The original UN plan had the territory divided between Jewish and Muslim land. The Arab Muslims rejected any independent Jewish state, so the moment one was declared the Arabs attacked from all sides. Had the Arabs won, it would have been a second holocaust. Yet since they were fought off and the Jews counterattacked and saved themselves from annihilation some of the Arabs living in Palestine fled and cry foul. Their own failure to annihilate the Jews in the region and secure the land as another Islamic territory is their "Nakba."

The other Arab nations should have taken them in and integrate them but they would rather just leave this as a perpetual problem for Israel and treat the Arabs in Gaza and the West Bank as front line soldiers for Islamic expansion which has always been the aim of their religion from the very beginnings.

The Philistines were likely from Crete or somewhere in the Aegean. They were not Arabs.

One hundred years ago "Palestinianism" wasn't a thing, and hopefully it won't be a thing in another hundred. Meanwhile, the Jews continue 3000+ years of their connection to their actual homeland as it is even stated in the Quran.

I think if they were exiled they would lose their culture fairly quickly. "Palestinian" as an ethnic identity is only around 60-70 years old and it will fade in due time.

What's perhaps a more divisive question is, are there good reasons to burn a Quran? — flannel jesus

The first one that comes to mind is that the practice is a way of preserving/testing the outer limits of free speech and free expression in a society. It tests those enlightenment-era values against older religious values involving inviolable divine directives or the sanctity of the holy book.

If wishing for the destruction of a culture where e.g. powerful men routinely abuse young boys or human sacrifice is a constant make me a Nazi then so be it.

In Nazism, it was a perpetual war between races. One's blood made one the enemy. Jews who abandoned their own culture and adopted German culture were not spared. Such an evil could only emerge in modernity.

Ideally the wicked group is destroyed by God/nature/its own internal dynamics. As we see with Sodom and Gomorrah. I'm not typically one to support military intervention against a group simply because it is wicked. However, if that group is being both wicked and violent towards its neighbors it likely needs both a decisive military defeat and wholescale culture reform. It will surely lose its self-determination after the defeat. It must be purged of certain practices by its new rulers, like the Spanish did with human sacrifice in the New World.

I apply this to my own group as well. Our texts do describe one of our ancient exiles as punishment for our own practice of child sacrifice (among others) in the first temple period. So my hope is, in the end, that wickedness is vanquished from all cultures. Some cultures are just more egregious and aggressive in their wickedness than others, and bad cultures poison all within it. May we one day see a day where it is all gone.

And that's not the only young Palestinian teenager dying in a manner like that. Not too long ago a 14 year old Palestinian boy was blown up when the explosives he was transporting detonated.

I've been mostly pro-Ukraine and anti-Russia, but I'm now quite relieved that Trump seems to be de-escalating and relations appear to be slightly warming with Russia. Russia has released 1 or 2 American prisoners. I have no issue with Ukraine defending their borders, but it was getting quite expensive for us here in the US. I don't mind if Europe picks up the slack on the funding. The conflict seems fairly far removed from us here in the US.

If Mexico or Canada were to join an anti-US alliance or if Russia were to station its troops in either of those two border countries it would be alarming so their concern is understandable. Europe should be able to hand this one.

Just because I'm uncomfortable with something doesn't mean that I oppose it. We ethnically cleansed Germans from territories like Alsace-Lorraine and I've never heard of anyone complain about that. Jews have been ethnically cleansed 3x from Gaza since 1929 and no one could care less. Perhaps we ought to work to reinstate their presence there.

Best PR would be to describe it as a temporary migration while Gaza is rebuilt.

Usually in war it's the combatants that one fights. — ssu

I wish we could take all the Hamas members and all the IDF and place them on an island where they could duke it out among themselves, but that's not realistic. Also consider that many of those who kept hostages as slaves were not Hamas, but civilians. Many of those who attacked Israel on 10/7 were civilians also. So when Israel hits back, the Palestinians get to turn their deaths into evidence of Israel's unimaginable cruelty.

Just recently Hamas killed a 14 year old Palestinian boy when one of their rockets crashed in Gaza. You know that's going on the "killed by Israel" list.

So you would be pro-Israel if all the dead were men who were involved in 10/7 or Hamas members? What of Hamas members who weren't involved in 10/7? Would those be valid targets?

Literature can be propagandistic. Theology is one aspect of the Bible.

My conscience tells me to fight. If ~1200 of your people were tortured, raped, and murdered and your conscience didn't tell you to fight I would question your brain development.

You need to learn to see Israeli civilians as human beings rather than just "Israel." You would never speak of the deaths of Palestinians as "resistance against Palestine" or "resistance against Hamas." There's a nasty double standard at work.

