Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Israel's justification for the right to the land is one of conflict depending on the religious and political factors of the time. In the Bible the justification is completely based upon them being strangers chosen and used by God to expel the inhabitants because of the promise to them and the evil of those in the land thus justifying their genocidal attempts. Yet the irony is that the truth of history is that the Israelites were not foreigners whose ancestor Abraham came from Ur. They were a subset of Canannites who split off in their religious beliefs and chose to create false stories about their origins to separate themselves from such evil peoples. As such it is a funny set of circumstances with the Bible and history both being used for the same purpose yet conflicting with one another. Israel does have a legitimate right to the land but not because of what is written in the Bible and the declaration of Israel understood this truth.
Whatever the case, reliance on biblical ideology or historiography is a double-edged sword since the Bible often includes conflicting conceptions. In this case, the notion of Israel’s indigenous origins championed in Israel’s Declaration of Independence, which contradicts the Bible’s major account, finds precedent in the late biblical Book of Chronicles.
What think you?
There are a number of reasons often cited. The biblical aspect is only a part of the overall picture.
Israel's justification for the right to the land is one of conflict depending on the religious and political factors of the time. In the Bible the justification is completely based upon them being strangers chosen and used by God to expel the inhabitants because of the promise to them and the evil of those in the land thus justifying their genocidal attempts. Yet the irony is that the truth of history is that the Israelites were not foreigners whose ancestor Abraham came from Ur. They were a subset of Canannites who split off in their religious beliefs and chose to create false stories about their origins to separate themselves from such evil peoples. As such it is a funny set of circumstances with the Bible and history both being used for the same purpose yet conflicting with one another. Israel does have a legitimate right to the land but not because of what is written in the Bible and the declaration of Israel understood this truth.
Whatever the case, reliance on biblical ideology or historiography is a double-edged sword since the Bible often includes conflicting conceptions. In this case, the notion of Israel’s indigenous origins championed in Israel’s Declaration of Independence, which contradicts the Bible’s major account, finds precedent in the late biblical Book of Chronicles.
What think you?
Actually, no--they weren't a subset of Canaanites. Abraham was from Ur. He migrated to Canaan when God called him there.
But yes, his ancestors were given the land of Canaan by God.
According to the Bible, which as been refuted archaeologically. The Jews were originally Canaanites.
What chapter and verse says that? Have you read Genesis? Have you not read, beginning with about chapter 12, how Abraham was living in Ur and then was called by Yahweh from Ur to go live in Canaan?
06-08-2018, 11:42 AM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by treemoni
Revelation 3:9
What does that have to do with the OP?
06-08-2018, 11:43 AM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie
Actually, no--they weren't a subset of Canaanites. Abraham was from Ur. He migrated to Canaan when God called him there.
But yes, his ancestors were given the land of Canaan by God.
Actually, no--they weren't a subset of Canaanites. Abraham was from Ur. He migrated to Canaan when God called him there.
But yes, his ancestors were given the land of Canaan by God.
"God", like any other imaginary creature, can't "give" anything.
The OT is a sad example of the victor writing the history. The Israelites were a subset of the Canaanites. Any archaeological evidence indicates the same, with the ONLY difference being that there was no pork evidence in the campfires of them.
However, the Israelis never destroyed the Canaanites as they like portray, as DNA evidence shows that those tribes that were loosely termed "Canaanites" just moved to what is today's Lebanon.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
