Posted on 12/13/2011 8:29:04 AM PST by geraldmcg
The first time the name was used was in A.D. 70 when the Romans committed genocide against the Jews, smashed the Temple and declared the land of Israel would be no more. From then on, the Romans promised, it would be known as "Palestine." The name was derived from the Philistines, a Goliathian people conquered by the Jews centuries earlier. It was a way for the Romans to add insult to injury.
"Palestine" has never existed as an autonomous entity. It was ruled alternately by Rome, by Islamic and Christian crusaders, by the Ottoman Empire and, briefly, by the British after World War I. The British agreed to restore at least part of the land to the Jewish people as their homeland.
There is no language known as Palestinian. There is no distinct Palestinian culture. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of 1 percent of the landmass.
What about Islam's holy sites? There are none in Jerusalem.
The Quran says nothing about Jerusalem. It mentions Mecca hundreds of times. It mentions Medina countless times. It never mentions Jerusalem. With good reason. There is no historical evidence to suggest Muhammad ever visited Jerusalem. In contrast, Jews can trace their roots in Jerusalem back to the days of Abraham.
Treating a 5,000-year-old birthright backed by overwhelming historical and archaeological evidence equally with illegitimate claims, wishes and wants gives diplomacy and peacekeeping a bad name.
Editor's note: This is a video version of a WND commentary written by Joseph Farah on May 31, 2011, a slightly updated version of one he had written and published on October 11, 2000. Is it out of date? Hardly. Ironically, with every passing day this editorial gets more newsworthy, not less.
A made-up nation with a made-up religion.
THIS is simply not even close to true. Looks as if it could have been written by a ten year old with no understanding of history, let alone chronology.
They’ll make up anything
Overall it seems to agree with what I have read elsewhere. Where is this writer off?
So the Palestinians are really Philistines (Goliathians), seeking reparations from Israel?
Totally true. Totally agree. Newt is 100% correct.
“The first time the name was used was in A.D. 70 when the Romans committed genocide against the Jews, smashed the Temple and declared the land of Israel would be no more. From then on, the Romans promised, it would be known as “Palestine.” The name was derived from the Philistines, a Goliathian people conquered by the Jews centuries earlier. It was a way for the Romans to add insult to injury.’
Syria Palaestina was a Roman province between 135CE and 390CE. It had been established by the merge of Roman Syria and Roman Judaea following the defeat of the Bar Kokhba Revolt in 135 CE. In 193 Syria-Coele was split to form a separate provincial locality. Syria Palaestina had become part of the splinter Palmyrene Empire for a brief period of 260-272 CE, but was restored under Roman central authority. Eventually the province became reorganized under Byzantium as part of the Diocese of the East, which included it as the provinces of Byzantine Syria, Palaestina Prima and Palaestina Secunda.
It might have had something to do with the Philistines, but I doubt it since Philistia was the name of their country, or territory. Why palaestina instead of Philistia if that was their intent? Makes no sense. The intent was to destroy the Hebrew identity. That much is true. But they NEVER succeeded. The Assyrians were not arabs either. And it was NEVER known as palestine.
Palaes means “it is evident”. It is much more in keeping with the way the Romans thought. In other words, the message was, “WE have crushed you and it is evident.”
“The Quran says nothing about Jerusalem. It mentions Mecca hundreds of times. It mentions Medina countless times. It never mentions Jerusalem. With good reason. There is no historical evidence to suggest Muhammad ever visited Jerusalem. In contrast, Jews can trace their roots in Jerusalem back to the days of Abraham.”
The first part of this is correct. But stop and think. Abraham, while he probably would have delighted in Jerusalem, existed long before Jacob was born and renamed Israel from whose sons the slaves leaving Egypt took their tribal names. Most of them never made it to the Promised Land. So how in the world could we trace our roots in Jerusalem back to Abraham?
We did not build Jerusalem. David chose it a his capital to be the center of Hebrew life. But it was an already existing city, most likely built by the Jebusites...who were not arabs either.
I suppose that these historians just made it up also. Btw, Americans are a made up people also.
In the 5th Century BCE, Herodotus, the first historian in Western civilization, referenced “Palestine” numerous times in chronicle of the ancient world, The Histories, including the following passage describing “Syrians of Palestine”:
“...they live in the coastal parts of Syria; and that region of Syria and all that lies between it and Egypt is called Palestine.” (VII.89) The above translation by Harry Carter is featured in the 1958 Heritage Press edition of Herodotus’ famous work. Both older and newer versions corroborate the accuracy of the reference. A. D. Godley’s 1920 translation of the crucial line states, “This part of Syria as far as Egypt is all called Palestine”, while Robin Waterfield’s 1998 updated Oxford translationrenders the passage this way: “This part of Syria, all the way to the border with Egypt, is known as Palestine.”
A hundred years later, in the mid-4th Century BCE, Aristotle made reference to the Dead Sea in his Meteorology. “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,” he wrote. “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.” (II.3)
Two hundred years later, in the mid-2nd Century BCE, ancient geographer Polemon wroteof a place “not far from Arabia in the part of Syria called Palestine,” while Greek travel writer Pausanias wrote in his Description of Greece, “In front of the sanctuary grow palm-trees, the fruit of which, though not wholly edible like the dates of Palestine, yet are riper than those of Ionia.” (9.19.8)
But what do these historians know right. Also, their are Palestinians Christians living in Gaza and the West Bank. I suppose that they do not matter either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.