How pro-Hamas rhetoric infected US high schools

[rjs330]

"Palestinian" - like "American" - isn't an ethnicity. Palestine is a region - in Jesus's time, considered to be what is now Israel, Lebanon, and parts of Syria and Jordan. At the time of Jesus's birth, the entire region of Palestine was under the rule of Herod (who had previously been king of Judaea, the southernmost part of Palestine), as a client king of the Roman Empire. Following Herod's death, Palestine was split between his children, but the region was still collectively known as Palestine. In other words, there is nothing historically inaccurate about saying that Jesus was born and raised in Palestine.

Yes we understand all that. Just as Jesus was from Nazareth. He was called a Nazarene. However what is a far cry from what is considered a Palestinian today. It's not the same the thing as it was in Jesus day. Palestinians today consider themselves Arabs and not Jews or Israelis. Unless they live in Israel, which some do. The Jews of Jesus time would have considered it an insult to be be called a Palestinian due to the fact the Romans coined the term for them after the Jewish uprising was put down. The Romans used the non-Jewish word to rename the region after the Philistines who were non-natives to the region. It was created to erase the Jews from the land Israel.

In s rupture Christ is never called a Palestinian, but he is called a Nazarene. Palestine was an insult to the Jews. Jesus was a Jew from Judea. Calling him a Palestinian is an insult to the Jews.

Arabs themselves never considered themselves Palestinians. For most of the last 2000 years there really was no such thing as a Palestinian. Palestine was used as a word during the Middle ages and the crusades. During the British mandate the Brits did use the term to refer to the Jews living in the area and the Jews did accept the term in some fashion. But it still wasn't a country or state of any kind as we know.

Arabs did not refer to themselves as Palestinians. They referred to themselves as as Syrians.

There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. . . . Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it." — Local Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937

"There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not" — Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian to Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry, 1946

"It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria." — Ahmed Shukairy, United Nations Security Council, 1956

It wasn't until the Six Day War that Arabs in the region adopted the name of Palestinians as a national name. They were Jordanian or Samarian. The Arabs of the region declared themselves as Palestinians.

So as we see there have been many alterations in what it means to be Palestinian. At the time of Christ it was a derogatory term to the Judeans. Calling Jesus a Palestinian is an insult. Don't insult the Christ.

Here’s how the Palestinians got their name - The Jewish Star

Arabs living in what Jews call the Land of Israel, including Judea and Samaria, call themselves “Palestinians” after “Palestine,” the non-Jewish term for the region. They …

www.thejewishstar.com

 

[MForbes]

What importance does Arabs also being Israelis have?

Look, man…I was just pointing out that Israelis are also Arab and not just Jew as you asserted.

 

[ralliann]

Look, man…I was just pointing out that Israelis are also Arab and not just Jew as you asserted.

Ok, so some Arabs live in in the Jewish state of Israel. It does not make them Jews. We seem to agree, or it seems so anyway. Still don't know the relevance of that.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Yes we understand all that. Just as Jesus was from Nazareth. He was called a Nazarene. However what is a far cry from what is considered a Palestinian today. It's not the same the thing as it was in Jesus day. Palestinians today consider themselves Arabs and not Jews or Israelis. Unless they live in Israel, which some do.

Again, going back to the OP, the author takes issue with the fact that a history textbook states that Jesus was "...raised in Nazareth, in northern Palestine." Aside from the fact that Nazareth is closer to central Palestine (as it was defined at the time), that is a historically accurate statement, and hardly insulting. What "Palestine" and "Palestinian" mean today is irrelevant to a statement of historical fact.

The Jews of Jesus time would have considered it an insult to be be called a Palestinian due to the fact the Romans coined the term for them after the Jewish uprising was put down. The Romans used the non-Jewish word to rename the region after the Philistines who were non-natives to the region. It was created to erase the Jews from the land Israel.

That happened about 100 years after Jesus, following the Bar Kokhba revolt (132-136 AD). The Jews of Jesus's time were definitely more granular in their use of place names to identify each other (after all, "Jesus the Palestinian" doesn't really narrow things down very well when that's the name of the whole region), but I haven't seen anything that would suggest that it would have been considered insulting to call someone Palestinian. In fact, the Jewish writers Philo of Alexandria and Josephus (both contemporaries, or near enough, of Jesus) both used "Palestine" to refer to the region, and use of the name in general dates back to roughly 500 BC, with the Greek writer Herodotus.