This sort of analysis of I & II Samuel has fallen into disrepute, because of both the unity of style and dramatic elements use throughout the books of Samuel and because, if these stories are supposed to be "propaganda," they are pretty terrible at that role. The entire second half of the David story is a tragedy, one where David's shortcomings play the key role. Things like the literary echo of David, as a now feeble old man being confused by the sound of conflict outside during the coup attempt at the start of I Kings, as recalling/echoing the situation of the priest Eli at the opening of I Samuel, seems hardly the incidental work of "splicing propaganda narratives." — Count Timothy von Icarus

And deservedly so. Samuel is a rich text. It was originally one book. An unflinching look at David, for sure. If I had to pick a couple texts that could be closer to "propaganda" I would maybe say Joshua and perhaps 1 & 2 Maccabees. Still I hate that label "propaganda" because these texts are more complicated than that; still, when we compare Joshua to our knowledge of that period something's gotta bend. I do tend to be more on the historical-critical side of things but I do try to remain open to other methods. Conservative Judaism is more open to modern scholarship, while Orthodox Judaism is much more skeptical of the historical-critical approach and relies more on its own tradition.

But seriously, if you're expecting the Jews to have sympathy after Israelis were kept in concentration camp like conditions in Gaza and being paraded on stages and leaving emaciated, after women and children were murdered in Hamas captivity, after Israeli women were raped and then set on fire at a music festival.... I don't know what else to tell you.

It seems like with you Hamas could be in literal Nazi uniforms burning Israeli prisoners alive and you'd still be pearl clutching about Israeli soldiers. I'd imagine you'd say something like "well Israel is the ultimate cause behind all of it." And you can charge the same at me -- that I overlook Palestinian suffering yet I never claimed to be impartial but amazingly you apparently do.

Let's start with destroying Hamas and allowing Palestinian migration. I'm as uncomfortable with forced deportation as anyone.

The Middle East was never de-Nazified.

Good to see all these Jews in support of deportation. — Benkei

They're a nasty little bunch, aren't they? Always causing trouble.

Famous Israeli Journalist
@shlomieldar

“I’ve been talking to people from Gaza since this morning, and most of them say the same thing: If ships docked at the Gaza coast, they would board them for countries with Palestinian communities, such as Sweden, England, and Canada—if they were guaranteed medical insurance and education for their children. In that case, they would leave.

Egypt and Jordan aren’t seen as real options. If they were to leave, it would be for a place that offers the next generation a chance to live, breathe, and integrate.

People want a better life—a future for their children. The question is: Is such a move even feasible? Is the world ready, able, and willing to support Trump on this plan?”

https://x.com/Osint613/status/1887860828159742239

Many if not most Gazans seemly want a new start after 15 months of war.

Many Palestinians actually would like to leave and go to peaceful Palestinian communities abroad. Many Palestinians would like to raise their children in peace and live quiet lives. The problem is Hamas doesn't let them. A few days ago Hamas murdered many innocent Palestinians for "stealing aid." The Egyptian border is built so high and so tough because without it the Palestinians would be leaving. When one lives under totalitarian rule one is not in a position to express open dissent or speak of one's true intentions publically without risk of reprisal.

If Moses is false then why did Jesus say:

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

And gJohn would have been written many decades after J's death by one his disciples who Nietzsche would have presumably labeled a false Christian. Didn't N say that J's disciples ruined Christianity?

Jesus is the very personification of slave morality, imho: "the greatest among you will be your servant." The man takes servitude to a whole other level.

IDK about the "psychology of the gospels".... I look at the text. He washes the feet of his followers... as a flex.

Anyway, juxtaposing radical, kind, loving Jesus versus cruel legalistic Judaism is a really nasty (and false) portrayal. Not commenting on Nietzsche personally here; just the idea.

Who grew out of his opposite in Judaism... atleast according to the gospels which Nietzsche's got mad respect for Jesus from, as he details in AC 39 and 33... — DifferentiatingEgg

Very pernicious idea btw that has virulently anti-semitic repercussions. And wrong, of course. But when you're only reading some passages in the gospels and completely disregarding others, which I suspect Nietzsche is doing, I can see how you could get this idea.

Remember, Gaza is a prison and a concentration camp. But they must not leave! :lol:

FAFO Hamas. :fire: :party:

It began with them going from house to house murdering, raping, and torturing their neighbors. It ended with them losing their land. Divine justice.

Wickedness sows the seeds of its own destruction. Trump saw the 10/7 footage.

Better start calling it the MAGA strip. :cheer:

Sinwar would be rolling in his grave. :rofl:

"Beware lest a statue slay you." — 180 Proof

Now that is a good one. :fire:

Jesus. Did you just liken me to a lowly disease...for my apparent Nietzsche hatred? :chin: :snicker:

I don't resent Nietzsche. I don't think too much about Nietzsche. It's called asking questions and challenging an idea. Welcome to The Philosophy Forum.

