I am surprised...

[Cow Poke]

Well - after it was filtered through Martin Luther's writings about Jews, anyway.

I never trusted those Lutherans!

[tabibito]

I never trusted those Lutherans!

Seriously though - H_A isn't entirely wrong. Most of the Western World had much the same attitude to Jews as did Germany - until Germany invaded the wrong country. Then suddenly Jews were declared humans as an extra string to the bow of justification for war against Germany. There was even a case (long before the 20th century dawned) where a man in France (?) was executed for bestiality after have sex with a Jewess (and her along with him.) per Levitical law.

A few small benefits actually arose from the atrocities of WWII. Not that any of them were worth the price.

[Cow Poke]

That H_A's argument re European attitudes toward Jews .....

I think I'm seeing a pattern here....

She disappears for periods of times where she furiously Googles stuff to type (or copy/paste), comes back, unloads it in machinegun fire manner, then has to retreat to Google some more.

Again, at first, I thought she was really smart ---- then she comes up with really dumb stuff like Paul not being a Jew because he didn't use one very specific word, or the Texas Hearbeat Bill being about "Bounty Hunters" and suing taxi drivers, baby sitters and secretaries all on the word of an abortionist in NYC who MAYBE has connections with colleagues in Texas who know the law better than a guy who lives here and regularly consults with Texas lawmakers...

But she IS entertaining!


(wow, Mrs McCurdy would really not like that long run-on sentence )

[tabibito]

I think I'm seeing a pattern here....

She disappears for periods of times where she furiously Googles stuff to type (or copy/paste), comes back, unloads it in machinegun fire manner, then has to retreat to Google some more.

Again, at first, I thought she was really smart ---- then she comes up with really dumb stuff like Paul not being a Jew because he didn't use one very specific word, or the Texas Hearbeat Bill being about "Bounty Hunters" and suing taxi drivers, baby sitters and secretaries all on the word of an abortionist in NYC who MAYBE has connections with colleagues in Texas who know the law better than a guy who lives here and regularly consults with Texas lawmakers...

But she IS entertaining!


(wow, Mrs McCurdy would really not like that long run-on sentence )

Paul and Peter would have considered it substandard for its brevity.

[Cow Poke]

Paul and Peter would have considered it substandard for its brevity.

[Terraceth]

The history of Christian anti-Judaism/anti-Semitism is long and complex. There was certainly distinct animosity among late first century Christians towards Judaism. The Jews had rejected the Christ and for some Christians that rejection seemed incomprehensible. The people who should have been the first to acknowledge the Christian claims proved the most intransigent and while there is distinct hostility to the Jews in the NT texts it remains under restraint. However, Justin Martyr [100-165 CE] stands at the point of establishing the rabid anti-Judaism that would quickly become part of Christian culture.

In his Dialogue with Trypho Justin Marty’s view of the passion narratives expunges the memory of Roman involvement. It is the Jews alone who are the crucifiers and their motives are premised on their depraved and satanic natures [echoing John 8.44]. His vitriolic stance against the Jews is founded on the simple fact that the Jews will not accept Christianity. Justin had lived through the Bar Kochba rebellion and saw this further attempt for Jewish independence [which was far more bloody than the First Jewish War] as yet more divine retribution for the Jews’ stubbornness. Furthermore for Justin the crucifixion of Jesus was not a one time offence. It was something the Jews did continually “For still, of a truth, is your hand high to do evil, because though ye have slain Christ even so ye do not repent, but you ... hate and murder us all” [Dial. I33:6]

So the claim here, it appears, is that you are saying that Justin claims that because of the crucifixion and refusal to repent of it, Jews are hating and murdering Christians in some kind of a metaphorical sense. The problem is, to arrive at this interpretation, one must remove some key words Justin uses which are removed via ellipsis. Here is what he says in a little more context and with the erased portion restored:

"For verily your hand is high to commit evil, because ye slew the Christ, and do not repent of it; but so far from that, ye hate and murder us who have believed through Him in the God and Father of all, as often as ye can; and ye curse Him without ceasing, as well as those who side with Him."

As we can see when we keep in the text that was removed via the ellipsis, Justin's usage of "ye hate and murder us" comes not from some metaphorical sense of the crucifixion, because he says "but so far from that". Rather, he is saying that, setting the crucifixion aside entirely, Jews are guilty of literally hating and murdering Christians in the recent past. This is blatantly clear when one does not remove "but so far from that" via an ellipsis.

Indeed, it's interesting that it is claimed that Justin saw the failed Bar Kochba rebellion as divine retribution for the Jews' stubbornness. While stubbornness in not accepting Jesus may have been a factor, it appears his approval of the putdown of the rebellion had more to do with the fact that he says Bar Kochba had been persecuting and killing Christians, as stated in The First Apology 31:

"They [Old Testament scriptures] are also in the possession of all Jews throughout the world; but they, though they read, do not understand what is said, but count us foes and enemies; and, like yourselves [the Romans], they kill and punish us whenever they have the power, as you can well believe. For in the Jewish war which lately raged, Barchochebas, the leader of the revolt of the Jews, gave orders that Christians alone should be led to cruel punishments, unless they would deny Jesus Christ and utter blasphemy."

To claim that Justin's "vitriolic stance against the Jews is founded on the simple fact that the Jews will not accept Christianity" requires cutting out an important part of his statement via a convenient ellipsis and ignoring the fact that Justin refers to Jews, especially during the revolt, killing and hating Christians.

