JERUSALEM is not the sole proprietorship of ISRAEL

[Route_70]

Boy... it didn?t take much to send Route over the edge! His hatred of Christians is evident. It is one thing to debate ideas but the rancor is a bit over the top

The truth can be very offensive.

And inconvenient.

Especially for the arrogant and the ignorant.

 

[T-Bone]

Boy... it didn?t take much to send Route over the edge! His hatred of Christians is evident. It is one thing to debate ideas but the rancor is a bit over the top

The truth can be very offensive.

And inconvenient.

Especially for the arrogant and the ignorant.

Oh the irony!

 

[FSSL]

Because we believe that Israel has a right to govern herself, we are ignorant? It sounds like even you know that your argument is void of any real traction.

 

[Route_70]

"The 1948 Palestinian exodus ...  occurred when more than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from their homes, during the 1948 Palestine war.  Between 400 and 600 Palestinian villages were sacked during the war"

"Later, a series of laws passed by the first Israeli government prevented them from returning to their homes or claiming their property. They and many of their descendants remain refugees."

There are still tens of thousands of refugees, living in squalor because neither Jordan nor Israel wants them.

But we have self-righteous, pure-as-the-driven-snow Christians in this country who said: "Good riddance.  The land belongs to Israel anyway."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestinian_exodus

 

[T-Bone]

"The 1948 Palestinian exodus ...  occurred when more than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from their homes, during the 1948 Palestine war.  Between 400 and 600 Palestinian villages were sacked during the war"

"Later, a series of laws passed by the first Israeli government prevented them from returning to their homes or claiming their property. They and many of their descendants remain refugees."

There are still tens of thousands of refugees, living in squalor because neither Jordan nor Israel wants them.

But we have self-righteous, pure-as-the-driven-snow Christians in this country who said: "Good riddance.  The land belongs to Israel anyway."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestinian_exodus

Surely as the smartest man on this forum you know that anybody can add anything to Wikipedia...hardly a reliable or scholarly  source.

 

[Route_70]

"The 1948 Palestinian exodus ...  occurred when more than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from their homes, during the 1948 Palestine war.  Between 400 and 600 Palestinian villages were sacked during the war"

"Later, a series of laws passed by the first Israeli government prevented them from returning to their homes or claiming their property. They and many of their descendants remain refugees."

There are still tens of thousands of refugees, living in squalor because neither Jordan nor Israel wants them.

But we have self-righteous, pure-as-the-driven-snow Christians in this country who said: "Good riddance.  The land belongs to Israel anyway."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestinian_exodus

Surely as the smartest man on this forum you know that anybody can add anything to Wikipedia...hardly a reliable or scholarly  source.

But it is a source.  And the Palestinian Exodus really did happen.

Anybody can add anything to anything, including the Bible.  I could link to other sites, but here is the question:

Do you deny the facts laid down in the article to which I linked?

Using your logic, the Holocaust did not happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust

Using your logic, The Civil War never happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War

Using your logic, the September 11, 2001 attacks did not happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

 

[FSSL]

"The 1948 Palestinian exodus ...  occurred when more than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from their homes, during the 1948 Palestine war.  Between 400 and 600 Palestinian villages were sacked during the war"

"Later, a series of laws passed by the first Israeli government prevented them from returning to their homes or claiming their property. They and many of their descendants remain refugees."

Okay. That was PRE 1949. So there was no violation of the Geneva Convention.

Wars have implications.

 

[Route_70]

"The 1948 Palestinian exodus ...  occurred when more than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from their homes, during the 1948 Palestine war.  Between 400 and 600 Palestinian villages were sacked during the war"

"Later, a series of laws passed by the first Israeli government prevented them from returning to their homes or claiming their property. They and many of their descendants remain refugees."

Okay. That was PRE 1949. So there was no violation of the Geneva Convention.

Wars have implications.

Yes, there is!  Israel started the 1967 war, after which they conquered and occupied Jordanian territory, namely the West Bank, driving out an additional 250,000 Palestinians, and razing their villages.  They continue to occupy the West Bank, establishing settlements, which is clearly a violation.

Are you saying that you are okay with the refugee situation from 1948?  You are okay with 1948 Israel displacing 700,000 Palestinians?  Why are you okay with Israel?s clear violation of international law?  Why do you continue to look for ways to justify that wicked position?

