3 hours ago, liddelljohn said:

It was the Romans who were pagans who executed jesus ,,,, Not the local jews many of the loved him,,,,,although a small minority of greedy temple priests and politicians wanted him out of the way same as the Romans did ....

I would not describe the Romans as "pagans" at all. They were polytheistic, much like Hindus.

original hebrews of the 2nd millenium BC were not montheistic either they had a trinity of gods a fire good later known as Baal, A female godess mother , and a head warrior god that later became yahweh they also had a pantheon minor under gods for agriculture , the sea rivers etc like all the polytheistic pagan religions ,it was not until about 1200bc that true monotheistic judaism evolved into the All knowing single entity of Yahweh ,, The archaeology confirms all this in israel .

On the absurd outrage over the use of the words goy or goyim, I have some thoughts which you can take or leave.

It's a way for a minority group to describe people not in the minority.

It's basically a neutral, descriptive word that can of course be used a slur depending on the context.

We're in this group. We're different than the majority. Words are NEEDED.

Consider how Amish in America call everyone not Amish the English.

If that's offensive to you, seek counseling. So why does goy seem to bother people?

A personal experience context I can relate is the use of the phrase goyim naches to describe what non-Jewish culture stereotypically values which is different than what dominant Jewish American culture values.

Examples from school days

Goyishe nachim -- football players, cheerleaders

Jewish -- Chess club, debate club, getting good grades, being a mensch

Different, yeah maybe viewed as better, but tell me that football players don't think they're "better" than nerds. Human nature isn't it with Jews or anyone?

Next

...

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Of course it was a political decision.

The ideology of political Zionism is that Jews living in the diaspora for thousands of years had been a very negative experience, so thus a return to the source homeland of the Jewish people, Israel, and a nation state dominated by Jewish people where Jewish people could determine their own affairs was the only hope for improvement and survival. It wasn't a Yiddish nationalist movement. It was and is Zionism. Jews for thousands of years didn't say Next Year in Minsk, they said Next Year in Jerusalem.

Hebrew wasn't a modern spoken language before Zionists intentionally worked to make it so. Ancient Hebrew isn't modern Hebrew any more than ancient Greek is modern Greek. Modern Hebrew happens to take a lot of words from Arabic.

I'm writing this off hand, not as a scholar, but I think I've basically said the gist of it, more or less.

As I understand it, Zionists have been fanatics, more or less, from the beginning. Perhaps without such zeal, there would not be a state of Israel.

But theocracies are not ideal. Look at Iran. And the US is hardly a Xian nation.

So was modern Hebrew an organic development? Yes, it's true that Jews in shtetls were poor and excluded from many of the benefits of society.

Not keen on fanaticism, though, of any stripe.

1 hour ago, unblocktheplanet said:

As I understand it, Zionists have been fanatics, more or less, from the beginning. Perhaps without such zeal, there would not be a state of Israel.

But theocracies are not ideal. Look at Iran. And the US is hardly a Xian nation.

So was modern Hebrew an organic development? Yes, it's true that Jews in shtetls were poor and excluded from many of the benefits of society.

Not keen on fanaticism, though, of any stripe.

Zionism wasn't originally overwhelmingly popular. That's for sure. For example a popular way to escape the pogroms of Eastern Europe was migration to the USA and other not Israel countries. You seem to be suggesting that the original Zionists were RELIGIOUS fanatics. I think that is false. I see the origins of Zionism as a primarily POLTICIAL movement about the betterment and future survival of the Jewish PEOPLE. As you know Jewish refers to both a religion and ethnicity. Not a requirement whatsoever to be religiously observant to be a Jew OR a Zionist.

There were considerations to create a Zionist Jewish state in other places other than Israel so in theory that could have happened. The core ideology is about a place of Jewish political self determination. It was debatable whether that needed to Israel even though Israel historically made the most sense.

A side note of speculation. What IF the world had been very open to Jewish refugees in World War 2 instead of very closed, including the USA and British Mandate Palestine? It seems to me that would have decreased the chances of Israel ever becoming a state. But it wasn't only Hitler that didn't want many if any Jewish refugees. No country did. That, my friends, kind of validates the theory behind the political ideology of Zionism. A side note on the side note -- the not well known history of how China and the Philippines took in Jewish refugees.

2 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

As I understand it, Zionists have been fanatics, more or less, from the beginning. Perhaps without such zeal, there would not be a state of Israel.

