all semitic religions were founded by Arabs, by ! 10:28am Thu Jul 10 '03 The truth: print article Judeo-Christian implies a European heritage, when nothing could be further from the truth. The father of all three religions, Abraham, was an Iraqi Bedouin. Moses, was the son of royalty in Egypt, And the Lord and Savior was from Palestine while Muhammad was from the region. All three religions have Middle Eastern roots. Many folks assume that Jews and Christians are Europeans mainly because the church had spread its wings to many continents under the guise of saving the locals with the Lords’ message, only to occupy their territories! On top of that famous portraits of biblical figures such as 'David' status and different paintings of the Lord and his Virginal mom, were perfected by white Europeans who portraid the Arab figures as white men, for that was all they had known. Judeo-Islamo-Christian is the accurate abbreviation as opposed to "Judeo- Christian" and shall be incorporated into modern-day lexicon. add your comments

Problems with these assumptions by Dr. Landen Spiegelhaus 10:43am Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment Current data suggests that the Hebrews were a Canaanite sub-grouping from the highlands of Canaan who took power from a related Canaanite tribes approximately three thousand years ago. The Hebrew language and script are much more closely related to other Canaanite languages and scripts than those further east. Moreover, there is no archeological or historical evidence for the existence of either Abraham or Moses, and are most likely mythological characters which gave historical cohesion to the tribal pacts made between what became the tribes of Israel. It is to this day common for tribes who make political pacts between one another, to take on the familial lineages of the other and to project affinity back into a quasi-historical past. add your comments

Landen Spiegelhaus by merry go round/ 10:55am Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment so if there is no abram, who promised the land of canaan to his descendents, the zionists add your comments

Landen Spiegelhaus by more of the same: 11:14am Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment The Zionist ideology currently justifies the settlement of world Jewry within Palestine through the following quote: "Abram passed through the land as far as the site of Schem [Nablus], at the teberinth of Moreh. The Cananites were then in the land. The Lord appeared to Abram and said, "I will assign this land to your offspring." But it is misintrepreted as all of the founders of the Muslim-Judeo-Christian religions are His descendants! add your comments

They WERE Canaanites... by Dr. Landen Spiegelhaus 11:29am Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment If the Hebrews were made up of a coalition of Canaanite tribes (and we have evidence to conclude that sections of the former power elite aligned with the Hebrews), than they are part of the indigenous network of Canaanite tribal affiliations from beginning to end. They were part of the local population. The sacred contract is merely an externalization of their generational tie to the land as a religiously binding pact. add your comments

Right and Jesus was a Paletsinian terrorist by Christian 11:43am Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment There were NO ARABS IN IRAQ at the time of Abraham, morons. Nor in "Palestine". add your comments

Spiegelhaus. by ! 11:45am Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment The offsprings of Canaanites via Abram are Muslims, Christians and Jews, do you disagree? add your comments

to chris by Jews for Jesus 11:52am Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment Your inherent anti christian attitude reveals alot of your background. Where did you grow up that you developed such a lack of religious tolerance to Jesus Christ the Lord and Savior? add your comments

What do you mean when you claim that Arabic peopl did not exist > by Dear Christian- 12:14pm Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment The founder of the Jewish, Muslim and Christian faith was an Iraqi desert dweller. Christ was Palestinian, Moses an Egyptian and Muhammad was of Middle Eastern descent. The people of the Land don’t change color when a new emperor arrives. When Turkey was the ruling empire, Arabs remained Arabic. When Rome was the ruling empire, Arabs remained Arabic. Same was when the land changed hands to Britain, the Arabs remained Arab and observed their respective religions without a lot of interference. add your comments

