Jews should demand compensation for centuries of abuse under Islam

Until the late 1800s entire ancient Jewish communities had to flee Palestine to escape the brutality of Muslim authorities. The real colonialists were the Arabs.

Arutz Sheva – Israel National News
Ezequiel Doiny, 16/02/20 08:42 | updated: 07:40

Jews should demand compensation for centuries of humiliation and abuse under Islamic rule

Arab colonialism

The Jizya was a discriminatory tax imposed only on non-muslims until the late 1800s. Non-muslims had to either convert to Islam or abandon their lands to avoid it. If they did not pay they were imprisoned, tortured and slaved.

Muslim rulers instituted the jizya to reduce the number of Jews living in the Holy Land, in what was then called Palestine (the Roman term for the area, with no connection to the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians today) before the British Mandate was instituted in 1922.

Until the late 1800s entire ancient Jewish communities had to flee Palestine to escape the brutality of Muslim authorities.

As Egyptian historian Bat Ye’or writes in her book, The Dhimmi: “The Jizya was paid in a humiliating public ceremony in which the non-Muslim while paying was struck in the head. If these taxes were not paid women and children were reduced to slavery, men were imprisoned and tortured until a ransom was paid for them.”

“The Jewish communities in many cities under Muslim Rule were ruined by such demands.  This custom of legalized financial abuses and extortion shattered the indigenous pre-Arab populations almost totally eliminating what remained of its peasantry…

“In 1849 the Jews of Tiberias envisaged exile because of the brutality, exactions, and injustice of the Muslim authorities.  In addition to ordinary taxes, an Arab Sheik that ruled Hevron demanded that Jews pay an extra five thousand piastres annually for the protections of their lives and property. The Sheik threatened to attack and expel them from Hevron if it was not paid.”


It is the Jews who lived under Muslim rule who were the true victims of colonialism… “By the time the Arab conquerors had swept over the Middle East and North Africa, the Jews had been living in the region for 1,000 years…
Lyn Julius commented about the incontrovertible findings in George Bensoussan’ book Juifs en pays arabes: le grand deracinement 1850 – 1975:  

“…Bensoussan, threatens to stand the notion of ”Jewish colonialism” on its head: it is the Jews who lived under Muslim rule who were the true victims of colonialism…

“By the time the Arab conquerors had swept over the Middle East and North Africa, the Jews had been living in the region for 1,000 years…

“Under Islam, according to the eighth-century Pact of Omar, indigenous Jews and Christians were permitted to practise as long as they acquiesced to the dhimmi condition of inferiority and institutionalised humiliation…

“… Bensoussan observes that the Islamic order was built on a ”colonial” notion – submission. The Muslim submits to Allah, the Muslim woman submits to her husband, the non-Muslim dhimmi submits to the Muslim. At the very bottom of the pile is the slave…

“He produces incontrovertible evidence that, 100 years before Israel was established, most Jews in Arab and Muslim lands lived in misery and fear….

“Jews were regularly mobbed, robbed, their possessions looted, beaten up on the slightest pretext, or false charge brought by a jealous neighbour. Jews were feminised in the Muslim imagination – cowardly, submissive, unable to stand up for themselves.

“…Bensoussan”s great achievement is not just to blow out of the water the myth of Arab-Jewish coexistence predating the creation of Israel, but unfashionably to place the colonial boot on the Arab foot…

“A sovereign Jewish state in the land of Israel begins to look like the liberation of a colonized, indigenous people from 14 centuries of subjugation…”

The Muslim conquest

Simon Sebag Montefiore describes, in his book Jerusalem, the Arab Conquest of the Eastern Roman Empire (Chapter 16, page 166) that Arabs built the Al Aqsa Mosque in Temple Mount to make Muslims the legitimate heirs of Jewish sanctity: “In 518, aged thirty-five, Justinian found himself the real ruler of the Eastern empire when his uncle Justin was raised to the throne…”

“Justinian demoted Judaism from a permited religion and banned Passover if it fell before Easter, converted synagogues into churches, forcibly baptized Jews, and commandeered Jewish History: in 537, when Justinian dedicated his breathtaking Church of Hagia Sophia (Holy Wisdom” in Constantinople, he is said to have reflected ‘Solomon, I have surpassed thee.’

