Israeli Historian: Palestinians Are Biological Descendants of Bible’s Jews

Israel/PalestineUS Politics
on 27 Comments

Two new articles deal with political/genetic controversies over the origins of “the Jewish people” (of whom I consider myself a part for one tribal reason or another). Here is Israeli historian Schlomo Sand in Le Monde Diplomatique, writing, “Israel Deliberately Forgets Its History.” Sand says that the Jewish exile of 70 AD is a myth, and “the Jews” of Europe were created by conversion.

Then there is the question of the exile of 70 AD. There has been no real research into this turning point in Jewish history, the cause of the diaspora. And for a simple reason: the Romans never exiled any nation from anywhere on the eastern seaboard of the Mediterranean…

But if there was no exile after 70 AD, where did all the Jews who have populated the Mediterranean  since antiquity come from? The smokescreen of national historiography hides an astonishing reality. From the Maccabean revolt of the mid-2nd century BC to the Bar Kokhba revolt of the 2nd century AD, Judaism was the most actively proselytising religion…

The most significant mass conversion occurred in the 8th century, in the massive Khazar kingdom between the Black and Caspian seas. The expansion of Judaism from the Caucasus into modern Ukraine created a multiplicity of communities, many of which retreated from the 13th century Mongol invasions into eastern Europe. There, with Jews from the Slavic lands to the south and from what is now modern  Germany, they formed the basis of Yiddish culture…

Until about 1960 the complex origins of the Jewish people were more or less reluctantly acknowledged by Zionist historiography. But thereafter they were marginalised and finally erased from Israeli public memory. The Israeli forces who seized Jerusalem in 1967 believed themselves to be the direct descendents of the mythic kingdom of David rather than – God forbid – of Berber warriors or Khazar horsemen. The Jews claimed to constitute a specific ethnic group that had returned to Jerusalem, its capital, from 2,000 years of exile and wandering.

Hillel Halkin somewhat concedes the point in Commentary, writing that DNA studies suggest that “Jews” owe a lot to intermixing of genes in eastern Europe and Asia. Halkin briefly sounds an enlightened note:

Perhaps one day Israel will be become the “state of all its citizens”
that democratic values require it to be, a country of Hebrew-speaking
Jews, Muslims, and Christians, all equal before the law. Although the
great majority of secular Israelis do not yet subscribe to this point
of view, more and more will come to it if things continue on their
present course.

As for Palestine, Schlomo Sand suggests that the Palestinians are the people we call “the Jews” in the Bible:

Apart from enslaved prisoners, the population of Judea continued to live on their lands, even after the destruction of the second temple [in 70 AD]. Some converted to Christianity in the 4th century, while the majority embraced Islam during the 7th century Arab conquest.

Most Zionist thinkers were aware of this: Yitzhak Ben Zvi, later president of Israel, and David Ben Gurion, its first prime minister, accepted it as late as 1929, the year of the great Palestinian revolt. Both stated on several occasions that the peasants of Palestine were the descendants
of the inhabitants of ancient Judea.

I guess that’s why I’m for the right of return. Hey, we’re all just people. Can’t we all just get along??

(Thanks to Nabil Al-Khowaiter for the tip.)

27 Responses

  1. Todd
    September 2, 2008, 3:32 pm

    I've always wondered why the Palestnians have made so little hay out of the obvious fact that the Jews are not a racial or tightly-bound genetic gorup, or why they seem to have forgotten that Judaism predated Islam. The sight an obvious European looking IDF soldier herding Palestinians around baffled me.

  2. cooper
    September 2, 2008, 3:36 pm

    Phil, you've honestly never heard of the Khazars, or read Koestler or Stoddard?

    Ashkenazi are most likely heavily descended from the Khazar. This may go a long way towards explaining why Phil spends so much time thinking about doing some plundering and pillaging on the lusty wives and widows in his community. Khazar is interpreted to mean "wandering" in the Turkic language they spoke.

  3. Todd
    September 2, 2008, 3:46 pm

    I read somewhere that Koestler wasn't serious about his Khazar claims. If so, he went through a fair amount of trouble for a hoax.

  4. Richard Witty
    September 2, 2008, 3:49 pm

    The thesis as stated is false.

    There nearly certainly was a Roman exile, as there was prior a Babylonian and Persian exile.

    There was at least a Roman inquisition. If the Spanish inquisition is any model a large number remained, converted for appearance, but remained Jews privately, and a large number left.

