's promise that ALL his decendants would multiply upon the land which they have. Now they are fighting over it.
How then is it that Christians would chose to back the Jewish son's promise from God but not that of the first born son and his rights to be as prosperous as Abrahams other son?
Dismissing one part of a promise seems that the whole promise is then baseless unless it is taken in it's entire form.

KMS
 
View attachment 1380
~My Kingdom is NOT of this World.~ Jesus
 

Attachments

  • egyptian_empire_1450_bc.webp
    56.2 KB · Views: 5
  • Greek_Empire.gif
    4.8 KB · Views: 4

Good point.Could it have anything to do with the immense power that the jews have throughout the world which is totally disproportionate to their size as a people?
 
Gottos said:
Good point.Could it have anything to do with the immense power that the jews have throughout the world which is totally disproportionate to their size as a people?
Click to expand...



The State of Israel was established by David Rockefeller--not a Jew.

David is the heir to the Standard Oil Monopoly which controls the most of the world's Oil Supplies through a corporate conglomeration (aka Seven Sisters).

David also makes money on interest payments for loans on weapons.

He is a war profiteer.

Lots of Jews work for him: Kissinger, Wolfowitz (World Bank), Larry Silverstein (WTC complex) to name a few.

He uses the Jews to do his dirty work because they often have no allegiance to the greater population and it gives the illusion of a "Jewish Conspiracy."

Its tough to get White folks to destroy their own Nations---- except the Bush family of course.

Rockefller Musuem: Israel
 
Last edited:


I disagree.According to my research the Rockefellers are of Jewish extraction.
But that is not the issue.If you care to do a little research yourself you will come to the inescapable conclusion that Jews are over-represented on the boards of multi-national companies,newspapers,radio and TV stations,in education,law firms,politics and just about anything that can mould,shape and direct "public opinion". Are you saying that is NOT the case?
 


Sorry friend...Rockefellers are German.

The symbol for Chase Bank is the Swastika.....Bush (German) are one of their families closest allies.

Skull and Bones (Order of Death) at Yale is a Germanic Order and does not allow Jews as members.
 

Attachments

  • chase.webp
    10 KB · Views: 8
  • rockefeller.webp
    13.5 KB · Views: 3
  • 05E-12-19-04-rockefeller-rothschild-hitler.webp
    8.2 KB · Views: 7
  • davidRtedturner.webp
    7.7 KB · Views: 2
From both an Islamic and Jewish viewpoint there is absolutely nothing wrong the Holy Land being a Jewish state.

First, and the most obvious viewpoint, the Torah states that the land of Israel belongs to the Jews:

Then the LORD said to him, "This is the land I promised on oath to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob when I said, 'I will give it to your descendants.' I have let you see it with your eyes, but you will not cross over into it."
Deuteronomy 34:4

However, the Quran also states very nearly the same thing:

Moses said to his people: O my people! Remember the bounty of God upon you when He bestowed prophets upon you, and made you kings and gave you that which had not been given to anyone before you amongst the nations. O my people! Enter the Holy Land which God has written for you, and do not turn tail, otherwise you will be losers.
Chapter 5:20-21

If you want to look at it from strictly the Jewish and Islamic texts then there should be nothing wrong with either religion admitting the Holy Land belongs to the Jews.
 

The Land belongs to the descendents of Abraham. Hagar bore Abrahams First Born Son with the blessing of Sara. Not only A true son but FIRST SON. Abraham visited Hagar and his son, even God intervened and sent Gabriel the angel to put forth Water in the desert to ensure his survival. If God promised only that land to the sons of Abraham and Sara would there be this conflict today?

I ask this question from a report on Christian News I viewed on PBS where the reporting was skewed (admittedly so) to the Jewish occupation. I find this picking and chosing of God's promise to a forefather of both to be hypocritical.

Both Holy books claim it as such and it is a fact that they both have a claim to it through biblical text as descendants of Abraham. Thus if the Jewish scriptures and Islamic both say the Jewish have a claim does that not also go the opposite way too? Can we not also say that the Jewish scriptures admit that Islam has a claim as well?

KMS
 
Last edited:
Just A Guy said:
From both an Islamic and Jewish viewpoint there is absolutely nothing wrong the Holy Land being a Jewish state.

First, and the most obvious viewpoint, the Torah states that the land of Israel belongs to the Jews:
Click to expand...


Actually it belongs to Emperor Rockefeller.

Israel/Palestine has been the property of Every Empire since the begining of Recorded history.

Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Roman, Ottoman, Brittish, American...in that order.

It has never belonged to the Jews independently.
 
The quote from the Quran I put earlier:

Moses said to his people: O my people! Remember the bounty of God upon you when He bestowed prophets upon you, and made you kings and gave you that which had not been given to anyone before you amongst the nations. O my people! Enter the Holy Land which God has written for you, and do not turn tail, otherwise you will be losers.
Chapter 5:20-21

was the Quran stating that God (Allah) had given the land to the Jews. Due to the Islamic belief in the infallibility of the Quran, they have no right [according to their religion] to take the Holy Land from someone their God appointed it to.

I can only speculate on this, but I believe if it clearly stated that and the history of the Middle East stayed the same (because of wars and expansion under the name of Islam by greed and so forth while not actually following the Quran), many of the 'masterminds' we hear about in the Middle East would still be able to distort the Quran to their followers. That, of course, is only my take on it.

CaliNORML said:
I ask this question from a report on Christian News I viewed on PBS where the reporting was skewed (admittedly so) to the Jewish occupation. I find this picking and chosing of God's promise to a forefather of both to be hypocritical.
Click to expand...
Just wondering, do you remember which sect of Christainity was reporting it?

Perhaps by materialistic standards, but biblically the land was given by God which is something humans cannot change.
 
Just A Guy said:
Perhaps by materialistic standards, but biblically the land was given by God which is something humans cannot change.
Click to expand...


Sorry this has not happened in all of history....go look at maps of that region for the last 6000 years.

Israel is today part of the American Empire...it does not exist independently...never has in all of history.
 
Lucidthots said:
Sorry this has not happened in all of history....go look at maps of that region for the last 6000 years.

Israel is today part of the American Empire...it does not exist independently...never has in all of history.
Click to expand...

and...

Australianlibertarian said:
I don't think that the Bible or Torah are great sources for settling land disputes. Do you?
Click to expand...

I am just replying to the topic at hand. The title of the thread is "Isreal VS Palestine: Who Are The Biblical Land Owners?", so I assumed that we would be debating who is the biblical land owner.


Does it matter whether the Holy Land has or has not been independant? It should not if the discussion is "Who Are The Biblical Land Owners?"
 

Well then according to the Bible....the original land owners are the Cannanites.
 
Lucidthots said:
Well then according to the Bible....the original land owners are the Cannanites.
Click to expand...
The Canaanites are the original, I have made no claim to the contrary. I have only claimed that according to the Torah and the Quran the current land owners are the Jews. The original landowners of the Holy Land has little to do with how the Quran and Torah apply to the situation in the Middle East today.
 

Well you are certainly correct about what the Torah says.

I havent read the Quaran yet so I will get back to you on that one.
 
Hagar searching for water is an scene re-enacted by all good Muslims during the time in Mecca, a journey every Muslim must complete once in their life time. Hagars frantic race between two mounds in the desert seeking water for herself and her son is experienced down to the pace one must travel between the mounds, to know what Hagar must have felt. This is when Gabriel appeared and founded the well that saved Hagar and her son who later went on to found the Muslim Faith. The well of water that saved Hagar and her son still flows today and is considered a most sacred place, one of the largest houses of worship was built in the valley between two mounds.

The link between these 2 religions is obvious, the only place sacred to both faiths is The Temple Of Abraham, here no fighting occurs, as the site is most holy. If this is not enough to fuel a land dispute biblically speaking what is? This is the reason for this war, the land of the Temple of the father to both religions.

The irony of the whole situation is that the Muslim faith built the temple that the Jewish faith deems it inheritance and birth right.

In reguards to where I first heard this story here is a link to those transcripts:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/media/july-dec05/christian_11-23.html

Here is the part I based this debate upon.
LEE WEBB: I think you could probably make the case that we're probably going to be a bit pro -- more pro-Israel than other media outlets.

TERENCE SMITH: Why?

LEE WEBB: Well, I think that by and large, the production staff and the editorial staff have here believes, from a Biblical point of view, that Israel has a right to the land.

TERENCE SMITH: So, well, that gets to the essence, doesn't it, that your beliefs on a given subject filter or affect the coverage?

LEE WEBB: Yeah. And I'm not sure -- I'm not going to apologize for that, either.

TERENCE SMITH: Sanford Ungar worries how that will affect news consumers.

