Peace and love to everyone

I want to understand the difference between Islam and Judaism, there roots between the children of Abraham, who is the founder of all 3 faiths (Judaism, Chriostianity and Islam) to one God Almighty, and the Ka'Baa..

Can someone explain what Isaac and Jacob have to do with these roots since they both are the children of the same Father, Abraham and about the Ka'Baah,
and yes, Peace again to all.

Morganite

In Islam, the Mosque follows the pattern of the synagogue, as Christian churches do, while the Kaaba, a wholly different institution, represents the temple;
(Gustav E. von Grunebaum, Mohammadan Festivals (New York: Schuman, 1951), 20-21; Elie Lambert, "La Synagogue de Doura-Europos et les origines de la mosquée," Semitica 3 (1950): 67-72.)

When Omar conquered and entered Jerusalem in 638 he asked first of all to be shown "the glorious Temple that Solomon had built," only to discover that the Christians had converted the place into a garbage dump.

The treasure that the churchmen had so foolishly thrown away the Moslems were quick to exploit, promptly rebuilding the temple and restoring it to its prestige as a center of world pilgrimage.

They had already harnessed its unique powers by "transferring to Mecca cosmological ideas in vogue among Jews and Christians concerning the sanctuary of Jerusalem," and though the legends of the Kaaba, of its founding and refounding by Adam and Abraham as an earthly replica of the eternal preexistent heavenly prototype, etc., were borrowed freely from Jerusalem, there is no long history of bitter rivalry between the two.

The Kaaba is a small bulding in the courtyatd of the central mosque in Meccsa, that houses the black polished stone which is th eobject of pilgrimage and veneration.

For Islam, Jerusalem remained par excellence the City of the Holy House, and as late as the eleventh century anyone who could not make the Hajj to Mecca was instructed to go to the great feast at Jerusalem instead.

Moslem intellectuals, exactly as the Jewish and Christian doctors before them, protested against the glorification of a mere building, and campaigned vigorously against the pilgrimages, but the temple had a powerful advocate in Christian jealousy. Like children fighting for a toy, each faction came to prize the temple more highly when it saw how much the other wanted it.

This jealous rivalry became apparent on the very day Omar entered Jerusalem and visited the temple ruins "in all humility and simplicity."

The Christians, who saw in his unassuming manner "only a Satanic hypocrisy," were piously horrified at the sight, and the Patriarch Sophronius cried out:

"This, surely, is the Abomination of Desolation in the Temple, of which David [sic] prophesied."

For the Christians it was their temple now, though they had turned it into a dungheap.

Such horror the Jews of old had expressed at the sight of profane feet in the temple, and presently the Moslems took up the refrain, banishing Christians and Jews on pain of death from the sacred precincts "where the Saracens believe, according to their law, that their prayers are more readily answered than anywhere else."

The only genuine religious clashes between Christians and Moslems, Müller informs us of the Crusades, were the two fights for the temple, when the Christians took it in 1099 and the Moslems got it back in 1187--"und damit war die Geschichte des Glaubenskrieges als solches ziemlich aus."[thus was the history of religious war worked out] - loose trs.

Solomon's Temple was in each case, as it had been in Jewish times, the last redoubt; there alone neither side gave or asked for quarter; it was the ultimate all-out objective, and each conqueror in turn entered the holy place with songs of apocalyptic joy.

Actually the possession of the temple complex was more than a mere matter of prestige. In the endless rivalries of the Christian sects there was just one claim to supreme authority that could neither be duplicated nor matched:

"Those who cannot be reached by scriptural and doctrinal arguments," says a writing attributed to Athanasius, "are bound to credit the claims of that church which holds the holy places, including "Zion, where the salvation of the world was worked out. . . . And if the opposition say that we hold those places by the brute force of imperial arms, let them know that . . . Christ has never allowed His Places to fall into the hands of heretics."

It was a strong argument until Islam took over.

The Moslems teach that the Kaaba was put into orbit around the earth during the flood, descending again after the danger was over, certainly suggesting the nature of the thing as a meteoric stone (Tha'labi).
(Qisas al-Anbiya' [Cairo: Mustafa Bab al-Halabi, A. H. 1340], p. 214f.)