    And, if ANY Jews mixed with Khazars, then there had to be at least inter-marriage, and not that Khazars arbitrarily adopted Judaism and imposed it.

    As far as the assertion that Palestinians are the remaining "Israelites", that ignores migration in and out of the region prior.

    Most likely some are descended from Jewish origins, and are genetic kin to Jews, if not matrilinially Jews.

    It does not support either Shahak's or Martillo's revisionist theories though.

    I suggests that there are more tributaries than a single, but not that the European tributaries are fraud.

  5. samuel burke
    September 2, 2008, 4:12 pm

    and someone is surprised that the palestinians presently living in the middle east part of the world where the old testament hebrew kingdoms once flourished are genetically members of the same family?

  6. Joachim Martillo
    September 2, 2008, 4:29 pm

    Everything that Sand put together was known when we were undergrads. In fact practically all of it was known by the 30s.

    I go through a lot of the material in The Origins of Modern Jewry and in Followup(II): The Origins of Modern Jewry and all the articles to which these blog entries link.

    In the short description of the current state of affairs, Palestinians are the descendants of the Judeans of Palestine of the Greco-Roman period.

    Islam has evolved from the peasant form of Second Temple Judaism and is for the most part Jamesian Christianity.

    Syrian Christianity and Greek Orthodoxy are closer to the elite Palestinian and Hellenistic versions of Second Temple Judaism. They are grounded in Paul's and John's interpretation of Jesus with the modifications that Constantine supported.

    Medieval Rabbanite and Karaite Judaism are much later highly modified developments.

    When I have had to deal with Christian Zionists, I start from this point to argue that by supporting Zionist interlopers and invaders in preventing the exiles from returning to their homes in Palestine, they have become actors in the prophesies of the Revelation and are firmly on the side of the anti-Christ.

    By their own interpretation of scripture, Christian Zionists are destined to suffer eternal torments in Hell.

  7. Joachim Martillo
    September 2, 2008, 4:33 pm

    BTW, The Judonia document covers a lot of the same material from a different perspective in Ernest Renan: A Nation … Presupposes a Past and Creating the Ethnicity and National Consciousness of Judonia.

  8. Richard Witty
    September 2, 2008, 4:40 pm

    Its a false summary, Martillo.

    The accurate summary is of multiple tributaries, containing both blood and culture, that retained a common theme.

    Those that retained the theme are Jewish, regardless of origin or path.

    Identified as a culture, affirmed in a nation.

    Racialists that regard themselves as ANTI-Jewish certainly found means to identify common identity and exclude or kill.

    Revision isn't an idea, its a distortion.

  9. Joachim Martillo
    September 2, 2008, 5:08 pm

    Richard, I was quoting the Book of Esther, which is quite explicit about conversions.

    The type of essentialism and primordialism you espouse differs in no major way from that of the German Nazis, and is a major reason why I call you an ethnic Ashkenazi Nazi.

    As a group, ethnic Ashkenazi Nazis like Richard Witty are far worse than the German Nazis. They are completely unwilling to acknowledge that they serve a lie and that Jewish ethnic fundamentalism as led to the commission of mass murder, ethnic cleansing, and genocide. Germans show remorse for the crimes committed in the name of the "German People." Ethnic Ashkenazi Nazis like Richard and his ilk in Stolen and Occupied Palestine never do anything of the sort for crimes committed in the name of the "Jewish People."

    For this reason I believe — independent of the need to dismantle the Zionist imperial system (Judonia) — that the Zionist invader and interloper population must be removed.

    Until there is some awareness that Zionism was fundamentally wrong, one must assume that Zionists will some time in the future commit exactly the same crimes all over again.

    BTW, Zionist crimes do not stop with Palestine. On the basis of Pipes appearance at Harvard, I have the impression that Neocon sights are already set on Saudi Arabia in addition to or as a substitute for Iran. See Saudia in the Gun Sights.

  10. Jonathan
    September 2, 2008, 5:14 pm

    It's an interesting question to ask what the evidence is for the claim that the Romans forcibly expelled inhabitants from Jerusalem or Judea in 70 when they sacked the temple. There's no question that they did sack the temple – Roman authors talk about it, and it's commemorated on the arch of Titus and on contemporary coins. But when I looked into this question a year or so ago, I found absolutely zero evidence among Roman authors, including Josephus, for the claim. On the face of it the claim is crazy – the Romans never did this elsewhere, at least as far as I could discover. Does anyone know what the sources are? If they go no further back the medieval sources, that's not very good evidence…so I'd appreciate any help here. Thanks!