 

[T-Bone]

"The 1948 Palestinian exodus ...  occurred when more than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from their homes, during the 1948 Palestine war.  Between 400 and 600 Palestinian villages were sacked during the war"

"Later, a series of laws passed by the first Israeli government prevented them from returning to their homes or claiming their property. They and many of their descendants remain refugees."

There are still tens of thousands of refugees, living in squalor because neither Jordan nor Israel wants them.

But we have self-righteous, pure-as-the-driven-snow Christians in this country who said: "Good riddance.  The land belongs to Israel anyway."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestinian_exodus

Surely as the smartest man on this forum you know that anybody can add anything to Wikipedia...hardly a reliable or scholarly  source.

But it is a source.  And the Palestinian Exodus really did happen.

Anybody can add anything to anything, including the Bible.  I could link to other sites, but here is the question:

Do you deny the facts laid down in the article to which I linked?

Using your logic, the Holocaust did not happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust

Using your logic, The Civil War never happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War

Using your logic, the September 11, 2001 attacks did not happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

Did I say what it said did not happen...my comment was about your alleged intelligence and your scholarly source...not even sure why you use a source after all you are smarter than everyone else...certainly smarter than any written source. We will just take your word for it...NOT!

 

[Route_70]

not even sure why you use a source after all you are smarter than everyone else...certainly smarter than any written source. We will just take your word for it

Aw, gee, gosh!  Thanks, T-Bonehead!

 

[FSSL]

Why are you okay with Israel?s clear violation of international law?  Why do you continue to look for ways to justify that wicked position?

The REAL questions are two-fold:

1) Why  do you hate Israel?
2) Why do you love the UN and Palestine?

 

[Route_70]

Why are you okay with Israel?s clear violation of international law?  Why do you continue to look for ways to justify that wicked position?

The REAL questions are two-fold:

1) Why  do you hate Israel?
2) Why do you love the UN and Palestine?

1.  I do not hate Israel.  There is no convenient or reasonable way to undo their establishment as a state in 1948.

2.  The U.N represents the disposition of 193 of the world's sovereign nations.  Why not support them?  Do you hate them?  If yes, then why?  Why hate the Palestinians?  They are humans with feelings and rights, too.

In 1988, Palestine declared their independence as a sovereign state.  136 of the members of the U.N. have acknowledged Palestine as a state.  The United States and Australia voted against the establishment of Palestine (five nations abstained).

Why does the United States hate the Palestinians?  Why do you hate the Palestinians?  Their land was taken from them.  Their homes, having been in their families for multiple generations, were taken from them.  Why do you hate them?

WHY DO YOU SUPPORT THE CURRENT STATE OF ISRAEL?

First:  The current state of Israel has no connection to the OT Children of Israel.

Second:  Even if it did, the Apostle Paul clearly says that the day of Israel and the Jews is past.

Third:  The state of Israel is in clear violation of international laws regarding the occupation of the West Bank.

WHAT IS YOUR JUSTIFICATION FOR SUPPORTING ISRAEL?

 

[FSSL]

1.  I do not hate Israel.  There is no convenient or reasonable way to undo their establishment as a state in 1948.

Boom. (but we all know you want to undo it)

2.  The U.N represents the disposition of 193 of the world's sovereign nations.  Why not support them?  Do you hate them?  If yes, then why?

Because Israel is a SOVEREIGN state. Even if 20 million other nations voted against Israel, it does not change their legitimate right to their own sovereignty.

Why hate the Palestinians?  They are humans with feelings and rights, too.

They have no legitimate right to owning Israel's land.

In 1988, Palestine declared their independence as a sovereign state.  136 of the members of the U.N. have acknowledged Palestine as a state.  The United States and Australia voted against the establishment of Palestine (five nations abstained).

Obvious problem... Arafat.

What more do we need to illustrate the moral bankrupt, delinquency of the United Nations?

 

[Route_70]

Why hate the Palestinians?  They are humans with feelings and rights, too.

They have no legitimate right to owning Israel's land.

So, you hate them?  That's not very Christian.

Besides, it is not Israel's land.  Why be so obstinate on that "minor" point?  The Arabs have lived there continuously for thousands of years.  Except for a very small number, the Jews are new arrivals.  They do not have the right to claim the land as theirs.  The Jews and Arabs that lived there before WW1 got along quite well, without there being a need for an Israeli state.