“Then he turned to Jerusalem to trump Solomon’s Temple. In 543 Justinian and Theodora started to build a basilica, the Nea Church of St.Mary Mother of God, almost 400 feet long and 187 feet high, with walls 16 feet thick, facing away from the Temple Mount and designed to overpower Solomon’s site…

“The Holy City was ruled by the rituals of Orthodox Christianity… The city was set up to host thousands of pilgrims: the grandees stayed with the patriarch; the poor pilgrims in the dormitories of Justinian’s hospices which had beds for 3,000; and ascetics in caves, often old Jewish tombs, in the surrounding hills…

“…Heraclitus seized power (of the Bizantine Empire) in 610…Constantinople was besieged by the Persians ( then Zoroastrians)…(Heraclitus) outmanoeuvred the Persian forces …then defeated their main army…

“… In 632 Muhammad, aged about sixty-two, died (in Saudi Arabia) and was succeeded by his father in law, Abu Bakr…

“Abu Bakr managed to pacify Arabia. Then he turned to the Bizantine and Persian empires, which Muslims regarded as evanescent, sinful and corrupt. The Commander dispatched contingent of warriors on camels to raid Iraq and Palestine…in Mecca, Abu Bakr died and was succeeded by Omar…

” …Heraclitus dispatched an army to stop the Arabs…After months of skirmishing, the Arabs finally lured the Byzantines to battle amidst the impenetrable gorges of the Yarmuk river between today’s Jordan, Syria and Israeli Golan…and on August 636…

“Khalid cut of their retreat and by the end of the battle, the Christians were so exhausted that the Arabs found them lying down in their cloaks, ripe for the slaughter. Even the emperor’s brother was killed and Heraclitus himself never recovered from this defeat, one of the decisive battles in history, that lost Syria and Palestine.  Byzantine rule, weakened by the Persian war, seems to have collapsed like a house of cards…

“The Arabs converged on the city which they called Ilya (Aelia Capitolina, the Roman name (for Jerusalem))… Omar offered Jerusalem a Covenant – dhimma- of Surrender that promised religious tolerance to the Christians in return for payment of jizya tax of submission. Once this was agreed, Omar set out for Jerusalem…

“Omar knew that Muhammad had revered David and Solomon. ‘Take me to the sanctuary of David,’ he ordered Sophronius (Jerusalem’s Christian Patriarch). He and his warriors entered Temple Mount, probably through the Prophet’s Gate in the south, and found it contaminated by ‘a dungheap which the Christians had put there to offend the Jews.

“Omar asked to be shown the Holy of Holies. A Jewish convert, Kaab al Ahbar, known as the Rabbi, replied that if the Commander preserved ‘the wall'(perhaps referring to the last Herodian remains, including the Western Wall), ‘I will reveal to him where are the ruins of the Temple.’

“Kaab showed Omar the foundation stone of the Temple, the rock which the Arabs called the Sakhra.Aided by his troops, Omar began to clear the debris to create somewhere to pray.

“Kaab sugested he place this north of the foundation stone ‘so you will face make two qiblas, that of Moses and that of Muhammad.’

“’You still lean towards the Jews,’ Omar supposedly told Kaab, placing his first prayer house south of the rock, roughly where the al-Aqsa Mosque stands today, so that it clearly faced Mecca.

“Omar had followed Muhammad’s wish to reach past Christianity to restore and co-opt this place of ancient holiness, to make Muslims the legitimate heirs of Jewish sanctity and outflank the Christians.” (Simon Sebag Montefiore “Jerusalem” page 166-184)

Muslim Replacement theology

The roots of the Arab-Israeli conflict are theological, Muslims claim they have a stronger claim to Jewish Holy Sites than the Jews and use this as a justification to build their mosques there.

On March 25, 2019 Arutz 7 reported “Iran Broadcasting Authority (IRIB) head Abdolali Ali-Asgari, talking about superiority and great nations, said that while in ancient times G-d had given the Jewish People superiority, the Iranian people – the countrymen of the Prophet Muhammad’s companion Salman the Persian – were chosen to “shoulder the heavy burden of truth and progress in the world” after the Jews “pursued worldly ornaments and behaved unjustly.”

Ishrat Hussain Muhammad wrote in Quora “… Moses & Prophet Abraham PBUH were Muslims…The Islamic belief is that all the prophets including the last prophet Mohammad PBUH were following the will of the God and all prophets were teaching same thing and from same God, therefore Islam considers all prophets to be Muslims…” According to Islam Jewish Prophets like Abraham, Moses and David were actually Muslim and Jewish Holy Sites are actually Islamic Holy Sites.