  11. cooper
    September 2, 2008, 5:17 pm

    The Zionist neocons have had their sights on Saudi for some time, and their ambitions don't stop there:

    link to slate.com

    The PowerPoint That Rocked the Pentagon
    The LaRouchie defector who's advising the defense establishment on Saudi Arabia.
    By Jack Shafer
    Posted Wednesday, Aug. 7, 2002, at 7:49 PM ET
    Diplomatic china rattled in Washington and cracked in Riyadh yesterday when the Washington Post published a story about a briefing given to a Pentagon advisory group last month. The briefing declared Saudi Arabia an enemy of the United States and advocated that the United States invade the country, seize its oil fields, and confiscate its financial assets unless the Saudis stop supporting the anti-Western terror network.

    The Page One story, by Thomas E. Ricks ("Briefing Depicted Saudis as Enemies: Ultimatum Urged To Pentagon Board," Aug. 6), described a 24-slide presentation given by Rand Corp. analyst Laurent Murawiec on July 10, 2002, to the Defense Policy Board, a committee of foreign policy wonks and former government officials that advises the Pentagon on defense issues. Murawiec's PowerPoint scenario, which is reproduced for the first time below, makes him sound like an aspiring Dr. Strangelove.

    Just who the hell is Laurent Murawiec? The Post story and its follow-up, also by Ricks, do not explain. The Pentagon and the administration insist that the presentation does not reflect their views in any way. The Rand Corp. acknowledges its association with Murawiec, but likewise disavows any connection with the briefing. (Neither Murawiec nor Rand received money for the briefing, Rand says.) According to Newsday, Defense Policy Board Chairman Richard N. Perle, a former Pentagon official and full-time invade-Iraq hawk, invited Murawiec to brief the group, so Perle can't exactly distance himself from the presentation. But he can do the next best thing—duck reporters' questions. Murawiec also declined reporters' inquiries, including one from Slate.

    The first half of Murawiec's presentation reads calmly enough, echoing Fareed Zakaria's Oct. 15, 2001, Newsweek essay about why the Arab world hates the United States. Its tribal, despotic regimes bottle up domestic dissent but indulge the exportation of political anger; intellectually, its people are trapped in the Middle Ages; its institutions lack the tools to deal with 21st-century problems; yadda yadda yadda.

    But then Murawiec lights out for the extreme foreign policy territory, recommending that we threaten Medina and Mecca, home to Islam's most holy places, if they don't see it our way. Ultimately, he champions a takeover of Saudi Arabia. The last slide in the deck, titled "Grand strategy for the Middle East," abandons the outrageous for the incomprehensible. It reads:

    Iraq is the tactical pivot
    Saudi Arabia the strategic pivot
    Egypt the prize
    Egypt the prize?

    Because none of the Defense Policy Board attendees are talking candidly about the session, it's hard to divine what "Egypt the prize" means or if Murawiec's briefing put it into any context. It sounds a tad loopy, even by Dr. Strangelove standards. The Post report does mention a "talking point" attached to the 24-page PowerPoint deck that describes Saudi Arabia as "the kernel of evil, the prime mover, the most dangerous opponent" in the Middle East. That's extreme talk even by the standards of the anti-Saudi editorialists at the Weekly Standard and the rest of the invade-Iraq fellowship.

    Who is Laurent Murawiec, and where did he learn to write like this? The George Washington University Elliot School of International Affairs' Web site lists him as a faculty member, but it lists no current or future classes by him. The site's biographical page adds that he's a graduate of the Sorbonne University, that he worked as "A foreign correspondent for a major French business weekly in Germany" (isn't that kind of vague?) and is the co-founder of GeoPol Services SA, "a consulting company in Geneva, Switzerland, which advised major multinational corporations and banks." It also lists him as a former adviser to the French ministry of defense and the translator (into French) of Clausewitz's On War.

    A sweep of the Web shows that he lectured on Islamic terrorism in Toronto on March 11, 2002, under the aegis of the Canadian Institute for Strategic Studies. He wrote an article titled "The Wacky World of French Intellectuals" in the Middle East Quarterly, co-edited a Rand Corp. book, and made these comments at a Nautilus Institute conference. When he spoke on panel with Richard Perle at the American Enterprise Institute on Dec. 1, 1999, Murawiec was introduced as having just moved to the United States after "a dozen years" of working as managing director of GeoPol in Geneva, "a service that supplies advice to European clients, similar to what Kissinger Associates offers from New York, except without the accent." That is a bit of an overstatement. A Google search of "Murawiec and GeoPol" produces 12 hits. Compare that to the 10,300 hits on Google for "Kissinger Associates."

