More Ancient Proof of Jewish Claims to Jerusalem Temple

[Roudy]

"And He said, "I will hide My face from them. I will see what their end will be, for they are a generation of changes; they are not as My children whom I have reared (or generation of children lacking trust in them).
They have provoked My jealousy with a non god, provoked My anger with their vanities. Thus, I will provoke their jealousy with a non people, provoke their anger with a foolish nation. ( non people?? sounds familiar)

Jews aren't just Antichrist, but they believe non-Jews to be non-people. Those "Christians" who support Israel are not Christians. They're non-people themselves, destined to be thrown into the lake of fire.

Judas, "as my children" is not what the text says. There is no "as". It's just "not my children." The rest of it is also butchered. How sad, Judas, that you appeal to such a corrupt translation.

The rest of your quote teaches that God will take the gentiles and make them his people. What is hinted at here is said more clearly other places in both the Old and New testaments.

You are referring to the gentiles who reject God, asshole.
I speak and read Hebrew, you don't.

And you can stick the NT where the sun don't shine.

Rest assured Achmed has not read the NT either, and it is more than obvious he hasn't the first clue about Christianity, and doing a horrible job posing as one, which shouldn't come as a surprise. His other sock pretends to be Jewish, while spewing the same hate. Funny but sad.

 

[BulletProof]

Always interesting discussing theology with an IslamoNazi piece of Shiite who thinks a good Christain should hate Jews. Totally ignoring that Jesus was a Zionist Jew who loved his people and Israel.

Judas, which verse says Jesus was a Jew or a Zionist, let alone a Jew or Zionist that would resemble any of that Talmudic devil spawn today?

Genesis 16 Genesis 16:13

"He will be a wild donkey of a man, His hand will be against everyone, And everyone's hand will be against him; And he will live to the east of all his brothers."

Nope, that's not it, f@ggot.

 

[BulletProof]

You are referring to the gentiles who reject God, asshole.
I speak and read Hebrew, you don't.

And you can stick the NT where the sun don't shine.

Speaking Hebrewish doesn't make the word "as" appear in "not my children." Loser.

 

[Indeependent]

You are referring to the gentiles who reject God, asshole.
I speak and read Hebrew, you don't.

And you can stick the NT where the sun don't shine.

Speaking Hebrewish doesn't make the word "as" appear in "not my children." Loser.

How cute...the uneducated Jew hater is telling someone who can read Hebrew what something in Hebrew means.
So absolutely darling!

 

[rylah]

You are referring to the gentiles who reject God, asshole.
I speak and read Hebrew, you don't.

And you can stick the NT where the sun don't shine.

Speaking Hebrewish doesn't make the word "as" appear in "not my children." Loser.

The word "as" appears in an authentic translation from original Hebrew text to English.

What You quote is a revised American version, of a 3rd party translation, Hebrew-Greek-English.

I pointed to verse 20 for a reason. There's no logical way one can interpret both 5 and 20 in the same way.
1.If You interpret ("translate") 5 as You do, then 20 contradicts it because they're still called later "sons" or "children"
2.If You try to fit 20 into the same picture, You need to somehow show that it doesn't matter that the word "no" changed its' place in relation to "children".

To do that You'll have to show that that translation works as well, in other books.

I'm listening.

 

[rylah]

But then again what's the point of all this?
Even the al-Quds Mufti recognized it as a place of Jewish heritage.

 

[BulletProof]

I pointed to verse 20 for a reason. There's no logical way one can interpret both 5 and 20 in the same way.
1.If You interpret ("translate") 5 as You do, then 20 contradicts it because they're still called later "sons" or "children"
2.If You try to fit 20 into the same picture, You need to somehow show that it doesn't matter that the word "no" changed its' place in relation to "children".

To do that You'll have to show that that translation works as well, in other books.

I'm listening.

In v19 shows God rejected the Jews because he hates them. There's a reason you started your quote at v20.

They were God's sons and daughters until they turned away from God, and which point they were no long God's children. Many other OT passages reveal God's hatred for unfaithful Jews. In the Christian perspective, God hates all Jews because Jews reject Jesus, and therefor are not faithful to God, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God... You are of your father the devil."

Deut 32 says Jews are not God's children. You might insert "as" to try to change the meaning, but your "as" doesn't fit the context of either the chapter, the book, the OT, and the Bible. But, at least can enjoy your dumb, little lapdog, Indeependent.

 

[rylah]

I pointed to verse 20 for a reason. There's no logical way one can interpret both 5 and 20 in the same way.
1.If You interpret ("translate") 5 as You do, then 20 contradicts it because they're still called later "sons" or "children"
2.If You try to fit 20 into the same picture, You need to somehow show that it doesn't matter that the word "no" changed its' place in relation to "children".