According to Islamic replacement theology Islam replaced Judaism and Muslims replaced the Jews as the inheritors of Jewish Holy sites. Based on this view, Muslims justify Islamic colonialism, the occupation of Jewish Holy Sites and deny the connection of modern Jews to Jewish Holy Sites and to the land of Israel.

Abuse of Freedom of religion 

Israel allows Muslims to pray in Al Aqsa but Jews were not allowed to pray in Hevron’s Cave of the Patriarchs (Judaism’s second holiest site)or in Jerusalem’s Western Wall during the Jordanian Occupation (1948-1967).

Today Jews are not allowed to pray in any Jewish holy sites under Islamic rule and are humiliated if they try.

On August 5, 2019 Tzvi Joffre wrote: “The site where Aaron, Moses’ brother, is said to be buried near Petra was closed by Jordan’s Ministry of Awqaf Islamic Affairs and Antiquities on Thursday after Israeli tourists were filmed performing ‘Jewish rituals’ at the site on the anniversary of Aaron’s death.

Tour guide Roni Ayalon told Ynet that the group was subjected to humiliating treatment by Jordanian authorities.

“They just stripped down all of us,” he said.

“They took off the women’s head scarves. All the boys’ yarmulkes were taken off. They took off everyone’s shirts to see if they had tzitzit (religious fringes) under their clothes and took [the tzitzit] off them.

“They confiscated any religious symbols they found on us.

“If there was this kind of humiliation of an Arab on our side who wanted to enter Jerusalem and they would dare to tell him to take off his shirt or confiscate his Koran, there would be a world war….But they can do whatever they want to us.”

According to Ayalon, the group was forbidden from praying while traveling in Jordan, even in their hotel room. Walla News reported that Jordanian police arrived at the hotel near Petra and searched the Israelis’ rooms to confiscate religious items.

The Awqaf ministry strongly condemned the entry of the tourists and said an investigation will be opened to find out who was responsible for allowing them into the site, the official Jordan News Agency reported.

Former Jordanian tourism minister Maha al-Khatib said, “There is a Zionist scheme to claim ownership of any part of our Arab homeland, especially in archaeological sites.”

On July 26, 2019 Elder of Zion reported “Palestine Today has an article about Joseph’s Tomb in Schechem (Nablus) and how the semi-regular Jewish pilgrims that visit the site have “turned it into a place that spreads death and blackness to the villagers” who live nearby.

Jews cannot visit without an army escort because otherwise they’d be lynched.

The article goes through a history of the site, saying that Palestinians are divided between believing that it is the tomb of the Biblical Joseph or of an Arab named Yusuf Dweikat.

It quotes a  researcher of archeology from An-Najah National University named Louai Abu al-Saud.  Al Saud. Abu Al-Saud did not deny or confirm that the ‘Prophet Joseph’ is buried in this grave, but he said that in case that is proven – from an archeological point of view – that this grave is the grave of Joseph, ‘then we Palestinians, as Arabs and Muslims, are worthier of ownership of it than the Jews.’

Palestinianism is now a replacement theology for Judaism.  But Jews face Temple Mount when they pray, Arabs face Mecca even when in or around Temple Mount. Despite being the holiest site of Judaism, Jews are not allowed to pray on the Temple Mount.

On February 27, 2019 Elder of Zion reported “Arab and Muslim media, especially Palestinian Arab media, routinely deny that there were ever any Jewish Temples on the Temple Mount.”

Howver, this academic paper by  Milka Levy-Rubin about why the Dome of the Rock was built to begin with gives copious amounts of proof that show that the Muslims who built the Dome chose the site precisely because of its association with the two Temples.

The main point of the paper, published by the Bulletin of SOAS at the University of London in 2017, is that the Dome of the Rock was meant to be a rebuilding of the Temple of Solomon which would fulfill the need by Muslims to have their own significant holy  place in their conquered lands that could compete with the Hagia Sophia church in Constantinople which claimed to have surpassed the beauty of Solomon’s temple.

The image linked below  from the Ottoman Imperial Archives says that the Al Aqsa Mosque was built on the site of Solomon’s Temple.

Since the creation of the State of Israel Jews can defend themselves against Islamic persecution. Other minorities like the decimated Yazidi continue to be vulnerable to persecution by Islamic forces today because they don’t have their own State to protect them.

For centuries Jews endured humiliation and abuse under Islamic rule, for centuries Jews were denied the freedom to pray in most of Judaism’s holiest Sites converted into mosques, for centuries Jews were subject to institutionalized financial abuse in the name of Jizya, it is time to demand compensation.