    Murawiec's résumé would predict many Nexis hits, but a search of his name reveals just five bylines: Twice already this year, Murawiec has contributed to the neocon publication the National Interest, on the subject of Russia. [Correction: Murawiec wrote for the National Interest once in 2000 and once in 2002. The topic both times was Russia.] In 1999 he wrote for the Post's "Outlook" section on "internationalism," and in 1996 he contributed a piece to the Journal of Commerce on Russia. His only other Nexis-able byline is a dusty one from the Jan. 23, 1985, edition of the Financial Times, which describes Murawiec as "the European Economics Editor of the New York-based Executive Intelligence Review weekly magazine."

    Executive Intelligence Review, as scholars of parapolitics know, is a publication of the political fantasist, convicted felon, and perpetual presidential candidate Lyndon H. LaRouche Jr. It's not clear exactly when Murawiec left the LaRouche orbit. An article by LaRouche that appeared last year in Executive Intelligence Review calls Murawiec "a real-life 'Beetlebaum' of the legendary mythical horse-race, and a hand-me-down political carcass, currently in the possession of institutions of a peculiar odor." In 1997, LaRouche's wife Helga Zupp LaRouche wrote in Executive Intelligence Review (republished in the LaRouche-affiliated AboutSudan.com Web site) that Murawiec "was once part of our organization and is now on the side of organized crime." The truth value of that statement surely ranks up there with LaRouche's claim that the Queen of England controls the crack trade. To say, zero.

    When Murawiec departed LaRouche's company is unclear, but Dennis King, author of 1989's Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism, thinks it came when many followers split as LaRouche's legal problems grew and climaxed with a 1988 conviction for conspiracy and mail fraud. "[Murawiec] was not a political leader," says King, "but a follower who did intelligence-gathering."

    Now that Murawiec has assumed such a vocal place in the policy debate, the man who gave him the lectern owes us the complete back-story. Over to you, Richard Perle.

    ******

    Laurent Murawiec's 24-slide presentation to the Defense Policy Board was obtained by Slate and is presented here in type-treatment that approximates the original.

  12. anonymous
    September 2, 2008, 5:32 pm

    Linguist Paul Wexler of Tel Aviv University has traced the east to west movement of Yiddish and its roots in a Turkish dialect. There was no west to east movement… leaving Spain in 1492, etc, larger than a few hundred people. However people with a profound investment is this mythology have resorted to devious tactics to suppress the scientific evidence. There have been many complaints in genetic science circles about the distortion of DNA analysis to suggest a Ahkenazi/Palestine link. There is no such connection, rather the Ashkenazi are related to Kurds and other eastern Turkic groups. Other complaints have come from the Library of Congress to small town libraries that copies of Koestler's book routinely disappear from the shelves.

  13. Joachim Martillo
    September 2, 2008, 5:32 pm

    I think the Pipes-Brook panel discussion, which was also rather loopy, may have gone a tad further because I think they were talking about restricting the rights of Muslim American citizens.

    Unfortunately, the videos were edited, but you might find question 2 interesting in terms of audience reaction. First the Muslims in the audience applaud me, and then the rest of the audience cheers Brook for spewing Zionist hasbarah that no one should take seriously in this day and age.

    Far too many American Jews are simply desperate to exculpate Zionism of its crimes.

  14. MRW.
    September 2, 2008, 7:58 pm

    Here's some archeological info from Sand's book:

    "The Wandering Who?"
    By Gilad Atzmon
    link to informationclearinghouse.info

    Todd
    Victor Ostrovsky in either one of his books or a lecture said that Koestler was offed because he didn't debunk his book The Thirteenth Tribe (1976) sufficiently. It was passed off as a double suicide with his third wife.

  15. D.
    September 2, 2008, 8:12 pm

    I found it interesting how weakly Brook responded to your question, Joachim. Basically, he was falling back on "a land without a people" and "making the desert bloom". The Zionist edifice is cracking.

    BTW, here's more on the Zionist take-over of the Objectivist movement, from Stephen Sniegoski in 2002–
    Objectivism = Sharonism?

  16. Francis
    September 2, 2008, 10:01 pm

    Your title is "Historian: Palestinians are biological …"
    Stop right there. Historians are not Biologists. Palestinians may descend from ancient Jews, but such questions should be in the hands of science not supposition.

