#judahite kingdom

[learnwithmearticles]

Radiocarbon Case Studies

Judahite Kingdom

For the first time, radiocarbon dating was used to date the Judahite Kingdon’s capital, the City of David, a location referenced in the Bible and subject to scrutiny for how big it has been described as.

Under what used to be the Givati parking lot in Jerusalem lie the ruins of the City of David, often believed to be part of a small dominion of Biblical figure David. If a true historical figure, he would have ruled around the 11th-10th centuries B.C.E.

Radiocarbon dating has been difficult in this region due to atmospheric variations in C-14 concentrations. Researchers have finally attempted to solve for these issues with field methodologies and microarcheology. Using other indicators like texts, knowledge of solar events, and other events in the region, researches were able to use radiocarbon dating to find that various organic materials in the City of David originate from the 12th century B.C.E. to 586 B.C.E., the latter of which being when Babylon destroyed Jerusalem. The evidence of this city going so far back makes it more likely to have been more developed and expansive than originally thought.

This case study helps illuminate the Iron Age period of the Judahite monarchy, as well as exemplify how archaeologists utilize a wide scope of information to accurately examine excavation sites.

Brief Aside About Propaganda

The original article I found that brought me to this study from the National Academy of Sciences was from an Israeli newspaper. Having read that first, I was interested to find the original study and compare how the findings were used by the author. The article is here if you’re interested in examining it for yourself.

The author of this article focuses immediately on the relation to the City of David and the Biblical references, explaining the figures of David and Solomon. He seems to argue that this study is a strong indication of the Bible stories being true historical facts. 

The author repeatedly refers to both the City of David and the First Temple Period, while the original study uses the phrases Judahite Monarchy and Iron Age. In contrast, there seems to be a strong bias for proving and invoking the story from the Bible.

That is not to say that writing persuasively and using literary tactics is wrong. I do it, as well. But in a time where thousands of people are being killed by the state of Israel, an article that invokes the Bible to discuss the history of Jerusalem is likely to contain a lot of propaganda. So I advise readers to consume with caution.

Mesopotamia

Another first was published in 2023 - the first absolute dating of a palaeo-canal system in what is modern-day Iraq. At the time, it was Girsu, Mesopotamia.

The city of Girsu was a main city of the Lagash state, dated to around 2475-2315 B.C.E. Girsu itself is indicated to have had human activity as early as 4900-4500 B.C.E.

Shell and charcoal samples were collected from the palaeo-canals for C-14 dating. The results were then used in collaboration with geomorphological and archaeological data, such as the theoretical dating of ceramic styles. The C-14 dating, consistent with other archeological evidence, dates to around 5200 B.C.E. at the earliest, and to around 2300 B.C.E. at the youngest.

Contrastingly, the earlier archeological evidence, not from radiocarbon dating, is from around 2900-2600 B.C.E., a very significant discrepancy from the older radiocarbon date.

Investigating Mesopotamia is extremely important because it is often considered the cradle of civilization. Much of the surrounding region is not easily cultivated, but with artificial irrigation, early civilizations used the otherwise highly fertile land to sustain themselves. It is the location of many notable civilizations such as Sumer and Babylon.

Urban societies in Mesopotamia, facilitated by the access to water from canals and irrigation systems, are also believed to be roots of modern societal facets, such as writing, laws, and stratified society. The actions of these early people from the 4th millennium B.C.E. made an unmeasurable difference to the modern world.

In this case study, introducing radiocarbon dating primarily highlights an issue related to absolute dating: the freshwater reservoir effect (FRE). This occurs when dissolved inorganic carbon is incorporated into freshwater environments. It can cause the dating results of C-14 to vary between 250 and 700 years due to the carbon content not being in equilibrium with the environment as expected. The significantly older radiocarbon dates come from shells as opposed to the charcoal samples, so the researchers expect that the significantly older dates from the site are due to the FRE.

Previous studies have avoided publishing C-14 dates that end up out of sync with other data. The FRE has also largely not been considered significant when studying Mesopotamia before now. Because of the release of this study, researchers will be aware that FRE is an element to account for.

Radiocarbon dating is not perfect when applied on its own. There have been cases where reviewing other data indicates certain environmental influences on the C-14 of the area and artifacts. Used in conjunction with these data, however, radiocarbon dating is still a tremendous help in contributing to artifact analysis.

Additional Resources

1.https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2321024121

2. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871101423000687

3.https://conservationbytes.com/2023/12/18/rextinct-a-new-tool-to-estimate-when-a-species-went-extinct/

4.https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/radiocarbon/article/dating-ancient-canal-systems-using-radiocarbon-dating-and-archaeological-evidence-at-tellogirsu-southern-mesopotamia-iraq/DFCB7F569B744396C9E4BDA923A8EB07

5. https://www.britannica.com/place/Mesopotamia-historical-region-Asia6. https://heritagesciencejournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/2050-7445-1-24

Radiocarbon

A recent article touched on how radiocarbon dating works in relation to the impacts of cosmic rays and the secondary particles they create on Earth. Now, let’s focus on radiocarbon dating itself.

Types of Dating

Radiocarbon dating is an invaluable tool to the fields of archaeology and history. Within the process of dating artifacts, there is absolute dating and relative dating. Relative dating establishes if something is older or younger than another artifact, usually within the same excavation. For example, excavations can expose the stratigraphy of the ground: layers of rock and sediment deposit that build up over time and can be visually distinct, though sometimes bleed into each other. Artifacts found in a lower layer can be theorized to be older than artifacts in layers above it.

Absolute dating provides more specific dates for the origin of artifacts, and often relies on chemical processes. Radiocarbon dating is one such method.

Radioactive Isotopes

Radiocarbon dating works on the fact that isotopes of carbon exist in nature, and it is their nature to decay over time.

Isotopes are variations of the same chemical element. They have the same atomic number -and therefore number of protons- as the base element, but different amounts of neutrons in the atom’s nucleus. So all carbon isotopes have six protons, but instead of six neutrons like C-12, they can have seven or eight neutrons, which are known as C-13 and C-14, respectively.

Though an isotope, C-13 is stable, meaning it does not decay into another form or element over time. It has enough binding energy to keep the protons and neutrons in its nucleus together.

C-14 is not stable. Over time, C-14 decays into stable Nitrogen through one of the neutrons becoming a proton. In this process it also loses an electron, which are negative particles that ‘orbit’ the nucleus.

C-14 Dating

From secondary particles produced by cosmic rays, C-14 or 14C becomes 14CO, then 14CO2 (carbon-14 dioxide), entering Earth’s carbon cycle. In this way, C-14 absorbs into living tissues through photosynthesis and the food chain. When the living tissue dies, no more C-14 is introduced, starting the time of radioactive decay.

C-14 has a half-life of 5,700± 30 years, meaning that after that many years, the amount of C-14 in the subject has decreased by half. The amount of C-14 present in a material can be measured in three ways: gas proportional counting, liquid scintillation counting, and accelerator mass spectrometry.

In gas proportional counting, the sample of organic material is converted to carbon dioxide gas before being put into cylinders where beta particles are measured. Beta particles are produced by radiocarbon decay, so the dating measures how much more C-14 is left to decay at the time of evaluation.

Similarly, liquid scintillation measures beta particles by the scintillator producing a flash of light when interacting with a beta particle. In this process, the organic material is in liquid form and put between two photomultipliers, devices that convert photons into electrical signals to register when the scintillator indicates a beta particle.

Accelerator mass spectrometry does not measure beta particles. It measures the proportion of C-14 to C-13 and C-12 present in the sample.

The results of these methods are compared to an international standard reference, which has changed throughout the years. For some time, sugar beets harvested in the 1950s were used as comparison for the amount of C-14 present, as well as wood from 1890 and beet molasses from 1977. These varieties of organic material have helped provide reference for the measurements of C-14 isotopes.

Radiocarbon dating has been a useful source of knowledge when examining artifacts. The science behind it is expansive and requires piecing together many different properties of the universe, such as how C-14 enters the atmosphere from cosmic rays, and how it naturally changes form over time as a radioactive isotope. Understanding these different elements can help demystify the processes of scientific discovery, and help us better understand specific case studies in the future.

Additional Resources

1. https://www.nature.com/articles/s43586-021-00058-7#

2. gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/isotopes/chemistry.html

3. https://news.uchicago.edu/explainer/what-is-carbon-14-dating4. https://www.radiocarbon.com/about-carbon-dating.htm#

[blueiscoool]

‘Extremely Rare’ Ancient Stone Seal Discovered in Jerusalem

An "extremely rare and unusual" ancient stone artifact-thought to be around 2,700 years old-has been discovered in Jerusalem.

The artifact in question, a seal made of black stone, was uncovered during an excavation conducted by the Israel Antiquities Authority and the City of David organization near the Southern Wall of the Temple Mount (also known as Al-Aqsa)-a site in Jerusalem's Old City that is considered holy by Jewish people, Muslims and Christians.

The stone seal bears a name inscribed in the paleo-Hebrew script, as well as an image of a winged figure. It is thought to have been used both as an amulet and as a stamp to seal documents, Filip Vukosavović, a senior field archaeologist with the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA), told Newsweek.

"The seal is one of the most beautiful ever discovered in excavations in ancient Jerusalem, and is executed at the highest artistic level," Yuval Baruch and Navot Rom, excavation directors on behalf of the IAA, said in a press release.

The seal has a hole drilled through it lengthwise so that it could be strung onto a chain and hung around the neck. In the center, a figure with wings is depicted in profile, wearing a long, striped shirt and striding toward the right. The figure has a mane of long curls covering the nape of the neck, and on its head sits a hat or a crown.

The figure is raising one arm upward with an open palm, perhaps indicating that it is holding some kind of object.

Depictions of winged figures such as these are known in neo-Assyrian art of the 9th-7th centuries B.C. and were considered a kind of protective magical figure, according to Vukosavović. The artifact, thus, demonstrates the influence of the Assyrian Empire-a major civilization of the ancient Near East that had conquered the Israelite Kingdom of Judah, including its capital Jerusalem.

"This is an extremely rare and unusual discovery. This is the first time that a winged 'genie'– a protective magical figure-has been found in Israeli and regional archaeology," Vukosavović said in an IAA press release.

On both sides of the figure, an inscription is engraved in paleo-Hebrew script. In English script, this inscription translates as: "Le Yehoʼezer ben Hoshʼayahu."

"[Yehoʼezer] was a common name," Ronny Reich, a researcher from the University of Haifa said.

The researchers believe that the stone object was originally worn as an amulet around the neck of a man called Hoshʼayahu, who held a senior position in the administration of the Kingdom of Judah. He may have worn the object as a symbol of his authority. "It seems that the object was made by a local craftsman-a Judahite, who produced the amulet at the owner's request. It was prepared at a very high artistic level," Vukosavović said in the press release.

The working hypothesis of the experts is that upon Hoshʼayahu's death, his son, Yehoʼezer, inherited the seal, and then added both of their names on either side of the figure. The names were added in negative, or mirror, script-so that the impression would appear in positive and be legible-according to Reich.

"The combination of figure and script, and particularly a neo-Assyrian figure is uncommon in Judah," Reich said.

By ARISTOS GEORGIOU.

[krindor]

Jewish Life Pre-Diaspora: Jewelry

In my previous post in this series, I looked at something ephemeral and best seen in art; women’s hairstyles [x] and came up a bit short. While I’ll get to men’s hairstyles later I wanted to do something a little easier first, and so am doing a topic archaeology is the best tool at answering: What did indigenous Israelite and Judean people wear as jewelry?

Amir Golani has written the literal book on the subject, and so I’d recommend for further information and techniques you should read his book Jewelry from the Iron Age II Levant or his article Revealed by their jewelry: Ethnic identity of Israelites during the Iron Age in the southern Levant, but I’ll provide a summary and some images here.