Tomorrow: List of Jewish sites overrun by Islamic rule.

 Ezequiel Doiny is author of “Obama’s assault on Jerusalem’s Western Wall”

Indyk: “the two-state solution is not applicable at this time.”

For what it’s worth, Martin Indyk states “that the two-state solution is not applicable at this time. “I don’t believe that a one-state solution is any more viable than the solution that’s being presented at the moment in the Trump plan. I do think that in the end, the parties will eventually, after exhausting all the other possibilities, come around to the reality that the only way to live together is, first of all, to separate into two independent states living alongside each other in peace. But at the moment, the conditions, as I’ve said all along, aren’t ripe for that.”
Indyk’s statement makes no sense (is double-speak politok): “the reality that the only way to live together is, first of all, to separate into two independent states living alongside each other in peace.”
How are you “living together” if you are “separated into two independent states” living “alongside each other?” That’s like saying, “the only ways for there to be domestic tranquility is for the husband and wife to live in separate homes!”
What he should have said is, “the reality is that for there to be peace, there needs to be two separate independent states living alongside each other” –
In reality, there are two separate independent states living in peace alongside each other: Israel and Jordan.
As Israel is Western Palestine, Jordan is Eastern Palestine – that is the legal reality. Treaty law (e.g. the Anglo-American Treaty of 1924) stipulates that “no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power.”
The Hashemites are a foreign Power (viz the Kingdom of the Hejaz) having their origins in Mecca, Arabia and are unlawfully occupying by military force Eastern Palestine (the Tribal territories of Gad, Reuven and Manasseh) in violation of Articles 5, 6, 15, and 25 of the Mandate for Palestine.
Treaty law also stipulates that “No person shall be excluded from Palestine on the sole ground of his religious belief.”
It’s time to end the Apartheid Hashemite Kingdom of trans-Jordan, send the Hashemites back to the “Kingdom of the Hejaz” and restore the Tribal territories of Gad, Reuven and Manasseh to the Jewish “Kingdom of HaShem” as per the Anglo-American Treaty of 1924 and as the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement stipulates the boundaries of Eastern Palestine are “just West of the Hajaz Rail Line!”

Deal of the Century – Palestinian Arabs, partners for peace?

Arutz Sheva – Israel National News

The British report to the League of Nations 1937 noted the hate that fueled Palestinian Arab political culture: “… Palestine Arab nationalism is inextricably interwoven with antagonism to the Jews. …”. Has that changed?

Eli E. Hertz, 11/02/20 08:21 | updated: 14:11

 

Faced with the Deal of the Century, we must look at the history of deal-making with the Palestinian Arabs.

Will they come to the table, or refuse to negotiate altogether?

The report by His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of Palestine and the Palestine Royal Commission 1936-1937 testifies to the fact that there is no linkage between terrorism and “occupation” and the use of violence that required building security fences is not new.

Unfortunately, these are salient features on the landscape that repeat themselves due to the violence deeply embedded in Palestinian political culture. The only difference is that the ‘shoe is on the other foot’ in terms of ‘who is fenced in,’ the potential victims or the perpetrators.

The British report to the League of Nations noted Palestinian Arabs’ “refusal to negotiate.”

1937 report: “Attacks by Arabs on Jews, unhappily, are no new thing. The novelty in the present situation is attacks by Arabs on Arabs. For an Arab to be suspected of a lukewarm adherence to the nationalist cause is to invite a visit from a body of ‘gunmen.'”
“The Arab leaders had refused to co-operate with us [British] in our search for a means of settling the [Arab-Jewish] dispute.”
The British report to the League of Nations had no problem acknowledging the sustaining character of political violence in Palestinian Arab culture – internal and external, noting:
“The ugliest element in the picture remains to be noted. Arab nationalism in Palestine has not escaped infection with the foul disease which has so often defiled the cause of nationalism in other lands. Acts of ‘terrorism’ in various parts of the country have long been only too familiar reading in the newspapers. As in Ireland in the worst days after the War or in Bengal, intimidation at the point of a revolver has become a not infrequent feature of Arab politics. Attacks by Arabs on Jews, unhappily, are no new thing. The novelty in the present situation is attacks by Arabs on Arabs. For an Arab to be suspected of a lukewarm adherence to the nationalist cause is to invite a visit from a body of ‘gunmen.’”
The above Mandator’s report cites additional corroborative evidence:
“There were similar assaults [by the Arabs] on the persons and property of the Jews, conducted with the same reckless ferocity. Women and children were not spared. … In 1936 this was still clearer. Jewish lives were taken and Jewish property destroyed. … The word ‘disturbances’ gives a misleading impression of what happened. It was an open rebellion of the Palestinian Arabs, assisted by fellow Arabs from other countries, against British Mandatory rule. Throughout the strike the Arab press indulged in unrestrained invective against the [British] Government. The [British] Government imprisons and demolishes [houses] and imposes extortionate fines in the interests of imperialism.”
The British report to the League of Nations noted the hate that fueled Palestinian Arab political culture:
“… Palestine Arab nationalism is inextricably interwoven with antagonism to the Jews. … That is why it is difficult to be an Arab patriot and not to hate the Jews”.
“…We [the British] find ourselves reluctantly convinced that no prospect of a lasting settlement can be founded on moderate Arab nationalism. At every successive crisis in the past that hope has been entertained. In each case it has proved illusory”].
The British report to the League of Nations noted the destructive role of Palestinian Arab leadership:
“If anything is said in public or done in daylight against the known desires of the Arab Higher Committee, it is the work not of a more moderate, but a more full-blooded nationalism than theirs.”

