The bible was written almost exclusively by Jews, both the Old and New Testament. Jesus was a Jew and so were most of His apostles. The events of the majority of the books in the bible happened in Israel. Christianity is a Jewish religion. So, it shouldn't really surprise anyone that the bible has a lot to say about the Jews. Where they came from, how they got there, and what happens to them in the future.

Christian support for the Jews is a relatively new phenomenon. During the reign of the Catholic church, Jews were persecuted by Catholics and forced to convert to Christianity. The Jewishness of Jesus was lost to history; this is why you see much of the art during the middle ages depicting the Lord as a European man.

What changed is that the Jews returned to the land of Israel in 1948, something that many scholars of time past assumed was impossible. The general teaching was that God had broken His covenant with the Jewish people because they rejected Christ and that the church was now the new Israel. This is called replacement theology.

Yet, the Jews did return to their own land, a unique event in all of history. Never before had a people group been displaced from their own country, scattered all over the world for thousands of years, and then regathered to their original land with their cultural and genetic purity intact. This is a true miracle which anyone can plainly see is evidence of the hand of God working in the Earth on behalf of His chosen people.

The video makes it seem like the idea of Israel being integral to end times prophecy is some kind of leap, yet anyone who has studied the bible seriously knows that nearly everything predicted about the end times revolves around Israel, and particularly Jerusalem. There are numerous prophecies in the Old Testament stating plainly that God will scatter His people and gather them back to Israel in the last days.

The scripture predicts that the Jews will build a third temple. At this moment the Dome of the Rock, the golden domed building you see in photographs of Jerusalem, stands in the place where the third temple must be built. You could sum up the entire tension in the middle east in two words: "Temple Mount".

Not only are the Jews ready to rebuild their temple in a moments notice, they have created all of the implements of the temple and have been training priests to serve in the temple. The scripture declares that for end times prophecy to be fulfilled there must be a third temple. I can confidently predict that this will happen sometime in the future and the Dome of the Rock most likely be destroyed.

I also wanted to mention one other thing. The name "Palestine" was given to the area by the Romans. The Palestinians are not a people group, they are Arabs who settled in the area after the Jews were dispersed around the world. The video really does you a disservice by neglecting to mention the fact that it was the Arab nations that attacked Israel unprovoked on multiple occasions and the Jews against all odds defeated them. It was their right to take that territory and they are under no obligation to return it.

In the end, there will be much more conflict in the middle east, all revolving around the Jews and Jerusalem in some way. You may doubt the scripture but you will see this unfold with your very eyes. One day a charismatic man will come on the scene who will negotiate a peace in the middle east between the Jews and the nations of the world. He will seem at first to be someone who can solve all of our problems but eventually he will establish a one world order and rule the world with an iron fist. He will go into the Jewish temple and declare himself to be God. This is who the bible calls the Antichrist.

So, if you want to know where we are at in the end times, watch Israel and Jerusalem. Jerusalem is Gods prophetic time clock. When you see the Dome of the Rock being replaced by the temple, know the Lord is near, even at the doors.

I don't know enough about the situation in Palestine, or what kinds of laws are imposed from outside there, but just hypothetically, I wonder: what if they renounced all initiation of violence altogether, and just dropped the push to set up their own state? What if, instead they declared their territories to be "state-free" and "tax free havens?" Maybe they could open some casinos a la Native Americans; and provide some tax-free banking; let tech giants set up tax-free research centers there without all of the immigration restrictions that seem to impose so many unnecessary challenges.. And what if, instead of waging war or attacking Israel, they simply used any military capabilities they had to set up private security firms, and secure their banking system, maybe provide some safe gold depositories? In a generation or two, the Israelis would see that they are the ones living in a prison/tax farm, not the Palestinians. I wonder if they could get away with it...