To do that You'll have to show that that translation works as well, in other books.

I'm listening.

In v19 shows God rejected the Jews because he hates them. There's a reason you started your quote at v20.

They were God's sons and daughters until they turned away from God, and which point they were no long God's children. Many other OT passages reveal God's hatred for unfaithful Jews. In the Christian perspective, God hates all Jews because Jews reject Jesus, and therefor are not faithful to God, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God... You are of your father the devil."

Deut 32 says Jews are not God's children. You might insert "as" to try to change the meaning, but your "as" doesn't fit the context of either the chapter, the book, the OT, and the Bible. But, at least can enjoy your dumb, little lapdog, Indeependent.

Dude I don't know what exact version of the English translation You read, but even in 19 it talks about children, and' Hashem's anger at the children. No hatred there, not in the original Hebrew text.


You just blew Your initial premise once again, by using 19.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Always interesting discussing theology with an IslamoNazi piece of Shiite who thinks a good Christain should hate Jews. Totally ignoring that Jesus was a Zionist Jew who loved his people and Israel.

Judas, which verse says Jesus was a Jew or a Zionist, let alone a Jew or Zionist that would resemble any of that Talmudic devil spawn today?

Genesis 16 Genesis 16:13

"He will be a wild donkey of a man, His hand will be against everyone, And everyone's hand will be against him; And he will live to the east of all his brothers."

Nope, that's not it, f@ggot.

I am curious, what was Jesus in the 1st Century CE? Which cult or religion?

 

[Challenger]

[Why, oh, why, would the Arabs discard anything which should prove their ancestral claim to the land of Palestine (cough), I mean Israel?]

Revealing the Buried Treasures of the Temple Mount


Revealing the Buried Treasures of the Temple Mount

You mean this half Shekel?

Why is there still a fake musical instrument on the half-shekel coin?

or this one?

Benjamin Netanyahu mistakes museum souvenir for 2,000 year old Jewish coin

As if those two examples wipe out all the Arabs have been throwing away as fake?

What? The Arabs have a factory under the Temple where they are fabricating fake ancient anything for the sake of the Jews?

More leaping to conclusions like a Gazelle on steroids; the more likely scenario is that the Zionist Ahnenerbe are fabricating the past to fit in with their fantasies. In reality a lot of interesting and significant archaeological finds can be made sifting through rubbish, but nothing I've seen provides, " more ancient "proof" of Jewish claims to Jerusalem Temple" ; something that's never been disputed. The only problems that arise are from the actual location of the Temple itself.

 

[Sixties Fan]

[Why, oh, why, would the Arabs discard anything which should prove their ancestral claim to the land of Palestine (cough), I mean Israel?]

Revealing the Buried Treasures of the Temple Mount


Revealing the Buried Treasures of the Temple Mount

You mean this half Shekel?

Why is there still a fake musical instrument on the half-shekel coin?

or this one?

Benjamin Netanyahu mistakes museum souvenir for 2,000 year old Jewish coin

As if those two examples wipe out all the Arabs have been throwing away as fake?

What? The Arabs have a factory under the Temple where they are fabricating fake ancient anything for the sake of the Jews?

More leaping to conclusions like a Gazelle on steroids; the more likely scenario is that the Zionist Ahnenerbe are fabricating the past to fit in with their fantasies. In reality a lot of interesting and significant archaeological finds can be made sifting through rubbish, but nothing I've seen provides, " more ancient "proof" of Jewish claims to Jerusalem Temple" ; something that's never been disputed. The only problems that arise are from the actual location of the Temple itself.

"Never been disputed" you say. You are missing modern history.
And to use "more ancient proof"......There is proof, period.


Temple Denial refers to the assertion that none of the Temples in Jerusalem ever existed or were not located on the Temple Mount. Israeli writer David Hazony has described the phenomenon as "a campaign of intellectual erasure [by Palestinian leaders, writers, and scholars] ... aimed at undermining the Jewish claim to any part of the land", and compared the phenomenon to Holocaust denial.[1][2] Daniel Levin calls Temple denial a "relatively new phenomenon" that "has become a central tenet of Palestinian nationalism".[3] He stated: "The Islamic land trust is destroying Judeo-Christian ruins beneath the Temple Mount so as to deny any connection between Judaism and Christianity and Jerusalem."[4]

Temple Denial - Wikipedia

 

[Indeependent]

I pointed to verse 20 for a reason. There's no logical way one can interpret both 5 and 20 in the same way.
1.If You interpret ("translate") 5 as You do, then 20 contradicts it because they're still called later "sons" or "children"
2.If You try to fit 20 into the same picture, You need to somehow show that it doesn't matter that the word "no" changed its' place in relation to "children".

