David Singer a "professional stirrer"? - Alan B.

He makes more sense than the resident monotonous amateur stirrers do, including old Alan.

Dear Yuyutsu,

Words are not defined by their origins but by their usage. The word, Palestine is a variation of the word, Philistine. The Philistines occupied the area now known as Gaza. The word, Palestine, no longer has any insulting connotations whatever its origins.

https://www.bibleodyssey.org/en/tools/map-gallery/i/map-israel-and-judah

refers to a map showing ancient Philistia.

On the button david f.

When you say "Palestine, no longer has any insulting connotations whatever its origins."

One clearly hits Yuyutsu, the "expert's" raw nerve when we exercise our right to mention Palestine.

Would not Yuyutsu agree with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_nationalism "Palestinian nationalism is the national movement of the Palestinian people that espouses self-determination and sovereignty over the region of Palestine."

Dear David F and Maverick,

The Philistines are mentioned many times in the Bible as Judea's arch-enemies. Many bitter wars and skirmishes were fought between Judea and the Philistines, including the alleged battle between David and Goliath and the exploits of Samson. In one of these wars the Philistines even managed to capture the most sacred Ark of the covenant.

The memory of the Philistines, long extinguished for centuries by Assyria and Babylon, was revived by the Romans who conquered Jerusalem and destroyed its temple, as a deliberate insult to humiliate the defeated Israelis.

Whatever the formal use of the word in other countries today, for most Israelis this is a shameful reminder of their defeat and subjugation by the hated Romans (Israeli children learn to hate them from kindergarten, who destroyed the temple and forbade the practice of Judaism). The choice of that particular name by the local Arabs indicates ill-will, or let us put it mildly, is not a nice way to start a new day...

Dear Yuyutsu,

The Romans were hated. However, it was a Roman, Vespasian, who allowed ben Zakkai to set up what was to be the beginning of rabbinical Judaism. The Temple was destroyed, but the Jewish people continued. They owe their continuation in large part to the action of the Roman, Vespasian, in allowing ben Zakkai to set up his centre. The nation state of Israel is one manifestation of the Jewish people. There are others.

In Israel some Jews have paraded yelling "Death to Arabs". Other Jews want to live peacefully with other groups. We can keep alive the animosities of the past or try to end them. It seems to be easier to keep hate alive. The way of the peacemaker is not easy. He or she is often reviled by his or her own people. Which way do you want?

Dear David,

Thank you.

The question of Roman "good-heartedness" was already discussed in the Talmud: http://halakhah.com/shabbath/shabbath_33.html

"Rabbi Judah commenced [the discussion] by observing, 'How fine are the works of this people!¹ They have made streets, they have built bridges, they have erected baths.' Rabbi Jose was silent. Rabbi Simeon Bar Yohai answered and said, 'All that they made they made for themselves; they built market-places, to set harlots in them; baths, to rejuvenate themselves; bridges, to levy tolls for them.'"

It is not only the question of living in peace with other people and not wishing their death, but also of living in peace with animals and not killing them. I don't find the Romans good at either, but yes, Ben Zakkai established the kind of Judaism that replaces animal sacrifices with prayers, and I wouldn't like to see Judaism going back to that kind of bloodshed. I wonder whether the author includes animal-sacrifices in the rebuilt Jerusalem Temple in his aspirations for Jewish expansionism (an easy way for the lazy who would no longer be required to pray three times a day).

---
¹ The Romans