It's interesting to me how some folks tend to (more or less) "take sides" in defense of states (or would-be states) in conflicts like this one. As if states somehow had "rights" or as if states somehow represented "the people" within each state. That is simply, prima facie, false: For one thing, I think armed conflict on any sort of large scale inflicts violence against innocent parties on both sides; who, in their own rights, have reason to see the other side's violent acts as aggression (or at least as material threats to their human rights).

So I certainly agree that Israelis have a right not to have rockets coming at them, but it also seems to me that individual Palestinians have a right not to be collateral damage in Israel's bombings. Surely the hundreds who've lost family in Gaza have reason to be angry at Hamas, but you could see why they too would want to defend themselves.

The logic of war often leads to a situation where if you can defend one side fighting, you have to see why the other side would fight as well. And so we can condemn both sides, or sympathize with the innocent victims of both sides, but I don't see any simple formulation that shows why people who happen to live on one side of an arbitrary line have more of a "right" to respond violently to attacks that threaten their lives than the other side has.

The United States commits many forms of aggression quite frequently. In revenge, terrorists murdered innocent Americans on 9/11. Those Americans had a right not to be attacked and as Americans, we have a right to defend ourselves. But if tactics our government employs hurt third parties, doesn't it seem that the logic of collective self defense could easily be used to justify perpetual war?

None of what I say relies on any assumption that Hamas is any less criminal than the Israeli state. Even if it's much more criminal than the Israeli state, it seems to me that collective defense = perpetual war, because of the innocents on both sides who seem to have no way of striking against belligerents without violence that itself puts innocent people in harm's way.

Ahmadinejad threatens to remove Israel from the map. Ayatollah Khamenei does the same. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard(which reports directly to Khamenei) virtually founded and continually provides training, arms and funding to Hezbollah which it must be observed routinely attacks Israel.

I'm not trying to say Israel is some pure and innocent virgin. I'm pointing out some basic facts that are routinely denied by a great many people and I felt the need for the truth to be out there. I also fail to understand why pointing out facts like this requires anyone to come out and basically state that Israel deserves it, or at the very least that they started it and are the ones in the wrong.

It's quite possible for there to be 2 wrongs and no need to lesson the sins of either.

But where does it stop? As I asked before, is Syria now completely justified in attacking Israel? Is it justified to attack the United States since the US is transferring weapons to a state that constantly attacks Syria?

All of these scenarios and actions are and would be justifiable in a state of declared war. Perhaps your position is that Israel is in effect in a state of constant war with its neighbors, in which case all attacks against Israel are fair and any response is also justified (although even the just war doctrine doesn't allow for asymmetrical responses). However, that hawkish position definitely impedes any peaceful settlement.

A war ends when one side wins or one side decides it is not worth fighting anymore. Nobody is going to "win" this conflict. Instead, I would rather like to see Israel, the stronger side militarily and economically, be that harbinger of peace and accept the inherent security risks of its position by deciding it doesn't want this fight. It is because of that stance that I am always so deeply disappointed by acts like this and feel the need to push back against those who claim that Israel is justified in whatever it does (even if you are not exactly that person).

aaronfr and Kofi,

You both seem to have the notion that Israel is, has and always will be the aggressor in it's relationship with it's neighbours. If you want to talk about unjustified acts of aggression between Israel and neighboring arab states, you can't decide to only look at the time frame which supports your position.

What is your view on Israel's declaration of independence? Even Al Jazeera describes the events as the culmination of a civil war between Jewish and Arab Palestinians, in which the Jewish Palestinians were the minority. The Jewish Palestinians were largely victorious, and declared independence within the the territory they held. Immediately, all neighboring Arab states declared war on them and proceeded to promise a cleansing that would drive the Jews into the sea. They even encouraged an extensive temporary mass exodus of all Arab Palestinians for the expected short duration of the conflict. After all, each individual Arab state vastly outnumbered Israel by itself. To their great consternation, Israel survived and has been in constant conflict ever since.