Since in his writings on the topic Golani found the Israelites and Judahites (the members of the two Israelite Kingdoms in Canaan in the Iron Age) to be similar in ornamentation trends and groups them together, I’ll be doing the same here under the umbrella term Israelites.

(looooong post beneath the cut. you have been warned.)

Part 1: Distinctly Israelite Jewelry

While trade and the movement of craftspeople led to the dispersion of different styles of jewelry around the Mediterranean, we can see trends that indicate certain pieces of ornamentation are distinctive to Israelite culture.

Three types of pendants, usually made of bone or ivory but sometimes of terracotta or stone, follow the history of the Israelite kingdoms to a surprising degree: originating around the 10th century BCE and disappearing in the 8th Century BCE in the North, and the 7th to 6th centuries BCE in the South (matching the beginnings of the diasporas of Israel and Judah, respectively).

1.1 Club Pendants

These pendants are typically 4-9 cm long shaped pieces with rounded ends and a slightly conical shape. They have been found as far north as the Lebanese Coast and as far south as the northern Negev Desert, though most examples come from the historic borders of the Israelite Kingdoms. Some were plain, but many have bands, latticework, or ring-and-dot ‘eyes’ incised into them.

Similar pendants are found in Ephesus (in Asia Minor) and various sites on the Greek Mainland, but these all date to after the 8th century BCE, are truncated at the top rather than rounded, and only have the horizontal bands as decorations and may have arrived with Phoenician traders (as they had been found in the Phoenician city of Byblos in modern day Lebanon).

1.2 Plaque Pendants

These plaques were made of bone and usually had a stringing hole at one end, or with a tab to be attached to a string. Unlike the club pendants, they have more than a single shape; they can be rectangular or oval, circular or teardrops, and are incised with ring-and-dots, lines, and chevrons.

These have a much smaller range than the club-pendants, with most only being found in the territory of the Judean Kingdom. Two were found at Meggido in Israel’s territory, and one at the site of Hama in Syria.

It was at one point theorized that these served as calendars, since some examples have three rows of ten uniform ring-and-dots, the presence of examples with other, non-calendrical numbers (such as 17) indicates that this could not have been their only use.

1.3 Mallet Pendants

The most restricted of the Israelite pendants, both in morphology and in chronology, these pendants are made of two pieces of bone or ivory; a cylindrical head often decorated with ring-and-dot incisions, and a thin shaft pierced at one end for suspension that was inserted into the head at the other end.

These pendants appear in the 10th Century BCE, but disappear in the 8th Century, despite being found in both Israel and Judah.

The hammer form of these pendants, as well as their strict morphology, has led some to theorize that they were used to identify the wearer, though it is unknown if that identity would be to a profession, religion, or some other faction. Similar looking pendants are found in Sardinia in the 12th-10th centuries BCE, as well as Etruscan Italy and Greece in the 9th – 7th Centuries BCE, but those are made of cast bronze and are a single piece. There, however, we know from context that they were probably linked to the wearer’s profession. Whether this bears true for their Israelite counterparts is still unclear.

Part 2: Inherited Canaanite Traditions

While the bone pendants appear to be an aesthetic choice that evolved along with the Israelite identity, as a part of the Canaanite cultural tradition, Israelites also continued to create and wear adapted forms of Canaanite jewelry. Several styles of metallic jewelry that Canaanites also wore, and do not have aesthetic designs credited to the Phoenicians to the north, may be concluded to be the work of local craftspeople in the Israelite kingdoms.

2.1 Crescent Pendants

These are flat crescent-shaped pendants typically made of copper alloys, silver, or gold, though bone examples have been found. They are either strung through a hollow tab at the center of the pendant, connected to a string via two perforations in the crescent itself, or possibly directly sewn into clothing by those same perforations.

These pendants first appear in the area in the Middle Bronze Age (18th - 16th centuries BCE) and appear in archaeological contexts through the Iron Age II, with designs getting simpler over time.

What they represent is debated. Most intuitive to most people reading this would probably be the crescent moon, which was a widely used symbol in the Ancient Near East, either as a symbol of fertility or of redemption and regeneration. The moon cult has been extant in the region for a long time at this point (Jericho, one of the oldest cities in the world, is named after the local moon god Yarikh, who is also the source of the Hebrew word for The Moon, Yareakh).

Other hypotheses include bulls horns or boars tusks, the later of which were used in the area to ward the evil eye away from horses through the Ottoman Period in the Levant. This is further supported by one of the specimen from the Middle Bronze Age in Megiddo is apparently too large to be worn comfortably by a human, and lines up nicely with a story from the biblical story of Gidon taking crescents as spoils of war from Midianite camels in the book of Judges.

2.2 Rings

2.2.1 Finger Rings

Finger rings with bezels (a wider portion used for mounting or displaying an object or image) are by no means a Israelite invention; the style they imitated comes from Egyptian scarab rings, named for their scarab-shaped bezels, which first appeared around 2000 BCE. However, types were worn by Israelites, and their innovations on the style are of interest.

(Egyptian scarabs and scarab rings, via Wikimedia Commons)

The first style Israelites used, all dating to the 7th and 6th centuries BCE, widens and flattens the metal of the ring at its terminal ends, which can support a scarab or other bezel. The rings are made of silver or gold and flattened ends are decorated with flowers, palmettes, or other forms of decorative flora.

The bezel may be made of gold, silver, faience (ancient glass) or may be absent entirely (though it's possible the bezel was simply lost to the sands of time). Unfortunately, such rings are rare (and some of them are poorly documented), so a more robust typology is difficult.

The second form more closely resembles a traditional Egyptian scarab; a round body to the ring with a flattened area at the tips of the terminal ends to support a bezel that may be swiveled on its axis to show off all sides of the piece (this was very important with scarabs, as the bezel was shaped to resemble like a beetle and the flat bottom bore a seal or inscription). The key difference is the material of the scarabs: where the Egyptian scarab is faience or stone, the Israelite 'scaraboid' is made of metal, and the carved scarab is nonexistent.

These are extremely rare and only appear in the record at the end of the Iron Age II (right before the diaspora) and in the Persian period following, so they may have been a relatively short-lived phenomenon - at the same time similar non-metallic, non-ring seals and scarabs are relatively common.

2.2.2 Large Rings

A form of large ring (that is large enough to fit on a limb rather than a finger) that only appears in Israelite contexts has a catch to secure it in place, using a diamond-shaped end and a U-shaped end with upturned ends. Only four of these have been found, all made of a copper alloy, and all from the latter half of the Iron Age II (8th-7th centuries BCE)

This wearing of metal bracelets and anklets appears to be a holdover from Canaanite traditions, where we see depictions of goddesses wearing such items. That, their rarity, and idea that the innovation here is functional rather than aesthetic, are why I believe is why Golani doesn't consider this as a uniquely 'Israelite' jewelry form.

It should be noted here that these are not the only large rings found in the Israelite kingdoms, and evidence from graves indicate that both men and women wore single, solid metal arm-bands as jewelry. Women may have also worn multiple, simple, large rings as bangles as depicted in figurines (which to my chagrin told me nothing about hair, but I digress). This may be a local innovation by Southern Canaanites and Israelites, as the Phoenicians to the north are not depicted this way. Bangles were made of many materials; copper alloys, silver, gold, iron, and even shell.

(More common styles of large rings found in the Israelite kingdoms alongside the rare locking one above)

2.3 Earrings

The styles of earring Israelites used were innovations on earlier Canaanite styles, and were so numerous I'll just be showing archetypal forms and the uniquely Israelite ones, otherwise I might as well rewrite the whole book.

2.3.1 'Lunate Earrings'

These earrings are solid metal (usually silver or copper, but any nice metal works) with a crescent body, a bent and tapered hoop that is narrower than the body, and ends that usually meet at one side.

(Simple Lunate Earrings, found throughout the Ancient Near East)

The most common Israelite version of this earring, and indicative of the Iron Age II (our time period of interest), widens the lunate and rounds out the whole earring for a more robust, heavy design, often with a small rise in the center of the body

Towards the end of the Iron Age II, the hoop elongates and decorations such as wire wrapping or soldered hoops and globules appear on the lunate, and are made of exclusively expensive metals such as silver and gold.

A unique final example comes from the city of Lachish in the Shephelah of Judah from the 8th century BCE (Iron Age II). 'At least a dozen' lunate earrings were found in a corroded mass in a burial cave. at least one of these depicted the head and torso of a woman, but the corrosion of the pieces precluded further analysis.

2.3.2 Lunates with Fixed Attachments

A more ornamental variation on the lunate where the body has an attachment joined to it. The archetypal form of the attachment is that of a hollow ball, tear, or pear, and is further decorated with wiring or soldered globules. Much more detailed than the basic lunates, these seem to typically be made of nicer metals such as silver and gold.

These evolved from much simpler tear and globule attachments worn by Canaanites as early as the Middle Bronze Age.

There is an variant of these solid globule attachments that is common in the 8th - 7th centuries BCE with a ring of globules supporting a center orb, that I think is neat, but is kind of an evolutionary offshoot of the more ornate attachments.

Towards the end of the Iron Age II, elaborate attachments begin to appear, including clusters, rows, and pyramids (or even rows of pyramids!) of globules, as well as fans and the elaborate hollow examples above.

It should be noted that these more ornate forms of earrings are rare in Israelite society, the simple lunates and solid globule attatchment lunates were by far the most common forms of ear ornamentation.

Part 3: Conclusion

When looking at the more common pieces of jewelry among Israelites, bone pendants and copper alloy metal rings and earrings in relatively simple forms seem to be the most common items, despite the wealth of the kingdoms attested to by Assyrian records of what they looted during their invasions.

Additionally depictions of Israelites generally show them without jewelry (but that may be due to them being depicted by conquerors who took their jewelry, rather than by Israelites themselves).

So what's with this apparent aesthetic of austerity? According to Amir Golani, the Israelite kingdoms may not have been poor, but the Israelite Identity as separate from Canaanites possibly started as a rejection of the Canaanite City State culture of the Late Bronze Age, and a general distaste of luxury goods may have persisted through the development of the ethnicity to a more spartan aesthetic overall (this is not just seen in jewelry, Israelite pottery is basically earlier Canaanite forms, just undecorated, with some exceptions).

If you made it this far, congratulations! I hope this was as interesting to read as it was to look into, and thank you for your time.

[girlactionfigure]

In 1047 BCE, a confederation of Hebrew tribes came together to found the Kingdom of Israel, the first ever unified, sovereign nation state in the history of the land. Though some historians have cast doubt on the existence of a unified Israelite state, in recent years, more and more archeological evidence has suggested that some form of unified state existed, though its grandiosity as depicted in the Torah is contested.

In 930 BCE, the Kingdom of Israel split into two: the Kingdom of Israel to the north, also known as Samaria (after its capital “Shomron,” or Samaria in English), and the Kingdom of Judah to the south. The term “Jew” comes from “Judahite,” as in, “someone from the Kingdom of Judah.” In Hebrew, the words for “Judahite” and “Jew” are the same word: Yehudi.

Our closest ethnoreligious brothers, Samaritans (or Shomronim in Hebrew), are the descendants of the citizens of the northern Israelite kingdom.

When the Babylonian Empire conquered Judah in 587 BCE, the territory of the Kingdom of Judah went on to become a province of the Babylonian Empire (587-539 BCE), the Persian Empire (539-332 BCE), the Seleucid Empire (332-37 BCE), and finally, the Roman Empire, which is depicted in green in the map to the left. “Judea” is merely a Romanized version of “Judah.”

After the Romans crushed the Bar Kokhba Revolt in the year 135, Emperor Hadrian carried out a retaliatory genocide against the Jewish people that took some 600,000 lives. Part of his genocidal agenda was to erase any trace of Jewish presence and autonomy in the land. To do so, he dissolved the Roman province of Judea and united it with Syria, creating Syria-Palestina. Syria-Palestina was then divided into Palestina Prima, Palestina Secunda, and Palestina Tertia. “Palestine” derives from “Philistines,” the ancient enemies of the Israelites in the Hebrew Bible. They were of Greek origin, unrelated to today’s Palestinians.

