@Earth_is-, do you have a single historical document that supports your suggestion that all the events of the Bible occurred somewhere entirely different in the world?
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Palestine in Israel
- Thread starter Earth_is-
- Start date
Is Isreal.
I used that word deliberately, because if @Earth_is- was right, then historical Israel would be somewhere else - but the word Palestine, being solely secular, is unambiguously referring to the area of land we're talking about. Emotions aside of course!Is Isreal.
As Trump so eloquently has been known to say.
“Wrong”
Israel is not holy nor can Gentiles partake of the holiness of the root unless they be grafted onto Him.
Romans 11 is abundantly clear on this.
I don't wish to get into an argument over this @FollowingHim, but this is an important piece of both biblical and modern history. This is not a matter of emotions because facts matter.
The biblical record gives the boundaries for the nation of Israel which was promised by God Himself to Abraham around 2,000 B.C. and was initially occupied following the Exodus of the Twelve Tribes of Israel from Egypt. The modern state of Israel is bounded to the north by Lebanon, to the northeast by Syria, to the east and southeast by Jordan, to the southwest by Egypt, and to the west by the Mediterranean Sea - which is a significant portion of the original piece of the land described and promised in the Bible. Check a reputable World Map and you'll find that piece of real-estate is today called "Israel" and not Palestine.
Here is the full verse from Ezekiel which @Earth_is- quoted part of; Ezekiel 37:25, Then they shall dwell in the land that I have given to Jacob My servant, where your fathers dwelt; and they shall dwell there, they, their children, and their children’s children, forever; and My servant David shall be their prince forever.
The only piece of real-estate God ever gave to Jacob, and you can ask around, some of us have travelled to Israel and can attest to the nation's existence - we went to Israel, not Palestine. Shalom
Look, I agree with you @frederick. But the title of the thread is "Scripture proof Israel is not in Palestine". I am responding in the negative and saying "actually, Israel is in Palestine", simply because I am talking to @Earth_is- in his own terms, the ones he himself has used when framing this discussion. I'm not going to debate whether the words are the best ones to use, they simply convey the meaning I wish to convey to @Earth_is-.
Good question. What does the Scripture say?
Genesis 13:1
Then Abram went up from Egypt, he and his wife and all that he had, and Lot with him, to the South.
14 And Yahuah said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: “Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward, and westward; 15 for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever.
So where is the land? South of Egypt. What is South of Egypt?
Population map of Africa:
A lot of it it desolate - not populated. The animals described in scripture fit Africa much more than the middle east. Obviously, plenty of lions.
In scripture the land is sometimes called, "The Mountains of Israel." There are plenty of mountains in Africa. How about the land itself - is it milk and honey? Yes - it is.
Last edited:
Firstly, you missed out all the verses in between, which are absolutely packed full of identifiable placenames:
A true understanding must be consistent with every one of these verses. Note that archaelogists have actually found Sodom in present-day Jordon, and it was clearly destroyed by a meteorite strike. So not only do we have the historical record of these place names being applied to lands in what is now called Palestine / Israel / Jordan, but there is clear archaelogical evidence that confirms the precise location of one of these cities in a way that is simply undeniable - it is statistically improbable that there would be another Jordan Valley containing a town destroyed by "fire from heaven". These verses clearly state that Lot journeyed east to Sodom, so Abram was living west of this location, in a land called Canaan.
Now, the only verse you have that suggests anything else, is 13:1, which states that Abram moved to the "south". I admit it's intriguing on face value. But the word "south", "negeb", is used in two different ways in scripture. It is used as the direction "south", and used as the place-name of the desert to the south of Israel / north of Sinai. Check all instances in a concordance and you'll find plenty of examples of it being used as a name for an identifiable place rather than a direction.