But theocracies are not ideal. Look at Iran. And the US is hardly a Xian nation.

So was modern Hebrew an organic development? Yes, it's true that Jews in shtetls were poor and excluded from many of the benefits of society.

Not keen on fanaticism, though, of any stripe.

attempting to put Israel in the same category as Iran .

Fails though because Israel isnt a theocracy

5 hours ago, emptypockets said:

They (the local Jewish populace) were given the choice between him and Barabas. He got the short straw at the vote.

Pilate washed his hands of the matter history tells us.

Hardly a trope.

Jesus didn't die though did he ?

Wasnt he around a few days after that ?

18 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Jesus didn't die though did he ?

Wasnt he around a few days after that ?

I think we can definitely say that there is nobody around these days to verify that statement..lol

11 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Thank you, Patong. This is a very sensible Friday School for those who know nothing about Judaism. We should also have such responsible discussions here about Islam and Christianity with the usual rancour.

What language did the original Jewish immigrants speak, say 1880s to 1920? I assume their native language was Yiddish. I really like Yiddish literature, poetry & theatre.

But they must have had to learn Arabic to communicate with their neighbours.

So why Hebrew? It is cettainly not as pleasantly euphonic as Yiddish so I assume it was a political (?) statement of some sort.

You have repeatedly mentioned that you are a successful author and very important social activist. Surely, you will have come across such things as books and libraries, where information is found. You can even do a search on the internet to obtain your answers. No need to agitate and to foment against a social demographic you appear to be obsessed with.

Original jewish immigrants in 1880's and 1920's? Again your attempt at a leading question based upon intentional misinformation will not entrap anyone used to the tactics of agent provocateurs. Immigrants to where? If you mean Israel, it has always had a jewish population who spoke a variation of Hebrew, at least as for back as 12,000 years ago which are the oldest historical records. The Old Testament of the bible was written in "biblical" Hebrew, which is known as a form of Judean, since the Jewish epicenter was Judea, and that is their ancient language, much as Greek is the ancient language of the people who originated in Greece. During multiple occupations, first by Babylonia, then Greece, then the Romans, the jews were not allowed to speak their language. Surely, as a social activist you should be familiar with this scenario as your people did this to the the native peoples in the Americas too. The locals spoke Greek, then Roman Latin , then Turkish, then English and French keeping Hebrew for their religious activities, where it was often spoken in secret. They also spoke various arabic language dialects, The Romans at one time had a death penalty for people found speaking Hebrew. (Do you agree with that, the death to the Israelites for speaking Hebrew?) Because of the edicts against the use of the language, Hebrew was primarily a religious language and was used specifically for religious study. It only came into prominence as a general language in the late 1800's when there was a move to revive the language and to reassert their culture that Hebrew became more prominent, but it has been a fixture of the region and the people for centuries.

You do know that Palestine was actually the term the Europeans used to describe Jewish residents of the British Mandated territory don't you?

5 hours ago, Jingthing said:

On the absurd outrage over the use of the words goy or goyim, I have some thoughts which you can take or leave.

It's a way for a minority group to describe people not in the minority.

It's basically a neutral, descriptive word that can of course be used a slur depending on the context.

We're in this group. We're different than the majority. Words are NEEDED.

Consider how Amish in America call everyone not Amish the English.

If that's offensive to you, seek counseling. So why does goy seem to bother people?

A personal experience context I can relate is the use of the phrase goyim naches to describe what non-Jewish culture stereotypically values which is different than what dominant Jewish American culture values.

Examples from school days

Goyishe nachim -- football players, cheerleaders

Jewish -- Chess club, debate club, getting good grades, being a mensch

Different, yeah maybe viewed as better, but tell me that football players don't think they're "better" than nerds. Human nature isn't it with Jews or anyone?

Next

...

If Jews think themselves as superior to others then any word to describe them is derogatory.

16 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Zionism wasn't originally overwhelmingly popular. That's for sure.

That, my friends, kind of validates the theory behind the political ideology of Zionism. A side note on the side note -- the not well known history of how China and the Philippines took in Jewish refugees.

You’re right. Zionism was not religious fanaticism but political. The political homeland is what excited Haganah to its early excesses against Arabs and turned its offspring into terrorists—the ancestry of the present IDF.

You talk about the ‘betterment and survival of the Jewish people’. Economically, Israel is a powerhouse but other than comfort, has Israel really improved the lives of Jews culturally as compared to their origin countries?

