Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Ancient History / Forbidden Knowledge / History Rewritten
Register FAQ Chat Social Groups Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-06-2012, 07:41 PM   #1
believenothing
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hyperborea
Posts: 3,420
Default Jerusalem never existed

Most people know not to take biblical history literally, but many still think the locations and some of the events were historical and/or based on historical events when they shouldn't. There is no proof. The bible is more myth than fact and in both cases stories have been borrowed and re-purposed from the history/myth of others. Some scripture is meant to be symbolic and taken as a metaphor even.

Biblical historians and archaeologists unfortunately muddy the waters with their confirmation biased research which is often based on wishful thinking via less-than-circumstantial evidence. Since they're the ones who care about the subject the most, theirs is often the only research confusing others into thinking it is fact.

Here is a real fact: Jerusalem never existed. If it did, it was completely destroyed and not a shred of physical evidence remains of it. Either that or it wasn't in Palestine. So what is the Old City in Jerusalem if not the biblical one? A Roman city called Aelia Capitolina:


If Josephus is to be believed (and I wouldn't blindly trust him):

Quote:
Jerusalem was still in ruins from the First Jewish-Roman War in 70 AD. Josephus, a contemporary, reports that "Jerusalem ... was so thoroughly razed to the ground by those that demolished it to its foundations, that nothing was left that could ever persuade visitors that it had once been a place of habitation."
This conveniently supports "pre-existing" biblical prophecy by the way. Now it's possible that this was the truth, but it's also possible that it's not. It certainly sound suspicious that a city can be completely destroyed down to the foundation and not leave a trace behind that it ever existed.

So much for the Western Wall by the way. The Roman Emperor Hadrian allegedly re-built Jerusalem for the Jews in 130 AD. Nobody seems to agree about what happened in the prior 60 years. Some say Jerusalem was in ruins the entire time and nobody live there. Others believe these stories are mythological and Jerusalem wasn't in ruin, that the Romans just kicked out the Jews around 130 AD. This is more plausible actually so long as you avoid the biblical nonsense and had been a Roman city for a few centuries.

What is undisputed by all except the biblical nutters and Zionists is the framework of the Old City is Roman:



Whatever the truth regarding its age, what exists today in Occupied East Jerusalem, Palestine (aka Al Quds) is the Roman city of Aelia Capitolina. The so-called Temple Mount had a temple devoted to Jupiter. It's likely that even parts of the Al-Aqsa Mosque and/or Dome of the Rock were of this temple. Many of the world's Abrahamic religious sites are refurbished 'pagan' ones. Even in Vatican City. Even the Taj Mahal. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem was a Venus temple.

The Temple Mount complex was part of a Roman fort and a praetorium. The Western Wall was part of this fort, and the fort may have been Fort Antonia but Herod had nothing to do with it.

This blog has pointed out the similarity between Vatican City and the Old City of Jerusalem:

http://ivarfjeld.wordpress.com/2012/...-of-jerusalem/

Compare the above city layout with this:



It's not exact but there are a number of 'coincidental' features. Considering the name, this was probably a sister city to Rome, a city of importance then and now but not for the reasons we think.

The 'history' says that the Jews were kicked out in 135 AD and then foreigners were imported to live there. This sounds like historical bullshit. I'm aware that peoples were often settled and re-settled in designated towns/cities, especially with war. So it's not impossible I guess, it just sounds highly suspicious.

Somebody is distorting the facts that this was a Roman City before it was a biblical one. Jerusalem never existed, the Jerusalem of today was never Jewish until 1967. It was never Jerusalem until about 200 years after Aelia Capitolina was allegedly built when the Romans became Christianized. They generally held on to it for about 300 more years although the Persians fought over it here. After that, Islam moved into town. Despite a change of hands it's generally been in Islamic hands (either Arabs or Turks) ever since until the British came along, of course with the famous exception of a couple centuries during Crusader rule.

The Crusader period is about the only time I can reliably trace the usage of the name Jerusalem to. Anything before that and it's difficult to find any outside of the usual suspect 'historians'. The Aelia being derived from Arabic for Jerusalem is a bullshit story too. The biblical historians and their double standards.... you can't say the word Istanbul is unrelated phonetically to Constantinople and then try to say Aelia is from the Arabic for Jerusalem.

Anyways, all this arguing in Israel over nothing. It belongs to the Palestinians and not the Jews, that's for damn sure. The Jewish Jerusalem, if it were even there, was long gone when the Romans built a new one over it's ruins. Archaeology has found no such ruins though. They have found a lot of 'pagan' Roman stuff though. All the biblical names on sites there are just names.

Now the Vatican wants Jerusalem and always has. That's a fact. The UN sovereignty which was part of the partition plan would have gave it the same status at the Vatican. The Vatican has made not-so-secret deals with Israel about it, specifically with Shimon Peres. Rome wants back what was theirs and they're using Zionism to get it just like they used Christianity to control Europe. Religion and state are separate, but the same folks are running the show just as they always have. Rome never fell. Rome was never a continuous empire, it was a series of empires claiming succession from the last one. History split it with the Byzantines and drew the line at the Ottoman conquering (they still called it Rome) and Russia's claim. That's why the architecture is all over the Western government buildings. Caesar (Khazar) is still in charge

One last thing, this scene is a part of the famous Arch of Titus in Rome close to the Colosseum:



It's also a straight shot to Vatican City about three miles or so away. This Arch was erected by Emperor Domitian to commemorate the victories of Titus. Except as others have noticed, it would be a dumb move for a couple reasons, firstly being Domitian would not wanted to have commemorated Titus and secondly because Titus plays a small role in the 'siege' to begin with and was only a general at the time. There is also people who claim the arch is from a different era either older (which makes the inscription odd) or much newer (which makes no sense).

Either way, these are supposed to be Romans taking the 'spoils of war' back to Rome. In reality, they took them (or some of them) to Antioch. Regardless, there is only the assumption that these are Jewish spoils because of the war campaign. Jerusalem's history is a BS story. I don't think we are being told the truth about those Jewish wars and revolts and stuff. As for the famous arch, yes they depicted warfare much of the time but most were inspired by the Titus one. The menorah being so prominent here that I don't think this was to shove it to the Jews. I think Rome's history is fucked up too.

These are the "Israelites" so-to-speak (I'm not the first to say that) and the menorah is theirs. They're not Jews though. Jews and Israelites/Hebrews have become synonymous with each other over the past few centuries but they used to be distinct as they are in the Koran (not that it's reliable either though).

