Israel Declares War

Can you be specific? What opinions do you mean?

I don't want to derail this thread but appreciate that many see it the same as you do.
I'm not so convinced of that.

https://www.ae911truth.org/

You don't believe that God said any those verses? Well, work it out with God.

🍉

C'mon, of course I believe that God said all those things... I just believe that God said other things on that topic.

How many innocent Japanese civilians did we murder then?

@Ted01 @ThereRoseaLamb

Correct me if I'm wrong, in relatively modern history (the last 500 years), Palestine/Israel has been populated predominantly by non-Jews. Going back much further than 500 years ago, it was once a land populated predominantly by the Jews. Would yall agree to this?

My history is a bit fuzzy, but I believe the Ottoman empire controlled Israel/Palestine until 1918'ish (after the battle of Megiddo). Then the British controlled it until 1947 when they gave it to the Jews. Prior to giving it to the Jews however, it was a dominant majority of non-Jews.

It's so relatively recent that many Palestinian people today have parents that owned land in what was called Palestine (Israel today). So you have to ask yourself, should the Palestinian people have the right to the homes their parents and grandparents owned when the land was under British rule?

The counter to this question is that the Jews owned it going back further into history. The issue with this stance is that the US took over land from the Native Americans... Should we give over our land back to the tribes and go back to Europe? I think the obvious answer is "No." What was done to the Native American people was terrible... It was wicked. We committed crimes against humanity... Too much time has passed to fix what we unfortunately. This is not the same with modern day Palestinians however. This is recent enough that some people are still living who were raised in a home that they were forced out of.

I'm sure many of you will think I'm a Palestinian supporter based on my understanding of the events. I enjoy discussing history and if I'm wrong with anything, I welcome people to set me straight.

@Ted01 @ThereRoseaLamb

Correct me if I'm wrong, in relatively modern history (the last 500 years), Palestine/Israel has been populated predominantly by non-Jews. Going back much further than 500 years ago, it was once a land populated predominantly by the Jews. Would yall agree to this?

My history is a bit fuzzy, but I believe the Ottoman empire controlled Israel/Palestine until 1918'ish (after the battle of Megiddo). Then the British controlled it until 1947 when they gave it to the Jews. Prior to giving it to the Jews however, it was a dominant majority of non-Jews.

It's so relatively recent that many Palestinian people today have parents that owned land in what was called Palestine (Israel today). So you have to ask yourself, should the Palestinian people have the right to the homes their parents and grandparents owned when the land was under British rule?

The counter to this question is that the Jews owned it going back further into history. The issue with this stance is that the US took over land from the Native Americans... Should we give over our land back to the tribes and go back to Europe? I think the obvious answer is "No." What was done to the Native American people was terrible... It was wicked. We committed crimes against humanity... Too much time has passed to fix what we unfortunately. This is not the same with modern day Palestinians however. This is recent enough that some people are still living who were raised in a home that they were forced out of.

I'm sure many of you will think I'm a Palestinian supporter based on my understanding of the events. I enjoy discussing history and if I'm wrong with anything, I welcome people to set me straight.

I think it has more to do with what God decided. He wanted to move the Jews back to the land He had ousted them from and no amount of opposition is going to change that. I think the Palestinians should become Christians and trust Him to give them a land that they would be happy with (and won't cut into others). Because apart from God, they're not going to get anything.
🍉

So Hamas didn't murder innocent civilians because they are at war with Israel? I mean... two things can be true. Hamas is at war with Israel, but it's also true they are murdering innocent Israeli civilians.

Dropping a nuclear bomb and saying you're sincerely attempting to only "kill" military forces and not the dense civilian population surrounding it is disingenous. Why do we have to lie to ourselves? There is no justification to "kill" civilians with such an indiscriminate nuclear weapon.

If you want to blow up a port, do so with a traditional bomb... but a nuclear weapon? It's a disingenuous distinction and you're intelligent enough to know that.

I suppose I am going to order a Tsar Bomba (biggest/most powerful nuclear bomb ever created) next time I have a pest control problem. "Sorry if I blow up my entire state, I was discriminately trying to kill the cockroaches and crickets in my house."

I gave you a link in the post that you quoted earlier.

Your opinion about Jews being in the land before the Arabs - post #350... you told the person whom you quoted that they were incorrect and that the land belonged to the Jews first. That's only true if you view from OT promises (that had a condition) ... but it's not true from the historical record. The Jews left in and around 70 AD... other peoples inhabited the land which was vacated.

None.

Arabs are descended from Ishmael, Abraham's son with Hagar. Palestinians are not Arabs, they are Philistines. They were in the land prior to the nation of Israel coming into the land from Egypt. However, that was more than 400 years after God made a covenant with Abraham to give the land to him and his seed (referring to Isaac). The reason God displaced the Philistines was because they offered up children sacrifices to Moloch and Baal (abortion and infanticide). God is a defender of the helpless.

None.

What is foolish is thinking that your words make any difference. In war the winners make the rules and write the history. You keep trying to define one act of aggression as a crime and another act as "OK".

I look at this differently. I will have to give account for the things I have done in this world, how will this act look when I appear before the Lord. I would not want to be on the airplane that dropped the bomb, but if I was on a Navy ship in the Pacific when the war ended I would have been thankful for the person who did drop it. On the other hand if I was a kid in the 50s hiding under my desk during a drill for nuclear war I would not have been thankful.

What you do has consequences and will affect many people.

Call me naive, but I think it was entirely possible for a Palestinian state and an Israeli state but neither side wanted to make any concessions. It's utterly sad.

I guess that I understand your reasoning... somewhat. But I think that in mingling ancient history with, moderately, recent history people get confused.

That particular piece of real estate was legitimately renamed Palestine long ago. It makes no difference whether we like it or not.

It's not that I think MY words make a difference, it's that there is clearly deceit when people attempt to justify killing innocent Japanese civilians. We all agree that there is sometimes collateral damage... especially when using non-nuclear bombs. But people are doing verbal gymnastic to make it seem like an atomic bomb is a discriminate bomb ideal for selectively killing armed forces inside of a densely civilian populated area.

If we can agree there is a difference between discriminate killing and indiscriminate killing (murdering), then we can get somewhere. If we agree there is a difference, the next step is to ask if the atomic bomb is the ideal bomb TO discriminately kill armed forces. The problem is that it is so blatantly obvious you don't use a nuclear bomb if you're trying to discriminately kill armed forces. That's why no one is answering the question.