Don't come out pretending that nobody ever attacks Israel when groups like Hamas and Hezbollah launch attacks into Israeli territory every week. Don't claim you support Syria's or Iran's 'peaceful', position in this when they promise the destruction of Israel and continually provide funding, training and weapons to groups directly launching attacks on Israel.

You cry double standard, and that Israel's attacks are unjustified. Where are you similar cries against Syria and Iran when weapons made by them, and deployed by people they have trained hit Israel?

The point is that violence against and from Israel has been a two way street since before it's declaration of independence, and demanding Israel just take it's lumps and do nothing but file complaints at the UN in it's own defense is naive in the extreme.

Shelving what Christian and Jewish nations say about what about what i means to be an islamic nation...

Iran probably wouldn't attack Israel because it's mutually assured destruction.

However until they have nuclear weapons they have everything to fear from Israel for whom there would be no consequence from a unilateral strike.

also Israel's track record for choosing military action over diplomacy, coupled with a level of ultra-nationalism and nonsecular religious motivation...

From a secular / political standpoint, Iran seems like fish in a bucket until they are equally armed.

this is reality:
http://videosift.com/video/Theres-No-Tomorrow

any world leader with half a brain understands this.

and top military US brass agree that Iran is a "rational" actor
http://videosift.com/video/RealNews-US-General-Iran-a-Rational-Actor-but-is-US-one

Would Iran attack Israel in order to secure a piece of desert with no resources? Unlikely at best. Israel is closely allied with the greatest military power the world has ever seen, and has a stockpile of nuclear weapons. It would be instant suicide for Iran. But for Israel, past hostilities with arab nations has been an opportunity to expand their small country and expel non-jews from their territory.

For Iran, if we look at a longer timeline, which is what older civilizations are more likely to do, power will shift in the future to those that control the most important resources.

If you are Israel, your preference is probably for the US to go in and take out any potential threats now and control as many resources as possible, rather than wait for a world-wide oil glut to empower Iran and financially ruin their biggest ally - the US.

As for the spread of Islam, like most religions, it closely follows a spread of poverty, and the poorer nations of the world are still reproducing at a higher rate as human life is a labor commodity.

But in the future, who your god looks like will be trumped by much more primary necessities, namely food. And for states - internal stability.

Well, since this has been promoted, I'll paste the reply I left on EndAll's profile to his question.
I'll also correct myself: In my third point I falsely claim that Lehi was responsible for the King David hotel bombing, when in fact it was the Irgun that committed that act. Those guys weren't as extreme as Lehi, but not by much.
>> ^demon_ix:

- The video seems to take it for granted that "Zionists" are a tiny fraction of Jews, when in fact, the opposite is true. The anti-Israel Jews are a tiny minority, and their only objection to Israel is that it's too early. They believe that when the messiah comes again, he will take back the land, and so there is no reason to do it before his return. They are the Jewish equivalent of Christian believers in Rapture, fanatical Muslims and so on.
- There's some nice footage at 5:50 of planes dropping bombs and cannons bombarding settlements while Mr. Rees discusses the Jewish defensive organizations, conveying the appearance that the Jews were attacking Palestinians at the time, when the biggest piece of military hardware they had at the time were rifles, often without ammo.
- The bombing of the King David hotel (6:46) was performed by a tiny splinter group known as Lehi, which was the most extreme bunch of lunatics in our history. They even attempted to ally themselves with Nazi Germany at one point. Mr. Rees generously attributes this to "The Zionists".
- In the description of UN resolution 181 (7:20), he skips completely over the actual formation of the Nation of Israel on May 14th 1948, and declares the 1948 war which involved EVERY SINGLE NATION BORDERING ISRAEL, was in fact simply Jews terrorizing Palestinians. The relevant details about the actual progress of the war are here. He mentions the actual war in about 3 words afterwards.
- The 1967 war, or the Six Day War, started with an invasion of Israel by it's bordering nations. Mr. Rees states that Israel expanded it's borders as though it was on an Imperialist quest to grab more land.
- The quickly described war of 1973, or the Yom-Kippur War, was started AGAIN by an invasion from all sides. This time, they picked Yom-Kippur as their day of attack, and managed to catch most of our army by surprise on the one day where the vast majority of Jews rest and eat nothing. This war wasn't spinnable in an anti-Israeli way for Mr. Rees, so he glossed over it quickly and moved on.
- At around 14:00 Mr. Rees describes the American aid to Jordan and Egypt as "payment for not attacking Israel", and ignores the fact that Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1979 and Jordan followed in 1994. Syria and Lebanon are still technically at war with Israel, and Iraq actively attacked Israel with Scud missiles during the first Gulf War.
---------
I could probably go into further detail, find more links and keep debating this, but it's 2:15am and I'm quite sleepy. I'll be glad to continue tomorrow.
In reply to this comment by EndAll:
Can you point out for me what history was rewritten? What facts they got wrong, or left out?