Jews HATE this arch because they think it's their temple's loot stolen by Titus after he destroyed Jerusalem. I don't think that's what is being depicted here at all, that was the lie to explain the anomaly. The big fucking menorah being the most obvious anomaly. These are Romans, but the Romans were probably originally "Israelite" just like some European royalty always say they are. Israel asked for the Menorah back from the Pope a few times in the last 20 years. The Vatican says they don't have it. The Jews know it is there because the Vatican has been infiltrated. The truth probably is, the menorah belongs to the Vatican. Always has. Was never part of any Jewish temple.

Us lesser classes (non-elites) had illiterate peasant class ancestry (probably). They didn't know what real history was. History is the lie commonly agreed upon.

Last edited by believenothing; 11-06-2012 at 07:42 PM.
believenothing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 08:50 PM   #2
totalrecall
Senior Member
 
totalrecall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: somewhere and nowhere and everywhere and here.
Posts: 455
Default

I agree that history is largely a lot of bullshit.

There's an interesting perspective put out by Fomenko in "History: Science or Fiction?" that basically everything before 1600 is bullshit or has the wrong locations and the wrong time.

I mean, if "history" of the present is mostly an elite theme, e.g. 9/11, to quote many examples, now being exposed because of the Internet, then we can be damn sure that "history" prior to the Internet has been one elite theme after another too, and that "history" prior to the Gutenberg printing press is an even bigger disaster.
__________________
Deception is a state of mind and the mind of the state is deception.

(credit: youtube comment)
totalrecall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 09:32 PM   #3
believenothing
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hyperborea
Posts: 3,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by totalrecall View Post
I agree that history is largely a lot of bullshit.

There's an interesting perspective put out by Fomenko in "History: Science or Fiction?" that basically everything before 1600 is bullshit or has the wrong locations and the wrong time.

I mean, if "history" of the present is mostly an elite theme, e.g. 9/11, to quote many examples, now being exposed because of the Internet, then we can be damn sure that "history" prior to the Internet has been one elite theme after another too, and that "history" prior to the Gutenberg printing press is an even bigger disaster.
It is an interesting theory. I doubt all of it is true, but some of it probably is. His method is criticized and unorthodox, but I can see it working for some things. Certainly made me think! I noticed on my own a while back that lists of royal ancestry that had successors hundreds of years later with the same name would sometimes share much of the same accomplishments. Probably because it was the same guy and somebody messed up. Documents get lost, people have short memories, then all of a sudden you got two events in Europe recorded on dates hundreds of years apart yet are the same thing. Makes me wonder what the date really is. Not that it really matters, it would just be nice to know.

The compilations of history to justify rulers and their unreliability past the 15th century is certainly true. Doesn't mean the history is false, but I wouldn't be surprised. Something is wrong. The elites today in large part came from the elites of yesterday. Class had never changed, inheritance keeps the dynasty going. So us lesser classes are literate now and our ancestors from several centuries back probably weren't because that's a class thing.

They can make up all kinds of crazy stuff, especially when plagues are wiping out entire populations or the church is smiting pagans.

That's an excellent point about 9/11. Modern history which we know has reliability issues (Nosama comes to mind as absolute bullshit) thanks to information and tech. We didn't have this before. Even archaeologists find stuff all the time that they really can't explain (Indus Valley civilizations)

Last edited by believenothing; 11-06-2012 at 09:36 PM.
believenothing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2012, 06:59 PM   #4
oiram
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lost Oz "Unless they oppose it, they will be blamed for it. If they defend it, they are part of it."
Posts: 9,958
Thumbs up The Jerusalem Below & the Eternal New Jerusalem

Let me support your claim my friend; with some texts I found.....

Yes you are correct with a small but .... because spiritual understanding is real & not a myth! Otherwise I would not understand these texts if there would be no spiritual reality......

If you would except that spiritual is a reality we are on the same frequency!


Yes its metaphorical like 95% is in all of scripture; but with a logical spiritual meaning which is the real deal!

I have three items & think about the Cross symbolism which has the above, the below, the left & the right!

The Above is the Angels department

The Below is the Daemons department

The Right = the right hand path judge

The Left = the evil pathway

One more problem & Mystery solved for me! ....... & yes the Jews are liars since the beginning! They lied to there own & the rest of the world with there bullshit manipulation of everything they could touch & get there hands on.



1) the Jerusalem Below--the physical world
1a) is the one who built Jerusalem by means of the demons. =
I'm also presume strongly when they say in scripture they gathered in Jerusalem that they talked about the place within ... or it could be classed as meditating by the once already understanding what God truly stands for like the Apostles for example.
I come to the conclusion because the texts below talking about the New Jerusalem is exactly this; a metaphorical name of a place being eternal & therefore by spiritual understanding its within the individual.

2) the Eternal City, New Jerusalem. =
Yes its a Mystery item! This New Jerusalem has 100% nothing to do with Jews because its located in heaven & means within the individual!

3) Israel - which is, "the man that sees God";


The Fifth Gnostic Mystery:
The Descent of the New Jerusalem.


Behold, a small star from the Heavens descends to the Earth,
With Light more brilliant than the Sun.
It comes to dwell in the Hearts of the children of men,
and these hearts are the foundation upon which is built
the Eternal City, New Jerusalem.

18. Hail Sophia ten times, while meditating on the Mystery.
19. Closing prayer.
http://www.gnosis.org/library/rosary.htm

They are wicked in their behavior! Some of them fall away to the worship of idols. Others have demons dwelling with them, as did David the king. He is the one who laid the foundation of Jerusalem; and his son Solomon, whom he begat in adultery, is the one who built Jerusalem by means of the demons, because he received power. When he had finished building, he imprisoned the demons in the temple. He placed them into seven waterpots. They remained a long time in the waterpots, abandoned there. When the Romans went up to Jerusalem, they discovered the waterpots, and immediately the demons ran out of the waterpots, as those who escape from prison. And the waterpots remained pure thereafter. And since those days, they dwell with men who are in ignorance, and they have remained upon the earth.