    As for Jews, the genetic evidence shows that Ashkenazi Jewry is mainly middle-eastern in origin. An arab tribe who went north, and maintained their cultural heritage. But there is also a fair bit of european admixture. Interestingly, the admixture occurred mostly at the beginning of the Jews arrival in Europe, after which the community closed in on itself. And the European element was female. In other words, mainly male Jews made up the diaspora, and acquired gentile mates in Europe, and future generations were made up from this initial mingling… but very little further mingling occurred until the Jewish emancipation.

    So I would expect most Ashkenazi can trace themselves back to Polish/German woman. Yet in the standard view of Judaism, Jewishness is inherited by the mother.

  17. Mafish Falastin
    September 3, 2008, 3:18 am

    How odd that such last names as al-Masri (the Egyptian,), al-Djazair (the Algerian), el-Mughrabi (the Moroccan), al-Yamani (the Yemenite) and even al-Afghani are so common among those claiming to be "Palestinians."

    Today's Palestinians are immigrants from many nations: "Balkans, Greeks, Syrians, Latins, Egyptians, Turks, Armenians, Italians, Persians, Kurds, Germans, Afghans, Circassians, Bosnians, Sudaneese, Samaritans, Algerians, Motawila, Tartars, Hungarians, Scots, Navarese, Bretons, English, Franks, Ruthenians, Bohemians, Bulgarians, Georgians, Syrians, Persian Nestorians, Indians, Copts, Maronites, and many others."
    (DeHass, History, p. 258. John of Wurzburg list from Reinhold Rohricht edition, pp. 41, 69).

    There are villages populated wholly by settlers from other portions of the Turkish Empire in the 19th century. There are villages of Bosnians, Circassians, and Egyptians.
    -Parkes, James William, History of the Peoples of Palestine, Hammondsworth, Great Britain, 1970, p. 212.

    There are very large contingents from the Mediterranean countries, especially Armenia, Greece, and Italy, Turkomen settlers, a fairly large Afghan colony, Motawila, immigrants from Persia, tribes of Kurds, a Bosnian colony, Circassian settlements, a large Algerian element, Sudanese…
    -Encyclopedia Brittanica, 1911 ed.

    [Ibrahim Pasha, the 1831 Egyptian conquerer of Palestine] "left behind him permanent colonies of Egyptians at Besian, Nablus, Irbid, Acre, and Jaffa. Into Jaffa alone, "at least 2,000 people have been imported."
    -Ernst Frankenstein, Justice For My People, London, Nicholson and Watson, 1943, p. 127.

    In 1860, entire Algerian tribes immigrated en masse to Safed. The Muslims of Safed, are "mostly descended from these Moorish settlers and from Kurds that came earlier to the city."
    -De Haas, Jacob, History of Palestine, The Last Two Thousand Years, New York, 1934, p. 425.

    "I learn of the arrival of about 6,000 of the Beni Sukhr Arabs at Tiberias who are very seldom seen this side of the Jordan."
    -British Consul James Finn in apers Relating to the Distubances in Syria, no. 2, June 1860, p. 35.

    After 1870, "the [Turkish] forward policy included…the planting of Circassian colonies in the country."
    -Smith, CG in Studies on Palestine During the Ottoman Period, Jerusalem, 1975, p. 93.

    "The Arabs would have sat in the dark forever had not the Zionist engineers harnessed the Jordan river for electrification. Now they swarm into Palestine in seeking the light."
    - Winston Churchill, 1922 "A Peace to End All Peace"

    "This illegal [Arab] immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery."
    -Palestine Royal Commission Report, London: 1937

    "So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country and multiplied until their population has increased more than even all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish population."
    -Winston Churchill, 1939.

    BECOMING PALESTINIAN: A GOOD CAREER MOVE

  18. Mafish Falastin
    September 3, 2008, 3:51 am

    By the way:

    GENETIC EVIDENCE LINKS JEWS TO THEIR ANCIENT TRIBE

    And see this one from the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America:

    JEWISH AND MIDDLE EASTERN NON-JEWISH POPULATIONS SHARE A COMMON POOL OF Y-CHROMOSOME BIALLELIC HAPLOTYPES

    And we also see it from the The Cohen Modal Haplotype (CMH) and the 1997 study published in nature magazine (also one of the leading scientific journals):

    “Y Chromosomes of Jewish Priests” (Nature Volume 385 2 January 1997)

    And on and on.

  19. Glenn Condell
    September 3, 2008, 3:52 am

    'The thesis as stated is false.'

