Thread for Zionists who Deny the Existence of the Palestinian Christians and Muslims

[rylah]

So, explain to Rylah that it is not Stockholm syndrome. Christian Palestinians and Muslims Palestinians are a people with their own culture and their own version of Arabic.

It's indeed Stockholm syndrome the Palestinians are suffering, especially the Christian minority. But I'm sure Montelatici prefers Sharia law for the Palestinian Christians.

 

[Hollie]

So, explain to Rylah that it is not Stockholm syndrome. Christian Palestinians and Muslims Palestinians are a people with their own culture and their own version of Arabic.

It's indeed Stockholm syndrome the Palestinians are suffering, especially the Christian minority. But I'm sure Montelatici prefers Sharia law for the Palestinian Christians.

Islamist sharia and Islamic fascism has worked out so well for Christians across the Islamic Middle East.

 

[Ria_Longhorn]

European Jews are foreign to the Muslims and Christians of Palestine. Palestinian Christians are the first Christians, and they are Middle Eastern.

Yet neither Palestine nor Palestinians appear in the Christians' sacred book, The New Testament -- but Judaea, Jews and Israel does:
Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, saying, where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him." -- Matthew 2:1,2

"That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel." -- Ephesians 2:12
That's right, folks, Jesus never met a "Palestinian."

 

[Ria_Longhorn]

No, you are using Google translate and it is incorrect. Eusebio, of course, mentions Palestinians in his work. He was Palestinian.

Wrong. Eusebius does not mention any "Palestinians" in his work, History of The Martyrs In Palestine -- but he does mention Jews:
"There is a large city in the land of Palestine, teeming with population, of which all the inhabitants were Jews. It is called in the Aramaic tongue Lud, and in the Greek it is called Diocaesarea."

 

[ForeverYoung436]

European Jews are foreign to the Muslims and Christians of Palestine. Palestinian Christians are the first Christians, and they are Middle Eastern.

Yet neither Palestine nor Palestinians appear in the Christians' sacred book, The New Testament -- but Judaea, Jews and Israel does:
Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, saying, where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him." -- Matthew 2:1,2

"That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel." -- Ephesians 2:12
That's right, folks, Jesus never met a "Palestinian."

^^^
This.

 

[montelatici]

No, you are using Google translate and it is incorrect. Eusebio, of course, mentions Palestinians in his work. He was Palestinian.

Wrong. Eusebius does not mention any "Palestinians" in his work, History of The Martyrs In Palestine -- but he does mention Jews:
"There is a large city in the land of Palestine, teeming with population, of which all the inhabitants were Jews. It is called in the Aramaic tongue Lud, and in the Greek it is called Diocaesarea."

Wrong. The title is "De martyribus Palestinae". The "ae" suffix denotes the plural in Latin. The correct translation is "Palestinian Martyrs" or in modern Latin languages, like Italian "I martiri palestinesi"
"los mártires palestinos" where the adjective's tense has to correspond to the noun. In any case the martyrs in Palestine would still be palestinians.

The work mentions Palestinians (martyrs) numerous times.

 

[rylah]

No, you are using Google translate and it is incorrect. Eusebio, of course, mentions Palestinians in his work. He was Palestinian.

Wrong. Eusebius does not mention any "Palestinians" in his work, History of The Martyrs In Palestine -- but he does mention Jews:
"There is a large city in the land of Palestine, teeming with population, of which all the inhabitants were Jews. It is called in the Aramaic tongue Lud, and in the Greek it is called Diocaesarea."

Wrong. The title is "De martyribus Palestinae". The "ae" suffix denotes the plural in Latin. The correct translation is "Palestinian Martyrs" or in modern Latin languages, like Italian "I martiri palestinesi"
"los mártires palestinos" where the adjective's tense has to correspond to the noun. In any case the martyrs in Palestine would still be palestinians.

The work mentions Palestinians (martyrs) numerous times.

The attempt to present Greco-Roman culture and people as 'Palestinian', only shows what 'Palestinian' means.

One could just go straight to the semitic root of the word 'Plesti',it means 'INVADER'. 'Palestinian' simply means that, and no Greco-Roman interpretation will change that.

 

[montelatici]

The Palestinian martyrs were simply native people that had converted to Christianity, many previously practiced Judaism, Samaritanism, Paganism etc. They invaded no one.

"Peleset" is an Egyptian term for the people, it does not mean invader.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

The Palestinian martyrs were simply native people that had converted to Christianity, many previously practiced Judaism, Samaritanism, Paganism etc. They invaded no one.