Who, then, is David? And who is Solomon? And what is the foundation? And what is the wall which surrounds Jerusalem? And who are the demons? And what are the waterpots? And who are the Romans? But these are mysteries ...
http://gnosis.org/naghamm/testruth.html


The Mystery of the Cross.
"Our Lord stood in the midst of the cave and filled it with light and said, 'To the multitude below, in Jerusalem [? the Jerusalem Below--the physical world],
I am being crucified, and pierced with lances and reeds, and gall and vinegar is given Me to drink; to thee now I speak, and hearken to My words. ’Twas I who put it in thy heart to ascend this mount, that thou mightest hear what disciple must learn from Master, and man from God.'

http://www.gnosis.org/library/grs-mead/fragments_faith_forgotten/fff61.htm

Thereafter he (Sabaoth) created a congregation of angels, thousands and myriads, numberless, which resembled the congregation in the eighth heaven; and a firstborn called

Israel - which is, "the man that sees God"; and another being, called Jesus Christ, who resembles the savior above in the eighth heaven, and who sits at his right upon a revered throne. (the right hand way judge) And at his left, there sits the virgin of the holy spirit, upon a throne and glorifying him.
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/origin.html


Every Palestinians should be enjoying the DIF forum & should be joining the party!

Because they are right now the most effected; because of all these lies of the past!

We can only help by doing things together!!



Quote:
Still, when we attach the word "Gnostic" to "Catechism" we may encounter another problem. A Gnostic is by definition a knower, and since knowledge supersedes belief, a knower cannot very well be a believer. If a catechism is mainly a statement of beliefs, it is something that no Gnostic would have a need for. So far so good, but the issue under consideration is a bit more complex than that.

It is no doubt true that without Gnosis there is no Gnosticism, but it is also true that without the context of the Gnostic Mythos the Gnosis of the individual loses its salvific character. Our world harbors many people who have had impressive spiritual experiences which, however, never yielded any significant meaning. (The specific salvific meaning the Gnostic derives from the experience of Gnosis is redemption, which means liberation from the necessity of earthly existence.) Only when Gnosis occurs within a particular meaningful context will the Gnostic obtain optimal results from his experience. This does not mean that Gnosticism posits any kind of dogma against which to measure the authenticity of the experience of the Gnostic. What it means is that Gnostic sages and seers have brought forth from their own original experiences of Gnosis a vast and meaningful Mythos which represents the theoretical matrix for our practical experience. This mythic matrix is of course not closed; rather it invites modifications and additions of an appropriate nature from other seers and travelers on the Aeonial paths of Gnosis.

The catechism which follows is a manual of instruction in the Gnostic Mythos. Its aim is to instruct not only in one variety of this Mythos, but in the entire heritage of the Gnostic tradition, whereby we mean the teachings of the Gnostic sages and seers as found in their original writings, including the Nag Hammadi collection. The less reliable accounts and recensions of these teachings found in the writings of the Church Fathers have also been taken into consideration. The non-Christian Gnosis of the Hermetic writings has been considered also. The teachings of the Prophet Mani are often included. (It is increasingly evident to scholarship that the Manichaean Gnosis is an organic part of the Gnostic tradition.) The spirit, if not always the letter of all known dispensations of the Gnostic tradition, finds its expression in this catechism.

Catechisms have been with us for a long time. It is believed that the first such compendia were based on the catechetical lectures of Cyril of Jerusalem in the Fourth Century A.D. The name originates in the Greek verb katexein, meaning to teach, and the first catechisms seem to have grown out of oral instructions given to those who were candidates for membership in the church.

Not only mainstream orthodoxy had catechisms, however. So called heretics, sometimes of a Gnostic or gnosticising orientation, often had their own catechisms. It was rumored that the Cathars of the Languedoc had a catechism, but no copy of this work has been found so far. The most famous "heretical" catechism was the one printed in 1498 (although existing earlier) which was used not by one but by three heterodox movements at once, i.e. the Waldenses of Savoy, the Brethren of the Common Life in Germany and the Unitas Fratrum in Bohemia. A catechism format was even employed by the renowned esoteric teacher of the 19th Century, H. P. Blavatsky, in her work, The Key to Theosophy. (Indeed one is tempted to interject that if such a non-dogmatic system as Theosophy could employ this format, surely modern Gnosticism could do the same.) The French Gnostic Church possessed a catechism, written by Bishop Jean Bricaud and published in 1907. (See our bibliography.) It would seem that there exists ample precedent for our present effort.

http://gnosis.org/ecclesia/catechism.htm
oiram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2012, 07:13 PM   #5
lightgiver
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 30,822
Lightbulb Jerusalem

The third most sacred city in Islam is Jerusalem, which was the original qibla (direction of prayer) before it was changed to Mecca. Jerusalem is revered because, in Muslim tradition, Muhammad miraculously traveled to Jerusalem by night and ascended from there into heaven. The two most important Muslim sites in Jerusalem are the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque...

The most notable Muslim site in Jerusalem is the Dome of the Rock (Qubbat as-Sakhrah), which, like the Ka'ba, is built over a sacred stone. This stone is holy to Jews as well, who believe it to be the site at which Abraham prepared to sacrifice Isaac (Muslims place this event in Mecca).

The Al-Aqsa Mosque (Arabic Masjid Al-Aqsa, "farthest mosque") is part of the complex of religious buildings in Jerusalem known as either the Majed Mount or Al-Haram ash-Sharif (the Noble Sanctuary) to Muslims and the Temple Mount to Jews.


http://www.religionfacts.com/islam/places/jerusalem.htm
lightgiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2012, 07:13 PM   #6
roman piso
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,836
Default

This specific scene below is actually depicted in the Gospels , where Jesus (Titus) Cleanses the Temple.



The Menorah depicts The Vestal Virgin candelabra depicting the seven gods each with a FIRE of Vesta/sungod

The trumpet/torch of truth, which is the one held by the Genius ( life essence guardian angel each person receives at birth)

The fact is that the Roman temple of Hierosolyma had been defiled by the rebels/merchants, so the Romans took the main ROMAN SACRED objects back to ROME to purify them.

Last edited by roman piso; 30-08-2012 at 07:15 PM.
roman piso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2012, 07:15 PM   #7
lightgiver
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 30,822
Lightbulb Kingdom of Judah



The Kingdom of Judah (Hebrew: מַמְלֶכֶת יְהוּדָה‎ (Mamlekhet Yehuda) was a Jewish state established in the Southern Levant during the Iron Age. It is often referred to as the "Southern Kingdom" to distinguish it from the northern Kingdom of Israel.

Map of the region in the 9th century BCE


Judah emerged as a state probably no earlier than the 9th century BCE, but the subject is one of considerable controversy. In the 7th century BCE, The Kingdom capital Jerusalem became a city with a population many times greater than before and clear dominance over its neighbours, probably as the result of a cooperative arrangement with the Assyrians, who wished to establish Judah as a pro-Assyrian vassal state controlling the valuable olive industry. Judah prospered under Assyrian vassalage, (despite a disastrous rebellion against the Assyrian king Sennacherib), but in the last half of the 7th century BCE Assyria suddenly collapsed, and the ensuing competition between the Egyptian and Neo-Babylonian empires for control of the Levant led to the destruction of the kingdom in a series of campaigns between 597 and 582, the deportation of the elite of the community, and the incorporation of the Land of Israel as a province of the empire



lightgiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2012, 09:06 PM   #8
believenothing
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hyperborea
Posts: 3,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by roman piso View Post
This specific scene below is actually depicted in the Gospels , where Jesus (Titus) Cleanses the Temple.



