[Paul Bunyan]

Originally posted by jcsd
No one knows much about the origin of the Philistines and even less is known about the Hykos (?) or Sea people, though there is some evidence to link them together, that link is by no means definite. After Philistine culture ended, their sucessors were almost certainly absorbed into other populations.

I don't see what the fuss is, ancient Palestine in this particular context is more accurate than ancient Israel, as ancient Israel was specific state that no longer existed at that time, whereas Palestine was the name given to the general region by outside cultures and represented the area where Aramic was spoken better than any other short description. You know, I have to tell you without meaning to be overly hostile, that you seem to just "throw" your opinions around as if they were mudballs, some of which you are hoping will stick to the walls. When someone offers you some historical perspective and, in the case of Abu Afak, some evidence, you just flit away to some other equally lame "opinion".

What is your purpose in participating in this particular thread? Attempting to minimize the existence of Israel in this thread or Forum is ridiculous. You appear to be some gadfly whose basic contribution is leaving specks on the wall.

Personally, I don't care what the Romans decided to call Israel. I don't give any credence whatever to what pals and their buddies think Israel is either.

The "fuss" you refer to concerns the statement being disseminated by People's Magazine that Israel did not exist before 1948, a view absurd on its face.

[Ifroham4]

Originally posted by danholo
Israel did not exist in the time of Jesus. The Jewish kingdom, which was a Roman protectorate, was called Iudea or "Yehuda" as its Jews called it. But it could be called ancient Israel instead of ancient Palestine. As far as history tells us, there is no "ancient" Palestine to speak of.

A shameful act by People magazine. I am making no religious claims whatsoever here, but in the King James Version of the Old and New Testament translated in the 1500's, the lineage of Jesus Christ is laid out from Abraham through David right up to his present day.

Whatever a person's beliefs might be, an historical document translated in the 16th century, though probably not unaffected somewhat by the politics of the day, nonetheless had no bones to pick with whether or not Israel existed. They certainly did not dispute the presence of the Hebrews as a viable nationality with a capital at Jerusalem.

And though the area was called Judea, and I admit my history is fuzzing up a bit here, wasn't the name from Judah, a son of Jacob?

Whatever, People Magazine started off sounding like idiots and went downhill from there. I have already fired off a letter to them!

[Ifroham4]

Well, ok I KNOW that the Romans always called that region Palestine after the Philistines who were the dominant power in the region during several prior periods. Israel at it's largest extent in the time of Solomon is believed to of occupied an area made up pretty much of modern day Israel, the West Bank (though not Gaza), some of Lebanon and Syria and also part of the Sinai penisula. It was this size only for a short period, after which it waxed and waned in size. Of course there were other tribes in the region throughout this time and who at several times gained hegemony over the Israelites.

And yes of course there were Jews living in this region at the time.

[Ifroham4]

Originally posted by jcsd
Michael C, it's just that I find such pendantic nationalism laughable, that someone could waste their time to write to People over something so petty and insignificant, particularly when their complaint is inaccurate.

The state of Israel and the biblical kingdom are two separate entities, so of course the modern-day state didn't exist before 1948. This will be my last comment to you in this thread. I would just let it slide but I feel I need to sign off with you and then just allow you to have the last word.

YOU don't get. And it is apparent that you are not interested in "getting it". This is not the only thread in which I have observed your modus operandi, which is essentially to throw doubt around Period. No matter what anyone says to you, you attempt to sow doubt with innacurate and ill thought out statements.

I have a pretty good idea of why you here at this board and it is not to offer constructive views.

[Lt_Apple]

If you think what I have written on this particular thread is motivated mainly by political/partisan reasons you are wrong, as what language was spoken, which area was occupied by whom, what the areas were called has only minimal bearing on the present day situation in Israel and the OT.