As I read it, 1880 to 1920 was an Eden for Jewish immigrants to Palestine. There were conflicts, of course, between neighbours but no hatred driving those conflicts.

The other country choice that I remember is Argentina (interestingly, where the Nazis fled). Jews would certainly not have any natural enemies in the wild there.

I had to look this up. There were actually many choices considered: Autonomous regions of the USA and USSR (at the Chinese border)—were Americans friendlier than Stalin?

British Uganda—more realistic. pre-war Imperial Japan, the Fugu Plan, named for the poisonous Japanese blowfish! What were they thinking! Doesn’t sound so friendly.

The Madagascar Plan is interesting because it was the original Nazi alternative to death camps. Resettlement of a million Jews a year  for four years (Herr Trumpf must be drawing on this!)

Madagascar was a French Indian Ocean territory. After the Nazi conquest of France, the Madagascar Plan could have been put into motion.

The island would become a police state under the SS. A territorial solution rather than a final solution devised by Eichmann and supported by Himmler, Goering, von Ribbentrop and approved by Hitler.

The Brits screwed that up when they won the Battle of Britain. That means British shipping would not be available to transport Jews to Madagascar even on a humanitarian basis.

A self-governing Jewish state in Italian East Africa among the Beta Jews living in Ethiopia. Similarly, Italian Libya. An Ottoman coup foiled that one.

These Jewish state ideas were created because Jews refused to assimilate (failed to might work better) where they were. Have we discovered the original reason for antisemitism, people who don’t assimilate?

There has certainly been anti-Chinese sentiment…forever. Chinese always refused to assimilate in their new digs. Anti-Chinese sentiment is still powerful today.

All this causes me to wonder if there would have been less conflict for Jews in places other than the Middle East. If native antisemitism developed in places which had never seen a Jew, then we’d have to look deeper into other reasons for antisemitism

Your final speculation raises the question of whether Jews would have been better off without a Jewish state. If other countries accepted them as valid refugees from Nazi Germany, much of the Holocaust might have been averted.

Aside. Hitler’s Germany chose to spend an enormous amount of the public purse on concentration camps and slaughter. Why? Esp because the camps were kept fairly hidden from the public so there was no political gain. Were the camps an open secret among Germans and Poles? Why did the Nazis not choose to spend this money on war?

It has always puzzled me why USA, Canada and other countries turned away Jews fleeing fascism. It’s unforgivable. I’d like you to tell us more about German Jewish refugees to China and Philippines (USA and then Japan in WWII)!

It's heartening to me that we can toss around these ideas here instead of true believer vitriol.

12 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

The locals spoke Greek, then Roman Latin , then Turkish, then English and French keeping Hebrew for their religious activities, where it was often spoken in secret. They also spoke various arabic language dialects, The Romans at one time had a death penalty for people found speaking Hebrew. (Do you agree with that, the death to the Israelites for speaking Hebrew?) Because of the edicts against the use of the language, Hebrew was primarily a religious language and was used specifically for religious study. It only came into prominence as a general language in the late 1800's when there was a move to revive the language and to reassert their culture that Hebrew became more prominent, but it has been a fixture of the region and the people for centuries.

You do know that Palestine was actually the term the Europeans used to describe Jewish residents of the British Mandated territory don't you?

I do hope you feel that reinforcing your views with insults proves the worth of your opinion. I was not aware that the Romans punished those who spoke Hebrew. But religionists in Canada punished First Nations for speaking their language. Got it.

Homeric, or Attic, Greek has precisely the same structure as modern Demotic Greek but a smaller vocabulary and different pronunciation (as far as we can tell, nobody really knows what Homer sounded like) after 4,000 years. Every Greek can decode ancient Greek. The first Bible I ever read was studying Attic Greek.

Is that true of Hebrew? Most of the Jewish world with which I am familiar was Yiddish. I'm sure some scholars knew Hebrew, perhaps ancient and modern but, even among my cultured friends, none cared much about Hebrew. We're talking 10-15 years after the establishment of Israel.

Attic Greek was a use-language as well as a literary element. Prior to modern Hebrew, the language was only used by religious scholars not in daily life. Please tell me why you think Hebrew is more acceptable than Yiddish?

Obviously, both Jewish and Arab residents of Palestine were Palestinians. They still are.