After the Arab conquest in the 7th century, what is now Israel and the Palestinian Territories became a part of Bilad al-Sham, or the province of Syria. There is a reason early Palestinian nationalists in the 20th century advocated for a unified Palestinian and Syrian Arab state in Greater Syria.

 At this time, Jund Filastin, translating to “the military district of Palestine,” was a military district encompassing the green region surrounding Jerusalem.

All throughout 1280 years of Islamic rule, the territories now encompassing Israel and the Palestinian Territories belonged to some variation of a Syrian province.

The map on the left is of Ottoman Syria (1517-1917), which itself was further split up into various vilayets (administrative divisions).

In the wake of World War I, the British and French conspired to carve up the Middle East amongst themselves, thus creating the borders for much of the region as we know it today. The map that we are familiar with as Israel and the Palestinian Territories is a British invention. 

The British also chose to revive the Roman name “Palestine” as a political entity for the first time since the year 636.

Transjordan, seen in brown above, was originally assigned to the British Mandate for Palestine (1917-1948), though in 1923, the British handed the territory over to the Hashemite family, an ancient dynasty that traces its origins to the Arabian Peninsula. Throughout the period of the Mandate, Jews were not allowed to settle anywhere in Transjordan.

Until 1920, early Palestinian nationalists wanted Palestine to become a province of the pan-Arabist Greater Syria, which would include Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, and the Palestinian Territories.

At the first Palestinian Arab Congress 1919, the resolutions included statements such as, “We consider Palestine nothing but part of Arab Syria and it has never been separated from it at any stage…Our district Southern Syria or Palestine should be not separated from the Independent Arab Syrian Government and be free from all foreign influence and protection.”

ORIGINS OF ISRAEL

The earliest known mention of “Israel” in history — and the earliest mention of Israel outside of the Torah — is 3200 years old and was discovered in Thebes, Egypt, in 1896.

The mention is found in what is known as the Merneptah Stele, an inscription by the ancient Egyptian pharaoh Merneptah, who reigned between 1213 BCE to 1203 BCE. The Stele itself is dated to 1208 BCE. It’s written in ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs.

 The Merneptah Stele mainly describes Merneptah’s victory over the ancient Libyans. However, three of the 28 lines talk about a separate Egyptian military campaign in Canaan. It reads:

“The Canaan has been plundered into every sort of woe:

Ashkelon has been overcome;

Gezer has been captured;

Yano’am is made non-existent.

Israel is laid waste and his seed is not;

Hurru is become a widow because of Egypt.”

 The hieroglyphs used describe Ashkelon, Gezer, and Yano’am as city-states, whereas “Israel” is described as a foreign (to Egypt) people. This suggests that at this point in time, the Israelites did not rule over a unified state, but rather, were a nomadic or semi-nomadic tribe(s). This would corroborate the narrative of the Torah, as the Kingdom of Israel did not become a unified state until some 161 years later. 

As a side note, it’s interesting that the first ever mention of Israel in history comes from a ruler bragging about our supposed destruction. Over three millennia later, here we are.

In 1040 BCE, a loose confederation of Hebrew tribes united to form the first centralized state in the Land of Israel, known as the Kingdom of Israel.

The Hebrew tribes originated -- and later split away -- from the Canaanites, a loose group of semi-nomadic tribes that lived during the second millenium BCE; they were the original inhabitants of the Land of Israel. Though depicted as the enemies of the Israelites in the Torah, archeologists, linguists, Biblical historians, and geneticists today widely agree that the ancient Hebrews were originally Canaanites themselves. The Tanakh itself even makes some vague references to the Hebrews’ Canaanite origins. Ezekiel 16:3 tells us, “Thus said the sovereign God to Jerusalem: by origin and birth you are from the land of the Canaanites — your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite.” The Amorites were a Canaanite people. 

It was customary at the time and in the region for nations to name themselves after their most important deities. For example, Israel’s neighboring Assyria named itself after the Mesopotamian deity “Ashur.” “El” was the most important god in the Canaanite pantheon; over time, the cult of El and of the southern deity YHWH merged to form the Hebrew God as we know Him today. “Israel,” then, translates to “one who wrestles with El [that is, God].”

Until 1948, the United Kingdom of Israel (1047-930 BCE), the southern Kingdom of Israel (930-722 BCE), and the Kingdom of Judah (930-587 BCE) were the only ever sovereign nation states in the entirety of the land’s history. At all other times, the region was a colony, vassal state, or province of some foreign empire whose administrative center was elsewhere. The founding of the State of Israel in 1948 marked the first time that the land belonged to a fully sovereign, independent state in over 2500 years.

ORIGINS OF PALESTINE

Historians have long debated the origins of the name “Palestine.” Most believe that the word derives from the Hebrew and Ancient Egyptian word “peleshet,” translating to “invader” or “migratory.” “Peleshet” was used to describe the Philistines, who settled on the Mediterranean coastline above Egypt, in parts of what is now Israel and Gaza. The Philistines were a seafaring people of Greek origin, entirely unrelated to today’s Palestinians, who are an Arab ethnonational group. Some Palestinians, particularly Christian Palestinians and Palestinians from the city of Nablus, have Jewish and Samaritan ancestry, respectively.

The first use of the word “Palestine” to describe a geographic region was in the 5th century BCE, at least 700 years after the first use of the word “Israel.” Like the Land of Israel, “Palestine” was a loose region, describing the coastal strip that runs from Egypt to Lebanon. However, unlike “Israel,” Palestine was not a political entity until the Romans renamed Judea “Syria-Palestina” in the second century CE.

Another, newer, more controversial theory asserts that “Palestine” derives from the Greek word “Palaistes,” meaning “wrestler.” If you recall, the term “Israel” means “one who wrestles with God.” According to this theory, “Palestine” is a direct Greek translation of “Israel.”

For hundreds of years, the term “Palestinian” was virtually synonymous with “Jew.” In the 18th century, for example, Immanuel Kant described the Jews in Europe as “the Palestinians among us.” In the early 20th century, Jews used “free Palestine” as a rallying call to establish a Jewish state.

The first Arab Palestinian to identify as Palestinian was Khalil Beidas in 1898, though the term was not universally used until the 1960s. During the 1937 Peel Commission, Palestinian Arab nationalist Anwi Abd al-Hadi told the British, “Palestine is a term the Zionists invented!”

WHY IS THE STATE OF ISRAEL "ISRAEL"?

Though the second Kingdom of Israel was conquered by the Assyrians in 722 BCE, both Jews and Samaritans continued referencing to the land as “Eretz Israel,” or the Land of Israel, for three millennia. When the Maccabees briefly gained a semblance of independence after the Maccabean Revolt (167-141 BCE), they referred to their new semi-autonomous kingdom as “Judea” and “Israel” interchangeably. During the Bar Kokhba Revolt against the Roman Empire (132-135 CE), the revolt leader, Simon Bar Kokhba, was known as the “prince of Israel.” 

Even during the British Mandate (1917-1948), the official name of Palestine was the “British Mandate of Palestine (Aleph Yud).” Aleph Yud are the letters corresponding to the abbreviation for “Eretz Israel,” the Land of Israel.

Even so, most assumed that the new Jewish state would be called “Judea,” or “Yehuda” in Hebrew. In 1949, on the first anniversary of the State of Israel, Zeev Sharef, who had been present during the deliberations, explained why the name “Judea” was quickly discarded: “Most people had thought that the state would be called Judea. But Judea is the historical name of the area around Jerusalem, which at that time seemed the area least likely to become part of the state...So Judea was ruled out.”

The Provisional Government of the State of Israel also spent some time deliberating on what the name for the country would be in Arabic. Initially they considered Palestine, or "Filastin" in Arabic, to "take the feelings of the Arab minority into account." But the idea seemed too confusing, because they assumed an Arab state would be established alongside the Jewish state, and that Arab state would likely be called Palestine. As such, the idea was discarded. Instead, Israel is called "Isra'il" in Arabic.

Since a lot of you guys seem to have a problem with reading comprehension, let me comprehend this for you: the point of this post is *not* to say only Jews have a right to live in the land, or to say that I unequivocally support everything the Israeli government has done, is doing, & will continue to do forever into eternity. 

the point is: (1) the idea that Israel is “colonial” is ahistorical & antisemitic because it is a blatant erasure of Jewish history & identity, (2) the idea that Palestine is “anti-colonial” is also ahistorical and also an erasure of Jewish history, & (3) the “river and the sea” that you’re so damn attached to in the name of “anti-imperialism”?Yeahhhh those borders were a British invention.

For a full bibliography of my sources, please head over to my Instagram and  Patreon. 

[whencyclopedia]

Ancient Israelite Technology

Technology enabled ancient Israel, the Northern Kingdom excluding Judah, to be economically prosperous and establish itself as a major political power as early as the 10th century BCE, steadily growing until its destruction in 720 BCE. Some of the most important technologies evident in archaeological and literary records include, though are certainly not limited to, construction and architecture, writing, industrial tools, and weapons of war.

As ancient Israelite technology here is presented primarily from the historical timeline as derived from archaeology, not the Hebrew Bible, the chronology suggested by Z. Herzog and L. Singer-Avitz will be used. Likewise, for the sake of this definition, “Israel” and “ancient Israel” refer to what is traditionally called the Northern Kingdom, while “Judah” refers to what is traditionally called the Southern Kingdom, with reference to the Hebrew Bible. “Israelite” or “Samarian”- Samaria being the capital of ancient Israel - and “Judean” or “Judahite” refer to the people of Israel and Judah respectively.

Technology in Israel Between the 13th and 11th Centuries BCE

The earliest mention of Israel appears in the Merneptah stele, which suggests that all the Israelites were killed. This was likely Egyptian propaganda. Even so, archaeological evidence for Israelites in this region as a unique ethnicity is lacking during this period. Therefore, is too hypothetical to discuss Israel's technology prior to the 10th century BCE.

Continue reading...

[miochimochi]

Simplified History of Canaan/Israel/Palestine

A good story starts at the beginning. In this case, about 15 thousand years ago in Canaan. The Canaanites were a Northwest Semitic people in the late bronze age comprised of a number of tribes: the Edomites, Amalekites, Phoenicians, Samaritans, and the Israelites, among others.

One of these tribes, the Israelites, revered the Canaanite god Yahweh above the rest. He would be worshiped alongside his consort Asherah and fellow gode El, and Baal. Over time, Yahweh came to lead the whole of the pantheon and became the sole subject of worship - a stage in the Israelite religion dubbed Monolatrism. This would later develop into a Monotheistic position, with gods like Baal being subject to demonization and El being to various epitaphs of Yahweh such as El-Shaddai. This change happened over a number of centuries, although we're unsure how many. What we do know is that the Monolatrist Yahwism was still a major religion in the region around 600BC.

Then came the Iron Age and the establishment of an Israelite kingdom in 1047BC. Saul rose as the first king of the now united Israel. It would continue until Jeroboam's Revolt in 930BC which would split the kingdom into two. Israel to the north, Judah to the south. Israel held control from east of the Jordan to the Mediterranean sea. Judah, on the other hand, had only the Jordan as its bordering water. The west side of Judah was held by the Philistine city states in what is today Gaza.

The Kingdom of Israel, also called the Kingdom of Samaria, had 4 capitals over its short time: Shiloh, Shechem, Tirzah, and Samaria. They lasted for 210 years before being subjugated by the Assyrians. The Assyrian Exile saw the forceful relocation of thousands of Israelites. There were 2 waves out of Israel up into Assyria and 1 other relocation that happened later in Beth-Eden out to Media. They took the northern Israel and dubbed it the province of Semarina. But the Assyrians would find themselves up against the Babylonians who sought the land for themselves. The Neo Assyrian Empire fell to the Neo Babylonian Empire and the lands of Israel, down to Judah as well, would be under Babylonian control.

