by Doug Mason 6 Replies latest watchtower bible
The capital of Biblical Israel was Samaria.
Jerusalem was the capital of Judah/Benjamin.
The modern state of Israel is not named after the Biblical nation of Israel. It is named after a man. It is named after Jacob, the lion of Judah, who was later given the name of Israel
Because symbol for the tribe of Jacob is a lion, the flag of Jerusalem features the lion.
Doug
Jerusalem was the capital before the division of the kingdom in the days of Rehoboam - and it looks like it'll be the capital once more.
Still, no worries, eh? Israeli Jews have nothing to worry about from 1.5 billion peaceful Muslims ...
And remained the official capital even after the break away, because the law-making-defining body was really the priesthood, centered in the temple there. Judah = rule, Benjamin, Moses= Law.
The population of all of Jacob=Israel were supposed to pilgrim to Jerusalem for the festivals.
Knowing what we know about the certainty of bible promises. I would not want to be there.
There’s no evidence of a United Kingdom of Israelite and Judah. Also the northern Kingdom was rulled by a guy named Omri. It very difficult to find any real evidence of a Kingdom called Israel, before 600 BC or at all before the Persian period out side of the Bible in my opinion. The Stella in Egypt is mistranslated in my opinion.
The very inception of Israel is shrouded in mystery. The multiple destruction of their temple with all the scrolls, and even The destruction of secular Library of Alexandria which also resulted in the loss of many scrolls and books .... all gave opportunities to create histories later. They used God for their own purpose--but it backfired. They put it in the scriptures that the very name Israel was given by God. Israel means one who struggles with God till He blesses in return which in the long run did not happen in the case of Israel as a nation. Its capital Jerusalem was described by Jesus as "Killer of prophets" (Mat 23:37). Even now Israel is not in a position to enjoy peace being surrounded by Arab nations inimical to them.
Interesting that much of the UK's 'liberal' Left say that the Jewish claim on Jerusalem and Israel can be safely dismissed because they were there thousands of years ago whereas Palestinians are there more recently.
Leaving aside the fact that Jews are a Levantine people, let's examine trendy opinion:
Palestine is for the Palestinians. It's often called 'their land'. Again, let us ignore the fact that Palestinians have never had an independent nation and have never owned that land as a nation.
Palestine is for the Palestinians ... Arab lands for the Arabs ... Europe for the Europeans?! ... England for the English?!
Both the last two would be condemned as racist by the same people who say Palestine for the Palestinians, Arab lands for the Arabs ... but it's where we end up using leftist 'logic'.
Why is 'Palestine for the Palestinians' not only acceptable but desirable ... whereas 'Europe for the Europeans' is racist?
