I was wrong in thinking that the Israelites had just a small presence in Palestine.

"the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
All the points that he denies are at least questionable, so he is being somewhat reasonable. That being said, he does not deny that the Kingdom of Israel existed, with Israelites. So there were Israelites in ancient Israel.

There is also a question over whether the Kingdom of Judah was part of the Kingdom of Israel, but no question that the Kingdom of Judah existed. Guess who the Kingdom of Judah had? Jews.
 
There is NO evidence of Israelites in Palestine.
You need to come up with a source that says that, because your current source says everything but that. Your source questions whether the Israelites came from Egypt, but not whether they were in Israel.

The Old Testament is myth.
The origin story of the Israelites is a legend, not a myth. It probably has some foundation in truth, but maybe not much. What is history is that the Israelites existed.
 
You need to come up with a source that says that, because your current source says everything but that. Your source questions whether the Israelites came from Egypt, but not whether they were in Israel.


The origin story of the Israelites is a legend, not a myth. It probably has some foundation in truth, but maybe not much. What is history is that the Israelites existed.
Not in Palestine, according to Israeli archaeologists.
The Israelites were also small potatoes- nothing to warrant the lies of Zionists.
 
The lack of evidence of King Arthur does not prove England does not exist.
Arthur is myth. The lack of evidence of Israelites in Palestine does not prove that Palestine does not exist, of course. Your mind is wandering, genocidal prosemite.
 
No point did your source question that there was a Kingdom of Israel, with Israelites living in it. He questions how they got to Israel, but not that they were there.
The evidence indicates that ' the kingdom of Israel ', was, at best, a small tribal affair. You didn't read the reports. Fuck off.
 
Arthur is myth.
Arthur is a legend. There is a kernel of truth in it.

More importantly, that does not disprove the Kingdom of England. Just because the origin story is not completely true does not prove that something does not exist. What you need to do is prove the Kingdom of Israel did not exist, but you have a problem there. It did exist.

The lack of evidence of Israelites
There is a huge amount of evidence of Israelites. The Kingdom of Israel, with Israelites, is an unmovable historical fact. You have a good point when you question their origin legend, but that falls apart when you claim that proves they did not exist.

The evidence indicates that ' the kingdom of Israel ', was, at best, a small tribal affair.
You are off on several points. The Kingdom of Israel was actually relatively well established. It is the Kingdom of Judah that appears to have started as a small tribal affair.

We have King Saul of Israel, with a reasonably sized bureaucracy, and then suddenly the narrative cuts to King David of Judah(and maybe Israel). King David did not seem to have anyone in his government who was not a close family member. The theory goes that Israel was a kingdom, but not united with Judah which was a small tribal affair.

Of course the Kingdom of Judah grew into a kingdom proper, especially when it absorbed the refugees from the collapsing Kingdom of Israel.
 
When you've finished with your prosemitic wishful thinking ^- the point made by archaeological experts is that..........are you paying attention, you genocidal asshole.........................................there is no evidence of Israelites in Palestine. They were not there. They were not in Egypt. No Moses in the bullrushes, no passover, no parting seas, no exodus , no stone tablets and no Jonah in any whales. The name ' David ' did not exist. It's nearest contemporary equivalent was ' Uncle '.
Not that any of this has any legal significance today. International law determines what belongs to whom- and your European Zionist intruders are illegal occupiers in the land of Palestine.
 
LOL. The Romans wrote extensively of Judea and the Jewish people that lived there. Including the Jewish War circa 75 CE. The Assyrians wrote of the "House of Omri" which was a Northern Israeli King, this was in BCE... these are just two of the many various written accounts of the people that this idiot wants to believe doesn't exist. Talking to him is like talking to a flat earther, you get stupider by the minute. Nothing you say, no evidence will be strong enough to get past the racism to the core belief of the imbecile beneath that racist skin. They become science deniers, ignore historical records, pretend that archeological finds never existed, will even tell you how they eat babies... ANYTHING... racism makes people incredibly gullible and stupid.

