re: Rama Duwaji, wife of Mamdani, is making some very ludicrous claims about Jesus' mother.

quote:

---

After you were wrong here I went ahead and posted the etymology of the word for you to prove to you you were wrong. And you still argued the point.

---

Ah, you were just too stupid to understand the point, i get it now.

Look at that last post you copy/pasted. What is your interpretation of what i said? The Palastinians were no more Phillistines than they were Canaanites. Do you consider the Canaanites Phillistines? If not, then why? Then why do you consider the Judeans Palestinians?

And to the bigger point, as i stated before, none of this means dick considering that the area we are talking about was known as Judea. Plain and simple. The fact that you keep dancing around that, and the historical timeline by the historians of the time and the Bible, is very telling.

I'm going to break this down for you again, so even you're slow mind can understand.

1) Mary was never a Palestinian during her life.
2) Mary was Jewish by religion and region.
3) Mary was from Judea.
4) Mary was a subject of King Herod.
5) Herod was King of Judea, Galilea, Samaria, Idumea, and Perea. These area were never considered "Palestine" during Mary's time. Ever.
6) And by that, she was ulitmately a subject of Rome. But no one should ever consider her a Roman, as even the Romans did not ascribe the people of this area as true Romans.
7) Palestine, as we know it today, has no relation to Palestine in 400 BCE or Palestine in 135 CE.
8) Palestine as we know it today, is ethno-centric Arabic.
9) She-Mamdani was trying to equate current day Palestine with 1st century BCE and CE, which is ignorant as best, and you are saying, "well she's not wrong".

What legitimate historical fact do you have, preferably a link, that states that during the time of Mary and Christ, that Judea was actually known as Palestine?

quote:

---

BoarEd

---

More facts for you:

quote:

---

Historical Facts

The region where they lived was called Judea (or Judaea) under Roman rule.
It was part of the Roman province of Judaea (established 6 CE), which included areas like Judea proper, Samaria, and (later) Galilee.
Earlier, under Herod the Great and his successors, it was a client kingdom of Rome.

The name "Palestine" (from Latin Syria Palaestina) was not used for the province until after 135 CE.
This occurred after the Romans crushed the Bar Kokhba revolt (132–136 CE). Emperor Hadrian renamed the province Judaea to Syria Palaestina as a punitive measure to detach it from Jewish identity (drawing on the ancient name associated with the Philistines).


Why the Confusion Arises

The term "Palestine" appears in earlier Greek sources (e.g., Herodotus, 5th century BCE) referring to the coastal area linked to the Philistines — not the entire inland region of Judea/Galilee.
Later Christian writers and maps sometimes used "Palestine" geographically for the Holy Land, but this was centuries after Jesus.
Modern usage retroactively applies the name, especially in political contexts, but it has no basis in the 1st-century historical record.

Jesus and Mary were born and lived in Roman Judea, as Jewish inhabitants. The political entity or widespread name "Palestine" did not exist in their lifetime. The renaming happened over 100 years later.
This is well-documented in Roman, Jewish, and early Christian sources from the period.

---

LINK

LINK

quote:

---

According to the Old Testament, the 12 tribes of Israel conquered Canaan (later to become known as Palestine, then Judea, then Palestine, and then Israel) around 1200 BCE. The tribe of Judah settled in the region to the south of Jerusalem.

This made Jesus a Judean (in Hebrew, a Yehudi), from which the English word “Jew” is derived. As a Judean, Jesus was part of the Jewish religious tradition, which was focused on the temple in Jerusalem, known as the second temple.

---

quote:

---

The name “Palestine” for that region also had a long history, though. It first appeared in the fifth century BCE, in the writings of the Greek historian Herodotus.

He wrote of a “district of Syria, called Palaistinê”, between Egypt and Phoenicia, an ancient region that corresponds to modern Lebanon, with adjoining parts of modern Syria and Israel. So, the land (or part of it) was called “Palestine” by the Greeks before it was called “Judea” by the Romans.


Emperor Hadrian changed ‘Judea’ to ‘Palestinian Syria’. Commonists/Wikipedia Commons, CC BY
The key moment in the creation of Palestine was shortly after a Jewish rebellion against Roman rule in Judea from 132-135 CE, known as the Bar Kokhba revolt.

---

quote:

---

BoarEd

---

quote:

---

Flavius Josephus (c. 37–100 CE)
Josephus, who fought in the First Jewish-Roman War and later wrote under Roman patronage, consistently uses "Judaea" for the province and land.