So far as the U.N. being corrupt, every nation is out for itself, and that includes the U.S.  The U.S. record on human rights is not so lily white.  The U.N. is right to reprimand Israel for occupying the West Bank. 

Because of the international protests, Israel relinquished the Sinai and Gaza.  Israel still occupies the Golan Heights (Syrian property) and the Wet Bank (Jordanian property).

Israel should bite the bullet and withdraw from the West Bank.

 

[FSSL]

I see that you totally ignore the Arafat issue. If you ignore that, then we know where you stand in relationship to Palestine.

 

[Route_70]

I see that you totally ignore the Arafat issue. If you ignore that, then we know where you stand in relationship to Palestine.

You and Random: you are so shallow.

Random:  "Answer my question, or you are a liar."

FSSL: "You ignore Arafat.  So, we know where you stand."

No one should have any difficulty understanding where I stand by what I write.

Talk about ignoring:  you have not responded to what Paul says in Galatians regrading God's promise to Abraham's "seed;" or what Paul said about Hagar being an "allegory" for the Jerusalem "that now is:" Jerusalem has nothing to do with the promise.

What is your reponse to what Paul wrote to the Galatians?

I'll help you out:

Galatians 3:16: "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ."

Galatians 3:19: "Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator."

Galatians 3:29: "And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise."

Galatians 4:22-29 "For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.  But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.  Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.  For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.  But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.  For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.  Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.  But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now."

In the words of Random:  "If you do not answer my question, then you are a liar."

In your own words:  "Ignore this issue, or we know where you stand.

 

[FSSL]

I already answered it. Your assumption is that we should ignore Israel on the basis that Paul says he went to the Gentiles. That is a logical fallacy.

Our political positions, today, are not guided by Paul in regards to Israel. It is a nonsequitor and you want to import 2017 back into 40 ad

So, your obvious annoyance of me bringing up Arafat reveals a strong weakness in your argument.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Route_70]

I already answered it. Your assumption is that we should ignore Israel on the basis that Paul says he went to the Gentiles. That is a logical fallacy.

Our political positions, today, are not guided by Paul in regards to Israel. It is a nonsequitor and you want to import 2017 back into 40 ad

So, your obvious annoyance of me bringing up Arafat reveals a strong weakness in your argument.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You confuse me with Hooper.  Besides, whatever his motive or to whomever he was sent, you have not responded to the verses I gave.

What about what Paul had to say about the difference between "seed" and "seeds."  It seems a trivial argument; and one has to ask the question: "How does Paul know that 'seed' does not reference the 'seeds' of Abraham?"

Paul is clearly implying that the promise God made to Abraham did not apply to his "seeds," namely the Children of Israel, but to his "seed," namely Jesus, and all that are in Jesus (the saved.)

?? in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.? ? Genesis 22:18 ? an obvious reference to Jesus.

And what of Paul comparing the then Jerusalem to Agar?  -- an obvious implication that, although Jerusalem would be the center of a great kingdom, it would not partake of the promise.  He said so!

Logical fallacy!  Ha!  I don?t try to logic things ? I just take them for what they are.  The scriptures are clear on this point.

Paul refers to the ?Jerusalem above.?  An obvious reference to the New Jerusalem, of which Jesus himself will be the temple.  Ergo, nix the idea of any rebuilding of the old temple.

It is all right there in Paul?s epistle to the Christians in Galatia.

Gentiles?  Paul said there was no longer any Jew or Greek (Gentile.)

Quit trying to win an argument, and just believe the Bible.

 

[FSSL]

Quit trying to win? You wouldn?t recognize a illegitimate totality transfer if it slapped you in the face... which it already did


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Route_70]

Quit trying to win? You wouldn?t recognize a illegitimate totality transfer if it slapped you in the face... which it already did

So you are just going to dodge the issue.

This is not about winning an argument.  This is about facing the facts.  This is about facing up to the truth, as I did, that just about everything you've always been taught is bogus.  And it is all right there in front of you --  right there between the pages of the book.

It is about us (the United States) doing the right thing toward the Palestinians, and treating them with the respect and human decency that they deserve.

Just as I was for years, you are too hard-headed to face the salient fact that you are wrong, and someone else is right.