The record of Palestinian Arab leadership is bleak. Are we bound to repeat this history of rejectionism and violence, or is there hope for a new deal?

Does the haredi UTJ party oppose the creation of a Palestinian state?

Min. Meir Porush quotes UTJ statement from 1936, says Trump plan allows other nations a foothold in Israel.

Arutz Sheva – Israel National News

Michal Levi, 11/02/20 14:02

 

Meir Porush

Meir Porush                                                                                                    Esty Dazyubov, TPS

 

Deputy Education Minister Meir Porush (United Torah Judaism) met recently with UTJ activists from around Israel, emphasizing the importance of preserving the Land of Israel and its holiness.

He also emphasized UTJ’s traditional stance, quoting a UTJ statement from 1936 regarding the Peel Commission’s discussion on dividing Israel between Jews and Arabs: “UTJ declares that the rights of the People of Israel to the Land of Israel are ancient and promised to us from the King of Kings, the Owner of all lands and countries, and they cannot be taken from us via limitations and burdens.”

“Therefore, we call to the People of Israel, in the Land and abroad, not to despair and to strengthen their faith in the One to Whom the Land belongs, that the rebuilding of the Land of Israel by the People of Israel, which thanks to G-d’s kindness began recently, will not end or be abolished, G-d forbid.”

This, Porush said, was also the situation during Oslo, when UTJ’s Council of Torah Sages advised the party to remain outside the coalition.

Porush added: “After dozens of years and our insistence, the US has changed its policies regarding everything surrounding the perception of the Jewish People’s ownership of the Land of Israel, which is according to Decision 242, made by the United Nations Security Council in 1967. This change was made by President Donald Trump, who is a friend of Israel.”

The UTJ party, he emphasized, is against the creation of a Palestinian state.

The plan presented by President Trump is lacking, since it allows other nations a foothold in the Land of Israel and allows the creation of a state for Arabs, something which we cannot agree to in any fashion, since the Land of Israel was given to the People of Israel. We must continue insisting and demanding our demands regarding everything concerning the Torah of Israel, the People of Israel, and the Land of Israel, and with this faith, we will be a deciding factor in these third elections.”

Understanding the ‘deal of the century’ from a Muslim perspective

Jewish News Syndicate

Column

Bravo to President Donald Trump and his team, and to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his team, who clearly understand how P.A. leader Mahmoud Abbas and other Palestinian leaders think.

Unsurprisingly, the Palestinian answer to the Trump administration’s historic “deal of the century” peace plan—as it would have been to any plan—was a resounding “no.”

The ultimate source of Palestinian rejectionism comes from the deeply rooted belief that according to Islamic law, any territory that ever comes under Muslim rule must remain Muslim forever. All of Israel and the West Bank were captured by the Muslims in 637-638 C.E. That means that from a Muslim perspective, it is Muslim territory, forever. (According to this view, Spain, too, which Muslims ruled from 712-1492 C.E., still belongs to the Muslims.)

Tel Aviv therefore is, from the Muslim perspective, as much a “settlement” as any of the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. Jews cannot be legitimate sovereigns over either. Only a “thought revolution” in Islam, whereby Muslims re-examine their sources and discover ways to live with non-Muslims in peace, will ever change this reality. Sadly, there seems to be no such revolution on the horizon.