50 minutes ago, unblocktheplanet said:

You’re right. Zionism was not religious fanaticism but political. The political homeland is what excited Haganah to its early excesses against Arabs and turned its offspring into terrorists—the ancestry of the present IDF.

You talk about the ‘betterment and survival of the Jewish people’. Economically, Israel is a powerhouse but other than comfort, has Israel really improved the lives of Jews culturally as compared to their origin countries?

As I read it, 1880 to 1920 was an Eden for Jewish immigrants to Palestine. There were conflicts, of course, between neighbours but no hatred driving those conflicts.

The other country choice that I remember is Argentina (interestingly, where the Nazis fled). Jews would certainly not have any natural enemies in the wild there.

I had to look this up. There were actually many choices considered: Autonomous regions of the USA and USSR (at the Chinese border)—were Americans friendlier than Stalin?

British Uganda—more realistic. pre-war Imperial Japan, the Fugu Plan, named for the poisonous Japanese blowfish! What were they thinking! Doesn’t sound so friendly.

The Madagascar Plan is interesting because it was the original Nazi alternative to death camps. Resettlement of a million Jews a year  for four years (Herr Trumpf must be drawing on this!)

Madagascar was a French Indian Ocean territory. After the Nazi conquest of France, the Madagascar Plan could have been put into motion.

The island would become a police state under the SS. A territorial solution rather than a final solution devised by Eichmann and supported by Himmler, Goering, von Ribbentrop and approved by Hitler.

The Brits screwed that up when they won the Battle of Britain. That means British shipping would not be available to transport Jews to Madagascar even on a humanitarian basis.

A self-governing Jewish state in Italian East Africa among the Beta Jews living in Ethiopia. Similarly, Italian Libya. An Ottoman coup foiled that one.

These Jewish state ideas were created because Jews refused to assimilate (failed to might work better) where they were. Have we discovered the original reason for antisemitism, people who don’t assimilate?

There has certainly been anti-Chinese sentiment…forever. Chinese always refused to assimilate in their new digs. Anti-Chinese sentiment is still powerful today.

All this causes me to wonder if there would have been less conflict for Jews in places other than the Middle East. If native antisemitism developed in places which had never seen a Jew, then we’d have to look deeper into other reasons for antisemitism

Your final speculation raises the question of whether Jews would have been better off without a Jewish state. If other countries accepted them as valid refugees from Nazi Germany, much of the Holocaust might have been averted.

Aside. Hitler’s Germany chose to spend an enormous amount of the public purse on concentration camps and slaughter. Why? Esp because the camps were kept fairly hidden from the public so there was no political gain. Were the camps an open secret among Germans and Poles? Why did the Nazis not choose to spend this money on war?

It has always puzzled me why USA, Canada and other countries turned away Jews fleeing fascism. It’s unforgivable. I’d like you to tell us more about German Jewish refugees to China and Philippines (USA and then Japan in WWII)!

It's heartening to me that we can toss around these ideas here instead of true believer vitriol.

I was talking about the ideology of political Zionism which is the ideology that led to the founding of the sovereign nation state of Israel. That ideology is that the Jewish people need their own nation state for political self determination in response to endless waves of persecution in the diaspora for thousands of years. It's a logical argument but that doesn't necessarily mean that the state of Israel becoming real has fully fulfilled that ideology. Objectively there are pros and cons and whether Zionism leading to Israel is ultimately "good for the Jews" is a continuing and legitimate area of debate. One obvious weakness of that is someone wanting to wipe out Jews, about half of the world's Jews are in one very tiny piece of land. A juicy target indeed for Jew haters. Personally, I'm not very interested in that now ACADEMIC debate as I don't see the real life point. Say we conclude Israel was a bad idea. Then what? Israel a state where the majority of Jews were born there is going to decide to not exist? Not a chance though defeat is always a possibility (thus the need for a very strong IDF).

You can find lots of info with a few seconds of googling about the history of WW2 Jewish refugees in China and the Philippines. The numbers were never very large, but the government of the Philippines in particular was very humane about their actions in that regard.

Yes, there were even some Jewish refugees in Thailand but the numbers were so small it's really just a footnote in history.

21 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Jesus didn't die though did he ?

Wasnt he around a few days after that ?

And handed out chocolate Easter bunnies.

1 minute ago, emptypockets said:

And handed out chocolate Easter bunnies.

Can you explain what happened ?

Jesus died, OK .

How did he manage to appear a few weeks later ?