It was thought that Mohammed's death would put a final stop to the progress of his religion; some persons gave him poison to see whether he was a prophet or not, and it was his belief that poison was the cause of his death. He died at the age of sixty-three, in 632, and was succeeded by his father-in-law, Abu Bukker, who was very faithful in sustaining the prophet during his life, and who was acknowledged as the first Khalif after the prophet's death.

This man continued the war which Mohammed had commenced, for when the prophet had found that the people would not leave their pagan idols by being preached to, he concluded the sword was the best argument; he therefore decided he would take up the line of march to his native city, sustained by a powerful army.

He destroyed the idols in the Kaaba, the temple of Mecca, and dedicated it to be the great temple of Mohammedt, and the centre of Islamic worship, which position it has held up to the present time.

G4-450

well

i think allot of what you posted is bizare indeed

The kabbah is a idea, testimony Abraham founded.
Abraham took his son Ishmael (Gen not Isaac his 2nd son) as a sacrifice, offering it for ransom and God finally refused, this was to state that on the last day even your sons will not be accepted and some evil people will offer there sons as well as everything they have to avoid the hellfire.

The kabbah was and is a place of pilgrimage not worship, its not worshipped, and any one who believed in God at the time Mohammed was facing his own uncles tribe persecuting him helped mohammed fight them and remove the idols from the kabbah, simple as that.

Who ever did not help mohammed and new the scriptures where the hypocrites and liars for it was written clearly that Abraham is the founder of the one true God religion and a friend of God's., diverting into any other religions aka sects is again the worked of Satan and his progeny according to the scriptures.

i came to accept this story after many distorted anti islamic ones i read first, i realized after wards that it corresponded to Jesus as well and all the prophets before and after him, and wether or not he was the son of God, God himself the message was very simple and clear and it was to guide people back to the children of Abraham.

Bobbye

You have received great responses so I'll just add one item of correction:i.e.,
Joseph was not the head of one of the tribes. His sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, were heads of the two half-tribes. Joseph never left Egypt until his bones were carried out with the Exodus some 400 years later.

Yes, Joseph was one of the sons of Jacob (Israel) but his position in Egypt -- comparable to "Prime Minister" -- (after being sold into slavery at 17 years of age by his brothers) declared him a "national hero," thus his burial in The Holy Land was prohibited at the time of his death. Some 400 years later the Hyksos kings (those not Egyptian who declared themselves rulers) had been replaced by Egyptians, and Joseph's fame was buried in the annals of Egyptian history -- which paved the way for his bones to be returned to his homeland.

Be blessed,
bobbye

Morganite

You are quite correct, Bobby.

Did Joseph start out as a tribal chieftan and then the two lads head up their own half-tribes? (What does a 'half'-tribe' look like?).

The story of the tribes of Israel, their origin, inheritances, divisions, rebellions, and final loss of their inheritances, is clearly recorded in the books of the Old Testament.

Jacob (a supplanter, in whose favor the law of primogenture was waived), whom the Lord named Israel (He who prevaiuls with God), had twelve sons, namely: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, Benjamin, Gad, Asher, Dan, and Naphtali.

Each became the ancestor of a tribe in Israel and received patriarchal blessings as such when Jacob went down into Egypt (Gen.49).

Jacob also blessed the two sons of Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim, and adopted them as his own sons, and they were blessed as founders of tribes in Israel.

The idea that these two sons of Joseph replaced Reuben and Simeon springs from the words of Jacob when he chose them for adoption, as recorded in Genesis Chapter 48, verse 5, as follows: "And now thy two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, which were born unto thee in the land of Egypt before I came unto thee into Egypt, are mine; as Reuben and Simeon, they shall be mine."

A careful reading will show the true meaning to be that they should be sons of Jacob just the same as Reuben and Simeon were, not that they were to replace them.

Then again some confusion has come because it is recorded in I Chronicles 5:1, that while Reuben was the firstborn, because of his transgression the birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph.

The matter of birthright, however, did not have anything to do with a place among the tribes of Israel, and Ephraim was not substituted as a tribe for Reuben.

The inclusion of the two half-tribes made the number of the tribes of Israel into twelve, because the Levites did not operate as a tribe, but were scattered among the remaioning tribes for sacerdotal purposes.



MORGANITE

Morganite

"And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar…and sent her away:…"

Then comes the supreme test, the sacrifice of Isaac (Genesis 22:2).

"Take now they son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest…and offer him there for a burnt offering."

Thus the Bible clearly identifies whioch of Abraham's son is the intended victim.