Jerusalem was the capital of Judah, part of what was known under the Neo Babylonian Empire as the province of Yehud. Judah was not very happy about or compliant with their Babylonian captivity. The Judahite revolts lasted about 15 years and concluded with the Neo Babylonian Empire laying seige to Jerusalem. The seige lasted 2 years, ending in 587BC, ending the Kingdom of Judah after 343 years with the Babylonian exile. The Kingdom of Judah was later granted permission by the Babylonians to return, but no such Edict was made for the Kingdom of Israel. The split is said to be 2 tribes returning to Judah, 10 tribes still in exile. Fun fact: there are actually 13 tribes, the 13th being the Tribe of Levi, a tribe with no territory!

It's likely that this Babylonian exile was a big catalyst for the monotheistic Judaism we know now and a good portion of the Tanakh was written during this time. This was the period in which the Hebrew identity really began to take shape. From their faith, to their politics, and even the writing of their history. It's possible that either the majority of Judah was exiles or that only the few elites, now embittered by their exile and the taking of their land by those who were below them, were the only ones taken into exile.

Keep in mind that since the seige of Jerusalem, the Israelites did not have their temple. It was almost a century later under the Persian empire that the second temple would be built, starting a new age of Hebrew identity. The Persians were rather open to Jewish self-governance, allowing an autonomous kingdom of Israel to rise in the province of Yehud Medinata.

Israel stayed relatively undisturbed for centuries after. The Greeks would conquer Persia and establish the province of Celesyria. The Hasmonean dynasty took rise in 140BC and lasted until 37BC. It was first under the Seleucid empire and then gained a brief period of autonomy until the Hasmonean Civil War broke out and the Roman empire took the opportunity to intervene and subjugate the kingdom in 63BC. The dynasty would collapse with the rise of the Herodian dynasty.

This Herodian Kingdom would continue to be a client state of the Roman empire. After the death of King Herod, the Romans divided the kingdom among his children, marking the beginning of the Herodian Tetrarchy. This too would come to an end and Provincia Iudaea and Iturea would take its place. It was during this time that a man named Yeshua had done his teachings - teachings which would have a great effect on the region in later years. It was also during this time that the Second Temple period came to an end when the Romans besieged Jerusalem in the First Jewish-Roman War.

Provincia Iudaea would find itself changing as a result of the Bar Kokhba Revolt. The region would be named Provincia Syria Palastina in its restructuring and the Jews once again found themselves in exile. Those who remained after the defeat and execution of Bar Kokhba would be themselves executed or enslaved. But the Roman Empire began its decline and would break apart some time later. The region would fall into the hands of the Byzantine Empire. The Jewish land was now under the first empire to be Christian from its founding.

This Christian control would hold until the Muslim conquests began. These conquests fundamentally changed the cultural and demographic landscape of the whole Levant. What was once Northwestern Semitic was now decisively Arabic, a Central Semitic culture. The land of Israel was split between Jund Filastin and Al-'Urduun. It would remain this way under three separate caliphates until the Pope declared the First Crusade which established the Kingdom of Jerusalem which lasted for almost 200 years, then had a 5 year gap in which it was under Muslim control again, and then a nearly 100 more years after it was recaptured with the Third Crusade.

From here, the lands gets continuously taken and divided between various Caliphates, Sultanates, Emirates, and Principalities. But none of them quite got a great hold of the region until the Ottoman Empire got in the game. The empire lasted over 600 years, although the first half of it did not have the region under its control. A joint effort of British, French, and Arab forces would take control of the region away from the Ottoman empire in 1917, and in 1920 there was the establishment of Mandatory Palestine.

In the 1800s, a nationalist movement arose among the Jewish diaspora within Europe called Zionism. The movement called for a Jewish homeland to be reestablished within the region of Palestine, at the time under the control of the Ottoman Empire. It partly rose as a response to the Haskalah, an intellectual movement among Jews in Europe and the Middle East. The Haskalah saw a turn away from traditional dress and institutions, but, likely more importantly, a revival of the Hebrew language. You see, Hebrew at this point was only a liturgical language, the way Latin is in Catholicism. The Haskalah sought for it to be used among even secular society. The Haskalah helped to unify Jews, especially in Europe.

Zionism was always a diverse movement with various leaders holding various different positions, but all agreed on the thing that unified the whole ideology: a return to Israel at any cost. At this point, Jewish identity was still scattered and the bloodlines were muddled by centuries of exile. The Jews were found throughout Eurasia and Africa, but it was particularly the European Jews that had the biggest push towards resettlement and the reestablishment of an Israeli state. The Aliyah had picked up more in earnest.

It's believed that less than 1% of the Jewish diaspora were living in the Palestinian region in the late 19th century. Many Jews began to make aliyah to the region in the 1880s and they began to settle into the land. This was further spured on by the various persecutions Jews had faced in various places, making for a refugee settlement within the land. Through the involvement of the British, French, and Arabs, the political landscape shifted around these new settlers until 1948 when Israel officially became a sovereign nation. In 1950, Israel issued the Law of Return, calling for the global Jewish diaspora to return to the region and be granted citizenship within Israel.

There were clashes between the Jews and Arabs in Palestine during their migrations, but it was at the founding of an Israeli state that tensions soared. Both Israel and new Palestinian states of Gaza and the Jordanian Annexed West Bank argued over their capital. East Jerusalem was held as the Palestinian capital and West Jerusalem was held as the Israeli capital, but both wanted full control of Jerusalem. The conflicts would see the scales tilted most towards the side of Israel, with Palestinians taking the most casualties since Israel's founding.

Thy founding of Israel wasn't a peaceful one. The Arab League was instantly hostile to David Ben Gurion declaring an independent Israel and on May 14th 1948 attacked. The war was decisive, but bloody. Israel lost around 6,000, two thirds of that being civilians, while the Arab League had a combined loss upwards of 20,000 soldiers and civilians. This conflict established the All-Palestine Government, Egyptian occupation of Gaza, the Jordanian annexation of the West Bank, the cementing of Israel as a new nation. The Nakba occurred during this war and is what contributed most to the civilian casualties on the side of the Arab League. This event is seen as an ethnic cleansing of Palestine, with many targeted massacres of Arab majority towns and villages. Israel had displaced over 750,000 Arabs from the region during this time.

The Armistance signed at the end of the war was being observed by the parties involved but there was tension over the Straits of Tiran. This culminated in an Israeli invasion of Egypt when Egypt closed off the Suez Canal to Israel. This invasion reopened the canal and placed UNEF forces at the Egypt-Israel border. Israel would then threaten Egypt with a casus belli should they close the canal again. About a decade later, Egypt would mobilize troops to a defensive position at the border, call for the UNEF to leave, and closed the canal again. The UNEF obliged and began to leave. In response to all of this, Israel launched airstrikes against Egyptian airfields and other locations. Israel would simultaneously invade the Sinai peninsula and Gaza sparking the Six Day War. Jordan would launch attacks aimed at slowing the Israeli forces. Syria would join in the fifth day with attacks in the north, and on the sixth day Egyptian president Nasser would call for an evacuation of troops and civilians from the peninsula. The casualties were in the thousands for one side and the hundreds for the Israeli side. Israel didn't even believe Egypt would attack Israel, as the troop movements were not significant enough to engage an offensive.

The Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) would exchange fire at the Israel-Lebanon border, resulting in a number of soldier and civilian casualties on both sides. Back in the UK, a gunman tried to assassinate Israeli ambassador Shlomo Argov. Prime Minister Menachem Begin blamed the PLO for the attack and launched an invasion of southern Lebanon. In reality, the PLO had nothing to do with it - in fact, it was one of the PLO's enemies, the Abu Nidal Organization, that attempted the assassination. With the help of a number of domestic Lebanese-nationalist Christian groups, Israel occupied territory in southern Lebanon. Again with thousands dead on one side, hundreds on the Israeli. The invasion led to an Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon, to the chagrin of their Christian allies who had proclaimed the land the Free Lebanon State.

In the 80s, a series of protests and acts of civil disobedience occurred in the Israeli occupied Palestinian territories. People would take to the streets, fights would break out, and people would be killed. It lasted until 1993 with the Israel-PLO mutual recognition letters. These letters saw the PLO recognizing Israel as a sovereign state and Israel recognizing the PLO as the legitimate Palestinian authority. This set the groundwork for the Oslo I accords which resulted in the creation of the Palestinian National Authority (PNA). Upwards of 200 Israelis were killed and almost 2,000 Palestinians were killed, about 350 of those were killed by other Palestinians.

The accords would call for a 5 year period of peace in which plans for permanent peace could be negotiated. The PNA were to have administrative control of Palestine and the IDF would withdraw from Gaza and the West Bank. Oslo II would be signed in 1995 as an agreement by Israel to transfer authority of the Palestinian Council while also making it so the only armed groups allowed in Palestine would be the Israeli police, Israeli military, and Palestinian police. This would bar Palestine from any formal military or militia.

In 2001, Netanyahu would be secretly recorded as he said "They asked me before the election if I'd honor [the Oslo accords]... I said I would, but [that] I'm going to interpret the accords in such a way that would allow me to put an end to this galloping forward to the '67 borders. How did we do it? Nobody said what defined military zones were. Defined military zones are security zones; as far as I'm concerned, the entire Jordan Valley is a defined military zone. Go argue."

Hamas was founded in 1987 and was an opposition force to, not only Israel but, the ruling party of Palestine: Fatah. It formed out of a charity affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. By 2006, they had won the majority vote in the Palestinian legislative election and in 2007 they seized control of Gaza from Fatah. Their position was a reinstatement of Mandatory Palestine, but over time they declared they would settle for the 1967 border. They offered a truce with Israel should they honor the '67 border, to which Israel rejected.

Hamas had received backing from Israel during its foundation, according to Israeli officials Yitzhak Segev and Avner Cohen. It was meant to act as a sort of balance to act against the PLO and Fatah. This means that Hamas, considered a threat to Israeli security, began as a sort of proxy for Israel, although likely unknowingly. Israel would find themselves regretting this decision as Hamas would commit multiple acts of violence against Israeli citizens and soldiers over the years since their creation. Even with as much as there is documented, though, much of what is attributed to them is rather unclear as to whether they were actually their acts.

On October 7th, Hamas would launch a small scale attack around a music festival. Israel is believed to have also contributed to the fatalities that day. More people would be killed amidst the fallout of this event and many unsupported accusations would be made by Israel, such as a claim that Hamas engaged in mass rape during this event. Netanyahu would use this event as a springboard for what he viewed as just cause to launch an invasion of Palestine, focusing heavily on the Gaza Strip. Since then, there has been documented atrocities committed by Israel, little reliable coverage of what Hamas has been doing during this time frame, and a lot of unsubstantiated claims from both Israel and Palestine. Among the documented atrocities committed would be: humiliation and execution of Palestinians (including children), firing upon medical personnel and journalists, giving as little as only 5 minutes of warning before dropping bombs in heavily populated areas, firing upon Israeli hostages Hamas had released while they waived white flags, invaded a hospital and killed people (including children) lying in hospital beds, kidnapping, and executing an unarmed old man begging for his life at his bedside.

I've brought everything here up to show that history is not as simple as people like to present it as. There are many ups and downs, twists and turns, and even fabrications. I've seen people on both sides of the aisle present false information, deny history, and act like everything is entirely black and white the whole way down. And when I speak, I'm accused of supporting the worst things imaginable. Ancient Israel and the Israelites has been a topic of interest for me at different points in my life, I've done my digging. It would be wrong to say that the Arab Palestinians are the indigenous people and that ethnic Jews aren't. It would also be wrong to say that Israel has done no wrong, acting only in defense.

I don't take a side between Israel and Hamas. I take my side with the people caught in between this conflict that's been going on for a long time. It did not start October 7th. It all started much much much more long ago. Knowing your history is important to understanding today.