The Menorah depicts The Vestal Virgin candelabra depicting the seven gods each with a FIRE of Vesta/sungod

The trumpet/torch of truth, which is the one held by the Genius ( life essence guardian angel each person receives at birth)

The fact is that the Roman temple of Hierosolyma had been defiled by the rebels/merchants, so the Romans took the main ROMAN SACRED objects back to ROME to purify them.
Couple things,

This image is on the Arch of Titus. If you make a straight line (Northwest) through the arch one way there is an ancient road that goes right into the heart of the Roman Forum. If you continue to follow it past the Forum, there are no longer any roads but I found it interesting that if you continue to make a straight line through the arch, it points directly to St. Peter's Basilica. The church itself though is situated exactly East/West, but the arch still points to it.

If you take the road from the other direction (Southeast) it ends up exactly at Meta Sudans, the ruins of an ancient fountain right in front of the Coliseum with the Arch of Constantine on its side.

The Arch of Titus is considered the original model for subsequent arches which generally celebrate victory through war. The difference here is that the arch was constructed by Domitian, his successor and brother. Which is odd an unlikely. The so-called 'siege of Jerusalem' occurred while Titus' father Vespasian was emperor (Titus was not an emperor of almost a decade later).

The canonical story for why this arch was erected, who erected it, and what is being depicted is unlikely. Add that to the fact that the 'siege of Jerusalem' is exaggerated and probably based on myth when Josephus wrote about it.

I don't discount your theory, it's interesting. I heard another theory. That the arch depicts the arrival of the conquering "Israelites" into Rome. The Flavian dynasty were Sabines. The Sabines were the indigenous people to this part of Italy before whoever the Romans truly were showed up, married (raped) their women, and founded Rome. Josephus unlikely story of being the survivors of the siege of Jerusalem, telling the Jews to draw lots and commit suicide, being a mediator between Jews and Romans, and then working for the Flavian dynasty and writing a history of all this (as well as being the primary and often only source on those events) is.... well not very likely.

Jewish history regarding the destruction of their temple, the Roman siege, being slaves to Romans, being completely expelled from their land in some cases, the diaspora, etc. is based on Josephus' account. The same account that says every stone was destroyed along with Jerusalem and it was merely a memory when the Romans built Aelia Capitolina. They can't just accept one part of the account as history and ignore the other. All signs point to Aelia Capitolina being older than it is and very Roman anyways, but if they want to believe his account than the Old City of Jerusalem is a Christian Byzantine city, the Roman city re-named Jerusalem. Even Constantinople was called Jerusalem.

Modern Zionists need the myth to claim the land. They also need the diaspora myth (not believed by serious historians, even their own) to solidify the 'return' story despite millions of Jews in Europe being unexplained by it and the Romans not in the business of expelling conquered people as slaves across the Mediterranean.

I think the truth is obscured by the Josephus account and Jewish mythology.
believenothing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2012, 09:12 PM   #9
Mr Happy
Senior Member
 
Mr Happy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,693
Default

Maybe Hitler was doing us a favour.
__________________
bitcoins for surgery please: 14HWrhnsNawQdP3iUj8cTAHpuFnU232xbw
Mr Happy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2012, 09:37 PM   #10
roman piso
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,836
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by believenothing View Post
he so-called 'siege of Jerusalem' occurred while Titus' father Vespasian was emperor (Titus was not an emperor of almost a decade later).
The Gospels answer this... Since "Vespasian" was the Roman Emperor, he is thus a "God", at this point in time, he was very Elderly, so he sent-forth his Son (The Son of God). Titus.

Galatians 4:4
But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son

[Tacitus, Histories, 1. 10.]
Flavius Vespasian, a general of Nero's appointment, was carrying on the war in Judaea with three legions, and he had no wish or feeling adverse to Galba. He had in fact sent his son Titus to acknowledge his authority and bespeak his favour, as in its proper place I shall relate. As for the hidden decrees of fate, the omens and the oracles that marked out Vespasian and his sons for imperial power, we believed in them only after his success.


Titus Christ
[Tacitus, History, 5. 13]
in the ancient records of their priests was contained a prediction of how at this very time the East was to grow powerful, and rulers, coming from Judaea, were to acquire universal empire. These mysterious prophecies had pointed to Vespasian and Titus

[Suetonius, Life of Vespasian, 4]
An ancient superstition was current in the East, that out of Judea would come the rulers of the world. This prediction, as it later proved, referred to the two Roman Emperors, Vespasian and his son Titus; but the rebellious Jews, who read it as referring to themselves.

[Josephus War of the Jews, 6.5.4]
But now, what did most elevate them [the Jews] in undertaking this war was an ambiguous oracle that was found in their sacred writings, how, “about that time, one from their country should become governor of the habitable earth.” The Jews took this prediction to belong to themselves in particular; and many of their wise men were thereby deceived in their determination. Now, this oracle certainly denoted the government of Vespasian, who was appointed emperor in Judea.

Transfiguration/Temptation of TITUS
[Suetonius, Life of Vespasian, 5]
In Judea, Vespasian consulted the God of Carmel and was given a promise that he would never be disappointed in what he planned or desired, however lofty his ambitions. Also, a distinguished Jewish prisoner of Vespasian’s, Josephus by name, insisted that he would soon be released by the very man who had now put him in fetters, and who would then be emperor.

[Tacitus, Histories, 2.78]
Between Judea and Syria lies a mountain called Carmel [ELIJAH], which is the name of the local god. Yet traditionally this god boasts neither image nor temple, only an altar and the reverence of its worshippers. Here Vespasian had offered sacrifice when he was turning over in his mind his secret ambitions. The priest Basilides time and again examined the entrails of the victims. Finally he declared; ‘What ever you are planning, Vespasian - this is granted to you. You shall have a great mansion, far-flung boundaries and a host of people.’ This ambiguous statement was immediately pounced upon by gossip, and was now given great publicity. Indeed ordinary people talked of little else. Still more lively was the discussion in Vespasian’s immediate circle, for hope is eloquent.