Just now, Nick Carter icp said:

Can you explain what happened ?

Jesus died, OK .

How did he manage to appear a few weeks later ?

Magic.

16 minutes ago, emptypockets said:

Magic.

Do you belkeive that Jesus died for a few days and then came back to life again?

Do you believe that God bough Jesus back from being dead ?

Just now, Nick Carter icp said:

Do you belkeive that Jesus died for a few days and then came back to life again?

Do you believe that God bough Jesus back from being dead ?

No and no.

Do you?

1 minute ago, emptypockets said:

No and no.

Do you?

So why do you believe that it was Jews that caused his death ?

Both stories originate from the same book .

Why do you believe one story from the Bible and not the other ?

1 minute ago, Nick Carter icp said:

So why do you believe that it was Jews that caused his death ?

Both stories originate from the same book .

Why do you believe one story from the Bible and not the other ?

Why not?

What point are you trying to make?

Open my eyes to a fairy tale? Your god?

1 minute ago, emptypockets said:

Why not?

What point are you trying to make?

Open my eyes to a fairy tale? Your god?

You are cheery picking stories from the Bible to believe in .

If you doubt/ disbelieve some stories from the Bible , surely that throws doubt on the whole book ?

Like, Jews are responsible for the death of someone who didn't die ?

11 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

You are cheery picking stories from the Bible to believe in .

If you doubt/ disbelieve some stories from the Bible , surely that throws doubt on the whole book ?

Like, Jews are responsible for the death of someone who didn't die ?

Whatever. Have a nice life.

On 2/24/2026 at 5:34 PM, liddelljohn said:

original hebrews of the 2nd millenium BC were not montheistic either they had a trinity of gods a fire good later known as Baal, A female godess mother , and a head warrior god that later became yahweh they also had a pantheon minor under gods for agriculture , the sea rivers etc like all the polytheistic pagan religions ,it was not until about 1200bc that true monotheistic judaism evolved into the All knowing single entity of Yahweh ,, The archaeology confirms all this in israel .

Pharoah Akenaten reigned around 1350 BC, and he introduced monotheism to Egypt, so from your information it appears that the Egyptians had monotheism first!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akhenaten
Maybe archeologists should look more into cultural influences coming from Egypt, perhaps some monotheists relocating when the ancient religion of Egypt abolished the cult worshiping Aten, the sun god. At that time, Palestine was anyway in the sphere of Egypt.

On 2/25/2026 at 12:21 AM, unblocktheplanet said:

I do hope you feel that reinforcing your views with insults proves the worth of your opinion. I was not aware that the Romans punished those who spoke Hebrew. But religionists in Canada punished First Nations for speaking their language. Got it.

Homeric, or Attic, Greek has precisely the same structure as modern Demotic Greek but a smaller vocabulary and different pronunciation (as far as we can tell, nobody really knows what Homer sounded like) after 4,000 years. Every Greek can decode ancient Greek. The first Bible I ever read was studying Attic Greek.

Is that true of Hebrew? Most of the Jewish world with which I am familiar was Yiddish. I'm sure some scholars knew Hebrew, perhaps ancient and modern but, even among my cultured friends, none cared much about Hebrew. We're talking 10-15 years after the establishment of Israel.

Attic Greek was a use-language as well as a literary element. Prior to modern Hebrew, the language was only used by religious scholars not in daily life. Please tell me why you think Hebrew is more acceptable than Yiddish?

Obviously, both Jewish and Arab residents of Palestine were Palestinians. They still are.

Apparently you never heard of Emperor Vespasian. In 70 AD he came up with the Jew tax, the fiscus Judaicus. All Jews were required to pay 2 drachmas annually for the benefit of the Temple of Jupiter in Rome. That's about 2 days wages for the typical worker. A rather steep tax if one was living hand to mouth. If caught engaging in Jewish prayers or living as a jew there were severe penalties. This was followed by Emperor Hadrian in135 AD who wished to punish the jews for their desire to break free of the Roman occupation by forcibly changing the name of Judea to Syria Paleastina. He also banned Jews from entering Jerusalem.

Judea had a non jewish minority made up of multiple ethnic groups minority. It had no muslims. Zero muslims. The non jewish people were primarily Bedouins and other nomadic non Jews who belonged to various nomadic clans, some were arabs who had migrated from the Arabian peninsula. Arabs and muslims only became a significant presence after 610 when Islam was invented, and the muslim expansion began. It is no different than the Berbers of Algeria. Idiot westerners call them Arabs, because they are muslim and are 1/3 the population of Algeria. They are not and consider themselves a unique people. Their country was invaded and occupied by Arab migrants, and Arabs became the majority population.