Also I wrote this on and off for about a month now and I just want to finally finish and post it, I'm not proofreading to make sure everything's entirely cohesive and strung together the best way possible, don't ever just trust some rando on the internet, do your own research.

No, I'm not pro-genocide nor antisemitic. I just like history and hate statists. Fuck this all. Heartless bastards always running the show and the people pay the price.

[inspofromancientworld]

The Destruction of Sennacherib and its Ancient Origins

By Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld - Die Bibel in Bildern, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=5490742

Lord George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron, published The Destruction of Sennacherib 1815. The poem is based on the Biblical account of the siege of Jerusalem in 701 BCE, which is attested to in the records of the Assyrians, though some details do differ. Where the Biblical account (found in 2 Kings 18-19 and Isaiah 36-37) tells of the death of 185,000 at the hand of an Angel of the Lord (מַלְאַךְ יְהוָה), the Assyrian record doesn't mention this at all.

By This image was produced by me, David Castor (user:dcastor). The pictures I submit to the Wikipedia Project are released to the public domain. This gives you the right to use them in any way you like, without any kind of notification. This said, I would still appreciate to be mentioned as the originator whenever you think it complies well with your use of the picture. A message to me about how it has been used would also be welcome. You are obviously not required to respond to these wishes of mine, just in a friendly manner encouraged to. (All my photos are placed in Category:Images by David Castor or a subcategory thereof.) - Own work, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6586365

During the reign of King Ahaz, Hezekiah's predecessor, the Kingdom of Judah began to experience some stability that continued through into the reign of King Hezekiah, allowing it to gain some political power even though it was a vassal state to Assyria and had to pay tribute to them annually. Its location, on the main roads between Assyria and Egypt lent them some power. When Hezekiah began to try and expand his power by reconquering lands in the Negev desert and making independent treaties with Egypt and Ascalon, a major Philistine city, and refusing to pay their tribute to Assyria, Sennacherib began a campaign in the Levant, leading to the siege of Jerusalem. Both sides claim it as a victory, the Judahites as above, by the hand of the angel of the Lord, the Assyrians as recorded on Sennacherib's Prism, written in about 690 BCE, a copy of a document written in 700 BCE. Sennacherib records that he had Hezekiah trapped 'like a caged bird' in Jerusalem and that his army caused the mercenaries reinforcing the city to flee, and that upon return to Assyria, Sennacherib received a large tribute, but does not mention a large loss of soldiers. There are mentions of campaigns two years later, in 699 BCE that lead to questions about the losses mentioned in the Hebrew account.

The poem has a galloping rhythm to it and a paired rhyming lines. It is rich with imagery, comparing the Assyrians to wolves coming on sheep, to stars upon the sea of Galilee, leaves in the summer forest among others.

You can read the poem here.

[tamamita]

I've been looking into some medical cases and was wondering, do you think the correlation of pig and humans organ anatomy being so similar causing pig transferred diseases to hit humans so much worse is related to pigs being impure in islam? Like it developing in the scriptures as haram as a protective measures to prevent stuff like pig tapeworms from affecting communities as much? Idk if this makes sense sorry haha

No, because pork wasn't associated with diseases back then. The idea of pork as a taboo was not something that became crystalized until the rivalry between ancient Judah and its northern Israelite neighbours. This was all before the Torah was codified, so most archeological evidence points to the idea that the Kings of Judah tried to establish an identity separate from that of the Philistines and the Northern Kingdom of Israel and thus the Kingdom of Judah became the center of identity and religious formation. This may be the reason why pork was seen declared unlawful for the Judahites, which distinguished it from its neighbours. But prok consumption as a taboo became especially wedged during the hellenistic period when Jewish people were introduced non-Jewish society, especially with the Greeks, Romans, and the later Christians.

The idea that pork is impure is obviously clear in Leviticus and the Qur'an, however, the idea of it carrying diseases was something discussed at a much later time. Maimonedes is assumed to be the first one to associate pork with viral diseases. No other religious source mentions the reason for why pork is forbidden except for it being ritually impure. This is why I keep mentioning that hygiene shouldn't be rationalized as a primary reason for its unlawfulness. While we can argue and discuss the prohibition of pork, it is attributed to socio-cultural and religious identity rather than how it has a detrimental effect on your health.

[spiritsoulandbody]

#DailyDevotion The Word Of The LORD Came to Hosea

#DailyDevotion The Word Of The LORD Came to Hosea Hosea I The LORD's Word that came to Hosea Beeri's son, when Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah were the kings of Judah and when Jeroboam, the son of Joash, was king of Israel. We're not really certain what fashion or form the Word of the LORD came to the prophets. Did they enter a state of ecstasy? Did they see a vision? Was it audible only in their heads or did they hear it outside of themselves? Inquiring minds want to know. What we do know is that is Word of God is our LORD Jesus Christ as identified by John 1, “1IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . .14And the Word became flesh and lived among us for a time and we saw His glory, the glory of the only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” This Word came to Hosea, Beeri's son. Hosea is an interesting name. It means salvation. It's the me word we sing “Hosanna.” There would only be salvation if the Israelites and the Judahites listened to his message and repented. This ministry of Hosea is placed in history. It is not some myth or fairy tale. He preaches during the reign of four kings of Judah and one king of Israel. That should tell you something of the palace intrigues in Judah. It also tells you something of how the kings of Judah acted towards the LORD to be replaced by the LORD in quick succession, although Uzziah lasted a while. It seems Hosea preached towards the end of his reign. Hezekiah would be the only decent king for Judah during this time. Hosea would only, according to his book, prophesy to Judah a few times. Jeroboam wasn't actually a good king in the LORD's eyes. Yet, for the sake of His people Israel, He blessed Jeroboam's reign. He allowed Jeroboam to recover the land lost after Solomon's reign. It was only for the sake of His people there the LORD blessed Jeroboam. We Christians might want to take note of this. The LORD blesses the world, our country, our states, our counties and cities for the sake of His people and those who would come to faith in the future. It's not that our leaders are so great. It is God who is so great. Maybe our leaders should take note of this and truly seek His blessing. Most of Hosea's prophecy would be trying to call the Israelites to repentance. He preaches a lot of judgment. They continued in the first king Jeroboam's sin, worshiping the golden calf in the south and in the north, treating them as if they were the LORD. They however, picked up worshiping the false gods of their neighbors as well. In the worship of these false gods the love of the neighbor would wax cold. They would cease to live according to the covenant the LORD made with them at Mt. Sinai. The preaching of judgment wasn't because it pleased the LORD to punish evil doers. It's purpose is always to call people to repentance and faith. God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Hosea would also preach the good news of the kingdom at times as well. He would preach the coming of the Messiah, the Word made flesh. Perhaps as we read God's word of judgment and salvation to these nations, we should examine our own hearts, our own nations actions, repent of our individual guilt and our nation's guilt and pray the LORD would grant repentance both to us individually and to our nation as a whole. Merciful God and Father, You have provided Your Word to us that we would repent of our sins and turn to Your only-begotten Son, the Word of God, for salvation. Grant us and also the people of our nation to turn from our own self-interest and to You for all good things. In Jesus' name we pray. Amen. Read the full article

[foggynightdonut]

Ammon, Moab and Edom

The kingdoms of Ammon, Moab and Edom fought with the Israelites and the Judahites over territory. The Bible presents things from the Israelites’ and Judahites’ point of view, and archaeological discoveries help show us the other side. By looking at what these ancient peoples wrote and left behind, we are able to better understand their perspective. We now have a fuller picture of their kings, gods and daily life.

[thegenealogy]

1 Chronicles 20: 1-3. "Tools."

The Capture of Rabbah

Rabbah is "Greatness." It is an offspring of Ammon, "the nation of the chosen."

רבב

The verb רבב (rabab) means to be or become many. Adjective רב (rab) means much, many or great, and the identical noun רב (rab) means chief or captain; hence too the familiar noun ραββι (rabbi), meaning Rabbi. Noun רב (rob) means multitude or abundance. Nouns רבבה (rebaba), רבו (ribo) and רבוא (ribo') mean ten-thousand or myriad. Noun רביבים (rebibim) denotes copious showers.

Noun רבב (rabab), describes a smear of viscous fat, an obvious sign that someone was well off. That same noun was spelled רבד (rabad), which may have helped the formation of the word ραβδος (rabdos), staff, rod or scepter.

20 In the spring, at the time when kings go off to war, Joab led out the armed forces. He laid waste the land of the Ammonites and went to Rabbah and besieged it, but David remained in Jerusalem. Joab attacked Rabbah and left it in ruins. 

All of this is tied to Joab, David's son who seems to do all his dirty work. If we don't transmit the blueprint for civilization from father to son, from King to Kingdom, then we get what we have: Savages using modern instruments.

2 David took the crown from the head of their king[a]—its weight was found to be a talent[b] of gold, and it was set with precious stones—and it was placed on David’s head. He took a great quantity of plunder from the city 3 and brought out the people who were there, consigning them to labor with saws and with iron picks and axes. 

Gold has no value except as jewelry. It is not used for any other purpose but vanity, except when it is used for royalty, then it gives an ordinary mortal the power of a god. This is the meaning of gold in the Torah, how the value system turns rote savages into men of the Royal Line of Israel.

Gold goes in the crown for the king, the people get saws, iron picks, and axes.

Anything made of iron refers to the male penis. As the following states, any king who got control of the iron in his kingdom was able to hold onto it and fight the others:

Iron in Israel and Judah

Why was iron adopted by the kings of Israel and Judah and preferred over bronze? The answer is related to economic, political and social aspects during this time. Mining the copper necessary to produce bronze items was a complex procedure that was tightly controlled by its producers. Tin, the other material required for the production of bronze, was pricey. Thus, bronze was reserved for specific artefacts that required casting.

Iron, was more readily mined and available in territories that came under the control of the Israelites and Judahites, such as the Negev in the south and the Ajlun in the northeast. Its alloying component—carbon—was naturally present in the furnace and just needed to be controlled.

Thus, once iron technology was mastered, it became the cheaper, more readily available and controllable metal, and thus preferred by producers, and consequently by consumers, alike. This afforded the rulers of the kingdoms an economic asset whose control granted them enhanced political power and social standing.

If we think of the Torah as the technology and men with penises as the iron ore as an asset, then we get the idea behind the iron picks, saws, and axes, used for clearing the landscape for the purposes of building all the assets a civilized nation requires for its survival.

David did this to all the Ammonite towns. Then David and his entire army returned to Jerusalem.

[ithisatanytime]

Norm Macdonald Provoking People for His Own Entertainment

"The western extremities of Judæa towards Casius are occupied by Idumæans(Edomites), and by the lake [Sirbonis], The Idumæans (Edomites) are Nabatæans (Caananite-Mixed Race), when driven from their country by sedition, they passed over to the Judaeans (The Kingdom of Judahites/Israelites), and adopted their customs. -Strabo, Geography 16.2.34 (23 AD)

They [Edomites] killed Hyrcanus four years later and then they kicked out all the Judahites from the Temple. -- Josephus (Antiquities XV, 6, 1)

 this is why jesus said they were not of abraham but there father who was a murderer FROM THE BEGINNING, and they would pay for all the spilled blood of the prophets going back to ABLE, and why in revelations it says TWICE to beware those who say they are jews and are not but do lie and are the synagogue of satan, read rev 2:9 and 3:9 if you dont already know them by heart. they are imposters, canaanites, edomites, etc, and were already so before the historical accounts listed above because the old testament records the lower kingdom of judah intermixxing with them multiple times, NOT the upper kingdom of israel who was taken into exile and then “lost” ten tribes of the twelve are considered “lost” the greater part of israel, they are not lost, they are the saxons, the celts, and the danes.

[dfroza]

“Heavenly wisdom centers on purity, peace, gentleness, deference, mercy, and other good fruits untainted by hypocrisy.

The seed that flowers into righteousness will always be planted in peace by those who embrace peace.”