I question the existence of an historical Abe by Dr. Landen Spiegelhaus 12:20pm Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment "The offsprings of Canaanites via Abram are Muslims, Christians and Jews, do you disagree?" I have already stated that Abram was most likely not a historical figure, but a mythological figure. But we must look at this issue in a broader manner. Canaan was never a homogenous population. There was always movement of populations into and out of the region. The Philistines were sea-farers most likely originating around Anatolia. Bedioun came into the region with the Arab invasions after the demise of the Nabatean populations in the Negev. During the Roman period, Mediterreanan traders, Roman citizens from lands to the East and West mixed with the local Canaanite populations. The Druse are a Shi'a break off, coming from Egypt to the highlands of the Galilee to avoid opression. During many periods of Muslim rule, especially during the late Abbasid, Mamluk and Ottoman periods, the local 'Palestinian' elite were actually not Arab at all, but 'Turkish' military slaves from Transoxania and the Caucasus. At different periods, there was movement from all over the areas of Dar al-Islam. Greeks, Armenians, Turks, Arabs from further east, North Africans, etc. moved into the region and intermarried with the local population. Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi, the Muslim conqueror of Jerusalem from the Crusaders was a Kurd. The Palestinians are made up of a mixture from all of these origins, and it is most likely as specious to say that Palestinians are the direct descendents of the indegenous population (Canaanite, Am Yisrael, etc.) as it is to say that the Jewish Diaspora are the direct descendents of the local indegenous population. Nationalism is built on the ideological projection of a unified mythological idea of historical community onto the present. This is equally as true of the Palestinians as it is of the Israelis. Both nationalisms are built on fiction and both populations are made up in large part of non-indegenous populations who at some point migrated either as the conquerors themselves or on the heels of the conquerors. add your comments

I disagree Landen by more of the same> 12:48pm Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment How convenient of you to claim that the Israelites already inhabited Palestine, in fact they were the Canaanites and what’s his name – Abram was the pigment of the imagination of some Middle eastern tribe. That leaves the Zionist ideology unencumbered by Biblical passages such as the following: "Abram passed through the land as far as the site of Schem [Nablus], at the teberinth of Moreh. The Cananites were then in the land. The Lord appeared to Abram and said, "I will assign this land to your offspring." That way they disregard the Biblical promise made by the Lord to Abram, which promises Canaan to the off springs of Abram- the Jews, Christian and Muslims add your comments

No, it is your reasoning that is encumbered by Peter Kropotkin 1:08pm Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment "The Lord appeared to Abram and said, 'I will assign this land to your offspring.' That way they disregard the Biblical promise made by the Lord to Abram, which promises Canaan to the off springs of Abram- the Jews, Christian and Muslims" Your logic is built up on the necessity of religio-mystical phenomenon. To prove the legitimacy of this contract and your logic stemming out of it you would have to prove not only the existence of God in general, but the existence of the specific god of Israel. Further, you would have to prove that this God actually nullified this contract and that Jesus was indeed the Son of God, and you would have to prove that Mohammed was the last true prophet. Otherwise, these are just words in an old book. Dr. Spieglehouse (or however it is spelled), on the other hand, is basing his assumptions in verifiable evidence. Moreover, he seems to me to be trying to argue against the use of indigenousness as a claim to legitimacy at all (neither for the Palestinians or the Israelis) This is obviously a much more easily defensible line of reasoning than your non-scientific mystical mojo. add your comments

Hi peter by 1:24pm Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment "Moreover, he seems to me to be trying to argue against the use of indigenousness as a claim to legitimacy at all"... He is doing that since Zionists lose that argument fair & square. Zionists have justified their conquering of Palestinian land by quoting 'mumbo jumbo' passages like the paragraph above to establish that the Lord promised Cannaan to them and them alone. Abram had off springs besides the Jews, who must be allowed to live in peace on their inheritance. And they are the Muslim and Christian indigenous Palestinians. add your comments

political opportunists at large,,, by yawn 1:47pm Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment The Zionists are political opportunists who use and discard biblical passages for their own blasphemous agenda. One day you hear the Zionist yell from every roof top that Palestine belongs to them because it was promised to them by the lord ext. When you mention that the Biblical paragraph they wave around also mentions Christians and Muslims as the promised People, they change gears by starting to quote modern day scholars who claim that Abraham and his off springs are a myth concocted by ancient tribes. add your comments