To do that You'll have to show that that translation works as well, in other books.

I'm listening.

In v19 shows God rejected the Jews because he hates them. There's a reason you started your quote at v20.

They were God's sons and daughters until they turned away from God, and which point they were no long God's children. Many other OT passages reveal God's hatred for unfaithful Jews. In the Christian perspective, God hates all Jews because Jews reject Jesus, and therefor are not faithful to God, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God... You are of your father the devil."

Deut 32 says Jews are not God's children. You might insert "as" to try to change the meaning, but your "as" doesn't fit the context of either the chapter, the book, the OT, and the Bible. But, at least can enjoy your dumb, little lapdog, Indeependent.

Yawn...
Take 3 months to learn some Hebrew and start from verse 1 as you are making an ass of yourself.

 

[Challenger]

Not even slightly pedantic, more to the side of arrogant.
"Habiru" or "Apiru" has connection to Hebrews only in English.
In the local language it's - 'Ivri' or 'Ivrim'.

Please learn the basics, pedantic..later.

Only English? Can't be bothered to respond to this, I'll lower myself to let Wikipedia debunk it for me:

Habiru or Apiru (Egyptian: ˁpr.w) was the name given by various Sumerian, Egyptian, Akkadian, Hittite, Mitanni, and Ugaritic sources...

And? Non of those languages are Canaanite.
And You have yet to prove any connection between the roots "P(b)-R-M" (Ugarit) and "I-V-R" (Hebrew).

When You do that please publish a paper, it will help all those professors who certainly cannot agree...and for a good reason.

If You really want to look into anything remotely close to "Ivrim" look at the town of Avaris in Egypt where they found traces of Canaanite culture distinct to that of the surrounding Egyptian towns. Plus You get a way more realistic connection between "Ivri" and "Avari".

So? They are Semitic languages of the region used to describe groups of wandering nomads and or bandits. Interesting that "Ivrim" is not considered an "ethnonym". As for Avaris, a Hyskos capital, it's not surprising they would have found Canaanite culture there as it is well known that Canaaanite tribes settled in the Eastern Nile delta and even established a kingdom there that pre-dated the Hyskos invasion, what point are you trying to make here?

 

[Indeependent]

Not even slightly pedantic, more to the side of arrogant.
"Habiru" or "Apiru" has connection to Hebrews only in English.
In the local language it's - 'Ivri' or 'Ivrim'.

Please learn the basics, pedantic..later.

Only English? Can't be bothered to respond to this, I'll lower myself to let Wikipedia debunk it for me:

Habiru or Apiru (Egyptian: ˁpr.w) was the name given by various Sumerian, Egyptian, Akkadian, Hittite, Mitanni, and Ugaritic sources...

And? Non of those languages are Canaanite.
And You have yet to prove any connection between the roots "P(b)-R-M" (Ugarit) and "I-V-R" (Hebrew).

When You do that please publish a paper, it will help all those professors who certainly cannot agree...and for a good reason.

If You really want to look into anything remotely close to "Ivrim" look at the town of Avaris in Egypt where they found traces of Canaanite culture distinct to that of the surrounding Egyptian towns. Plus You get a way more realistic connection between "Ivri" and "Avari".

So? They are Semitic languages of the region used to describe groups of wandering nomads and or bandits. Interesting that "Ivrim" is not considered an "ethnonym". As for Avaris, a Hyskos capital, it's not surprising they would have found Canaanite culture there as it is well known that Canaaanite tribes settled in the Eastern Nile delta and even established a kingdom there that pre-dated the Hyskos invasion, what point are you trying to make here?

Thanks for confirming Chapter 10 of the Torah even though that probably wasn't your intention.

 

[Challenger]

[Why, oh, why, would the Arabs discard anything which should prove their ancestral claim to the land of Palestine (cough), I mean Israel?]

Revealing the Buried Treasures of the Temple Mount


Revealing the Buried Treasures of the Temple Mount

You mean this half Shekel?

Why is there still a fake musical instrument on the half-shekel coin?

or this one?

Benjamin Netanyahu mistakes museum souvenir for 2,000 year old Jewish coin

As if those two examples wipe out all the Arabs have been throwing away as fake?

What? The Arabs have a factory under the Temple where they are fabricating fake ancient anything for the sake of the Jews?