"There is a prevalent notion that the Arabs, both of the south and north, are descended from Ishmael; and the passage in Gen. xvi.12, "he (Ishmael) shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren."

This passage is often cited as if it were a prediction of that national independence which, upon the whole, the Arabs have maintained more than any other people.

But this supposition is founded on a misconception of the original Hebrew, which runs literally, "he shall before the faces of all his brethren," i.e., (according to the idiom above explained, in which "before the face" denotes the east), the habitation of his posterity shall be "to the east" of the settlements of Abraham’s’ other descendants.

These prophecies found their accomplishment in the fact of the sons of Ishmael being located, generally speaking to the east of the other descendants of Abraham, whether of Sara or of Ketuah. But the idea of the southern Arabs being of the posterity of Ishmael is entirely without foundation, and seems to have originated in the tradition invented by Arab vanity that they, as well as the Jews, are of the seed of Abraham--a vanity which, besides disfiguring and falsifying the whole history of the patriarch and his son Ishmael, has transferred the scene of it from Palestine to Mecca."
(McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, (Vol. I:339)

Now, here is what we have, Two separate tradition that contradict each other in some details. On the basis of historical procession alone it seems most likely that the later version was made to claim superiority over the earlier version for purely theological advantage.



MORGANITE

G4-450

Hi

You posted something interesting

I read in your other posts how you refer to the hebrews as the jews, if i may explain why i repeat that Abraham was not a jew and arabs do not believe or argue about anything between these contradictions but hold up what Jesus said which was there is one God and him you worship alone, and Abraham is the father of this faith.,

Jesus also said that who ever submits to the will of God is his brother and his sister[SIZE=1]Mark.3 [35] For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.[/SIZE], this is to say that Abraham and his name should speak for itself is the Father of Faith in one true God, Faith been God's light which is the will and evidence to the keys of man's Good conscience or bad one which leaves him enslaved to his wrongdoing.

Aside from Jesus and back to Abraham, i find it interesting how if one does not speak semitic could be confused, Jesus Spoke Aramaic but the books where in greek, Aramaic is a semitic language, Hebrew also existed only in text and pre mature as a non spoken language, Abraham again did not speak either, he existed before there where jews and the only religion based on his foundation to the kabah is iSlam today, and yes, the nation of Judah fell and like Jesus said another nation will inherit Gods will,

i would say Islam been the other brother did based on faith and practice, but many racist theories clutter the truth about Abraham's covenant which has to do with faith like Jesus said, and not blood like Satan racist say,
And we already understand all mankind was created by the God of Abraham and we all have to keep our oaths to this covenant if we take it upon ourselves to inherit Gods blessings., so why all these race theories and blood claims to Jacob by some?, they are all false.

If anyone tells you that the God of Judah did not create the other semitic speaking brothers known as arabs, ask them , what God created you that could not create others if you claim to the one true God who colors and fashions all living beings?
You see how the truth sheds it light there?

Bobbye

Morganite:

No, Joseph was never the head of a tribel. He was only 17 years old when sold into slavery (Egyptian slavery); was the right hand of the Pharoah from 30 years of age until his death (never again lived in The Holy Land: never returned to The Promised Land until his bones were carried by the 3 million plus who left Egypt in the Exodus).

WHAT DOES A HALF TRIBE LOOK LIKE?

As any other tribe. However, it was counted only as "half" (one half to Manasseh and one half to Ephraim) when dividing the land into tribal territories -- after the Hebrews entered the Promised Land through Gilgal; then conquered Jericho under Joshua's command; then were defeated at little AI (until Achan and the "sin in the camp" was addressed); returned to Ai where they were victorious; then conquered Gibeon in the South (making an alliance with the Gibeonites, which God did not grant); then on to northern territories where they were victorious; AND, THEREAFTER, THE LAND WAS DIVIDED INTO TRIBAL TERRITORIES.

Be blessed in your insatiable desire for The Word!
bobbye

Morganite

You do not address a person. Is this post sent to me? If so:

I do not call Hebrews Jews, I call Jews Hebrews.

Abraham could not have been a Jew, because he could not have been one of the progeny of his own great grandson (Judah). I believe we agree on that.

What language did Abraham speak? It was either Hebrew or an early variation of it. On the antiquity of Hebrew, it was in Ras Shamra (ancient Ugarit), where C. Schaeffer beginning in 1929 brought forth thousands of tablets from a temple archive of the Canaanites going back to the 14th century b.c.