Interesting Assumption, but wrong by Dr. Landen Spiegelhaus 2:55pm Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment I am not a pro-Zionist, in fact I am anti-nationalist. I am against Jewish nationalism and I am against Palestinian nationalism. I reject the mythology of all nationalisms who try to root their legitimacy in a fictional past. It is you who seem to be attempting to defend a certain ideological stand despite the piling evidence to the contrary. Abraham and God are most likely not historical figures and therefore god could not have made a contract with Abraham. The lack of ANY historical evidence for any of the characters in the bible from the period before the time of King Solomon, and the similarity of many of these early stories with other of the regional mythologies, would suggest an uphill battle in attmepting to legitimize historical rights to land by these unsubstantiated myths. If Abraham and Moses are myth and the Jewish people did not recieve the 'Torah' at Mt. Sinai, it would suggest human design. This would also suggest that that not only does this fictionalize Judaism, but also Christianity and Islam which are based on the assumption of the historical reality of these events. Instead of living in the fictional past, let us live in the real now. add your comments

I believe in the lord! by yawn. 3:21pm Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment No matter how you look at it, Zionists lose the argument for the legitimacy of the conquest of Palestine. They cling to the mystical argument cause it is somewhat vague and they can set the criteria for the standard for “legitimate heritage”. If you deal with scientific facts, Zionists have no business settling in Palestine, because they have No history in the place. Their history is in Europe. My diatribe is not against victims of Zionism who are called to defend that insane and dangerous ideology, but the very ideology. I notice a trend among Israelis, which is quite cultish. They display a blind obedience to the dogma of Zionism, rarely giving themselves the permission to criticize it and are often on the defensive. It is symptomatic of people who have existed in cults and have been brainwashed. It arouses sympathy in me, I wish to break those mental chains and let them see through that mass deception; help them escape that mental prison. But alas, everything moves at its own distinct pace, and it is not my place to rush the inevitable. Peace . add your comments

Fine, the Lord exists and the contract valid by The Lord God 3:46pm Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment Fine there little Yawn, you want it both ways. If the Lord exists and God did promise the land to the Jewish people for all time, then how can you attempt to try to argue againt the Zionists? Probably because you believe that God broke his contract with the Jews and made a new one with the nice little Christian Folk. Who then spent the next 2000 years killing and opressing everyone that didn't accept their false prophet as the truth. If the Jews got the promise from god, than the land is theirs. If they didn't get the Contract, than neither did the Christians or the Muslims. I am SURE that IF there is a god, he despises all religions that would think that he makes favorites, parcels out land, demands that we sing to him and beg for things from him, or eat certain foods, do certain rituals, kill animals for him, or have sex on certain days. What kind of fool do you think he is? People who believe in God are as ignorant as people who believe in ghosts, Astrology, Alien abduction, etc. Why don't you just wake up and smell the reality. We are alone, no one is going to help us but ourselves, and if we don't start acting on that knowledge, we are going to kill each other over old children's stories. add your comments

good point? by yawn! 10:19pm Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment THE contract is not between the lord G-D and the Jews but between the lord G_D and the Descendants of Abraham. If my recollection serves me right, all Three Religions are descendant from the faith of Mr. Abraham. The Zionists have done exactly what crusaders have done before them. They single handedly invented a religious rationale to conquer and invade other peoples Properties. Although one of the many Crusaders intentions was to convert the locals into their ‘genuine faith’, Zionism’s intention was to rid the land from the local population, thus Clearing it for the WHITE man in particular. Zionism is an ancient atheist cult- not Jewish by any stretch of the imagination and somewhat of a spring board for “bigger and better things”(Iraq and among other crusades) add your comments

'one world order' by a christian! 10:31pm Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment It is interesting to note that George bush, an avid Zionist and Christian, has likened the invasion of Iraq to a ‘crusade’- When he warned Americans that “this crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take awhile." add your comments

This war is a zionazi crusade for land. by l 11:13pm Thu Jul 10 '03 print comment Ann coulter- a favorite among Zionist circles has uttered the following in relation to a war for Arab land: “we should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity”. She was fired for making that statement, yet David Horowitz came to her rescue and is now happily employed by as a writer for his ultra rightwing publication. add your comments