So, we've got two options here. Either Abram left Egypt and went south into Africa, where he discovered a land with a valley in which there was a city that ended up destroyed by fire from heaven, while simultaneously God did the same completely improbable thing to a different city in "Palestine" for some reason just to confuse us. An entire Bible of history occurred there down in Africa. And then, somehow, everyone forgot where it was and invented that it all happened in "Palestine", without knowing that it just happened to be the only other place on earth where there was buried in the dirt another city destroyed by fire from heaven to conincidentally confirm their error. And every Jewish, European, Egyptian and Islamic scholar has somehow got it completely wrong and also simultaneously made the exact same error as each other and picked the same wrong land.
Or, the word "south" is actually a placename for the Negeb, and it means that Abram moved from Egypt back up to the Negeb, and then on back to "the place of the altar, which he had made there at the first".
Only one of those two explanations makes a lick of sense.
Ok. I'll stay out of this. Cheers
You can go to older African maps - 18th/19th century - and you can also find plenty of biblical cities as well.
I found this very interesting:
The Arabian Sea and parts of the Indian Ocean used to be called the “Erythraean Sea.” Which in the Greek means “Red” or Red Sea. So it’s possible the biblical Red Sea actually extended down to East Africa.
Regarding the city in Palestine that got destroyed by fire - Peter says our Elohim is a consuming fire - for a reason. Read about the judgments the different cities throughout the earth received after Jerusalem went into exile (Babylon). The Ammonites for example:
Ezekiel 21:31
I will pour out my fury on you and blow on you with the fire of my anger.
If someone wants to put faith in a scholar or academic - that’s 100% their choice. But after seeing the world’s “scholars” vouch the Covid vaccine and things like evolution - I’m not the biggest fan. When they are in 100% agreement with no room for debate - that’s usually a major red flag imo. Kind of like the Catholic Pope - we are the one true church - but don’t try to read the Bible on your own. You need us to interpret it for you - lest you figure out you are the offspring of the northern kingdom of Israel; and we are teaching you to do the same exact things that got your ancestors kicked out in the first place!
This gets a wee bit confusing. There is the children (descendants) of Israel (the man) and there are those the scriptures call strangers that are not descendants of the man Israel. YHWH promised to gather others to him in Isaiah than those that were gathered....and He called them strangers. Of Israel YHWH says that the seed of Israel will be a nation before him forever.
Gentile never meant non Israelite. Get a concordance and look up the word and look at the context. In the Hebrew it was Goy, in the Greek Ethnos. Had it been uniformly translated NATIONS it would be less confusing as modern use has made people think this is a term contrasting Jews (which they think was applied to all Israelites) and NON Israelites. NOT SO!
So Paul said this reuniting happened 2000 years ago.....yet...
You are still waiting for it to happen.
That word back is not in the text of the King James. Indeed many times He talks about their OWN land, but again, Jeremiah chapter 7 makes me think it's not going to be that one. Their continued possession of it was CONDITIONAL. Yeshua's blood sealed the judgement against them.
There is now one body of believers under the ONE HEAD who was given all power and authority. His is a current reign, and it is global.
Israel prophesied that the gathering of the people would be TO HIM, Not to a geographical place.
@Bartato has this much right!
None of that is actual evidence you are right, it's just random things that don't prove you wrong (ie are consistent with either view).
Fundamental question - WHY do you think the Holy Land is somewhere in Africa? Is this entirely based on your problematic interpretation of Genesis 13:1, or do you have other reasons?
I appreciate you are skeptical of "scholars and academics". But if you just choose to disbelieve everyone else, and every written work of history on the planet, that's doesn't teach you anything, it just means you now know nothing. You would then have to rebuild a better understanding based on actual evidence. So, please tell us what this evidence is.
If you have no reason to believe anything else and are just making up fiction from your own head, just stop. Seriously. That is completely unprofitable. Either propose a clearly defined and testable theory and a reason to believe it's true, or stop spouting bollocks.
It didn’t follow the prophecies from scripture. When the 2nd exodus occurs - the land is desolate:
Ezekiel 36:34
The desolate land will be cultivated instead of lying desolate in the sight of all who pass through it. 35 They will say, “This land that was laid waste has become like the garden of Eden; the cities that were lying in ruins, desolate and destroyed, are now fortified and inhabited.