Josephus was a Prophet sent by God

[Josephus War of the Jews, 3. 8. 9]
"Thou, O Vespasian, thinkest no more than that thou hast taken Josephus himself captive; but I come to thee as a messenger of greater tidings; for had not I been sent by God to thee, I knew what was the law of the Jews in this case? and how it becomes generals to die. Dost thou send me to Nero? For why? Are Nero's successors till they come to thee still alive? Thou, O Vespasian, art Caesar and emperor, thou, and this thy son. Bind me now still faster, and keep me for thyself, for thou, O Caesar, are not only lord over me, but over the land and the sea, and all mankind; and certainly I deserve to be kept in closer custody than I now am in, in order to be punished, if I rashly affirm any thing of God"

Last edited by roman piso; 30-08-2012 at 09:42 PM.
roman piso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2012, 09:38 PM   #11
believenothing
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hyperborea
Posts: 3,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lightgiver View Post
The Kingdom of Judah (Hebrew: מַמְלֶכֶת יְהוּדָה‎ (Mamlekhet Yehuda) was a Jewish state established in the Southern Levant during the Iron Age. It is often referred to as the "Southern Kingdom" to distinguish it from the northern Kingdom of Israel.

Judah emerged as a state probably no earlier than the 9th century BCE, but the subject is one of considerable controversy. In the 7th century BCE, The Kingdom capital Jerusalem became a city with a population many times greater than before and clear dominance over its neighbours, probably as the result of a cooperative arrangement with the Assyrians, who wished to establish Judah as a pro-Assyrian vassal state controlling the valuable olive industry. Judah prospered under Assyrian vassalage, (despite a disastrous rebellion against the Assyrian king Sennacherib), but in the last half of the 7th century BCE Assyria suddenly collapsed, and the ensuing competition between the Egyptian and Neo-Babylonian empires for control of the Levant led to the destruction of the kingdom in a series of campaigns between 597 and 582, the deportation of the elite of the community, and the incorporation of the Land of Israel as a province of the empire
There is no archeological evidence to support this, the 'kingdom of Israel' and it's north and south portions are mythological.

The part of the Levant claimed to be "Israel" was split into several non-Jewish kingdoms such as Philistia, Phoenica, and Nabatea. There is no evidence of a kingdom of Judah or Judea prior to the 5th and 6th centuries BC. In the 6th century BC and earlier, that region is called Khumri or Huumri. Biblical historians have interpreted this to mean biblical Omri. The only problem with that is biblical Omri was associated with the "Northern Kingdom" and not the "Southern Kingdom" of Judah.

The 5th century BC Elephantine letters (from Elephantine, Africa near Egypt) are written by a polytheistic "Jewish" community who refer to their home "kingdom" as Yehud which biblical historians interpret as Judah.

By this time, the Assyrians had already conquered the Levant. But there was no Assyrian captivity or lost tribes or any of that. The name "Samaria" is occasionally used for the Palestinian highlands in the former so-called northern kingdom. This happens to be where the Samaritans live, a sect related to Judaism but long split from it. The monotheistic Druze live in the territory associated with the northern kingdom too. It was the Jews of this northern territory who cared so much about Exodus, the book which is so important to modern Jewish identity the historical Jews in Judea ironically could have cared less about.

We already covered the Jerusalem mythology in this thread.

One last thing about this area. The entire territory claimed to be part of the 'kingdom of Israel' was called Syria Palestina by the Romans after the so-called revolt period.

The name "Syria" pops up in the 8h century BC to describe the Aramaic-speaking people in the Levant. Not just among the Assyrians, it is a self-designated name. The etymology could very well be related to Asur. The point is they gave this time to themselves. What's really interesting is prior to the 8th century BC, what would be interpreted as "Syria" by historians when describing people form this area who speak Aramaic or Hebrew is (mis)interpreted as Israel. Either they're wrong, or more likely Syria and Israel were etymologically the same word once-upon-a-time and not Asur. The reason for the 8h century BC cutoff for interpreting it as Israel is because this is when the mythology claims Israel was conquered.

So you see, the Romans probably knew this when they called it Syria(Israel)-Palestina(Philistia/Palestine)

Last edited by believenothing; 30-08-2012 at 09:39 PM.
believenothing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2012, 11:05 PM   #12
roman piso
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,836
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by believenothing View Post
The name "Syria" pops up in the 8h century BC to describe the Aramaic-speaking people in the Levant. Not just among the Assyrians, it is a self-designated name. The etymology could very well be related to Asur. )
Syria is As-Syria (Assyria), they never was an Israel, but rather "Assyria-El" (Isra-el), because it was the Assyrian's (Sargon II) whom conquered Canaan around 700BC.. coincidently in Tacitus

Tacitus
It is said that the Jews were originally exiles from the island of Crete who settled in the farthest parts of Libya at the time when Saturn had been deposed and expelled by Jove. An argument in favour of this is derived from the name: there is a famous mountain in Crete called Ida, and hence the inhabitants were called the Idaei, which was later lengthened into the barbarous form Iudaei. Some hold that in the reign of Isis the superfluous population of Egypt, under the leadership of Hierosolymus and Iuda, discharged itself on the neighbouring lands; many others think that they were an Egyptian stock, which in the reign of Cepheus was forced to migrate by fear and hatred. Still others report that they were Assyrian refugees, a landless people, who first got control of a part of Egypt, then later they had their own cities and lived in the Hebrew territory and the nearer parts of Syria. Still others say that the Jews are of illustrious origin, being the Solymi, a people celebrated in Homer's poems,5 who founded a city and gave it the name Hierosolyma, formed from their own.

3 1 Most authors agree that once during a plague in Egypt which caused bodily disfigurement, King Bocchoris6 approached the oracle of Ammon7 and p179asked for a remedy, whereupon he was told to purge his kingdom and to transport this race into other lands, since it was hateful to the gods. So the Hebrews were searched out and gathered together; then, being abandoned in the desert, while all others lay idle and weeping, one only of the exiles, Moses by name, warned them not to hope for help from gods or men, for they were deserted by both, but to trust to themselves, regarding as a guide sent from heaven the one whose assistance should first give them escape from their present distress. They agreed, and then set out on their journey in utter ignorance, but trusting to chance. Nothing caused them so much distress as scarcity of water, and in fact they had already fallen exhausted over the plain nigh unto death, when a herd of wild asses moved from their pasturage to a rock that was shaded by a grove of trees. Moses followed them, and, conjecturing the truth from the grassy ground, discovered abundant streams of water. This relieved them, and they then marched six days continuously, and on the seventh seized a country, expelling the former inhabitants; there they founded a city and dedicated a temple.8

3 1 Most authors agree that once during a plague in Egypt which caused bodily disfigurement, King Bocchoris approached the oracle of Ammon7 and p179asked for a remedy, whereupon he was told to purge his kingdom and to transport this race into other lands,

...............

