@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:The Egyptian records specifically refer to the name of their culture as Israelites. That is pretty clear evidence of them being their own unique culture at that point.
The Merneptah Stele doesn't make reference to culture.
The line where Israel is thought to be mentioned is:
"Israel is laid waste and his seed is not."
oralloy wrote:The fact that it distinguishes several neighboring cultures (all descended from the same Canaanite culture) doesn't mean that the Israelites were not one of those cultures.
Right. You, however, had conflated Jewish dietary practices with evidence of Israelites. These practices are evidenced throughout the region, so they don't distinguish "Israelite culture" specifically.
oralloy wrote:There are several ninth century BC references to the House of David as the ruling power of Judah. This indicates that:
a) Judah existed in the ninth century BC
b) Judah was under the control of a single king in the ninth century BC
c) a leader named David existed at some point in the history of the region
d) David was the ancestor of the kings who ruled Judah in the ninth century BC.
You're presuming what isn't there.
The Tel Dan Stele from that time period says:
Quote:[I killed
Jeho]ram son of [Ahab]
king of Israel, and killed [Ahaz]iahu son of
[Jehoram kin]
g of the House of David. And I set [their towns into
ruins and turned]
their land into [desolation ...]
other [... and Jehu ru]
led over Is[rael ... and I laid]
siege upon [... ]
Nowhere does it mention Judah.
oralloy wrote:There are also records of Ahab the Israelite participating in famous battles of the time, either for or against various kings in the middle east. These kings would not have recorded Ahab the Israelite fighting for or against them if he did not exist.
Right. I was referring to your assertions about David which the archaeological record does not confirm.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:Actually, it was the Arameans, most likely Hazael of Aram-Damascus, that mention the defeat of the son of the king of Israel c.870–750 BC.
The existence of a king to defeat still suggests the existence of a kingdom.
The Assyrians only destroyed the northern Israelite kingdom. Judah allied with the Assyrians and prospered for a century.
I was referring to your assertion that Assyria recorded its conquest and destruction of the two kingdoms in 722 BC. In the Sargon Inscription, or Prism, it refers to Sargon besieging a town in Samaria, not the conquest and destruction of Israel nor Judah for that matter.
Here's a better translation:
Quote:At the beginning of my royal rule, I…the town of the Samarians I besieged, conquered (2 Lines destroyed) [for the god…] who let me achieve this my triumph… I led away as prisoners [27,290 inhabitants of it (and) equipped from among them (soldiers to man)] 50 chariots for my royal corps…. The town I rebuilt better than it was before and settled therein people from countries which I had conquered. I placed an officer of mine as governor over them and imposed upon them tribute as is customary for Assyrian citizens. (Nimrud Prism IV 25‑41)
oralloy wrote:The discoveries do however prove the existence of the kingdoms.
The scant discoveries call into question the legends and myths found in the Bible which is where we get most of the information about these kingdoms, which is the point I've been making.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:That the Zionists base their claims of ownership of Palestine on these legends and myths is risible.
I think they base their ownership claims on history and archaeology.
They base their claims of ownership on the legends and myths of the Bible, i.e. they or their ancestors followed a
religion with claims to Palestine, therefor they own Palestine. This assertion is complete and utter nonsense.
The arguments about the House of David and the House of Omri back in the days of Aram-Damascus and Assyria are plainly irrelevant to their preposterous stance.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:Those haplotypes originate from the Middle East in general, not the West Bank in particular,
We know from history and archaeology exactly where the Jewish homeland is.
Your assertion about the Jewish homeland has nothing to do with the genetic origins of a minority of Ashkenazim.
It is straightforward logic that they came from their own homeland, and not from someone else's homeland.
Right, it is straightforward logic that they came from their own homeland, i.e. the places the Zionist Ashkenazim were indigenous to, e.g. Central and Eastern Europe.
oralloy wrote:InfraBlue wrote:oralloy wrote:The fact that they interbred with others during their forced exile does not remove their right to their ancient homeland.
Like I said, your assertions are preposterous.
I find it reasonable to respect indigenous rights.
Right, it is reasonable to respect indigenous rights. It is completely delusional to claim ownership of Palestine based on the legends and myths found in the Bible as the Zionists assert, however.