They are in a language closely related to Hebrew and contain many expressions and concepts that are close to those of the Old Testament, making it possible to solve many Bible mysteries and brightly illuminate certain phases of the early history of Israel. Thirty more boxes of tablets were excavated in 1960.

In Aegypt, at Serdabit al-Khadim, there were mines of the Pharaohs where people from Palestine were employed around 1500 b.c. and where they left some thirty rock inscriptions behind. These were discovered by Petrie in 1905, with important additions in 1948.

They are written with Egyptian symbols but in Canaanitish dialect which has been identified as proto-Hebrew.

They show the early Egyptianizing of the Semites and indicate much closer ties between the cultures of Egypt and Israel than have heretofore been conceded.

It was the Ras Shamra texts more than anything else which showed that the Old Testament must be studied in an ever larger context to be properly understood. "The Bible strikes root into every ancient Near-Eastern culture, and it cannot be historically understood until we can see its relationship to its sources in true perspective," according to Professor Albright.

"One hundred years ago," writes A. Parrot, "in Mesopotamia it was discovered that history lies behind the Old Testament. Today . . . the Old Testament itself is being discovered," to wit, in the Ras Shamra documents, in the Mari Tablets (a huge collection of tablets discovered on the upper Euphrates by Parrot himself), and in the Nuzi Tablets, vast private archives which "make frequent mention of the Habiri," {Hebrews] and the Dawidum, and even tell of the use of fire-signals by the Benjaminites as described in the Old Testament.

The beginnings of Israel are rooted in a highly cultural Canaan, where we now know Mesopotamians, Egyptians, and branches of the Indo-Europeans had converged and blended. Hence the notion that early Israelite religion and society were primitive is completely false.

About the Patriarch Joseph. "Most scholars," writes Tha'labi, "say that Joseph is a Hebrew name . . . and Abu-l-Hasan . . . said that asaf is `sorrow' in that language, and that asif is `servant,' and that the two are combined in the name of Joseph."

The identification of Joseph with Asaf is an authentic Hebrew tradition. Adam in a vision (this is Tha'labi again) "saw Joseph sitting in all his glory, and cried out, `Who is that noble one sitting in such an exalted degree of glory?' And Gabriel answered, `O Adam, that is thy son, the envied one. . . . '

Then Adam clasped him to his bosom and his heart and said, O my son, do not sorrow (asaf), for thou art Joseph.Thus he first gave him his name."

The writer is puzzled by the preexistent situation and explains that "Joseph knew it all in the beginning in the preeminence of his intelligence, and he was instructed in the matter (of his future trials on earth) even as it would be, and he saw that he would be so and so before he was. But that is a thing that only God understands--how, for example, Adam knew all (his children's) names beforehand."

The mystery of Joseph appears in Benjamin's admonition to his children in The Twelve Patriarchs: "Follow the example of the holy and good man Joseph. For until death he was not willing to tell regarding himself; but Jacob, having learned it from the Lord, told it to him [Benjamin]."

In the Dead Sea Scrolls the famous Teacher of Righteousness is also called Asaph, that being, as we have seen, another name for Joseph, which, as H.J. Schonfield observes, "thus fits in with the Joseph traditions."

Jacob blessed Joseph according to Benjamin's Testament, saying, "In thee shall be fulfilled the prophecies of heaven, which say that the blameless one shall be defiled for lawless men, and the sinless one shall die for godless men."

According to the Testament of Zebulon, Joseph's three days in the cistern were the type of the descent of the Lord made to the spirits in prison. One can readily see how the Joseph type would be applied to any suffering servant, though the Messiah remains the archtype.

Indeed, the Christian fathers were fond of working out elaborate parallels between Joseph and Jesus.

The Teacher of Righteousness was also called the Chosen One, Asaph, the Son of Berechiah, Joseph the Just, and Joseph ben Joezer, so that his given name probably was Joseph and he "appears to us as a composite figure," just as his wicked opponent does.

The Joseph tradition has been traced backwards as well as forwards, and Bo Reicke has found significant parallels in the Ras Shamra fragments of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries b.c.!

Interesting?