King Bocchoris date around 700BC and Assyrian Imperialism coincidently dates to 700BC, and did you know that Tacitus places Moses around 700BC.

The one thing, is that "Tacitus" or any Roman or Greek historian never used the term "Israel",
roman piso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-08-2012, 04:56 AM   #13
believenothing
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hyperborea
Posts: 3,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by roman piso View Post
Syria is As-Syria (Assyria), they never was an Israel, but rather "Assyria-El" (Isra-el), because it was the Assyrian's (Sargon II) whom conquered Canaan around 700BC.. coincidently in Tacitus
What would later be known as Syria was called Aram or Damascus (or Aram Damascus) in ancient times. The inhabitants spoke a variation of Phoenician which would become both Hebrew and Aramaic.

The biblical account claims that 'Aram' conquered 'Israel' in the 9th century BC. No historical or archeological evidence supports this. The biblical account then goes on to say in the 8th century the two were allied with each other until conquered by Assyrians who then expelled the inhabitants. This is also not a historical or archeological event.

Aram/Damascus WAS the 'Northern Kingdom' of 'Israel' and after the Assyrians conquered them, they called themselves Syria which is a name the Aramaic speakers gave to themselves in that area and may not even be etymologically related to Asur or Assyria and may be derived from Coptic for the Hurrians.

The Kurkh stele dates to 850 BC and mentions "Israel" except that mention is an interpretation. The stele says "sir-il-la-a-a" which 100 years later would be translated as Syria. But to keep the biblical history going, the biblical historians misinterpret it as Israel. Unless Israel and Syria are the same word. After researching this, I reject that Assyria=Israel etymology and as odd and coincidental as it may seem, I think Syria and Assyria may not be a phonetic coincidence. Of course they could have been isolated and still related cousins. And the Asuras and Aesir might be etymologically related. The world used to be a strange place. And speaking of the Roman interest in the Levant, I have a feeling it is much more ancient than canoncial chronology claims. The Amorites, those foreign rulers over middle eastern peoples... Amor backwards is Roma. And the ME is on the fringe of right-to-left reading meaning it is plausibly an error in translation (sumer is remus btw.. and Assur would be Russa).
believenothing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-08-2012, 04:56 PM   #14
roman piso
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,836
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by believenothing View Post
I reject that Assyria=Israel etymology and as odd and coincidental as it may seem, I think Syria and Assyria may not be a phonetic coincidence.
When an Emperor conquers certain land, they commonly rename that land, but in Biblical case, the Places where named after certain People, the same is in Greek Mythology, where place names are named after people.

I have noticed that Israeli Kings are actually Assyrian Kings, Israel was just an Extension of Assyria, with there own transliterations of the Egyptian-Assyrian Kings

David [D-D] may even refer to "Adad" [D-D], and Solomon is [Šulmānu-ašarēdu] (Shalmaneser).

[quote]
Tiglath-Pileser Yushara[Jesse][Pinedjam] (Married) Duathhathor Henutawy daughter of Ramses XI]
Shamshi-Adad IV [King David] [Psusennes I]
Ashur-Nasir-Pal [Osorkon][Nathen?]
Ashur-Rabi II _(brothers)_Shalmaneser II[Solomon] [Siamun]
[/quote
roman piso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2012, 10:48 PM   #15
believenothing
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hyperborea
Posts: 3,420
Default

I've noticed how ancient references to Jerusalem geographically do not always refer to Palestine. In fact, some of the are most certainly referring to Constantinople. The Norse Heimskringla dates to the 13th century and it gives an Earthly and mortal origin to Odin and the Aesir/Vanir 'gods'. When it describes the location of Jerusalem it is most definitely referring to Constantinople. That is just one example. There are other references to Constantinople being called Jerusalem and the lack of acknowledgment in the modern era is suspicious. Russians referred to it as Jerusalem up until the Crimean War, perhaps for a reason.

Since the French Revolution, there had been many attempts to undermine the Ottomans and take the "Holy Land" which is something Napoleon even tried to do (and also promised it for the Jews.. but most people don't know that).

Jerusalem was/is called Al Quds by the Arabs, not Jerusalem. The name is not even phoentically related to Jerusalem (Like, for example, Istanbul is related to Constantinople without the 'con' part ).


This was essentially a modern crusade vying for control over the Holy Land and also meddling with the Ottoman Empire. After it was over, Russia sent thousands of Jews as pilgrims (this was before Zionism by the way) to Palestine where many Jerusalem-related construction projects occurred. It was from this point on where Jerusalem was created in Palestine. Sure it had been referred to it as that in the past, maybe even a few thousand years ago that was it's name. But in the modern era not so much.

There was even a "Jerusalem" in Poland, a town that is still there called Jarosław from Yaroslav, the latter attributed to Yaroslav the wise, another one of these divine law givers like Moses and Hammurabi. Yaroslav shares an etymology with the word Jerusalem.

Whatever the truth of the matter is, the point I'm really trying to make is that we do not know our own history. The history we inherited by the ancestors of royalty and elite is their history mixed with myth to justify their rule over our ancestors who would have been illiterate and unfamiliar with actual history. Even in the modern era history is obviously falsified. Like the media just makes shit up that becomes history like the Osama raid for example. We know it's bullshit because of all the absurdities. The script is written by Hollywood writers (who are usually Jews) and psychological warfare departments (who are often the same people). The Jews have certainly falsified their history in the modern era to claim Palestine as their homeland and Palestinians/Muslims/Arabs as their thousands-of-year old arch biblical enemy forever locked in winless battle. That's bullshit, Jews and Muslims got along just fine in even the 19th century. They definitely got along in Moorish Spain and it was the Muslims who accepted Jews with open arms when Spain expelled them during the Inquisition. They don't want you to know these facts because it undermines the thousands-of-years-old enemy story which makes it sound like I/P will never resolve and has been carried out for millennia. A bullshit story. I/P has been carried out since the 19th century European colonists started stealing land. Even the Arab Jews fought against these Ashkenazi impostors.
believenothing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2012, 03:00 AM   #16
bendoon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 10,409
Default

Quote:
Jerusalem never existed
These people would disagree with you, theres a lot more references I could provide but you should get the point.

Cicero (BC106 - 43)

text Flac., chapter 28: “But Cnaeus Pompeius, after he had taken Jerusalem, though he was a conqueror, touched nothing which was in that temple.”