    Oh is it? OK, thanks Richard for the heavy lifting. I wasn't looking forward to reading all that theory stuff. Better to leave to experts like you.

    'Far too many American Jews are simply desperate to exculpate Zionism of its crimes'

    They prefer not to mention them at all.

    'Palestinians may descend from ancient Jews, but such questions should be in the hands of science not supposition.'

    This too might fall into the category of 'things not to be mentioned'. Surely if Cavalli-Sforza, Craig Venter and co have managed to work out the origins of the Japanese (from ancient Koreans it seems, themselves descended from even more eancient Chinese – facts 'not to be mentioned' in Japan!) they will have some fairly firm ideas on Jewish origins.

    Mitochondria don't lie.

  20. Mafish Falastin
    September 3, 2008, 4:36 am

    Oh, and by the way, our claim to our land, the land of Israel, has nothing to do with biology.

    After all, Ruth the Moabite was King David's ancestor.

  21. Todd
    September 3, 2008, 11:06 am

    I've wondered when this topic would come up on Mondoweiss, and it isn't surprising that the one topic that truly gets to the heart of the Palestinian issue and the trouble caused by Zionizm and extremist Christian superstition goes by without much discussion.

    The issue of Jewish origins or superstitions isn't new to popular discussion. In fact, John Romer had a popular television series documenting the myths years ago. I'm sure that others have done the same.

    Has a detailed study of Jewish DNA been conducted? Have the results been compared to ancient DNA? Has a study of Palestinians been conducted? I would be interested in seing any results. A study was done in Lebanon that suggested that the population has remained stable for thousands of years regrdless of migrations or invasion. Similar studies suggest the same of the British Isles.

    I know that science can be manipulated just like anything else, and some of the crazy theories put forth with archaeological evidence or DNA testing have been ridiculous. One theory that comes to mind is the claim that Nigerians are more closely related to Swedes than Germans are to Swedes due to some similar markers, or the claim that tribes in the Jungles of Thailand are lost Jews because of some carved symbols–the tribes were clearly made up of Asian people.

    Sand's argument passes the 'is it logical' test. Israel is not a genetically homogeneous society, and anyone with working eyes and brain that function together can see that. At the same time, it is common knowledge that the Jewish religion had spread throughout the Mediterranean and Near East in Roman times, so an exile for which there is little evidence is an unlikely explanation for the spread of Jews.

    What happens when the myths unravel, and the consequences of the actions they fronted for are examined?

  22. Todd
    September 3, 2008, 11:09 am

    "Victor Ostrovsky in either one of his books or a lecture said that Koestler was offed because he didn't debunk his book The Thirteenth Tribe (1976) sufficiently. It was passed off as a double suicide with his third wife."

    I don't remember the book that I mentioned, but it wasn't written by Ostrovsky. I skimmed parts of it in a used bookstore, and regret not buying it. It's been years, but I bet that the book is in the same section of the store. I'll look for it the next time I'm there.

  23. Hubris
    September 3, 2008, 12:13 pm

    Israel is not a genetically homogeneous society,

    Sands theory is basically that the vast majority of Jews descend from converts to the religion. Therefore to speak of a 'Jewish race' is ludicrous. Correct?

    It would be as if one went around making reference to 'The Catholic Race'

  24. hass
    September 3, 2008, 2:37 pm

    Lets remember the last time a geneticist concluded that Jews and Palestinians are related: some people got very upset and demanded that the article be physically torn out from the scientific journal where it was published.

    link to guardian.co.uk

  25. hass
    September 3, 2008, 2:44 pm

    Incidentally:

    As Rabbis Face Facts, Bible Tales Are Wilting
    New Torah For Modern Minds

    New York Times March 9, 2002

    Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.

    Such startling propositions — the product of findings by archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25 years — have gained wide acceptance among non-Orthodox rabbis. But there has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with the laity — until now.

    The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called ''Etz Hayim'' (''Tree of Life'' in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine document…
    link to query.nytimes.com

  26. Joachim Martillo
    September 3, 2008, 6:00 pm

    I read that article. Zionists freaked because it claimed that Jewish Arabs were not much different genetically from other Arabs, but all Arabs whether Jewish or non-Jewish were quite genetically different from ethnic Ashkenazim.

    See Zionazi Racial Science.

  27. karen_j66
    September 10, 2008, 4:50 pm

    will be interesting to see what they dig up in russia…that lost empire khazar.

Leave a Reply