MORGANITE

G4-450

You keep calling it the old testament, its the TORAH.
when we call it the old testament we are testifyinh that we see it from a new testoment view, which again is not abrahamic.

i know that i also refered to the torah ( first five books that moses recieved) as the old testament, and i did it becuase many DO NOT KNOW the Troah is in the bible, but the closest language to it is ARABIC.

Arabic spoken has all the dialects withing the semitic tones as for example Aramaic (greek Arabic) and other spoken semitic languages wich most of thee people in the Mid East knew then are now muslim, and lets not forget the magnolians who conquiered Islam and learned arabic who also converted as muslims again becuase they realized that these so called Bible mysteries you speak off where not any more.

Hebrew may i repeate again was never spoken until 1945, when Israel became the silent U.S. state.

The BIG LIE is when a person who calls himself Jewish does not correct another person when he or she is confused about the authenticy of Judaism existing BEFORE Moses who received the books about Adam, Noa and Abraham who did not speak Hebrew and where not also Jewish, in-fact the children of Israel did not exist until Moses divided them into tribes again with guidance from God., i call this a Big Lie, because Lying is all Judaism today is about if they do not practice there faith based on Abraham.

On a recent BBC article, they showed a traditional Jewish wedding, the groom was wearing a scull cap, white and exactly like muslims.,

Muslims dress the way Jesus and the children of Abraham dressed, remember God as much as they can as Jesus told people to do, pray with all there might like Jesus told people to do, and keep all the commandments in the Torah (TENAK) like jesus told people to do as well as fight in God's way as Jesus told people to do and as well as love others the way they wanted to be loved as Jesus also told people to do,

Now the Media says terrorists attacked the WTC, a religious thing and all, i say it had to do with Israel's occupation and murdering of innocent people in a silent background, so yes religious and political, innocent blood on one side continued because the american people did not know about it since the media is pro jewish., by the way of what happened opened the story and we all are realizing now that the the U.S. government controls the information we know.

My point is that its backwards and distorted to see Jewish history pre dating King David and his son Solomon, after Solomon the tribe of Judah took over all the tribes of Israel, oppressed and forced people to convert to there religion, not Abraham's, while today we THINK judaism is abrahamic it actually is in no way relevant to the Torah since Ultra Orthodox jews claim that the talmud is HOLIER THEN THE BIBLE all together.

Morganite

You keep calling it the old testament, its the TORAH. when we call it the old testament we are testifying that we see it from a new testament view, which again is not Abrahamic.

You do not address any person in particular so you might not mean me,

BUT! the Torah is NOT the OLD TESTAMENT, The Torah is NOT the HEBREW SCRIPTURES.

The Torah is a PART of the collectuion of books known as the Old Testament, or the Hebrew Scripturesr.

The Torah is Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, also known as the Pentateuch, or "Five books." (because there are five separate books in it).

Testamaent means "Covenant," and refers to the covenant God made with Israel under the hand of Moses, and not to the individual covenants he made with Abraham, Issac, and Jacob, each separately, With Israel, God put the whole federation of tribes under Covenant (Testament) under Moses as Leader-prophet-administrator.

i know that i also refered to the torah ( first five books that moses recieved) as the old testament, and i did it becuase many DO NOT KNOW the Troah is in the bible, but the closest language to it is ARABIC.

Well, my friend, if you can refer to it that way, then you must not prevent me from having the same freedom. Is that just? Anyway, you know what I mean - I hope!

Arabic spoken has all the dialects withing the semitic tones as for example Aramaic (greek Arabic) and other spoken semitic languages wich most of thee people in the Mid East knew then are now muslim, and lets not forget the magnolians who conquiered Islam and learned arabic who also converted as muslims again becuase they realized that these so called Bible mysteries you speak off where not any more.

I have not spoken of "Bible mysteries."

Hebrew may i repeate again was never spoken until 1945, when Israel became the silent U.S. state.

"Hebrew was NEVER spoken"? You might not know it and you might not believe it, but it was.

The BIG LIE is when a person who calls himself Jewish does not correct another person when he or she is confused about the authenticy of Judaism existing BEFORE Moses who received the books about Adam, Noa and Abraham who did not speak Hebrew and where not also Jewish, in-fact the children of Israel did not exist until Moses divided them into tribes again with guidance from God., i call this a Big Lie, because Lying is all Judaism today is about if they do not practice there faith based on Abraham.

Judaism, was not the religion of the Patriarchs. Judaism is the attenutated form of Israelitish Cult Religion, centred on the Temple as an amphyicony.