PLO leader Yasser Arafat—at Camp David with then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and U.S. President Bill Clinton—explained it best. In exchange for peace, Barak offered Arafat the entire West Bank, in addition to eastern Jerusalem—except what was under the Temple Mount, which Barak said were the remains of the Jewish Temple. Arafat, as recounted by Clinton, jumped up and visibly shaken said there never was a Jewish Temple, and then said what was really on his mind: “I will not have tea with Sadat.”

Egyptian President Anwar Sadat signed an agreement with Israel and was assassinated for it, even though when he returned to Egypt, he gave a speech ending with, “I did what I did now for the good of Egypt. What will happen in the future will happen in the future,” meaning that in the future, “the time may come when we will be able to take back this Muslim land.”

If the internationally feted Arafat couldn’t agree to any type of peace agreement with Israel, certainly a relatively unimportant figure such as current P.A. leader Mahmoud Abbas can never hope to do so.

A fatal flaw of the Oslo process was thus that it gave the Palestinians veto power. In practical terms, that gave the Palestinians control over the process. Any time they disagreed with something, the United States and some Israeli leaders then started to look for ways to improve the offer, not understanding that there would be no way they could ever placate Palestinian negotiators. The “deal of the century” removes that veto power. It is built upon actions that each side is required to take.

In order for Palestinians to get any form of a state, they first need to meet a series of extremely difficult requirements. Similarly, the deal penalizes the Palestinians for failing to agree to previous generous offers while rewarding Israel for gaining military and economic strength since the first negotiations got underway. As such, Palestinians no longer have the luxury of being able to reject an Israeli offer, and expect that the previous offer would be the starting point in any future round of negotiations.

By removing the flaws that led to the failures of previous negotiation attempts, the “deal of the century” is much more likely to bring peace—even if the Palestinians reject its terms, which is a highly likely scenario.

Bravo to President Trump and his team, and to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and his team, who clearly understand how Abbas and other Palestinian leaders think. They clearly used the Muslim perspective as a basis for crafting this deal.

Harold Rhode received in Ph.D. in Ottoman history and later served as the Turkish Desk Officer at the U.S. Department of Defense. He is now a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute.

Virgin Birth Doctrine Disqualifies Jesus From Being the Moshiach (Messiah)

Back to the beginning – Jesus was not eligible to be messiah

Reposted from Sofiee Saguy’s Blog “Jesus is not for Jews”

7/19/2015

3 Comments

Picture

As mentioned in this post Jesus was not eligible to be the messiah if he was a “virgin birth.”   The messiah must be born of human Jewish parents.  The father must not only be Jewish, he must be of the tribe of Judah and descended from Kings David and Solomon.  The messiah will be a normal human.  He will not be a demigod,   The messiah will not possess supernatural qualities either, and performing miracles is not a criteria to be the messiah either.

The Messiah (moshiach ben David — the messiah son of David) must be descended on his father’s side from King David (see B’reshit /  Genesis 49:10, Yeshayahu / Isaiah 11:1, Yirmiyahu / Jeremiah 23:5, 33:17; Yechezkel / Ezekiel 34:23-24).   If the virgin birth story was true, and Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus then Jesus did not even have the most basic right to even try to be the messiah.

The T’nach (Jewish bible) makes it clear that the messiah must be descended from King David and King David’s son Solomon.  Some missionaries will claim that the “promise” that the throne must pass through Solomon is conditional, but this is untrue.

2 Samuel 7:12-16 – When your days  (King David) will be completed and you will lie with your forefathers, then I shall raise up your seed after you, that which will issue from your loins, and I shall establish his kingdom. (13) He shall build a Temple for My sake, and I shall make firm the throne of his kingdom forever.

And then read 1 Chronicles 22:9-10 –  Behold a son will be born to you; he will be a man of peace, and I shall give him peace from all his enemies around about, for Solomon will be his name, and I shall give peace and quiet to Israel in his days. (10) He shall build a House in My Name, and he shall be to Me as a son, and I to him as a Father, and I shall prepare the throne of his kingdom forever.

And while you’re at it read 1 Kings 8:15-20; 1 Chronicles 17:11-15, 22:9-10, and 28:3-7. Torah is clear that the messiah must be a physical offspring of both David and Solomon. The Torah specifies that blood rights, such as tribal lineage, are transmitted exclusively from a father to his biological sons. Whenever the Israelites were selected to serve in the army, it was done “according to the house of their father (Bamidbar / Numbers 1:17 – 18).

