India's 'lost tribe' dreams of return to Israel

[Son of Govinda]

You hit the nail on the head Lemontree!

Does trying to save my people from committing the eternal sins our ancestors taught us about 4000 years ago make me a Muslim? If so you might as well start calling me Muhammed(no offense to any Muslims).

So many of you intolerant Hindus go the Mundir, Eat Prashad, bow to idols, sing hymns day and night, and yet you don't know the first thing about faith or the true laws of the Vedas.

 

[ejazr]

This thread is about Jews living in India.

The Israel-Palestine conflict is completely different issue and we have a dedicated thread to discuss that here
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/west-asia-africa/1813-israel-palestine-conflict-6.html#post405213

And finally there is no excuse to stereotype Jews as not being loyal or faithful to their country. This news report is talking about only 1 or 2 Jews living in the NE. They don't represent all Jews living in India. Providing them with the ability to practice their faith freely has nothing to do with what is happening in Israel and Palestine.

 

[Son of Govinda]

Does trying to save my people from committing the eternal sins our ancestors taught us about 4000 years ago make me a Muslim? If so you might as well start calling me Muhammed(no offense to any Muslims).

So many of you intolerant Hindus go the Mundir, Eat Prashad, bow to idols, sing hymns day and night, and yet you don't know the first thing about faith or the true laws of the Vedas.

And before you try calling me out for hypocrisy with the Jews, modern Judaism does not represent faith or religion at all. True Torah Judaism based on faith died after the exile.

A Jew is someone defined as being born to a Jewish mother which is inherently intolerant and racist. Sure Jews accept converts now, but during the last 2000 years in Europe virtually all Jewish authorities refused to recognize converts unless they had power.

 

[lemontree]

Jerusalem was being controlled by fundamentalist Christians who oppressed all Muslims and Jews when it was conquered by Islam so yeah it really was fine.

You are picking history as per your choice. That fact is that the muslim Sassanids invaded Jerusalem much earlier in 614 and took it over from Byzantines and were assisted by the Jews. The jews the slaughtered thousands of christians in the city. The Jews had been banned from Jerusalem by the Romans since 4th century. The Byzentines were hardly what you call "fundamentalist".

The Byzentines re-took the city in 629 AD.
The muslims re-took it in 638 AD

The crusaders were the fanatics who came in 1099 AD to retake the city after the the christian population was expelled from the city by the Fatimid ruler.

Paying a tax versus not paying it and dying in battle... hmm I wonder who really had to sacrifice to protect the abrahamic holy lands.

Your understanding of Jerisalem history is of just one era?

The city exchanged hands many time between Byzentines, the muslims and the crusaders. Every time the city was taken the christians or the Jews/ muslims were butchered enmass by the victors.

What sacrifice are you talking about??....

 

[Son of Govinda]

You are picking history as per your choice. That fact is that the muslim Sassanids invaded Jerusalem much earlier in 614 and took it over from Byzantines and were assisted by the Jews. The jews the slaughtered thousands of christians in the city. The Jews had been banned from Jerusalem by the Romans since 4th century. The Byzentines were hardly what you call "fundamentalist".

The Byzentines re-took the city in 629 AD.
The muslims re-took it in 638 AD

The crusaders were the fanatics who came in 1099 AD to retake the city after the the christian population was expelled from the city by the Fatimid ruler.


Your understanding of Jerisalem history is of just one era?

The city exchanged hands many time between Byzentines, the muslims and the crusaders. Every time the city was taken the christians or the Jews/ muslims were butchered enmass by the victors.

What sacrifice are you talking about??....

You are only focusing on one sect of Islam. Any political force that called itself Islamic had to follow a Caliph, which Shia muslims completely reject. Sunni Islam is prone to corruption because of the Caliphs including political corruption, and Caliphs are also capable of extremism that violates the Qu'ran like destroying a church or desecrating Jesus Christ.

Therefore Islam as a faith is not responsible for those atrocities, all the responsibility is on the Caliphs that violated their own law and their followers.

Luckily the next Islamic leader after the crusades was smart and learned from history.

 

[Son of Govinda]

You are picking history as per your choice. That fact is that the muslim Sassanids invaded Jerusalem much earlier in 614 and took it over from Byzantines and were assisted by the Jews. The jews the slaughtered thousands of christians in the city. The Jews had been banned from Jerusalem by the Romans since 4th century. The Byzentines were hardly what you call "fundamentalist".

The Byzentines re-took the city in 629 AD.
The muslims re-took it in 638 AD

The crusaders were the fanatics who came in 1099 AD to retake the city after the the christian population was expelled from the city by the Fatimid ruler.


Your understanding of Jerisalem history is of just one era?

The city exchanged hands many time between Byzentines, the muslims and the crusaders. Every time the city was taken the christians or the Jews/ muslims were butchered enmass by the victors.

What sacrifice are you talking about??....

And the sacrifice I'm talking about is the spilling of blood. Muslims were the only ones who had to shed their blood to protect their "holy" land while Jews and Christians were able to pay for their pilgrimages without needing to sacrifice anything else.

 

[lemontree]

And the sacrifice I'm talking about is the spilling of blood. Muslims were the only ones who had to shed their blood to protect their "holy" land while Jews and Christians were able to pay for their pilgrimages without needing to sacrifice anything else.

That is incorrect. The Christians defended their holy land and paid for it in blood.
The Jews did not have a large army to take on either the crudaders or the muslims. So they sided with the muslims as the Christians to those days were quite anti-semitic.

 

[Son of Govinda]

That is incorrect. The Christians defended their holy land and paid for it in blood.
The Jews did not have a large army to take on either the crudaders or the muslims. So they sided with the muslims as the Christians to those days were quite anti-semitic.

I'm talking strictly about the post crusade Islamic rule of Jerusalem. No Christian or Jew could've shed their blood to defend it when it was under new Islamic rule because Jews and Christians were forbidden from joining the Islamic military due to suspicions of potential treachery.