It became Proto-Judaism during the Babylonian Captivity, when temple worship was not available to the Judahites. The dinner tabler became the replacement for the temple, and the forms of worship decribed in Moses' Leviticus were replaced by symbols instead of the full ritual.

Before Moses, Patriarchal religion worshipped 'yod-hey-vav-hey' and kings paid tithing and tribute to Abraham as if to God.

After the exodus from Egypt, the building of the temples (there were more than one) that replaced the portable tent-temple, life and worship was focused on the temple.

The captives, unable to continue that life and servive, adapted their religion and its rituals to what they could do, and thus we see the change from Israelitish amphyiotcony ot the stirrings of what, later,. would be called Judaism,

Nothing could be called Judaism in the time of Adam, Abrham, Isaac, or Jacob, because Judah, after whom it is named, was not then born.

On a recent BBC article, they showed a traditional Jewish wedding, the groom was wearing a scull cap, white and exactly like muslims

Jews had been covering their heads with yamlukes for more than a thousand years before the founding of Islam in 600 AD (CE) Turks called such hats 'rain' wear,' and their origin is lost in antiquity. The yamulke is a skullcap worn especially by Orthodox and Conservative Jewish males in the synagogue and the home. Itr is said to remind Jews that no one is above a Jew except God.

Muslims dress the way Jesus and the children of Abraham dressed, remember God as much as they can as Jesus told people to do, pray with all there might like Jesus told people to do, and keep all the commandments in the Torah (TENAK) like jesus told people to do as well as fight in God's way as Jesus told people to do and as well as love others the way they wanted to be loved as Jesus also told people to do,


Non-Muslim Arabs dress the same way, because it is sensible in hot countries. I dwell in the desert and it would be sensible here, but I wear loose clothing rather than the burnoose, whi8ch is an Arabn garment, rather than a Muslim garb. It is a little disingenous to claim that everything in the old world is Islamic.

Now the Media says terrorists attacked the WTC, a religious thing and all, i say it had to do with Israel's occupation and murdering of innocent people in a silent background, so yes religious and political, innocent blood on one side continued because the american people did not know about it since the media is pro jewish., by the way of what happened opened the story and we all are realizing now that the the U.S. government controls the information we know.

We can all pick holes in what the media says about this and that. It hardly ever agrees with itself over the same point. However, I have never seen the Terrorist attack on WTC attributed to any religious cause. Osama Bin Laden is not a religious lkeader, he does not represent Islam. He is a terrorist, a murderer, and is under God's fatwah for murdering inncent people. He might come from a Muslim fmaily, but he does not act in accordance with Islamic teaching, or Jewish, or Christian teaching when he turns his hand to cold blooded slaughter of the innocent.

If he sees himself as a soldier with a cause worth fighting for, then let him meet his enemy on the battlefield. No warrior creeps around in the dark like a thief, rapist, burglar, or murderer. Warriors stand tall and face their enenies head on, face-to-face.

Bin Laden is noit a warrior. He is a disgrace, and an enemy to God.

My point is that its backwards and distorted to see Jewish history pre dating King David and his son Solomon, after Solomon the tribe of Judah took over all the tribes of Israel, oppressed and forced people to convert to there religion, not Abraham's, while today we THINK judaism is abrahamic it actually is in no way relevant to the Torah since Ultra Orthodox jews claim that the talmud is HOLIER THEN THE BIBLE all together


Of course Jewish history cannot pre-date Judah. That is chronologically impossible, but it seems contrary to the argument you make earlier in your post.

As for Solomon and the House of Judah 'taking over' the rest ofd the tribes and forcing them to convert to Judaism, that sounds very much like the tactics that Mohammed would later use to effect the spread of Islam. However, that does not square with actual history.

The Kingdom of Israel (Northern Kingdom) was never subjugated by Judah. It was subjugated by Tiglath-Pileser III of Assyria around 720 BC.

Fictionalised history makes your position untenable. If someone cannot tell the truth about history, evensomeone else's, can we relied on anything else they say?

You obviously have sources for the things you write, but I have to suggest that they might not be as reliable as you think. History that is re-written to suit someone's particular point of view is called ":Revisionist History," and is considered blatantly dishonest.

Again, I admire your persistence, and also appreciate the problems you have with the sources on which you rely.




MORGANITE