Strabo

book 16, chapter 2: Then Joppa,73 where the coast of Egypt, which at first stretches towards the east, makes a remarkable bend towards the north. In this place, according to some writers, Andromeda was exposed to the sea-monster. It is sufficiently elevated; it is said to command a view of Jerusalem, the capital of the Jews,74 who, when they descended to the sea, used this place as a naval arsenal. But the arsenals of robbers are the haunts of robbers. Carmel, and the forest, belonged to the Jews. The district was so populous that the neighbouring village Iamneia,75 and the settlements around, could furnish forty thousand soldiers.

Polybius (BC200 - 118)

book 16, chapter 39: Ptolemy's general Scopas marched into the upper region during the winter and subdued the Jewish nation.

The siege having been conducted in a desultory manner, Scopas fell into bad repute and was attacked with all the petulance of youth. . . .

Having conquered Scopas, Antiochus took Batanaea,
Samaria, Abila, and Gadara; and after a while those of the Jews who inhabit the sacred town called Jerusalem submitted to him also. On the subject of this town I have a good deal more to say, and especially on account of the splendour of its temple, but I shall put it off to another opportunity.


Pausanias Greek Geographer 2nd century

book 8, chapter 16: ... of Helen, a native woman, in the city of Jerusalem , which the Roman Emperor razed to the ground.

Appian (AD 95 - 165)

text Mith., chapter 16: ... ,until he had captured their holiest city, Jerusalem. He advanced against, and brought under Roman rule without fighting, those parts of Cilicia that were not yet subject to it, and the remainder of Syria which lies along the Euphrates, and the countries called Cœle-Syria, Phœnicia, and Palestine, also Idumea and Iturća

text Syr., chapter 8: In this way the Romans, without fighting, came into possession of Cilicia and both inland Syria and Cœle-Syria, Phoenicia, Palestine, and all the other countries bearing the Syrian name from the Euphrates to Egypt and the sea. The Jewish nation still resisted, and Pompey conquered them, sent their king, Aristobulus, to Rome, and destroyed their greatest, and to them holiest, city, Jerusalem, as Ptolemy, the first king of Egypt, had formerly done.

book 2, chapter 12: ... D. 122 , says that "while he was passing from Judea to Egypt he offered a funeral sacrifice for Pompey,

C. Suetonius Tranquillus (AD 69 - 122)

life cl., chapter 25: ... on the stupendous events which had recently occurred in Judea , and we find Suetonius, although he lived at the ....

life gal., chapter 23: ... that he had sent assassins from Spain into Judea to murder him.

life tit., chapter 5: ... speedily strengthened, and being left to finish the reduction of Judea, in the final assault of Jerusalem, he slew seven .......

life ves., chapter 4: ... a universal monarchy, which should take its rise in Judea . The Jews looked for their accomplishment in the person... answered by Vespasian and Titus having been called from Judea to the seat of empire. The expectations entertained by ..........

Pliny the Elder (AD23 - 79)

book 8, chapter 43: ... in all ages; their destructive effects in Egypt and Judea, have formed the subject of a very elaborate dissertation
__________________
Teenage mutant ninja atheists - the internets are full of 'em.

You can spot them a mile off, repeating over and over the tired old arguments as found on jesusneverexisted.com and thejoyofsatan.com

Last edited by bendoon; 04-09-2012 at 03:50 AM.
bendoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2012, 05:03 AM   #17
believenothing
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hyperborea
Posts: 3,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bendoon View Post
These people would disagree with you, theres a lot more references I could provide but you should get the point.

Cicero (BC106 - 43)

text Flac., chapter 28: “But Cnaeus Pompeius, after he had taken Jerusalem, though he was a conqueror, touched nothing which was in that temple.”


Strabo

book 16, chapter 2: Then Joppa,73 where the coast of Egypt, which at first stretches towards the east, makes a remarkable bend towards the north. In this place, according to some writers, Andromeda was exposed to the sea-monster. It is sufficiently elevated; it is said to command a view of Jerusalem, the capital of the Jews,74 who, when they descended to the sea, used this place as a naval arsenal. But the arsenals of robbers are the haunts of robbers. Carmel, and the forest, belonged to the Jews. The district was so populous that the neighbouring village Iamneia,75 and the settlements around, could furnish forty thousand soldiers.

Polybius (BC200 - 118)

book 16, chapter 39: Ptolemy's general Scopas marched into the upper region during the winter and subdued the Jewish nation.

The siege having been conducted in a desultory manner, Scopas fell into bad repute and was attacked with all the petulance of youth. . . .

Having conquered Scopas, Antiochus took Batanaea,
Samaria, Abila, and Gadara; and after a while those of the Jews who inhabit the sacred town called Jerusalem submitted to him also. On the subject of this town I have a good deal more to say, and especially on account of the splendour of its temple, but I shall put it off to another opportunity.


Pausanias Greek Geographer 2nd century

book 8, chapter 16: ... of Helen, a native woman, in the city of Jerusalem , which the Roman Emperor razed to the ground.

Appian (AD 95 - 165)

text Mith., chapter 16: ... ,until he had captured their holiest city, Jerusalem. He advanced against, and brought under Roman rule without fighting, those parts of Cilicia that were not yet subject to it, and the remainder of Syria which lies along the Euphrates, and the countries called Cœle-Syria, Phœnicia, and Palestine, also Idumea and Iturća

text Syr., chapter 8: In this way the Romans, without fighting, came into possession of Cilicia and both inland Syria and Cœle-Syria, Phoenicia, Palestine, and all the other countries bearing the Syrian name from the Euphrates to Egypt and the sea. The Jewish nation still resisted, and Pompey conquered them, sent their king, Aristobulus, to Rome, and destroyed their greatest, and to them holiest, city, Jerusalem, as Ptolemy, the first king of Egypt, had formerly done.

book 2, chapter 12: ... D. 122 , says that "while he was passing from Judea to Egypt he offered a funeral sacrifice for Pompey,

C. Suetonius Tranquillus (AD 69 - 122)

life cl., chapter 25: ... on the stupendous events which had recently occurred in Judea , and we find Suetonius, although he lived at the ....

life gal., chapter 23: ... that he had sent assassins from Spain into Judea to murder him.

life tit., chapter 5: ... speedily strengthened, and being left to finish the reduction of Judea, in the final assault of Jerusalem, he slew seven .......

life ves., chapter 4: ... a universal monarchy, which should take its rise in Judea . The Jews looked for their accomplishment in the person... answered by Vespasian and Titus having been called from Judea to the seat of empire. The expectations entertained by ..........