More leaping to conclusions like a Gazelle on steroids; the more likely scenario is that the Zionist Ahnenerbe are fabricating the past to fit in with their fantasies. In reality a lot of interesting and significant archaeological finds can be made sifting through rubbish, but nothing I've seen provides, " more ancient "proof" of Jewish claims to Jerusalem Temple" ; something that's never been disputed. The only problems that arise are from the actual location of the Temple itself.

"Never been disputed" you say. You are missing modern history.
And to use "more ancient proof"......There is proof, period.


Temple Denial refers to the assertion that none of the Temples in Jerusalem ever existed or were not located on the Temple Mount. Israeli writer David Hazony has described the phenomenon as "a campaign of intellectual erasure [by Palestinian leaders, writers, and scholars] ... aimed at undermining the Jewish claim to any part of the land", and compared the phenomenon to Holocaust denial.[1][2] Daniel Levin calls Temple denial a "relatively new phenomenon" that "has become a central tenet of Palestinian nationalism".[3] He stated: "The Islamic land trust is destroying Judeo-Christian ruins beneath the Temple Mount so as to deny any connection between Judaism and Christianity and Jerusalem."[4]

Temple Denial - Wikipedia

Oh please. From your article "The neutrality of this article is disputed." Why am I not surprised, anything that doesn't fit into the Zionist narrative must be labelled as "denial". OK if we're getting into this sort of argument, I'll see your "Temple Denial" and raise you "Nakba Denial".

 

[Challenger]

Not even slightly pedantic, more to the side of arrogant.
"Habiru" or "Apiru" has connection to Hebrews only in English.
In the local language it's - 'Ivri' or 'Ivrim'.

Please learn the basics, pedantic..later.

Only English? Can't be bothered to respond to this, I'll lower myself to let Wikipedia debunk it for me:

Habiru or Apiru (Egyptian: ˁpr.w) was the name given by various Sumerian, Egyptian, Akkadian, Hittite, Mitanni, and Ugaritic sources...

And? Non of those languages are Canaanite.
And You have yet to prove any connection between the roots "P(b)-R-M" (Ugarit) and "I-V-R" (Hebrew).

When You do that please publish a paper, it will help all those professors who certainly cannot agree...and for a good reason.

If You really want to look into anything remotely close to "Ivrim" look at the town of Avaris in Egypt where they found traces of Canaanite culture distinct to that of the surrounding Egyptian towns. Plus You get a way more realistic connection between "Ivri" and "Avari".

So? They are Semitic languages of the region used to describe groups of wandering nomads and or bandits. Interesting that "Ivrim" is not considered an "ethnonym". As for Avaris, a Hyskos capital, it's not surprising they would have found Canaanite culture there as it is well known that Canaaanite tribes settled in the Eastern Nile delta and even established a kingdom there that pre-dated the Hyskos invasion, what point are you trying to make here?

Thanks for confirming Chapter 10 of the Torah even though that probably wasn't your intention.

Which "Chapter 10"? Care to provide a link?

 

[Sixties Fan]

[Why, oh, why, would the Arabs discard anything which should prove their ancestral claim to the land of Palestine (cough), I mean Israel?]

Revealing the Buried Treasures of the Temple Mount


Revealing the Buried Treasures of the Temple Mount

You mean this half Shekel?

Why is there still a fake musical instrument on the half-shekel coin?

or this one?

Benjamin Netanyahu mistakes museum souvenir for 2,000 year old Jewish coin

As if those two examples wipe out all the Arabs have been throwing away as fake?

What? The Arabs have a factory under the Temple where they are fabricating fake ancient anything for the sake of the Jews?

More leaping to conclusions like a Gazelle on steroids; the more likely scenario is that the Zionist Ahnenerbe are fabricating the past to fit in with their fantasies. In reality a lot of interesting and significant archaeological finds can be made sifting through rubbish, but nothing I've seen provides, " more ancient "proof" of Jewish claims to Jerusalem Temple" ; something that's never been disputed. The only problems that arise are from the actual location of the Temple itself.

"Never been disputed" you say. You are missing modern history.
And to use "more ancient proof"......There is proof, period.