*long
I highly doubt Israel will end up attacking Iran. I also don't believe that once Iran obtains nuclear weapons, it will attack Israel with them.

Any nuclear attack on any Israeli city would kill as many Palestinians and Israeli Arabs as it would Israelis. The distances are simply too small.

And then, there's also the MAD concept, so on the whole, I won't be losing any sleep over a nuclear Iran. Even though I live in a potential ground-zero.

- The video seems to take it for granted that "Zionists" are a tiny fraction of Jews, when in fact, the opposite is true. The anti-Israel Jews are a tiny minority, and their only objection to Israel is that it's too early. They believe that when the messiah comes again, he will take back the land, and so there is no reason to do it before his return. They are the Jewish equivalent of Christian believers in Rapture, fanatical Muslims and so on.

- There's some nice footage at 5:50 of planes dropping bombs and cannons bombarding settlements while Mr. Rees discusses the Jewish defensive organizations, conveying the appearance that the Jews were attacking Palestinians at the time, when the biggest piece of military hardware they had at the time were rifles, often without ammo.

- The bombing of the King David hotel (6:46) was performed by a tiny splinter group known as Lehi, which was the most extreme bunch of lunatics in our history. They even attempted to ally themselves with Nazi Germany at one point. Mr. Rees generously attributes this to "The Zionists".

- In the description of UN resolution 181 (7:20), he skips completely over the actual formation of the Nation of Israel on May 14th 1948, and declares the 1948 war which involved EVERY SINGLE NATION BORDERING ISRAEL, was in fact simply Jews terrorizing Palestinians. The relevant details about the actual progress of the war are here. He mentions the actual war in about 3 words afterwards.

- The 1967 war, or the Six Day War, started with an invasion of Israel by it's bordering nations. Mr. Rees states that Israel expanded it's borders as though it was on an Imperialist quest to grab more land.

- The quickly described war of 1973, or the Yom-Kippur War, was started AGAIN by an invasion from all sides. This time, they picked Yom-Kippur as their day of attack, and managed to catch most of our army by surprise on the one day where the vast majority of Jews rest and eat nothing. This war wasn't spinnable in an anti-Israeli way for Mr. Rees, so he glossed over it quickly and moved on.

- At around 14:00 Mr. Rees describes the American aid to Jordan and Egypt as "payment for not attacking Israel", and ignores the fact that Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1979 and Jordan followed in 1994. Syria and Lebanon are still technically at war with Israel, and Iraq actively attacked Israel with Scud missiles during the first Gulf War.

---------
I could probably go into further detail, find more links and keep debating this, but it's 2:15am and I'm quite sleepy. I'll be glad to continue tomorrow.