Jesus was an outcast from Judaism for rejecting their traditions to create his own life affirming values. — DifferentiatingEgg

I will read AC 33 and 39, and thanks for those references.

This I do not agree with.

Then Jesus said unto His disciples, “If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me."

And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, 48where ‘their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched.’

I would only agree this interpretation if by "life affirming" you mean living for the next one and the mentality that comes with that mindset.

I understood N more as favoring a more 'noble' morality over a 'slave' morality, which, in all fairness, is an apt description of christianity. But the cathedrals and abbeys built would have been in service of that 'slave' morality? It's been a while since I read N so I would have to go back to his thoughts on cathedrals and abbeys/brilliant christian architecture.

eing really that you were too short sighted to see how your insult fell flat. Nietzsche praises their architecture actually. — DifferentiatingEgg

Then N does understand that a focus on the 'other world' can lead to greatness and not nihilism.

Did the ancient Greeks not value brilliant architecture or artwork? The best of it was made for the divine.

at the expense of absolutely(?) devaluing this world (embodied life), which he diagnoses as nihilism (—> cultural 'decay & decadence'). — 180 Proof

Awfully rich of a man who lost his virginity to a hooker to talk of "cultural decay" and "decadence." The abbeys and cathedrals of the medieval world may want a word with him. :lol:

Apathy about Zionism.

Judeo-apathy would be a good descriptor.

Anti-zionism = anti-semitism.

The eating of the apple as being the impetus for God to cause Mary's immaculate impregnation so she could give birth to a messiah to rid mankind of all its inherented sin is no more or less a better interpretation than positing it means Justin Beiber is God if one thinks the text is what is to be referred to for interpretation.

But not to pick in Christianity, Jewish midrashim are stories built seemingly from scratch in efforts to interpret biblical passages. — Hanover

I am not a Christian.

Midrash is a very vast genre. A satisfactory discussion of it would be beyond our purview. I would not dismiss all midrash as fiction either. In any case, Jewish biblical interpretation takes many forms and thinkers like Ibn Ezra and Nachmanides are well-respected in academic biblical scholarship.

I'm not in the habit of dismissing any group's oral tradition that contains hundreds of texts compiled over many centuries spanning thousands of years of that group's history. Rabbinic tradition contains extensive biblical exegesis that contains various levels of analysis. My own approach is more based in academia but there is much in Jewish texts that is of academic value.

The meaning of certain passages varies significantly depending upon tradition. Christianity finds foreshadowing and references to Jesus in the Hebrew bible, where other traditions do not. — Hanover

Ok. And what of a tradition which finds Justin Bieber referenced throughout the entire Bible? My question is: Are all interpretations equally valid/equally grounded in a reasonable interpretation of Scripture? Scripture that was written in a certain time and place.

Of course not. So some interpretations/meanings are better than others. Several can hold insofar as they don't contradict each other. For instance one could give a historical analysis of text while another could provide a theological analysis. Both can work and actually supplement the other.

"this is what the Bible means"

I agree this quote is too broad. But certain passages and events are fairly straight-forward and historical.

Is this humility of understanding peculiar to the Bible or is something that you'd assert exists with any ancient writing? — Hanover

It's the message of Job; take it or leave it.

as Palestinians and Arabs will simply want to throw them into the sea and abolish the Israeli state. And any Palestinian state, how small or large, will continue this. — ssu

I get it; you don't want to believe that this is the case. It would be too ugly. Many of the 10/7 victims living on those kibbutzim on the border felt the same. We can see the world how we want to, or how it is.

The whole Israeli objective is to make living unbearable and basically impossible in Gaza. As long as Israel's trading partners don't be upset about it as long there is no media outrage. I think that's the way the final solution for the Palestinians is implemented. — ssu

I suppose the Allies "final solutioned" Nazi Germany by making life unbearable for them. It's called losing a war that you started.

Many of them would even go along with the idea that they would be now Americans and not anymore just Palestinians. — ssu

What do you know about Palestinians and their integration tendencies or are you just speculating? In any case, they're not coming to the US under Trump. Indonesia or Albania, maybe. Sometimes a people need to be scattered so the toxic elements can be removed and they can continue living in a healthier way.

Anyone suggesting that forced removal of people from where they have always lived is practical, or a great solution, should then be ready to take those people themselves. — ssu

Just make the offer first. As long as the decision to move is seen as individual and not national, people will go. Gazans are tired of the fighting. Hamas btw is now killing Gazans on the street and hunting down around ~400 more for "stealing" humanitarian aid. A ticket out of Gaza now could be a lifeline.

I think quite a few Gazans would choose to leave voluntarily if it were purely their own decision and they were promised stability elsewhere.

Hence it looks like present administration Israel wants to go for some kind of a "final solution" option in the long term. — ssu

Frivolous wording. There is no "final solution" here. Exile is not genocide, and could improve the lives of the Palestinians considerably if they were wrenched from their culture.