SANFORD UNGAR: The practitioners of Christian journalism would like to influence people, would like to convince them of a reality as they see it and they seem to be fairly direct and candid about that. And it does concern me if we are attempting to have a public dialogue on matters of policy, on events in this country and in the world.

LEE WEBB: We are grateful for the opportunity to be here today and report the news.

TERENCE SMITH: Meanwhile, Christian news organizations are reaching more and more people, and though they may be preaching to the choir, it is a choir that is growing larger every day.




KMS
 
Last edited:
According to the Biblical text it is Isaac that received the birthright blessing from Abraham and not Ishmael. Part of the birthright inheritance that Isaac received included the land of Canaan as an eternal inheritance for his descendants. The fact that the deserts of the Promise Land have bloomed since the Jewish people have re-established political control over the area and the miraculous way in which the sons and daughters of Judah have returned and defeated their enemies against great odds to me hint that the rightful heirs have taken possession of the land.

The Arabic people, the descendents of Ishmael, recieved great promises in the Bibical record also and they have become a great people and have inherited 99.9 percent of the middle east. It seems to me if Allah was on their side they would not continue to be defeated and embarassingly so in their quest to steal an inheritance that God has given to another.

[FONT=Geneva,Verdana,Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1][/SIZE][/FONT]
 


Then God's promise to Abraham that all his decendants will inherit was bogus?
Or is open to "interpretation" as to which side you back? All claims based in this arguement to ownership must be looked upon fully in context not only the part of the contract which appeals to you personally.

Allah and God would then be one in the same as all of Abrahams children had the same God. Which the Temple of Abraham emcompasses, how can Jewish individuals call a Temple built by ther followers of Allah holy if this is not the case? Wouldn't their actions of worshipping in such a place be viewed as a blasphemy if this is not true? There is only 1 true God according to both. A rose by any other name, is still a rose.

Jesus sent a message, "Love thy brother" if this is not a message that is still directly meaningfull today in this situation of half brothers fighting what is?

Abrahams other decendants used this as a model as well, why should the oldest first son inherit? They fooled the old man on his death bed with goats skin to see the second son inherit after all it had been done before. This event seemed to have started a tradition of political birth right manipulation if viewed from the actions taken by the people.

Sara gave her blessing upon the child of Abraham to Hagar that is a legal and binding contract done by the law of the time, just because she then had a child and realized what she had given up, she can take it back and God's promise to her husband as well? One could argue that Sara lost faith in God and grew impatient with his promise of a family, had she believed then Islam would never had been founded, the fact that it was by Abraham can not be dismissed.

Not only did the Jewish race and belief multiply so too did Islam in about direct proportion to Judism, the fact that both are still practiced by millions dosen't make it a homerun for the Jewish assertion to the land. It only makes it more obvious that God's promise did indeed come to pass, and all of Abrahams decendants are still the majority of that area today.

What of Abrahams promise to Hagar and her son? This we do not see in the Jewish accounts because it was not in your studied text does not mean that it never occured, and why keep records of a woman and child the entire clan only wanted to forget? It seems that this seletive memory is the basis of the evidence of scripture used in the larger picture of this debate.

KMS
 
Last edited:
Hi CaliNORMl, I am not sure I understand your last post. It seems you are stating that all of Abraham's descendants have equal claim on the land of Israel/palestine. If this is the case then I guess the Hebrews should have equal claim on the wealth of the oil fields in the middle east and equal political control over Mecca as they also are descendants of Abraham. It seems to me the Biblical record is clear that Isaac recieved the birthright from God and His descendants were given the land of Israel. Maybe the record of the Hebrews is biased and untrue here but the only way to know for sure is for God(Allah) to reveal the answer to this.
 
Last edited:

Ooh! Money!

*tries to avoid being a walking stereotype*
 
Sorry it took so long to reply.

I apologize if the previous post lead you to believe money was an issue in my question. I try not to stereotype anyone, as I myself do not want to be stereotyped by anyone.

When I first started this thread I was curious as to the fundamentals of the nation of Isreal staking a claim to land over another kindred faith. What it has turned into however was the point that I truly needed to probe further in understanding of the issues themselves.

Along with my 14 year old daughter we have done and are still doing just that today. Hopefully with truly open minds and a want to understand this conflict to the best of our abilities as unjudgemental of all sides as possible.

What this thread has stated to me is that I needed to know more, and through it I have and am now asking different questions to gain a better understanding. I appreciate all of you who do help me do on this forum remembering that no matter the argument, to question it, is always valid.

KMS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…