 

[rjs330]

The facts are that Jesus was never called a Palestinian. Jesus was considered a Judean. The Romans didn't call it Palestine until after the uprising.

Before that the word Palestine was never used. The closest representation may be Peleshet which appears to be a representation of Philistine. The land b fore the Rams came was know has Canaan and Judea. So no Jesus was never a Palestinian. Stop insulting the Christ. He was not nor ever was a Palestinian.

It would have been an insult to call Jesus and Philistine. That's the point.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

The facts are that Jesus was never called a Palestinian. Jesus was considered a Judean.

Generally, speaking, people don't refer to themselves (or each other) using an area that they're currently in. For example, I wouldn't refer to myself as an American if I was travelling around America. While I am an American, it's not a descriptive enough term when I'm already in America. Likewise, if I was in California (where I grew up), I wouldn't say that I'm from California - I would say which part of California. Yet, I am still a Californian. Jesus was called a Nazarean (the city He was raised in) and a Galilean (the kingdom in which Nazareth sits, and where He did most of His ministry). I'm not sure I've ever seen Jesus referred to as a Judean (because he wasn't actually from Judea), but that was sometimes used as a regional descriptor due to the fact that the whole region had been called Judea at times.

The Romans didn't call it Palestine until after the uprising.

Before that the word Palestine was never used. The closest representation may be Peleshet which appears to be a representation of Philistine.

Again, that's just flat-out wrong. The first documented (unambiguous) use of the name "Palestine" was by Herodotus around 450 BC, who described "a region of Syria, called Palaistinê" as such: "[The Phoenicians and the Syrians of Palestine], according to their own account, dwelt anciently upon the Erythraean Sea, but crossing thence, fixed themselves on the seacoast of Syria, where they still inhabit. This part of Syria, and all the region extending from hence to Egypt, is known by the name of Palestine." It's used as a regional descriptor multiple times in his books.

In 340BC, Aristotle also places the Dead Sea within Palestine: "Again if, as is fabled, there is a lake in Palestine, such that if you bind a man or beast and throw it in it floats and does not sink, this would bear out what we have said. They say that this lake is so bitter and salt that no fish live in it and that if you soak clothes in it and shake them it cleans them."

And there are many other references to Palestine throughout history, including mentions of the Jewish population and use of the name by Jewish scholars and writers, long before the Romans created the province of Syria Palestina.

Timeline of the name Palestine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[DaisyDay]

This is why the Bible traces and shows Christ's ancestry.

It shows two different lineages for Joseph who was not related to Jesus but by marriage. Christ has no ancestry if you believe that Christ is the Word that was there since before the beginning.

 

[Niels]

I figure it's driven by the kids who get their news on TikTok rather than a wide variety of sources. A mindset that reminds me of Klaus in this Top Secret! scene:

Which isn't to say that both sides don't have an argument that should be listened to and considered. I personally think Israel has the more compelling one, but it is a complicated situation without an obvious and mutually-acceptable solution. One with more nuances than I care to get into here. If it was recognized as such, I don't think there would be so much pro-Hamas rhetoric on high school and college campuses.

 

[rjs330]

Generally, speaking, people don't refer to themselves (or each other) using an area that they're currently in. For example, I wouldn't refer to myself as an American if I was travelling around America. While I am an American, it's not a descriptive enough term when I'm already in America. Likewise, if I was in California (where I grew up), I wouldn't say that I'm from California - I would say which part of California. Yet, I am still a Californian. Jesus was called a Nazarean (the city He was raised in) and a Galilean (the kingdom in which Nazareth sits, and where He did most of His ministry). I'm not sure I've ever seen Jesus referred to as a Judean (because he wasn't actually from Judea), but that was sometimes used as a regional descriptor due to the fact that the whole region had been called Judea at times.

Again, that's just flat-out wrong. The first documented (unambiguous) use of the name "Palestine" was by Herodotus around 450 BC, who described "a region of Syria, called Palaistinê" as such: "[The Phoenicians and the Syrians of Palestine], according to their own account, dwelt anciently upon the Erythraean Sea, but crossing thence, fixed themselves on the seacoast of Syria, where they still inhabit. This part of Syria, and all the region extending from hence to Egypt, is known by the name of Palestine." It's used as a regional descriptor multiple times in his books.