Hosea 2:18
18 On that day I will make a covenant with all the wild animals and the birds of the sky and the animals that scurry along the ground so they will not harm you. I will remove all weapons of war from the land, all swords and bows,
so you can live unafraid in peace and safety. 19 I will make you my wife forever, showing you righteousness and justice, unfailing love and compassion.
Isaiah 65:19
I will rejoice over Jerusalem and take delight in my people; the sound of weeping and of crying will be heard in it no more.
25 The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox, and dust will be the serpent’s food. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain,” says Yahuah.
——————————————-
Palestine was not desolate in 1948. Nor did the country of Israel enjoy peace when they moved there - exactly opposite of what Scripture says would occur.
The only possible exception - the Israel in Palestine becomes completely desolate - abandoned sometime in the future - and then there’s an exodus in the same area - sometime in the future as well. But then what was the purpose of 1948? Also, if Palestine is the true location, then wouldn’t that area be a high risk to live in - considering the scripture prophecies?
For Africa - I’ve just found pieces of evidence here and there. I will post some more of it. If it’s the land - I’d imagine the Creator is keeping her under wraps, so his Word comes true (she’s desolate/abandoned when the exodus occurs). If there was some smoking gun, then I’d imagine many people will flock to it - therefore - she would no longer be abandoned or desolate.
Last edited:
Yes - it’s a promise to Abraham that was given near the beginning of the book. It appears it’s going to be fulfilled at the end of the book.
Abraham means - father of many nations. That has been fulfilled. All prophecies will be fulfilled before the book comes to a close. Including the 2nd exodus of the remnant of Ephraim (northern kingdom of Israel), and Judah. United back together under one kingdom - under prince David. This remnant of Abraham’s offspring and heirs to the promise - are all scattered across the nations - to the ends of the earth. Through the Messiah - Yahushua - we (former gentiles) become heirs to that promise. HalleluYAH.
Isaiah 60 - Future glory of Jerusalem:
4 Look and see, for everyone is coming home! Your sons are coming from distant lands
21 All your people will be righteous. They will possess their land forever, for I will plant them there with my own hands in order to bring myself glory.
22 The smallest family will become a thousand people, and the tiniest group will become a mighty nation. At the right time, I, Yahuah, will make it happen.
Last edited:
No problem with these points. Although a large portion of the Evangelical church thinks that 1948 is a fulfilment of those prophecies, this is by no means universal among Christians, and it's entirely reasonable to think that does not fit (I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying it's an understandable opinion to hold).
But after that you go off into crazy speculation.
Yes, if 1948 was not the second exodus, then obviously the events prophesied must have either been fulfilled in the past, or are still to come in the future.
Fair question, but putting the Holy Land somewhere else doesn't answer that question, even if it's elsewhere you could still be left wondering why a bunch of Jews went and started the nation of Israel in 1948. So it is a tangent, and doesn't address the core issue.
Yes. It would be. And it is - just watch the news. What's your point?
And what would possibly make you think those scraps of evidence here and there overweigh the overwhelming evidence that it is in Palestine? I mean, even when you quoted scripture above, you had to pick three verses from a chapter that seemed to be scraps of evidence pointing towards Africa, and ignore the bulk of the chapter that clearly pointed to Palestine. Why are you willing to latch onto anything, however tiny, provided it points to any location in the world other than Palestine?
You appear to have decided what is true ("Israel is not in Palestine"), and to be on the hunt for evidence to prove what you already have decided. Like a crooked cop who has decided the suspect is guilty of something and then goes hunting for evidence to pin something on him. This is not how serious scholarship works.
This is his problem.
So just because "scholars" were propagandists once (not all were) in whole world it means they (scholars) were propagandists whole time. Which implies anything important is fakery and part of worldwide conspiracy. So any established fact is fake which means him being totally unhinged.