Today’s reading of the Scriptures from the New Testament is the 3rd chapter of the letter of James:

My brothers and sisters, do not encourage a large number of you to become teachers because teachers will be held to a higher standard. We all stumble along the way. If a person never speaks hurtful words or shouts in anger or profanity, then he has achieved perfection. The one who can control his tongue can also control the rest of his body. It’s like when we place a metal bit into a horse’s mouth to ride it; we can control its entire body with the slightest movement of our hands. Have you ever seen a massive ship sailing effortlessly across the water? Despite its immense size and the fact that it is propelled by mighty winds, a small rudder directs the ship in any direction the pilot chooses. It’s just the same with our tongues! It’s a small muscle, capable of marvelous undertakings.

And do you know how many forest fires begin with a single ember from a small campfire? The tongue is a blazing fire seeking to ignite an entire world of vices. The tongue is unique among all parts of the body because it is capable of corrupting the whole body. If that were not enough, it ignites and consumes the course of creation with a fuel that originates in hell itself. Humanity is capable of taming every bird and beast in existence, even reptiles and sea creatures great and small. But no man has ever demonstrated the ability to tame his own tongue! It is a spring of restless evil, brimming with toxic poisons. Ironically this same tongue can be both an instrument of blessing to our Lord and Father and a weapon that hurls curses upon others who are created in God’s own image. One mouth streams forth both blessings and curses. My brothers and sisters, this is not how it should be. Does a spring gush crystal clear freshwater and moments later spurt out bitter salt water? My brothers and sisters, does a fig tree produce olives? Is there a grapevine capable of growing figs? Can salt water give way to freshwater?

Who in your community is understanding and wise? Let his example, which is marked by wisdom and gentleness, blaze a trail for others. If your heart is one that bleeds dark streams of jealousy and selfishness, do not be so proud that you ignore your depraved state. The wisdom of this world should never be mistaken for heavenly wisdom; it originates below in the earthly realms, with the demons. Any place where you find jealousy and selfish ambition, you will discover chaos and evil thriving under its rule. Heavenly wisdom centers on purity, peace, gentleness, deference, mercy, and other good fruits untainted by hypocrisy. The seed that flowers into righteousness will always be planted in peace by those who embrace peace.

The Letter of James, Chapter 3 (The Voice)

Today’s paired chapter of the Testaments is the 25th chapter of the book of 2nd Chronicles that details the reign of King Amaziah of Judah:

Amaziah, son of Joash and Jehoaddan of Jerusalem, was 25 years old when he became king, and he reigned 29 years in Jerusalem.

He followed the Eternal, but was not completely devoted to Him for his entire life.

As soon as he took power in the Southern Kingdom, Amaziah solidified his throne by executing his opponents, the servants who had assassinated his father Joash. But Amaziah followed Moses’ law, which the Eternal had commanded, and had mercy on their children: “Everyone is responsible for his own sins. Therefore, parents will not be killed for their children’s actions and children will not be killed for their parents’ actions.”

Then Amaziah prepared for battle by gathering the Judahites and appointing commanders from each family in Judah and Benjamin. He took a census of the men 20 years old and older, and there were 300,000 ready to fight with spears and shields. To enlarge his army, Amaziah also hired 100,000 heroic men from the Northern Kingdom for 7,500 pounds of silver. But Amaziah was warned against hiring mercenaries from the Northern Kingdom by a man who followed after the True God.

Prophet of God: O king, do not let the army of Israel fight with you. The Eternal does not support the Northern Kingdom, these Ephraimites. But if you do take the mercenaries with you, prepare yourself well for the battle. The True God will support your enemy rather than supporting you because God has the power to both build you up and tear you down.

Amaziah: But I have already paid 7,500 pounds of silver to the Northern Kingdom’s troops. What should be done?

Follower of God: Don’t worry about the money. It is nothing compared to what the Eternal has to give you.

So Amaziah dismissed the Northern Kingdom’s mercenaries as the man had advised him to do, and they returned home. The mercenaries were furious at Judah because they would lose their portion of the spoils of victory, so they raided the cities in Judah (from Samaria in the north to Beth-horon in the south), killing 3,000 and taking spoils.

But Amaziah was rewarded for obeying God’s message. He strengthened himself and led only Judahite soldiers into battle at the valley of Salt. There they killed 10,000 Edomites from the city of Seir and captured 10,000. The Judahites then threw the prisoners from the top of a cliff, crushing them on the rocks below.

Unfortunately, Amaziah did not remain faithful to God and His messages. When he returned from fighting the Edomites, he brought the gods of Seir back to Jerusalem where they worshiped them—bowing down and burning incense—as he had worshiped God.

Furious with Amaziah, the Eternal sent a message to the king through a prophet.

Prophet: What are you thinking? Why would you choose to follow gods that cannot save their own people from your armies after I gave you victory?

Amaziah (interrupting): When did you become my advisor? Stop prophesying, or your life will be taken from you.

Prophet: I may not be one of your court advisors, but you should still listen to my counsel. If you do not, the True God will destroy you because you have worshiped other gods and ignored my warning.

Then Amaziah, king of Judah, listened to his royal counselors’ advice and decided to address the Northern Kingdom’s invasion of Judah. He sent a message to Joash (son of Jehoahaz, son of Jehu), the king of the Northern Kingdom asking for a face-to-face meeting.

Joash’s Response: The thornbush in Lebanon sent a message to the cedar in Lebanon: “Give your daughter to my son in marriage.” But a wild beast in Lebanon trampled the thornbush.

You defeated the Edomites, and now you have become haughty. For your own good, stay where you belong. Do not provoke me to destroy both you and your people, Judah.

But Amaziah would not listen to Joash’s warning because the True God had allowed him to become stubborn. God intended to give Joash a victory over the Southern Kingdom because they worshiped the Edomite gods. Then Joash, king of the Northern Kingdom, traveled south to the interior of the Southern Kingdom to face Amaziah, king of the Southern Kingdom, at Beth-shemesh. As predicted, the Northern Kingdom defeated the Southern Kingdom, and the Judahites fled to their homes. Joash captured Amaziah, son of Joash who was the son of Jehoahaz, at Beth-shemesh and took him to Jerusalem where the Northern forces tore down 600 feet of the wall of Jerusalem from the gate of Ephraim to the corner gate. Joash took all the gold, silver, and utensils from the True God’s temple from the service of Obed-edom. He then returned to Samaria with the temple treasures, palace treasures, and hostages.

Amaziah (son of Joash, king of the Southern Kingdom) lived 15 years longer than Joash (son of Jehoahaz, king of the Northern Kingdom). All the events of Amaziah’s reign are included in the book of the kings of Judah and Israel, from his ascension to his assassination. From the moment Amaziah stopped following the Eternal to follow the Edomite gods, the people of Jerusalem plotted against him. He fled to Lachish, where the people followed and killed him. They brought his body back to Judah on horseback, where they buried him. But Amaziah was not honored in his burial. He was not laid with the former kings, but with just his ancestors in the capital city of Judah, Jerusalem.

The Book of 2nd Chronicles, Chapter 25 (The Voice)

A link to my personal reading of the Scriptures for Sunday, march 12 of 2023 with a paired chapter from each Testament of the Bible along with Today’s Proverbs and Psalms

A post by John Parsons about opening to trust:

If you can't detect God's hand in your circumstances, then trust His heart... The heart of faith affirms: "Gam zu l'tovah" (גַּם זוּ לְטוֹבָה): “this too is for good,” particularly when the present hour may be shrouded in darkness... Whenever I am confused about life (which is often enough), I try to remember what God said to Moses after the tragic sin of the Golden Calf: "I will make all my goodness pass before you and will proclaim before you my Name, 'The LORD' (יהוה). And I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy" (Exod. 33:19). God’s character does not change: the LORD is the same “yesterday, today, and forever.” The meaning of the Name, however, cannot be known apart from understanding the need of the heart...

Earlier God had revealed to Moses that the Name YHVH (יהוה) means: "He is Present" (i.e., the word is a play on the Hebrew verb hayah [הָיָה], "to be"), and therefore the LORD God is “always there” (Exod. 3:14). The great I AM (אֶהְיֶה) means God stands outside of the constraints of time, “one day is as a thousand years” and “a thousand years as one day” before Him (2 Pet. 3:8). Just as a thousand years is but “a watch in the night” (Psalm 90:4), so one day is as a thousand years. God’s Spirit broods over all things and sustains the entire universe. God is “necessary being,” the Source of Life, and foundation for all other existence. God’s creative love and power sustain all things in creation...

Now while the idea that God is the Source of all life in the universe is surely important, it is not entirely comforting, especially in light of man’s guilt and anxiety over death. After all, we do not stand before the “god of the philosophers,” but rather the personal God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The meaning of the Name YHVH - that He is merciful, gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love and truth (Exod. 34:6-7) - therefore presents additional revelation in face of man’s inherent brokenness and spiritual need. Some things in life are only known in the *passion of faith... things like love, beauty, honor, and so on. The Name of the LORD as the Compassionate One is only known in humility, when all human pretense is stripped away and the inner life is laid bare in its desperate need. The Name YHVH is God’s response to the heart’s cry for deliverance, for compassion, for mercy....

What is God like - what is His heart - is the first question, and how we answer that will determine how we deal with all the other questions that come up in theology... What do you feel inside when you look up at the ceiling before you go to bed? In light of the ambiguity and heartaches of life we might wonder if God is truly there for us. Does God care? Is He angry at me? Does He really love me? This is the raw place of faith, where we live in the midst of our questions. The Name YHVH means “He is present,” even when we are unconscious of His Presence in the hour of our greatest need.

The religionist is at risk of being enslaved to the idea of God’s conditional acceptance. His unconscious creed is: “If you (outwardly) obey, then you belong.” The message of the cross scandalizes the realm of the outwardly religious because it boldly states, "if you believe, then you belong...” As Kierkegaard rightly observed, "And this is the simple truth - that to live is to feel oneself lost. He who accepts it has already begun to find himself, to be on firm ground. Instinctively, as do the shipwrecked, he will look around for something to which to cling, and that tragic, ruthless glance, absolutely sincere, because it is a question of his salvation, will cause him to bring order into the chaos of his life. These are the only genuine ideas; the ideas of the shipwrecked. All the rest is rhetoric, posturing, farce." For Kierkegaard, religious rituals devoid of a sense of crisis within the heart are little more than a sham. “I think of the times I tried to use him to make my life secure, and undisturbed, and painless. Also the times I was enslaved by fear of him, and by the need to protect myself against him through rites and circumstances” (Anthony de Mello). Religious behavior (i.e., rituals, ceremonialism, etc.) is an otiose substitute for trusting that God's heart (YHVH) is forever present for you.

[ Hebrew for Christians ]

========

Exodus 34:6 reading:

https://hebrew4christians.com/Blessings/Blessing_Cards/exod34-6-jjp.mp3

Hebrew page download:

https://hebrew4christians.com/Blessings/Blessing_Cards/exod34-6-lesson.pdf

See also: Ki Tisa Torah summary:

https://hebrew4christians.com/Scripture/Parashah/Summaries/Ki_Tisa/ki_tisa.html#loaded

3.10.23 • Facebook

Today’s message (Days of Praise) from the Institute for Creation Research

March 12, 2023

Limitations on God's Promises

“Thus saith the LORD; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the LORD.” (Jeremiah 31:37)

The people of Israel, in spite of all God had done for them, continually rebelled against Him, even turning to other gods. One might think God would have destroyed them and started again, but He had made a promise first to Abraham, then to Isaac, and then to Jacob that this nation would be His special people, and He would not break that promise.

In our text God reveals the “conditions” under which He would cast off Israel, but they are such that there is no possibility of their being met.

If heaven above can be measured: Neither Abraham nor Jeremiah could have had any concept of the number of stars or the depth of space. Now, with modern telescopes, we see unthinkable distances and even farther and farther as our technology increases. Estimates of the radius of the universe now stand at around 46 billion light-years, and no end is in sight.