What is your obsession with Yiddish? It has nothing to do with Israel. It was a language spoken by a large number of European jews. It was never a language spoken in Judea or Israel until there was European immigration. Jewish Israelites spoke multiple languages. usually their first language was that of the occupying colonial power at the time. It is the same reason why many of classmates parents spoke French or English because they had come from European occupied Arab countries, and the same reason why many Africans spoke French or English or Portuguese.

You still don't get it. There was no Palestine. It was an invention of the Romans who chose to punish the Judeans by forcibly changing the name of their land in an effort to wipe out Judean culture. The Arabs had no claim to the name Palestine since it was the new name for Judea. Your mindset is that of the typical colonialist. In the late 1800's when the British formalized their colonial occupation of current day Zambia they came up with names for the territory. It culminated in 1911 with the merging two of them to create Northern Rhodesia, a name that had nothing to do with the native Africans. In 1964 when the people were freed of the yoke of colonialism, they reverted to an African name, Zambia, derived from Zambesi river name. Your attitude and polemic is no different than that of the former colonial occupiers who still use the name of the land they colonized. Arabs come from Arabia. They migrated and colonized the regions around them. Your logic would hold that because they arabs colonized Spain, that it should be called al Andalus and that the caliphate should be re-established on the Iberian peninsula, since the arabs were there, even before they were in "Palestine".

16 hours ago, placnx said:

Pharoah Akenaten reigned around 1350 BC, and he introduced monotheism to Egypt, so from your information it appears that the Egyptians had monotheism first!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akhenaten
Maybe archeologists should look more into cultural influences coming from Egypt, perhaps some monotheists relocating when the ancient religion of Egypt abolished the cult worshiping Aten, the sun god. At that time, Palestine was anyway in the sphere of Egypt.

There was no Palestine in 1350 BC. The Egyptian empire was occupying the region right up into modern day Lebanon. The name Palestine was created in 135 AD by emperor Hadrian when he renamed Judea. This is why Jesus was born as a Judean.

50 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

There was no Palestine in 1350 BC. The Egyptian empire was occupying the region right up into modern day Lebanon. The name Palestine was created in 135 AD by emperor Hadrian when he renamed Judea. This is why Jesus was born as a Judean.

In 1350 BC, there was no Kingdom of Israel (a/k/a Samaria), either. That appeared around the 10th C BC. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_(region)

As for the Egyptian Empire, it died out around 1100 BC.

The origin of the name Palestine goes back long before the Romans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_name_Palestine

Whatever the history which we all know can be shaped in numerous ways to give support to one particular narrative (stories) or another, the fact remains that the modern nation state of Israel exists, millions of it's citizens mostly Jewish people and mostly born there exist, and most of them have no desire or intention to voluntarily move away, Israeli Jews go back home? Israel is home.

So even winning any academic argument that Israel doesn't have a strong enough historical case for why they should exist has no real world value at all, except to play further games to demonize Israel.

2 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

Apparently you never heard of Emperor Vespasian. In 70 AD he came up with the Jew tax, the fiscus Judaicus. All Jews were required to pay 2 drachmas annually for the benefit of the Temple of Jupiter in Rome. That's about 2 days wages for the typical worker. A rather steep tax if one was living hand to mouth. If caught engaging in Jewish prayers or living as a jew there were severe penalties. This was followed by Emperor Hadrian in135 AD who wished to punish the jews for their desire to break free of the Roman occupation by forcibly changing the name of Judea to Syria Paleastina. He also banned Jews from entering Jerusalem.

Judea had a non jewish minority made up of multiple ethnic groups minority. It had no muslims. Zero muslims. The non jewish people were primarily Bedouins and other nomadic non Jews who belonged to various nomadic clans, some were arabs who had migrated from the Arabian peninsula. Arabs and muslims only became a significant presence after 610 when Islam was invented, and the muslim expansion began. It is no different than the Berbers of Algeria. Idiot westerners call them Arabs, because they are muslim and are 1/3 the population of Algeria. They are not and consider themselves a unique people. Their country was invaded and occupied by Arab migrants, and Arabs became the majority population.