“Who is a Jew” passes maternally (see D’varim / Deuteronomy 7:1–5, Vayikra / Leviticus 24:10, and Ezra 10:2–3) and lineage (tribal status) passes paternally (by the father — assuming one first has a Jewish mother) — and ALL of this is found in the written Torah. Sh’mot / Exodus 6:14, 6:25, B’midbar / Numbers 17:21, 34:14, 36:1, Y’hoshua / Joshua 14:1, 19:51, 21:1, 22:14, Ezra 1:5, 2:59, 2:68, 3:12, 4:2-3, 8:1, 10:16; N’ḥemyah / Nehemiah 7:61, 7:69-70, 8:13, 12:12, 12:22-23.    According to the Torah, lineage/pedigree, a blood right, is passed exclusively by a biological father to his sons.

Ergo the virgin birth totally disqualifies Jesus from being the messiah.

Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that Joseph was Jesus biological father.   Joseph impregnated his wife, Mary, and she gave birth to a child, Jesus.    The Christian bible tells us that Joseph was of the tribe of Judah, so would a normal human child from Joseph’s sperm be eligible to be the messiah?

The Christian bible gives two different and conflicting lineages for Joseph.   Some missionaries will claim that one of those is actually the lineage of Mary (even though the Christian bible says that both are the lineage of Joseph).    If one were Mary’s birth lineage it would be immaterial as a wife takes her husband’s tribe upon marriage.  Her birth tribe becomes moot (ancient history, unimportant).  A woman does not pass tribal rights to her children — that is passed only from the father as shown by all those passages quoted earlier in this post.

Does the lineage of Joseph given by Matthew and also by Luke put Jesus in the running to be the messiah?

Let’s examine each one.

Matthew skips four kings in his lineage.  Melachim 1 / I Kings Chapters 1 through Melachim II / II Kings Chapter 24, Divrei Hayamim I / I Chronicles 3:10-17, and Divrei Hayamim II / II Chronicles Chapters 1-36 show the lineages from King Solomon to King Jeconiah.  Matthew skips:  Ahaziah son of Jehoram, Jehoash son of Ahaziah, Amaziah son of Jehoash and Uzziah son of Amaziah (also called Azariah.

Why does Matthew eliminate 4 kings representing 81 years of leadership?

Matthew 1:17 states “so all the generations from Abraham to David are 14 generations, and from David to the Babylonian exile are 14 generations, and from the Babylonian exile until the messiah are 14 generations”

This is inaccurate.  There were 18 generations — Matthew eliminated four of them.   The T’nach lists the list of lineage in three separate places in the T’nachLink.

Eliminating four generations still might put Joseph, and his sons, in line to claim kingship, but Mathew makes one more and far more serious error in his list.   Matthew left out a generation and the names given after Zerubbabel don’t match 1 Chronicles 3.  With such glaring errors can Matthew’s genealogy be trusted?

Matthew includes King Jeconiah in his lineage for Jesus and Joseph.  Yirmiyahu / Jeremiah 22:30 states that none of Jeconiah’s heirs will ever be kings of the Jews.   Thus by including Jeconiah in Jesus (and Joseph)’s lineages Matthew has just eliminated Jesus from the possibility of ever being an anointed (messiah) king of the Jews.

Some missionaries try to “get around” the problem of Jeconiah’s line being cursed and removed from the throne.  They claim that the curse on Jeconiah was lifted and they point to a Talmudic passage which says that Jeconiah repented, and G-d forgave him.  Yet missionaries reject the Talmud!  This missionary attempt to put Jeconiah back in the kingly lineage also throws a monkey wrench into the Christian theology that says that only blood can atone for sins.  If Jeconiah can ask for forgiveness and be forgiven, why does anyone need Jesus to die for their sins?

Bottom line regarding Matthew’s lineage for Joseph:  it excludes both Joseph and Jesus from kingship because it includes Jeconiah in the line and G-d removed him from any future descendants being kings.   (Again, if Joseph was not Jesus’ biological father he had no rights to the throne either).

OK, what about Luke?   Luke gives a totally different lineage than Matthew.   Would a male child from Joseph and his wife, Mary, be eligible for the Jewish throne?    The third chapter of Luke is irrelevant to this discussion because it describes lineage of David’s son Nathan, not Solomon. (Luke 3:31).   Based on Luke’s lineage Jesus would not have the correct pedigree to be messiah.