If the foundations of the earth [can be] searched out beneath: Sometimes scientists claim they know more about the sun than they do the earth. But in reality, only one percent of the earth’s radius has been explored. The pressures and temperatures that exist deep inside the earth are unthinkably great, and we don’t even know how matter acts under those conditions. The promise to Israel is secure.

Scripture is likewise full of “exceeding great and precious promises” (2 Peter 1:4) made to the believer. Our text indicates God’s attitudes toward His promises. We need not worry that He will keep His Word. JDM

[fortunatelychaoticphantom]

I think it is also important to note that the palestinians are in the area they call palestine because they colonized it, arab conquest and onwards - doesn't mean I don't support an independent palestinian state in the palestinian territories or think israel is blameless or that reparations aren't owed, but the framing as if the indigenous people dispersed by the colonizing empires returning is the actual act of colonization weirds me out.

Original post for reference.

Okay, so it's a bit more complicated than that. And by "bit" I mean A LOT.

I think one of the central problems in the entire conflict, a major crux that is harming any and all attempts at reaching a solution is that we are trying to solve a literally ancient problem with modern tools. This is incredibly important to understand when we speak about the territories of "Israel" and "Palestine".

The short answer is that our (as in the popular laymen) definition of what "Israel" means in a historical view is completely wrong, and we were never alone here to begin with. There are certain aspects that I agree with you about, and there is a LOT of hypocrisy on the Palestinian side (as well as Western Leftists), but the fact is that they are very much indigenous to this land just like us. The problems is, like I said, what exactly do we call "Israel" in the first place.

Now, here is the long answer.

We need to break down the meaning of Israel first, and there are five of those:

Yaacov - First and foremost, the man, the legend, the asshole. Yaacov, or Jacob as English speakers might know him, was a biblical character that at a certain point in the story was given another name - Israel - and is considered to be the "father of the nation", which leads us to...

The people of Israel - the name that was given to the Hebrew people, or the Jewish people, after their legendary ancestor.

The Kingdom of Israel - one of the two ancient kingdoms of the Hebrew people*. (*I'm not gonna go into the question of whether the Israelites actually saw themselves as Hebrew and as a single People with the Judahites, because that's just way way way out of the scope of this tiny answer). This is the older, more powerful and more affluent kingdom that existed from around the middle of the 10th century BC until its destruction by the Assyrians in the Sargon II campaign of 720 BC, when many of its people were exiled, it completely lost its autonomy and was divided into 5 provinces, the most famous one of which being Samaria, named after the former capital of the kingdom (Shomron). At its prime, the kingdom's borders were these: On the Mediterranean shore in the west from around modern Rishon LeTzion north through Jaffa and all the way to Haifa. In the north the Galil and Ramat HaGolan. In the east it followed the Jordan river until about Beit Shean, where it veered east of the river to what is modern Jordan, to the Heights of Gilead (depending on the period and who won the most recent war of course...). And in the south it bordered the Kingdom of Judea, north of Jerusalem (probably around the area of modern Ramallah). Other major cities that were a part of this kingdom were Shechem, Jericho, the aforementioned Samaria, Dor, Meggido, Hazor.

The Land of Israel (Eretz Israel) - the geographical region that corresponds to the modern definitions of what certain people want the Full Israel to be and others want the Full Palestine to be. In this context, both of these names are stupid. This land is actually and more accurately called Canaan, as this is what the actual people who lived here and their neighbors called it, besides the specific names of kingdoms within it. Also, depending on your definition (weird modern, insane modern, normal ancient), this territory also includes certain areas in Jordan, Syrian and Lebanon. The names of this land were changed throughout the years by the people who conquered it, usually dividing it to different provinces, pahavot, and so on, until it was pretty much known just as Palestina by the Byzantine period (I think?? this is way out of my periods of expertise... I have seen the other side of the zero in like a decade).

The country of Israel - you know the one... the one we love to hate and hate to love... a country that exists in the modern world with... certain borders. Sometimes. Depending who you ask.

Now, that's Israel. But we need to talk about the other one. Yehuda (or Judea or Judah at different periods). This is the second of the two ancient Hebrew kingdoms. This is the smaller, weaker and poorer kingdom with infinitesimal local importance. None, actually, whatsoever. This tiny little thing throughout most of its history resided on the mountain area around Jerusalem, and not much more. But at its height it reached Lachish in the west (, the Dead Sea in the east, and Beersheba in the south. After the destruction of Israel it wished to spread north, to its sister kingdom's territories, and in certain periods (especially the Greek and Roman) it did. Judea sometimes also included the important city of Hebron.

There are two things that should be taken from my descriptions of the borders of the two kingdoms - first, that these are, in fact, kingdoms, and that the modern concept of borders should absolutely not be applied to them, as they constantly change and move and shift, both by inner and outer machinations. To an Israelite, the eastern Jordan is a 100% a part of their homeland. But the only people who would dare suggest such a thing today are not exactly on the normal side of the political scale, not even on the right wing of it. Which is probably a good thing...

The second thing that should be taken is the vary glaring absence of the entire southern (HaNegev) and south-western areas of modern Israel. That's because those weren't ours. In the south-west lived a people called Plishtim (or as they are known in English, Philistines. It's a little complicated calling them a people, as some scholars are veering off of that in recent years, but we'll leave it at that for this time). These were several city-states that rose and fell in different periods, and to the most part disappeared as an entity into the broad Canaanite identity in later periods. The main cities they controlled were Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Gath, Ekron and Gezer (depending on the period). In the south was the Kingdom of Edom, who also spread east into modern Jordan.

This Edomite kingdom in particular is important in relation to that one city I mentioned earlier - Hebron. Like I said, this city was sometimes in Judahite control, and sometimes it wasn't. Sometimes they saw themselves as Judeans, and sometimes they didn't. Why am I mentioning this? Well, because Hebron happens to be the "birth place" of a particular mythical character - Abraham. By "birth place" I mean the place the myth was created. Abraham is an autochthonous character of this city, which specific connections to a particular temple in Elonei Mamre, that predates all of these kingdoms by a lot. This character was adopted by the Judahites as an ancestor when they ruled the city, but when other people ruled it, they adopted the traditions as well. This is just one example (and a particularly important one that affected the course of world history and the development of certain religions) of the flexibility and dynamism of kingdoms, borders and even ethnic identities.

But of coarse, a certain rebellion came and went, and the second temple was destroyed in 70 AD. Any remnants of Jewish independence and autonomy in Canaan were erased, and most of the Jewish people were exiled. Then the second rebellion came, and most of the few that remained were exiled or killed as well. And then came the name change... I won't go into where the name Palestina came and why, because it doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is the fact that we were no longer the rulers (even if under the authority of bigger rulers) of any territory of this land. That's when other people came in. Some from other areas in Canaan, other from outside it.

The Palestinians themselves are probably, to some extent, descendants of both the Philistines, the Edomites, other Canaanites and Beduin, and yes other outside Arabs and other-other peoples who have moved through this land or even conquered it. They are probably also related to us as well. Like I said, ethnic identity and nationality were very very very flexible back then. Heck, we converted half of the northern territories of Israel (the former territories of the Kingdom of Israel, that were populated by exiles that were brought by the Assyrians, Babylonians and Persians from other areas) during the reign of the Hashmonaim (Greek period).

So the thing is that when we say "Israel", what we mean is the Land of Israel, but that doesn't actually corresponds to our actual ancestral homeland, not entirely. It was also the home of other people, who are themselves the ancestors of the Palestinians. If you look at it like that, what you see is that actually, in an ancient sense (ignoring all modern context), we are colonizing some of their territories, like Ashkelon and Ashdod, and they are colonizing some of out territories, like Jericho, Shechem, and yes - Jerusalem.

And this is the thing that I absolutely agree with you on, and I really wish there was less hypocrisy about it from the other side. Like, I'm absolutely an atheist, and for all I care they can take it all if it means peace. and honestly I hate this city, but also, like, that's ours. That is indisputably, unquestionably, irrevocably an ancient Jewish city. The City. Unlike other cities, at no point in the entire existence of the entity that can be called Judea was this city in the hands of anyone else but us. Not even after the destruction of the first temple.

This is incredibly simplified and completely one-sided, but I can't help but imagine what if it weren't about Jewish people. Imagine that Italy was made of independent city-states and small kingdoms (like it used to). Imagine that India came and conquered it. Imagine that the Romans (as in the people of the city of Rome) decided to rebel. Imagine that it went horribly wrong. Imagine that most of the Romans were banished, exiled from Italia to roam the world. Imagine that the Indians also destroyed the Vatican, and in its place built a Hindu temple. Imagine that a few centuries later The Germans came. But its okay right? I mean their Europeans! What's the difference between Germans and Italians, right? So the Germans come and they fight the Indians for centuries, and they destroy the Hindu temple and build a new magnificent temple to Odin. Unbelievably beautiful. Many worshipers of Odin from all over the world come to see this temple. Imagine that 1700 years after they were exiled, the Roman finally have an opportunity to come to their homeland. Imagine that they do that, waging war against the Germans and the German-Italian city-states in Italia. Imagine that they win to the most part, and that they ask the Germans if they could come pray on the ground where once stood the holiest of their temples, the actual goddam Vatican. Imagine the Germans going full Horse-Loose-In-A-Hospital and screaming "if you even fucking look at the hospital, I will stomp you to death with my hooves" and calling the Romans "colonizers". Anyway, if a people that weren't Jewish would have returned to their homeland after more than a thousand years, there would have been outcries of Western Leftist circle to destroy the Odin temple... (which I am absolutely against, both in metaphor and in the real world, and will never support because I'm not out of my mind. Also, it really is pretty...).

To sum up - like I said, life is a shit show, and a tragic one at that. The pain of existence is that even when you are right, others are right as well about the same issue in a completely opposite way. Which sucks. But that's what you get for letting the Assyrians do whatever they want...

[a-queer-seminarian]

Amy-Jill Levine on the Parable of the Good Samaritan, Part 4:

Providing historical context about the Samaritans, to push against interpretations that imply Samaritans were oppressed by Jews (in Jesus’s time, neither group had systemic privilege over the other — both were subjugated by Rome & their enmity for one another was mutual).

...A Samaritan, who was on a journey, came to where the man was. But when he saw him, he was moved with compassion. The Samaritan went to him and bandaged his wounds, tending them with oil and wine. Then he placed the wounded man on his own donkey, took him to an inn, and took care of him.The next day, he took two full days’ worth of wages and gave them to the innkeeper. He said, ‘Take care of him, and when I return, I will pay you back for any additional costs.’

- Luke 10:33-35

The Samaritan’s compassion then becomes, for many of today’s interpreters, the hook by which the sermon functions. In a number of settings, the parable serves as a warning against prejudice; for example, the two who walk by are a pastor and a choir director, while the Samaritan is a gay man, an “illegal immigrant,” a person on parole, or any other victim of bigotry.

The point in this reading is that “they” are really nice, that “we” sometimes fail in our obligations to help, and that “we” too should “have compassion” on those who are mistreated. ... But to understand the parable as did its original audience, we need to think of Samaritans less as oppressed but benevolent figures and more as the enemy, as those who do the oppressing.

From the perspective of the man in the ditch, Jewish listeners might balk at the idea of receiving Samaritan aid. They might have thought, “I’d rather die than acknowledge that one from that group saved me”; “I do not want to acknowledge that a rapist has a human face”; or “I do not want to recognize that a murderer will be the one to rescue me.” ...

[Historical Context: Origins of the Samaritans]

As the Bible recounts, the Samaritan people originated after the twelve-tribe United Monarchy ruled by David and then Solomon split into two independent states. ...

The Northern Kingdom, called both Israel and Ephraim (after Joseph’s son; see, e.g., Isa. 7.9; Jer. 31.9), was conquered by the Assyrians in 722 BCE, and many of its citizens were carted off to places unknown. …The Assyrians then moved residents from other conquered nations into the region. …The resulting population took its name from the capital, and so the Samaritans as a nation were born. ...