There are tons of archeological and written historical evidence regarding the Jews and where they lived. Racist morons ignore the evidence because the world must fit within their comfort zone, they do not want to have Jews where they have lived for millennia, so they will say or do anything to try to get you to want it too. Even ignore terrorism, or the actions of leadership in the region that act against the self-interest of the people they pretend they care for....
 
Incredibly foolish dumbass can't differentiate between ISRAELITES and Jews of the Christian period. ^
Again- for the slowest ships in the JPP racist convoy- archaeologists have found NO EVIDENCE OF ANY ISRAELITES IN PALESTINE.
Jesus, it's like teaching chimps.
 
Can you imagine the British Mandate scribes counting how many Israelites there were in Palestine ?

Haw, haw.........................................................haw.
 
Tel Dan Stele (9th or 8th century BCE): This Aramaic inscription found in northern Israel mentions Israel and, significantly, "the House of David", supporting the existence of a Davidic dynasty.

Mesha Stele (circa 840 BCE): This Moabite inscription commemorates King Mesha's victory over Israel and includes an early extrabiblical reference to Yahweh, the Israelite god.

But hey, those "dirty joos" just weren't there and these various historical references to them imaginary "joos" are just a multi-authored fictional Don Quixote style novel where they were battling their imagination, and in reality these guys were just battling their addiction to LSD which will be invented 3,000 years later.
 
^ ' House of David ' . eh ? No, that is not accepted.


Archaeologists have found no evidence of Israelites in Palestine.
 
^ ' House of David ' . eh ? No, that is not accepted.


Archaeologists have found no evidence of Israelites in Palestine.
Like I said, no scientific discovery will be good enough, no amount of evidence can overcome the self-imposed ignorance of racism. The state of Israel has been referenced by other nations throughout history, he gloms onto one he particularly dislikes and pretends it negates everything. This guy is a simple flat-earther science denier and a small minded bigot. A Muslim racist that moved in with infidels in Britlandia, and cannot get over his simple and direct racism and the self loathing he feels that his own people cannot get it together and come to terms with their self-induced ingorance. He'll ignore all science, from DNA to actual references to the nation by others, including the people who tried to erase it by renaming it "Palestine", the Romans....

This moronic racist will never get past his own racism, and it is useless to engage such a moronic specimen of lower lifeform, they simply cannot get past their hate.
 
Er.... ' David ' David ? derived from דּוֹד (doḏ) meaning "beloved" or "uncle". King Uncle ? No, a stretch too far. Hebrew wishful thinking.

Weak, that is a weak argument, useless in this context. Names can mean many things. Do you know that there are actual people today named Beloved? That's a fact jack.

He couldn't exist because his name means "beloved"... what a frickin' joke. You used to pretend to have a brain, you've given up on that entirely now, ay?
 
This moronic racist will never get past his own racism, and it is useless to engage such a moronic specimen of lower lifeform, they simply cannot get past their hate.
Says the brain-scrubbed prosemite that simply cannot accept that the Israelites were never in Palestine.
It figures. Zionism is based upon lies....................and much, much worse.

Thankfully, we have international law . These blood-soaked apologies for Jews will never succeed- even with the backing of insane US of AIPAC presidents. All empires fall. Even King Uncle's
 
Says the brain-scrubbed prosemite that simply cannot accept that the Israelites were never in Palestine.
It figures. Zionism is based upon lies....................and much, much worse.

Thankfully, we have international law . These blood-soaked apologies for Jews will never succeed- even with the backing of insane US of AIPAC presidents. All empires fall.
lol.

Racist prick on again of his flat earth theories that ignore science.
 
You invent stuff to suit the Zionist agenda. Zionism is based upon lies and you subscribe to them.

Again- archaeologists have found no evidence of Israelites in Palestine. Israelites, not Roman era Jews, dumbass.
The Old Testament is myth. Further, there will be no second coming. There wasn't even a first coming. The New Testament is doctored history. Evangelism is a fraud.
 
Again- archaeologists have found no evidence of Israelites in Palestine.
Again, no one but you has said that, and you are not an archaeologist. What some archaeologists have argued is that the origin tale of the Israelites is untrue, not that they never existed. Some archaeologists argue that King Arthur never existed, none argue the English do not exist.
 
Back
Top