Pliny the Elder (AD23 - 79)

book 8, chapter 43: ... in all ages; their destructive effects in Egypt and Judea, have formed the subject of a very elaborate dissertation
I'm familiar with all those sources, bendoon, and no I do not get the point.

Firstly, the accuracy of all of these people including the existence of the people themselves is questionable considering the age. Nothing prior to the 15th century is reliable history and it's difficult to sort out facts from myth. Again, people made shit up to validate their rule. I'm glad you didn't mention Josephus for he is perhaps the kind of making shit up.

So let's assume these are real. Keep in mind that when Aelia Capitolina was built Jerusalem was said to be a memory. Also keep in mind that Josephus is the only real source for the Bar Kokhba revolt and his sources did not witness it by is own admission. Serious historians consider this a bullshit story and also Aelia Capitolina is older than the date attributed to that revolt.

Again, assuming these are real, what is Cicero and Polybius referring to? Palestine? The area which is modern Lebanon or Syria or Turkey? These ancient writers were not always clear where Jerusalem was and sometimes they're referring to Antioch or Babelek. What is Strabo talking about? You can't see Jerusalem from Jaffa even on a clear day. Your Pliny the Elder quote doesn't mention Jerusalem. The others were written when Aelia Capitolina was already there.

Modern Jerusalem the so-called "Old City" was never Jerusalem and that's a fact even by the historical record. It was a Roman (or Amorite... Amor is Roma backwards and probably lost in right-to-left translation) city known as Aelia Capitolina which was named Jerusalem by Christians and called Al Quds by Arabs for centuries after that.

And lastly, Byzantium was also called Jerusalem which for some reason is suppressed in the modern era especially in English language sources. It was called Konstantinopel Jerusalem even as late as the 19th century (by Russia).

Last edited by believenothing; 04-09-2012 at 05:07 AM.
believenothing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2012, 06:58 AM   #18
rodin
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 17,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrunhappy View Post
Maybe Hitler was doing us a favour.
By doing what? There never was a German-run Holocaust. The fictional one is a mirror of the real one the Bolsheviki inflicted on goy Russians, Ukranians, Finns, Poles, Latvians, Lithuanians, etc and also what they did to Germans after the war.

If I have one central theme on this forum, it is this.

Everything is hoaxed and Jews run everything.

If school children can be taught that 19 Muslims did 911 in the teeth of this evidence:


...an event soon to be only 11 years old, then what history can we trust?
rodin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2012, 11:23 PM   #19
bendoon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 10,409
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by believenothing View Post

Firstly, the accuracy of all of these people including the existence of the people themselves is questionable considering the age.
So what you are saying is that all the well known and less well known Greek and Roman Historians and Geographers over an 400 year period are all wrong about the existence of Jerusalem and Judea but you in your desperate attempts to try and make out it never existed are right ?

Come on give us a break.

I'm sorry to say you have been led down a dead end on this one and pardon another pun you are barking up the wrong tree. Jerusalem existed and the Temple existed, as did Judah and Israel, the question you should be looking into is are the people who call themselves Jews today really descendants of the original Israelites or are they imposters and if so why.

Quote:
Again, people made shit up to validate their rule. I'm glad you didn't mention Josephus for he is perhaps the kind of making shit up.
Well there is no reason to mention Josephus since everything he says is covered by a number of other non Jewish historians, all the mention of his name does is to give ammo to the detractors who can dismiss it simply because he was Jewish but they find it a bit more difficult to dismiss Pliny or Strabo. It shouldn't excape your notice that all this Ancient Israel never existed stuff is instigated by Jews from Israel.
__________________
Teenage mutant ninja atheists - the internets are full of 'em.

You can spot them a mile off, repeating over and over the tired old arguments as found on jesusneverexisted.com and thejoyofsatan.com

Last edited by bendoon; 05-09-2012 at 01:45 AM.
bendoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2012, 03:18 AM   #20
believenothing
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hyperborea
Posts: 3,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bendoon View Post
So what you are saying is that all the well known and less well known Greek and Roman Historians and Geographers over an 400 year period are all wrong about the existence of Jerusalem and Judea but you in your desperate attempts to try and make out it never existed are right ?

Come on give us a break.
There was definitely a Judea in Palestine from the 5th century BC onward. Before that it was called Khumri or Humri, the latter gets translated to biblical Omri. There were a lot of places called Judea in the Old World. Far East Asia is labeled Judea Superior in Latin on old maps dated to around the time of America's 'discovery'. India is labeled Judea on some old maps too, most likely because of Ayodhya which is also translated as Judea. Anatolia was called Yiddia or Lydia. There is a mountain there that used to be called Mount Ida or Yidda along with a mountain in Crete labeled the same thing and there used to be a theory that is where the Jews were from and where they got their name. As for the ancient sources, there are only a handful of them which makes their reliability questionable (and it is questioned). More has been written about that Batman shooting than ancient Rome.

Quote:
I'm sorry to say you have been led down a dead end on this one and pardon another pun you are barking up the wrong tree. Jerusalem existed and the Temple existed, as did Judah and Israel, the question you should be looking into is are the people who call themselves Jews today really descendants of the original Israelites or are they imposters and if so why.
I already looked into that. Israelite is not synonymous with Jew or Hebrew. I mean they say that it is but it didn't use to be. Even the Koran makes a distinction between the Children of Israel (mentioned positively) and the Jews (mentioned negatively). There is, however, no archeological evidence in the Levant that supports an ancient Israel. Assyria and Syria like I was saying. And Asia, Aesir, Issir, Assur, and a whole bunch of likely related phonetically-similar names that biblical historians ignore. There is absolutely no evidence of a Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem. The historical account says there was a Temple for Jupiter/Jove (Jove=YHWH most likely and is pronounced the same... meaning yeah there was a temple but again biblical historians ignore this Pagan history which is my whole point) and the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque are likely partial reconstructions of the ruins for the Jove temple. There is no other Islamic octagonal domes meaning they likely used the foundation and ruins of the old temple to make it.

Quote:
Well there is no reason to mention Josephus since everything he says is covered by a number of other non Jewish historians, all the mention of his name does is to give ammo to the detractors who can dismiss it simply because he was Jewish but they find it a bit more difficult to dismiss Pliny or Strabo. It shouldn't excape your notice that all this Ancient Israel never existed stuff is instigated by Jews from Israel.
Josephus isn't dismissed because he was Jewish, he is dismissed because the only surviving copies of his works are 1,000-year-old copies which say things that are not in much older surviving works that quoted the originals.
believenothing is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:42 AM.