During the next century, Babylon conquered Assyria and then in 587 BCE conquered the Southern Kingdom, Judah, and took the remaining Davidic king as well as many of the country’s leading citizens into exile in Babylon. In 538, Cyrus of Persia conquered Babylon; one of his acts was to repatriate the Judahites to their homeland. Some stayed in Babylon; others returned, and they did so with plans to rebuild not only their nation, but also their Temple. It was over the construction of the Temple that a new enmity between Jews who had returned from Babylon and Samaritans would develop. ...

In the early fourth century (ca. 388), the Samaritans constructed their own temple on Mt. Gerizim, and following the conquests of Alexander the Great in 333 Samaria was rebuilt as a Greek city (polis). Enmity with the Jews in the south continued.

The Jews who rebelled in 165 BCE against the assimilationist policies of the Seleucid king Antiochus IV Epiphanes and his allies in the priestly establishment resented the Samaritans for not coming to their aid. The Jewish king John Hyrcanus attacked Samaria in 128 BCE and burned down the Samaritan Temple on Mt. Gerizim. It was rebuilt by Herod the Great, who also rebuilt the Jerusalem Temple.

From the Persian period in the late sixth century BCE to the time of Jesus, Jews and Samaritans remained at odds. Each claimed the true descent from Abraham, true understanding of Torah, the correct priesthood, and the right form of worship in the proper location.

...

To look at the Samaritans only through the perspective of the biblical tradition is to tell only half the story. The Samaritans’ own self-designation is Shamerim, meaning “guardians” or “observers” of the Law. …Samaritans traditionally view themselves as descendants of Joseph, and thus of his sons Ephraim and Manasseh, and as possessing the correct interpretation of Torah, which had been promulgated at the Northern sanctuary in Shechem.

As for the Jews, according to ancient Samaritan tradition, they got off track at the time of Samuel, when the priest Eli set up a heretical sanctuary at Shiloh. Errors continued, from Solomon, who, incorrectly in their view, erected a temple in Jerusalem; to Ezra, who in their view rewrote the Pentateuch with a Judean bias; to Rabbi Hillel, who corrupted the tradition with his innovations regarding the interpretation of the Torah.

…According to Matthew, Jesus enjoins his disciples, “Enter no town of the Samaritans” (10.5). Luke even ensures that readers unfamiliar with local politics understand the enmity. In the chapter preceding our parable (9.51–56), Luke recounts that a Samaritan village refused Jesus hospitality “because his face was set toward Jerusalem.”

…

According to his Antiquities, at the time of the Roman governor Cumanus (ca. 48–50) it was the “custom of the Galileans” to travel through Samaria on their way to the pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem. Samaritan residents in a village called Ginea attacked the Galileans and massacred a number of them. Other Galilean Jews sought the governor’s help in punishing the murderers, but, as Josephus recounts, the Samaritans bribed Cumanus to do nothing. A number of Galileans, “much displeased,” ignoring the warnings of saner voices, and opting for vigilante justice, “plundered many Samaritan villages.” The Samaritan leaders accused the Jews not only of plunder, but also of setting their villages on fire. The political crisis, which arose in part because of both Jewish and Samaritan reaction to Roman rule, ultimately required the emperor Claudius’s intervention.

…

Finally, with the rise of postcolonial and liberation-theological readings, negative stereotypes of Jewish-Samaritan relations coupled with negative stereotypes of Jewish purity laws combine.

When biblical interpretation functions to enfranchise people, name systems of oppression, or inspire change for the better, this is all to the good. When, however, the means by which these concerns are facilitated include negative stereotyping, then the ends are compromised.

For example, in his “‘Dalit Theology’ and the Parable of the Good Samaritan,” M. Gnanavaram maps the Dalit (untouchable) onto the Samaritan, and the priest and the Levite correspond to the “high-cast non-Dalits.” The Samaritan is the “outcast,” although the only person cast out in the Gospel in relation to Samaritan issues is Jesus, who was refused lodging in a Samaritan village (Luke 9.53); the Samaritan is “oppressed,” although according to the parable he has freedom of travel and economic resources.

Readers will need to determine if the end, the passionate call for liberation, justifies the means, if the means turn out to be a negative caricature of Jewish culture.

...

Despite numerous sermons to the contrary, that the Samaritan is not a social victim. He has money, freedom of travel, the ability to find lodging (more than what Jesus found in the Samaritan village), and some leverage with the innkeeper.

The parable, in its original setting, is not about the type of prejudice that creates people on the margins; it is about hatred between groups who have similar resources.

- Jewish Scholar Amy-Jill Levine in Short Stories by Jesus: The Enigmatic Parables of a Controversial Rabbi (2014)

[kabane52]

Abraham’s Twofold Heritage

At one point I strongly contested any continued significance in God's election for the Jewish people. Abraham's seed was the church and the church was Abraham's seed- Jews were no more nor less covenantally significant than any other people. My argument for this was not based so much on a particular set of scriptural texts as it was on a way of reading the biblical story arc. There was, I believed, a definite structure to the prophetic and messianic hope: the seed of Abraham would undergo two exoduses and two covenants. The old covenant is described in Deuteronomy 29 and the coming to pass of its curses is specified with absolute certainty. The new exodus and covenant is described in Deuteronomy 30: Israel's heart would be circumcised, they would be gathered in from exile, and their right standing with God would endure.

Most simply, it seemed to me that the family of Abraham and the people of Israel were identical in every way. The apostles describe the nations as having been brought into Abraham's family, and there seemed to me to be no justification whatsoever in distinguishing Abraham's family from Israel. The New Testament is permeated by texts which describe the church as the fulfillment of promises made to Israel. In Romans 2:25-29, gentiles receive what is promised to Israel in the second exodus of Deuteronomy 30:1-6. The "new covenant" which God promised and which is identified by  Jesus as His work is a covenant between God and Israel.

I still believe that this argument has not been properly considered in Messianic Jewish literature. [Please recognize that Messianic Judaism is a much larger world than "Jews for Jesus" and there are some very sophisticated Messianic Jewish scholars.] Yet I have come to believe that it can be answered. Its answer is to be found in a constellation of texts ultimately unfolding from Genesis 17-25. We often think of Genesis 17 as the creation of Israel- "the circumcision" proper. But what we sometimes fail to recognize is that without "the circumcision" there is no such thing as "the uncircumcision." The dyad of Israel and the nations comes into existence with the circumcision of Abraham's family. Moreover, in this very text Ishmael and his descendants are the subjects of an enduring promise that is not the promise made to Isaac and his descendants. In Genesis 25, we have a genealogy of Abraham's children through Keturah and through Ishmael. Isaac is the heir of Abraham's estate, yet Abraham sends these other children east with gifts.

Here is the key: in Isaiah 60, we hear of those "from afar" coming to beautify and glorify Mount Zion, newly permeated by divine beatitude and uncreated light. The light of God attracts the nations as a fire attracts a crowd on a cold evening. But one detail could easily be missed: the first nations which are described are the children of Ishmael. As Abraham sent them away with gifts, now those gifts have matured and are consecrated on God's altar. The newly fermented wine which was given in the time of Abraham has now aged to perfection and is made holy on God's altar in the time of the Messiah. Actually, Matthew 2 echoes this passage. The magi are "from the east" and a strong case can be made that they are Ishmaelite Arabs rather than Persians. As the nations are drawn by light, so also are the magi attracted by the star. Two of the gifts mentioned in Isaiah 60 are gold and frankincense, and the magi bring these two gifts along with myrrh. Isaiah 60 is sacral in character: the nations are drawn by the divine presence in Israel, and so also Matthew 2: "God with us" has come to dwell with mankind, and the magi "worship" Him.

This twofold Abrahamic promise is something of a theme throughout the Tanach. The healing of Jacob and Esau's relationship is taken up in Malachi as a prophetic image for the healing of the rift between Israel and the nations. As the "sun rose upon" Jacob on the morning of his meeting with Esau, so also will the nations offer Tribute to God "from the rising of the sun." But the most pervasive image used to describe this twofold structure is that of the two houses of Israel: Ephraim and Judah. Consider the prophecy in Zechariah that "ten men" will take hold of the "wing" (the blue tassel or tzitzit which Jews wear) of a "Jew" (i.e. a Judahite). Ten is a significant figure here because of the northern ten tribes. The promise is given as part of a constellation of promises related to the reunification of the two houses. 

In a way, the nations correspond to Ephraim while the Jews, Israel according to the flesh, corresponds to Judah. Genesis 48 gives further support to this idea: Ephraim will become a "multitude of nations." The fact that the northern kingdom is the "house of Joseph" (remember that Joseph's double portion from Jacob meant that he was a double-tribe: his children Ephraim and Manasseh each became a tribe in the confederation of Israel) is also suggestive towards this end. The illumination of the nations of the world was Joseph's great work, a work which he carried out prior to his reconciliation with his brothers according to the flesh. Indeed, while his family believed him lost forever, Ephraim and Manasseh were present in Joseph's own household.

The New Testament is filled with quotations from prophetic texts about the ingathering of the ten tribes that are identified as having been fulfilled in the ingathering of the gentiles. Nor is this an apostolic innovation: the two ideas seem to shade into each other in many of the prophets themselves, as in the above referenced text from Zechariah. The prophet even refers to the ten tribes being "sown to" the nations and "swallowed up" therein. That word is only used four times in the Twelve- twice in this context and once in the Book of Jonah, where the Prophet is "swallowed up" by a "great fish" before bearing witness to Nineveh. The "great fish" is a symbol of the "great city." While some of the northern tribes were assimilated into Judahite culture and returned from Babylon (note for example that the prophetess Anna is from the Tribe of Asher) most were assimilated into the gentile nations. It seems that one function of this assimilation was to tie together the destiny of all nations with the destiny of Abraham's seed.

*Why* this sort of bond functioned to tie the nations with Abraham is something I do not presently understand. Nothing is merely typological. Types and symbols exist because they manifest the real, concrete, and cause-effect structure of the world. Every type of Christ serves to bring Christ's presence truly closer to fruition. And so we must not simply say that the assimilation of the ten tribes tied the nations to Abraham because of a typological link: that principle which perpetuates the rhythm of the world is also the principle which makes it beautiful. Every aesthetic perfection is also maximally functional. I am perfectly sure that there is an explanation, and that this explanation will teach a great deal about the significance of the human family and its structure as a genealogy of interrelated nations. But I do not know it yet.

In any case, this answered my most serious objection: that there was simply no available category for a covenantally bound member of Abraham's family who was not in every way a member of Israel. There seems to be exactly such a category in Abraham's extended family- from Hagar and Keturah, as well as in the assimilated Israelite tribes. The church shares in Israel's covenant and destiny through her identity as the Body of a Resurrected Jew. In that sense the church takes on the name and title of Israel. But just as we take on Christ's Name (Christ-ian) without dissolving the unique application the title has to the person of Jesus Christ, so also is the church joined to the name of Israel without taking away its special connection with the Jewish nation, Israel according to the flesh- the Messiah's own flesh whom He yearns for with uncreated affection. The first person to ever wail at the wailing wall was our Lord, as He wept at the fate He knew was to befall His own people. When Jesus rode into Jerusalem, He was in tears. These tears will not flow forever, for when Jesus wept on another occasion- an occasion very shortly prior to His riding into Jerusalem- He acted by telling the Jew for whom He shed tears to "come out" from His Tomb. There were those present who figured that Lazarus had been dead too long. But Jesus' words were fulfilled all the same. 

Perhaps the most precise expression of the church's identity in relation to Israel is in Ephesians 2:12. The church is the "citizenship" or "commonwealth" of Israel. We are enrolled in the citizenship of Zion to carry Zion to the far end of creation. But that river which Zionizes the creation must circle back to Zion proper to enrich it with the splendor of all nations- see Isaiah 65-66. The nations will "flow" to Jerusalem just as Jerusalem in the person of Jesus and the Apostles flowed to the nations.