Temple Denial refers to the assertion that none of the Temples in Jerusalem ever existed or were not located on the Temple Mount. Israeli writer David Hazony has described the phenomenon as "a campaign of intellectual erasure [by Palestinian leaders, writers, and scholars] ... aimed at undermining the Jewish claim to any part of the land", and compared the phenomenon to Holocaust denial.[1][2] Daniel Levin calls Temple denial a "relatively new phenomenon" that "has become a central tenet of Palestinian nationalism".[3] He stated: "The Islamic land trust is destroying Judeo-Christian ruins beneath the Temple Mount so as to deny any connection between Judaism and Christianity and Jerusalem."[4]

Temple Denial - Wikipedia

Oh please. From your article "The neutrality of this article is disputed." Why am I not surprised, anything that doesn't fit into the Zionist narrative must be labelled as "denial". OK if we're getting into this sort of argument, I'll see your "Temple Denial" and raise you "Nakba Denial".

It is wikipedia.

But you are actually denying that there is such a thing as Temple Denial since 1948?

I am not denying the Nakba. The Arabs brought it on themselves by attempting to destroy Israel and kill all the Jews.
The catastrophe they refer to is that they did not succeed at it.

 

[Indeependent]

Not even slightly pedantic, more to the side of arrogant.
"Habiru" or "Apiru" has connection to Hebrews only in English.
In the local language it's - 'Ivri' or 'Ivrim'.

Please learn the basics, pedantic..later.

Only English? Can't be bothered to respond to this, I'll lower myself to let Wikipedia debunk it for me:

Habiru or Apiru (Egyptian: ˁpr.w) was the name given by various Sumerian, Egyptian, Akkadian, Hittite, Mitanni, and Ugaritic sources...

And? Non of those languages are Canaanite.
And You have yet to prove any connection between the roots "P(b)-R-M" (Ugarit) and "I-V-R" (Hebrew).

When You do that please publish a paper, it will help all those professors who certainly cannot agree...and for a good reason.

If You really want to look into anything remotely close to "Ivrim" look at the town of Avaris in Egypt where they found traces of Canaanite culture distinct to that of the surrounding Egyptian towns. Plus You get a way more realistic connection between "Ivri" and "Avari".

So? They are Semitic languages of the region used to describe groups of wandering nomads and or bandits. Interesting that "Ivrim" is not considered an "ethnonym". As for Avaris, a Hyskos capital, it's not surprising they would have found Canaanite culture there as it is well known that Canaaanite tribes settled in the Eastern Nile delta and even established a kingdom there that pre-dated the Hyskos invasion, what point are you trying to make here?

Thanks for confirming Chapter 10 of the Torah even though that probably wasn't your intention.

Which "Chapter 10"? Care to provide a link?

I post Torah chapter 10 and you can't Google it?
Are you serious?
It's the story of where Noah's progeny settled.

 

[Roudy]

Always interesting discussing theology with an IslamoNazi piece of Shiite who thinks a good Christain should hate Jews. Totally ignoring that Jesus was a Zionist Jew who loved his people and Israel.

Judas, which verse says Jesus was a Jew or a Zionist, let alone a Jew or Zionist that would resemble any of that Talmudic devil spawn today?

Genesis 16 Genesis 16:13

"He will be a wild donkey of a man, His hand will be against everyone, And everyone's hand will be against him; And he will live to the east of all his brothers."

Nope, that's not it, f@ggot.

Which verse?! What book do you think Jesus preached from, Wild Jackass? It wasn't the New Testament, there wasn't any Christian religion to speak of. Jesus was born and raised a Zionist Jew in Judeah and what he preached was Judaism. He was obviously upset at Romans who had invaded and occupied the Promised Land and mistreated his fellow Jews.

It's interesting how you antisemites who claim to be Christians forget that Christianty is based on the life and death of a Zionist Jewish rabbi.

It's also interesting that you deny the existence of the temple but even the New Testament describes many instances of Jesus' interactions AT THE TEMPLE.

But then again Achmed, don't you Muslims believe that Jesus, Moses, and many of the prophets were Muslims and didn't know it at the time? Ha ha ha!

 

[Roudy]

Always interesting discussing theology with an IslamoNazi piece of Shiite who thinks a good Christain should hate Jews. Totally ignoring that Jesus was a Zionist Jew who loved his people and Israel.

Judas, which verse says Jesus was a Jew or a Zionist, let alone a Jew or Zionist that would resemble any of that Talmudic devil spawn today?

Genesis 16 Genesis 16:13

"He will be a wild donkey of a man, His hand will be against everyone, And everyone's hand will be against him; And he will live to the east of all his brothers."

Nope, that's not it, f@ggot.

I am curious, what was Jesus in the 1st Century CE? Which cult or religion?

According to Islam, Jesus was a Muslim and he didn't know it. Islam also says that Jesus wasn't even crucified, his death was faked by Jews in order to protect Jesus. According to the Koran the Christians misunderstood Jesus' message and Christianty is like a sect of Judaism.

True story.