What is your obsession with Yiddish? It has nothing to do with Israel. It was a language spoken by a large number of European jews. It was never a language spoken in Judea or Israel until there was European immigration. Jewish Israelites spoke multiple languages. usually their first language was that of the occupying colonial power at the time. It is the same reason why many of classmates parents spoke French or English because they had come from European occupied Arab countries, and the same reason why many Africans spoke French or English or Portuguese.

You still don't get it. There was no Palestine. It was an invention of the Romans who chose to punish the Judeans by forcibly changing the name of their land in an effort to wipe out Judean culture. The Arabs had no claim to the name Palestine since it was the new name for Judea. Your mindset is that of the typical colonialist. In the late 1800's when the British formalized their colonial occupation of current day Zambia they came up with names for the territory. It culminated in 1911 with the merging two of them to create Northern Rhodesia, a name that had nothing to do with the native Africans. In 1964 when the people were freed of the yoke of colonialism, they reverted to an African name, Zambia, derived from Zambesi river name. Your attitude and polemic is no different than that of the former colonial occupiers who still use the name of the land they colonized. Arabs come from Arabia. They migrated and colonized the regions around them. Your logic would hold that because they arabs colonized Spain, that it should be called al Andalus and that the caliphate should be re-established on the Iberian peninsula, since the arabs were there, even before they were in "Palestine".

It continues to boggle me how deeply rooted antisemitism is even in places so far removed one would never expect it. And lasting for a thousand years!

It appears the Bedouins have been mislabelled.

My “obssession” with Yiddish come from my NYC background. I had Jewish g/fs, some Orthodox & kosher, studied Yiddish, went to Yiddish theater, YMHA aso. I had frequent conversations with Isaac Bashevis Singer, the author, a Jewish vegetarian pacifist who wrote in Yiddish. He remains my favourite author. Nothing to do with Israel, you’re right. But I find myself uninterested in modern Hebrew. I first read the Bible in Greek.

Ah, one other thing. Yiddish was the language of  freedom, not one of colonisers. The fact that the colonisers couldn’t understand it gave Yiddish a mystique which must have engendered antisemitism.

Obviously, you’re more educated in the historical changes than I. Are you saying Palaestina was a Roman renaming of Judaea? I think historical occupancy is more important than the names. Numbers of residents also is immaterial. If both Judaeans and “Palestinians” lived there, that’s good enough.

If the Jewish diaspora dispersed from Judaea, why? Why did Jews leave? Population pressure? Military action? Famine?

“Arabia” Where is that, exactly, in the Middle East. It must include Saudi etymologically but, in fact, must be a far broader region.

My “mindset” is only that no one can know everything! Glad to be educated in this way, actually. I'm getting my pith helmet and jodhpurs out!

At this juncture in the conversation, which I find very interesting and informative, I have to say, lest I be misconstrued, I have no wish to deny the modern nation-state of Israel or to demonise her. It is what it is and, if it satisfies many, so be it.

The only thing I'm against is war & racism, no matter who are the perpetrators. There's no room in the world for those, some moronic, hillbilly idea of revenge or that some humans are different that other humans.

I'm like anybody else, not a true believer in anything, just trying to thread my way to the truth and, in truth find a solution to those conundra of war and racism.

Shouldn't we all be on the same page about that, no matter where it leads us? Isn't that what humanity means? There are no winners, just as there are no losers.

9 hours ago, placnx said:

In 1350 BC, there was no Kingdom of Israel (a/k/a Samaria), either. That appeared around the 10th C BC. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_(region)

As for the Egyptian Empire, it died out around 1100 BC.

The origin of the name Palestine goes back long before the Romans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_name_Palestine

Rather than dump a reference to Wikipedia, you should read it first. The reference confirms that there was no specific area, nor state called Palestine. A variant of the name was by non residents Greeks to refer to a non defined region.local people did not use the term. Your Wikipedia reference states; There is, however, no evidence of the name on any Hellenistic coin or inscription: There is no indication that the term was used in an official context in the Hellenistic and Early Roman periods, it does not occur in the New Testament, and Philo and Josephus preferred "Judaea" . There has never ever been a state, nor a kingdom, nor a republic, nor a recognized national district, city, province, county or territory called palestine prior to its formal invention in 135 AD by the Roman Emperor when he forced the change of name from Judea to punish its residents. This is why Jesus was born in Judea and registered as a Judean, not a Palestinian.