From Antiquities of the Jews (c. 94 CE):"...these Antiquities contain what hath been delivered down to us from the original creation of man, until the twelfth year of the reign of Nero, as to what hath befallen us Jews, as well in Egypt as in Syria, and in Palestine."
(He uses "Palestine" rarely and usually in a geographic or historical sense referring to the Philistine coastal area, not as the official name of the whole region.)
Another from Antiquities of the Jews:"...the children of Mesraim... possessed the country from Gaza to Egypt, though it retained the name of one only, the Philistim; for the Greeks call part of that country Palestine."
(Distinguishing the coastal area from the broader Jewish land.)
Josephus on Jewish identity (in Contra Apionem):"Syrians call the Jews Judaei, and that these took their name from the country they inhabit, which is called Judaea."

Josephus overwhelmingly refers to the land and Roman province as Judaea, not Palestine. He lived through the events of 66–70 CE and wrote shortly afterward.

---

quote:

---

Other Roman Historians

Tacitus (c. 56–120 CE), Histories (Book 5):"The princes now being dead or reduced to insignificance, Claudius made Judea a province and entrusted it to Roman knights or to freedmen..."
Tacitus describes the region and people as Judeans/Jews throughout his account of the 70 CE events.
Pliny the Elder (c. 23–79 CE), Natural History:
Refers to the area as Judaea, distinguishing it from the narrower "Palestine" (coastal Philistine reference).

---

In particular, the reference to pliny agrees with the map you posted a couple pages back. Which in turn states that the region was not known as Palestine. It was Judea. Phillistia was the coastal area known by the greeks and Herodotus. The area as a whole was never known as Palestine until after the Bar Khaba revolt in 135 CE.

quote:

---

Historians note that "Palestine" was not the official provincial name until after the Bar Kokhba revolt (135 CE). Before that, official Roman, Jewish, and Greek sources used Judaea. Josephus and contemporaries treated "Palestine" as an older geographic term for a portion of the coast, not the standard name for the Jewish heartland.

---

quote:

---

So you are saying that history and the Bible are wrong and Mary was not a descendant of David or from the tribe of Judah?

---

No, that's not what I'm saying at all.

quote:

---

Emperor Hadrian changed ‘Judea’ to ‘Palestinian Syria’.

---

This is the key here. Hadrian did this as an F-you to the Jews.

quote:

---

You are a clown.

---

You're the one in here telling bold faced frickin lies and then refusing to address it when it's proven that you're lying. Now go to hell and have a bad day. I'm not dealing with frickin liars.

quote:

---

What's that big yellow part say?

---

It's almost as if it's exactly what I've been saying this entire time. That Judea was a state within Palestine. You fricking idiot. This is another thing that you refuse to address and act as if I never said it. Which is another lie.

You just fricking admitted that this map is accurate. Look at the damn legend.



You have been dead wrong for two days straight now and now you're also a proven liar.

quote:

---

You're the one in here telling bold faced frickin lies and then refusing to address it when it's proven that you're lying.

---

You say this, knowing i posted this right after. Are you stupid, is that your problem?

quote:

---

Ah, you were just too stupid to understand the point, i get it now.

Look at that last post you copy/pasted. What is your interpretation of what i said? The Palastinians were no more Phillistines than they were Canaanites. Do you consider the Canaanites Phillistines? If not, then why? Then why do you consider the Judeans Palestinians?

And to the bigger point, as i stated before, none of this means dick considering that the area we are talking about was known as Judea. Plain and simple. The fact that you keep dancing around that, and the historical timeline by the historians of the time and the Bible, is very telling.

I'm going to break this down for you again, so even you're slow mind can understand.

1) Mary was never a Palestinian during her life.
2) Mary was Jewish by religion and region.
3) Mary was from Judea.
4) Mary was a subject of King Herod.
5) Herod was King of Judea, Galilea, Samaria, Idumea, and Perea. These area were never considered "Palestine" during Mary's time. Ever.
6) And by that, she was ulitmately a subject of Rome. But no one should ever consider her a Roman, as even the Romans did not ascribe the people of this area as true Romans.
7) Palestine, as we know it today, has no relation to Palestine in 400 BCE or Palestine in 135 CE.
8) Palestine as we know it today, is ethno-centric Arabic.
9) She-Mamdani was trying to equate current day Palestine with 1st century BCE and CE, which is ignorant as best, and you are saying, "well she's not wrong".

What legitimate historical fact do you have, preferably a link, that states that during the time of Mary and Christ, that Judea was actually known as Palestine?

---

quote:

---

You yourself admitted you are wrong.

---

I did not. I posted the historical evidence.

The facts are.

You lost this debate. You know you lost this debate. You are not a smart man so you will never admit to losing the debate. The proof is that you have yet to debate any of the historical facts presented that disprove your hypothesis. You are a poor debater.

If you care to redeem yourself, then by all means, take the historical evidence i presented, quote the passage that is wrong or incorrect or the interpretation by historians that is incorrect, state why, and repost You will not do this, and become the pigeon playing chess. Everyone sees your ignorance. Continuing to prove it to the board isn't a virtue, chief. Enjoy your Friday, Rama.