  • Matthew includes Jeconiah in his lineage, and this eliminates Joseph and his heirs from the kingly line;
  • Luke has Joseph descended from King David’s son Nathan, not Solomon, thus eliminating Joseph and his heirs from the kingly line.

So from the very start — his lineage — Jesus was not eligible to be a messiah.   But having the right lineage (which many even alive today can boast — after all Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines) does not make anyone the messiah.

To be the messiah a man must not only have the right lineage (which Jesus lacked), he must also be anointed with the שֶֽׁמֶן מִשְׁחַת קֹדֶשׁ shemen mish’ḥat kodesh (“Oil of Anointment of Sanctity”).  Notice the word מִשְׁחַת /mish’ḥat?  It means anointment.  This special mixture of spice and olive oil is the only one that was used for “anointing” Jewish kings or priests.  You can read about it in Sh’mot /  Exodus 30:22-33:

” G-d spoke to Moses, saying: 30:23 You must take the finest fragrances, 500 [shekels] of distilled myrrh, [two] half portions, each consisting of 250 [shekels] of fragrant cinnamon and 250 [shekels] of fragrant cane, 30:24  and 500 shekels of cassia, all measured by the sanctuary standard, along with a gallon of olive oil. 30:25     Make it into sacred anointing oil. It shall be a blended compound, as made by a skilled perfumer, [made especially for] the sacred anointing oil. 30:26     Then use it to anoint the Communion Tent, the Ark of Testimony, 30:27     the table and all its utensils, the menorah and its utensils, the incense altar, 30:28     the sacrificial altar and all its utensils, the washstand and its base. 30:29     You will thus sanctify them, making them holy of holies, so that anything touching them becomes sanctified. 30:30     You must also anoint Aaron and his sons, sanctifying them as priests to Me. 30:31     Speak to the Israelites and tell them, ‘This shall be the sacred anointing oil to Me for all generations. 30:32     Do not pour it on the skin of any [unauthorized] person, and do not duplicate it with a similar formula. It is holy, and it must remain sacred to you. 30:33     If a person blends a similar formula, or places it on an unauthorized person, he shall be cut off [spiritually] from his people.”

Jesus was never anointed with this, the only oil used to anoint Jewish kings.  Any claims of being anointed by the “holy spirit” or another oil is immaterial — it is not the right method for anointing Jewish kings as defined by G-d in the Torah (bible).

Lastly, and most important of all, Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies.   Missionaries counter that Jesus will fulfill these in the Second Coming, but Jewish sources show that the Messiah will fulfill the prophecies outright; in the T’nach no concept of a second coming exists.  In fact, the T’nach says when a person dies, “on that day his plans all perish.”  T’hillim / Psalm 146:4.

The excuse of Jesus’ “second coming” is an admission that Jesus failed to fulfill these essential Messianic passages.  Couldn’t anyone claim to be the messiah — and promise to fulfill the prophecies “next time”?   The question then becomes why anyone should believe that person was the Messiah when they first came upon the scene?

Paul seemed to realize that the two lineages were a problem.  He wrote But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.”  Titus 3:9.

‘The Supreme Court spits in the faces of the bereaved families’

Arutz Sheva – Israel National News

Tourism Minister criticizes Supreme Court’s decision to allow MK Heba Yazbak to run for the Knesset despite her glorification of terrorists.

 

Yariv Levin, 10/02/20 05:02

 

Minister Yariv Levin

Minister Yariv Levin                                                                                          Esti Desiubov/TPS

The Supreme Court spits in the faces of the bereaved families and authorizes the terrorist supporter Heba Yazbak, from the party of terrorist supporters – the Joint List.

This is the same court that authorized Hanin Zoabi and the successors of Azmi Bishara, who is still wanted for questioning on most serious security offenses against the State of Israel.

Ms. Yazbak’s remarks are some of the most outrageous we have ever heard. By glorifying and praising the horrific actions of killer terrorist Samir Kuntar and the atrocious plot of terrorist Dalal Mughrabi, she encourages more and more terrorist acts against Jews in a manner that cannot be interpreted otherwise.

Yazbak should be disqualified from serving for even another minute as a member of the Israeli parliament, and the sooner the better.

The courts need an immediate refreshment and a comprehensive reform in the judicial nomination process. Also, and mainly, because of delusional and outrageous cases such as this.

Get it into your heads – Blue and White does not have a government without Ahmed Tibi and Heba Yazbak. This cannot be allowed to happen. We must go out and vote for a national government that is independent of terrorist supporters.