"Peleset" is an Egyptian term for the people, it does not mean invader.

You don't know Hebrew or the "shoroshim" (roots) of Hebrew words, so how can you say what any Hebrew word does or does not mean? The Philistines were non-Semitic invaders from the island of Crete (Caphtor in the Bible). They were also the fiercest enemies of the Children of Israel.

 

[montelatici]

I don't need to know Hebrew to know what the ancient Egyptians called them. The term "Peleset" is transliterated from hieroglyphs as P-r-s-t.

 

[rylah]

The Palestinian martyrs were simply native people that had converted to Christianity, many previously practiced Judaism, Samaritanism, Paganism etc. They invaded no one.

"Peleset" is an Egyptian term for the people, it does not mean invader.

No the Egyptian root is -p-r-s-t, and they identified them as the invading Sea people. The name 'Palestine' or 'Filastine' comes from the semitic root P(h) - L - S(h), which means 'invade'. The Assyrians called them the same.

Native? You mean like Greco-Roman native?
Samaritans and Jews are native and indigenous, the Judean Christians, the original ones were messianic Jews, a sect of Jews who circumcised, put Tefilin and adhered to Jewish laws, today they're Jews for Jesus.

 

[montelatici]

The Samaritans and Jews and those that had already converted to Paganism, converted to Christianity. By 325 all followed the Nicene Creed.

 

[rylah]

The Samaritans and Jews and those that had already converted to Paganism, converted to Christianity. By 325 all followed the Nicene Creed.

I guess all those Jews and Samaritans who revolted against the Byzantine rule were somehow 'resurrected' from the dead.

At that time Jews created a lunar calendar, wrote the Jerusalem Talmud and even had an argument with the Babylonian diaspora over established schools of law in the diaspora and in the land.

 

[Shusha]

The Samaritans and Jews and those that had already converted to Paganism, converted to Christianity. By 325 all followed the Nicene Creed.

And by supporting this, you are following a moral reasoning which permits invasion, colonization and conversion. So you have absolutely no right to complain about the "invasion, colonization and conversion" BACK to a Jewish State.

 

[louie888]

See? There you go again? BACK to a Jewish State?

What evidence is there that there were ever any more than a small pocket of Jews and The Roman exile of the biblical Jews... fact or yet another lie?

 

[Shusha]

What evidence is there.....

Meh. Don't need any. Monte's assertion is that it morally acceptable to invade, colonize and convert. So?

 

[ForeverYoung436]

See? There you go again? BACK to a Jewish State?

What evidence is there that there were ever any more than a small pocket of Jews and The Roman exile of the biblical Jews... fact or yet another lie?

Didn't you read Xelor's posts in that thread? His proofs and evidence from historians?

 

[montelatici]

The Samaritans and Jews and those that had already converted to Paganism, converted to Christianity. By 325 all followed the Nicene Creed.

I guess all those Jews and Samaritans who revolted against the Byzantine rule were somehow 'resurrected' from the dead.

At that time Jews created a lunar calendar, wrote the Jerusalem Talmud and even had an argument with the Babylonian diaspora over established schools of law in the diaspora and in the land.

You mean the Jews who were recruited outside of Palestine who allied themselves with the Persians? Jerusalem was off-limits to non-Christians under Roman/Byzantine rule. Somehow the facts always undercut the Zionist propaganda. The Jews, Samaritans and Pagans that remained in Palestine converted to Christianity.

 

[montelatici]

See? There you go again? BACK to a Jewish State?

What evidence is there that there were ever any more than a small pocket of Jews and The Roman exile of the biblical Jews... fact or yet another lie?

Didn't you read Xelor's posts in that thread? His proofs and evidence from historians?

There was no proof no evidence and they were not historians. They were propagandists.

 

[montelatici]

What evidence is there.....

Meh. Don't need any. Monte's assertion is that it morally acceptable to invade, colonize and convert. So?

Who says it was morally acceptable? It was acceptable under international law at the time, not necessarily moral. Although most would say that converting the Jews and Samaritans to Christianity (those few that had not already converted willingly) was a good thing.

After gaining land by conquest became illegal under international law it became both illegal and immoral. It might seem hypocritical, but that what happens when laws are made. Italy was sanctioned and eventually kicked out of the LoN colonizing Ethiopia though France, Britain, the U.S., Belgium, Spain, Portugal etc. all maintained colonies.