In 340BC, Aristotle also places the Dead Sea within Palestine: "Again if, as is fabled, there is a lake in Palestine, such that if you bind a man or beast and throw it in it floats and does not sink, this would bear out what we have said. They say that this lake is so bitter and salt that no fish live in it and that if you soak clothes in it and shake them it cleans them."

And there are many other references to Palestine throughout history, including mentions of the Jewish population and use of the name by Jewish scholars and writers, long before the Romans created the province of Syria Palestina.

Timeline of the name Palestine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Nope that's wrong. Palestine didn't become a thing until the Romans I told you that it wasn't Palestine and whatever it was. The jJewish scholars never called it Palestine either. I told you what it was called.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/40105058

Aristotle spoke Greek. The reference is a reference to the land of the Philistines who were a sea going people and settled in the area. Jesus and the Jews never referred to themselves as those people. They never referred to the land at the time as Palestine.

Look I'm not going to argue this with you any more. It's obvious you have some sort of agenda that's bound and determined to paint the Christ as a Palestinian because you are trying to claim the Palestinians have claim to the land. They don't. Not as a people. The Jews had it long before the Arabic Palestinians did. The Philistines weren't even Arabic.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Nope that's wrong. Palestine didn't become a thing until the Romans I told you that it wasn't Palestine and whatever it was. The jJewish scholars never called it Palestine either. I told you what it was called.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/40105058

You've made claims, but you haven't backed them up. Even the partial introduction that you linked (which, it should be noted, is just one analysis) states:

The form Palestine, used by Greek and Latin authors, is first attested in Herodotus, and occurs in a number of later, classical texts. It occasionally appears as a noun, but more commonly as an adjective in apposition to Syria. In normal usage, Syria Palestine or Syria Palestina seems to have meant the coastal plain formerly inhabited by the Phillistines. It was sometimes extended to include territories further east...

That lines up with what I've said.

Aristotle spoke Greek.

And? Languages influence each other. The Greeks called it Palestine. The Romans were heavily influenced by the Greeks, and also called it Palestine.

The reference is a reference to the land of the Philistines who were a sea going people and settled in the area.

Considering that Aristotle specifically mentions the Dead Sea as being located in Palestine, it's clear that there was at least some debate over how far inland Palestine extended. The name is almost certainly derived, at least in part from "Philistine" (though it also bears a resemblance to the Greek word for "adversary"), but that's not really relevant to whether or not the use of the term as a regional descriptor is historically accurate.

Jesus and the Jews never referred to themselves as those people. They never referred to the land at the time as Palestine.

Irrelevant as far as historical fact goes. "Palestine" was a regional descriptor that was used, and that people today would still recognize.

Look I'm not going to argue this with you any more. It's obvious you have some sort of agenda that's bound and determined to paint the Christ as a Palestinian because you are trying to claim the Palestinians have claim to the land. They don't. Not as a people. The Jews had it long before the Arabic Palestinians did. The Philistines weren't even Arabic.

You might want to get your mind reader checked. Again, I'm simply taking issue with the OP article's contention that the factual statement "Jesus was ... raised in Nazareth, in northern Palestine" is "pro-Hamas" or "implying that Jesus was Palestinian".

 

[ralliann]

You've made claims, but you haven't backed them up. Even the partial introduction that you linked (which, it should be noted, is just one analysis) states:

That lines up with what I've said.

And? Languages influence each other. The Greeks called it Palestine. The Romans were heavily influenced by the Greeks, and also called it Palestine.

Considering that Aristotle specifically mentions the Dead Sea as being located in Palestine, it's clear that there was at least some debate over how far inland Palestine extended. The name is almost certainly derived, at least in part from "Philistine" (though it also bears a resemblance to the Greek word for "adversary"), but that's not really relevant to whether or not the use of the term as a regional descriptor is historically accurate.

Irrelevant as far as historical fact goes. "Palestine" was a regional descriptor that was used, and that people today would still recognize.

You might want to get your mind reader checked. Again, I'm simply taking issue with the OP article's contention that the factual statement "Jesus was ... raised in Nazareth, in northern Palestine" is "pro-Hamas" or "implying that Jesus was Palestinian".

Nazareth was in Israel wasn't it?