The Invention of the Land of Israel

Jos

Rookie
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
7,412
Reaction score
757
Points
0
In 2009, Shlomo Sand published The Invention of the Jewish People, in which he claimed that Jews have little in common with each other. They had no common "ethnic" lineage owing to the high level of conversion in antiquity. They had no common language, since Hebrew was used only for prayer and was not even spoken at the time of Jesus. Yiddish was, at most, the language of Ashkenazi Jews. So what is left to unite them? Religion? But religion does not make a people – think of Muslims and Catholics. And most Jews are not religious. Zionism? But that is a political position: one can be a Scot and not a Scottish nationalist. Besides, the majority of Jews, including many Zionists, have not the slightest intention of going "back" to the Holy Land, much preferring, and who can blame them, to stay put in north London, or Brooklyn or wherever. In other words, "Jewish People" is a political construct, an invention. Now Sand tells us, in this second volume of what will be a trilogy, that even the "Land of Israel" was invented.
The Invention of the Land*of*Israel by Shlomo Sand ? review | Books | The Guardian
 
"They had no common language, since Hebrew was used only for prayer and was not even spoken at the time of Jesus."

This is deceptive and misleading in the extreme....
 
It's a perspective. Misguided, granted, but it is the Authors opinion. For one, I personally believe that Religion does unite.
 
It's a perspective. Misguided, granted, but it is the Authors opinion. For one, I personally believe that Religion does unite.

It does but it does not turn foreigners into natives.
 
"They had no common language, since Hebrew was used only for prayer and was not even spoken at the time of Jesus."

This is deceptive and misleading in the extreme....

Just because the anti-Semite Gibson filmed his movie in Aramaic, doesn't mean Hebrew was not spoken then in Judea. It's an interesting point though. Hebrew was certainly spoken in the time of the Hebrew Bible, and I wonder when that switched over to Aramaic.
 
It's a perspective. Misguided, granted, but it is the Authors opinion. For one, I personally believe that Religion does unite.

It does but it does not turn foreigners into natives.

Yet Rule of Law and Due Process does make them Citizens. You do realize that both camps at the least, include descendants of Abraham, right?
 
It's a perspective. Misguided, granted, but it is the Authors opinion. For one, I personally believe that Religion does unite.

It does but it does not turn foreigners into natives.

Yet Rule of Law and Due Process does make them Citizens. You do realize that both camps at the least, include descendants of Abraham, right?

That is true. Palestine has always been inhabited by many different people. There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.
 
You can thank your Nazi friends for providing an "historic precedence" for a Jewish state.


It does but it does not turn foreigners into natives.

Yet Rule of Law and Due Process does make them Citizens. You do realize that both camps at the least, include descendants of Abraham, right?

That is true. Palestine has always been inhabited by many different people. There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.
 
Why is it that in all of the Middle East, only the Jewish State has citizens of virtually all living faiths?



You can thank your Nazi friends for providing an "historic precedence" for a Jewish state.


Yet Rule of Law and Due Process does make them Citizens. You do realize that both camps at the least, include descendants of Abraham, right?

That is true. Palestine has always been inhabited by many different people. There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.
 
You can thank your Nazi friends for providing an "historic precedence" for a Jewish state.


Yet Rule of Law and Due Process does make them Citizens. You do realize that both camps at the least, include descendants of Abraham, right?

That is true. Palestine has always been inhabited by many different people. There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.

I don't have any Nazi friends.

When the PLO defined who was a Palestinian they did not exclude anyone.

They even specifically stated that the native Jews were citizens.
 
You can thank your Nazi friends for providing an "historic precedence" for a Jewish state.


That is true. Palestine has always been inhabited by many different people. There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.

I don't have any Nazi friends.

When the PLO defined who was a Palestinian they did not exclude anyone.

They even specifically stated that the native Jews were citizens.

The same PLO that tried to set up a rocket launching area in southern LEbanon to terrorize Israelis
 
You can thank your Nazi friends for providing an "historic precedence" for a Jewish state.

I don't have any Nazi friends.

When the PLO defined who was a Palestinian they did not exclude anyone.

They even specifically stated that the native Jews were citizens.

The same PLO that tried to set up a rocket launching area in southern LEbanon to terrorize Israelis

What does that have to do with anything?
 
As to the language issue: Hebrew was and is not the only language used in Jewish liturgy. Many prayers, including the Kaddish and the Hagaddah (Seder service - a major religious ritual) are in Aramaic. Aramaic was certainly spoken in 1st C CE Judea: it uses the Hebrew alphabet and grammar, and is virtually indistinguishable from Hebrew - even quite expert readers/speakers have to sort of stop and think about it.

As to Yiddish: it's also written with the Hebrew alphabet, and many common words are direct from the Hebrew.

The author's "premise" is uninformed by study of linguistics, which to me is a strong indicator of slovenly methodology.
 
15th post
Title is misleading and false. We all know the land of Israel existed, and so did the Jews that lived in it, built two temples, and from which two great faiths, Judaism and Christianity arose that are still being practiced today. What the author proposes is malarkey.
 
As to the language issue: Hebrew was and is not the only language used in Jewish liturgy. Many prayers, including the Kaddish and the Hagaddah (Seder service - a major religious ritual) are in Aramaic. Aramaic was certainly spoken in 1st C CE Judea: it uses the Hebrew alphabet and grammar, and is virtually indistinguishable from Hebrew - even quite expert readers/speakers have to sort of stop and think about it.

As to Yiddish: it's also written with the Hebrew alphabet, and many common words are direct from the Hebrew.

The author's "premise" is uninformed by study of linguistics, which to me is a strong indicator of slovenly methodology.

I can always tell apart Hebrew from Aramaic. Yiddish seems to be a mixture of Hebrew and German. Sometimes, if I hear people speak German, I can actually understand them a little.
 
It's a perspective. Misguided, granted, but it is the Authors opinion. For one, I personally believe that Religion does unite.


Sands engaged in TALMUDIC THINKING----believe it or not----
---an interesting insight into HIS HERITAGE which he does
share with jews across the world and across time. In short--
the system includes examination of each issue FROM ALL
ANGLES----even the absurd. I,, personally believe that
the talmudic approach is the commonality that unites jews.
 
Back
Top Bottom