In reply to this comment by EndAll:
Can you point out for me what history was rewritten? What facts they got wrong, or left out?

i dont understand the hype on this guy. am i missing something? some one help me?
Hes wrong on one major point. The danger is not that they will attack us,the danger is they will attack their neighbors...duh. ( our allies) uh..iran anyone? are we worried that iran will attack us? no. but they may attack israel. neither iran nor north korea need icbm's. any short range delivery system will do.
When iraq wanted to attack us what did they do? Well,they launched scud missilies into israel. anyone remember that?
the missile doesnt have to be accurate,it just has to go off.
He is also saying what obama and democrats have been saying for years.(yes, years,obama said this exact thing all through his campaign) About engaging these people in talks and offering aid instead of the stick. While republicans and psychos have attacked him for.. talking to iran !! hes giving away the country ! shaking hands with chavez !!
republicans have no credibility. If just one of these republicans would stand up and correct the psychobabble within his party i might be able to listen to them.

If this guy would have one of these little talks and say, listen people,Obama is in fact, an american citizen.
Obama is not a secret muslim terrorist.
fema is not making redeucation camps for our children.
Obama is not a .nazi ,marxist.socialist,whos going to take all your money and give it to welfare. Now can we talk about health care? energy? education? infrastructure? iraq? afghanistan? the economy? deficit spending?
But he cant do that in texas. A large part of his voters believe all those things to be true. and he knows it. I cant have any respect for any of these guys until he goes on fox news and says that. peace out....robdot

>> ^quantumushroom:
Palestinians aren't even a real people, there's no Palestinian culture or language. They're a fiction of scattered Arabs no other Arab nation will allow to immigrate, because they enjoy exploiting them as a thorn in Israel's side.
Give "Palestinians" the exact same resources and land as Israel and the former will use them to attack Israel. Hitler's dream lives on in the UN thugocracy and surrounding Arab nations. Israel is surrounded on all sides by enemies.
It is intellectually dishonest to compare one of the few free nations in the Middle East to an abused and abusive ragtag people more focused on Israeli genocide than their own well-being.


No, they are human beings with a right to live without fear of having their front doors kicked in by a blitzkrieg raiding party, or having white phos. dumped on their heads.

The irony in this situation is disgustingly, and sadly lost on people of your ilk QM.

there's is a simpler solution
Israel should hand over West Bank to Jordan and Gaza to Egypt.
then when hamas begin attacking Israel again, it'll be Egypt's and Jordan's responsibility to pacify hamas.

>> ^quantumushroom:
Palestinians aren't even a real people, there's no Palestinian culture or language. They're a fiction of scattered Arabs no other Arab nation will allow to immigrate, because they enjoy exploiting them as a thorn in Israel's side.
Give "Palestinians" the exact same resources and land as Israel and the former will use them to attack Israel. Hitler's dream lives on in the UN thugocracy and surrounding Arab nations. Israel is surrounded on all sides by enemies.
It is intellectually dishonest to compare one of the few free nations in the Middle East to an abused and abusive ragtag people more focused on Israeli genocide than their own well-being.


It clearly shows that you are jewish (and a racist one) just like obama. Simple is that! So barack obama (a similar name: ehud barack, former israeli prime minister) will tolerate and support all war crimes committed by his people...

Historically there is no israel and there are only "ragtag" jewish tribes, kicked out of many countries for their "antisocial bejaviour" (Egypt, Turkey etc).

BTW their religions are very similar and they are both semitic... The big difference is that the jews treat every non-jewish as a goy / "animal" (contrary to popular belief - can be verified by reading their holy books)... The biggest enemy of the jews is their racist religion.

Palestinians aren't even a real people, there's no Palestinian culture or language. They're a fiction of scattered Arabs no other Arab nation will allow to immigrate, because they enjoy exploiting them as a thorn in Israel's side.

Give "Palestinians" the exact same resources and land as Israel and the former will use them to attack Israel. Hitler's dream lives on in the UN thugocracy and surrounding Arab nations. Israel is surrounded on all sides by enemies.

It is intellectually dishonest to compare one of the few free nations in the Middle East to an abused and abusive ragtag people more focused on Israeli genocide than their own well-being.