[Cow Poke]

None of the people you have mentioned are experts in this period of history and none of them are archaeologists. Simon “Si” Sheppard is a graduate in Political Science. Dean Smith is an amateur enthusiast who has written two pieces for an online magazine [one on the Sicarii and one on the 1982 British/Argentine Falklands War] Lon Abbot is an expert in his own field but has stepped outside his own discipline to comment on something upon which he is not qualified – he is neither an archaeologist nor a historian of this period. Nor do vague references to an article by someone with a Masters help.

Yadin alleges that the ramp was built by Silva’s soldiers “with the help of thousands of Jewish prisoners of war” without a shred of any archaeological evidence to support that statement.

In her 2019 book Masada: From Jewish Revolt to Modern Myth Jodi Magness [a student of Yadin] notes [p.22] that Yadin’s “ excavations focused on the remains on Masada’s summit and largely ignored the Roman siege works. These remained virtually untouched until summer 1995, when I co-directed excavations in the siege works with three Israeli colleagues”. So Yadin was making a unfounded statement about the ramp when he had never fully excavated the Roman siege works.

On p.26 she notes that “at Masada the Romans sought to bring the siege to a swift resolution. To accomplish this, they had to move their troops and siege machinery up the steep, rocky slopes of the mountain and break through Herod’s fortification wall at the top. There were two paths to the top of Masada: the Snake Path on the east and another path on the west (today buried under the Roman ramp). Using these paths would have required the soldiers to climb up in single file while carrying their personal equipment as well as the battering ram, which had to be erected at the top to break through the Herodian casemate wall—all the while leaving the soldiers vulnerable to stones, boulders, and other projectiles thrown or fired by the defenders above. To solve this problem, Silva ordered his men to construct an assault ramp of dirt and stones, which ascended to the summit from a low white hill (called the Leuke by Josephus) at the foot of the western side of the mountain”. She then quotes Josephus’ War 7.306-7.

Once again if we look at Trajan’s Column [depicting a campaign only a mere forty years or so later] we see the legionaries doing the digging and building. No slaves are being used in military building operations despite the fact that local populations had been enslaved in the course of the campaign and so a ready supply was available..

Magness also notes at p. 241 that Yadin was inclined to leap to unfounded conclusions. “Two rooms in the western palace contained hearths with large numbers of iron arrowheads and shafts. According to the transcripts, Yadin decided immediately that these must be stockpiles of weapons destroyed by the Jewish rebels to prevent them from falling into Roman hands, following Josephus’s account. However, Ben-Tor, the area supervisor, correctly interpreted these rooms as iron arrowhead workshops dating to the time of the revolt”. She continues that he was also somewhat precipitate regarding the remains of the “family” he discovered.

“Yadin’s moving account shows that he interpreted these remains in light of Josephus’s testimony. However, in recent years some scholars have questioned Josephus’s account of the mass suicide at Masada on both archaeological and literary grounds. For example, Joe Zias claims that the remains on the lower terrace of the northern palace do not belong to one family but instead are random bones brought to this spot by hyenas”

She concurs with Nachman Ben-Yehuda and notes “Yadin’s interpretation of the archaeological remains at Masada may have been impacted by his Zionist-nationalistic perspective” . She also cites Josephus "For not only were supplies conveyed from a distance, entailing hard labor for the Jews told off for this duty, but even water had to be brought into the camp, there being no spring in the neighborhood” (War 7.278). As Josephus indicates, Jewish slaves hauled the food and water." [p.24].

That is her only reference to slaves at Masada although she refers to Josephus later [p.164] “According to Josephus, the price of slaves in the Roman Empire dropped dramatically due to the glut created in the aftermath of the revolt."

In his 1995 book The Masada Myth: Collective Memory and Mythmaking in Israel the sociologist Nachman Ben-Yehuda notes the conditions that Yadin and his archaeological team encountered:

All sources about the excavations point out that the logistics of the operation were immense indeed, involving, among other things, taking care of food, water, housing, and equipment—all at a time when not even half-decent roads to Masada existed

Yet Yadin [your goodself and various others] are contending that nearly two thousand years earlier and facing that same hostile terrain but without modern transport and modern field communications, the Roman army decided to retain thousands of Jewish slaves to do the work of building the ramp. I ask again, is it likely?

In our very initial exchange I cited the archaeologist Gywn Davies who noted that “. So while no one is disputing that Jewish prisoners were used for carrying water and food to the camp the idea that thousands of prisoners/slaves were kept to build the ramp is arrant nonsense and is not supported by any archaeological or contemporary literary evidence.

As the Marxist archaeologist and historian Neil Faulkner notes in his 2002 book Apocalypse: The Great Jewish Revolt Against Rome AD 66-73 “Though there has been some doubt cast on the truth of Josephus account [...] there seems little reason to doubt the basic factual record. At the very least the archaeology can do nothing to refute the written testimony, and there is no reason to assume the latter to be a concoction. Josephus had access to reliable contemporary sources, the Hellenist tradition of historical writing did not sanction wholesale fabrication, and the event described, while it may be exceptional, is certainly not incredible. [p.275]

Then there is the significance of The Masada Myth [again from Ben-Yehuda]

"At the time of the revolt, several ideological-political groups existed among the Jews. Two of these groups were the Zealots and the Sicarii. The Sicarii’s distinct feature was their use of political assassinations against both Romans and Jews. The Sicarii were disliked and were driven out of Jerusalem not by Romans but by other Jews a long time before the Roman army put the city under siege and destroyed it. The Sicarii fled to Masada. Thus, the group on top of Masada was a group of assassins, not Zealots. During their stay on Masada, the Sicarii raided nearby (Jewish) villages, killed the inhabitants, and took their food to Masada. They were responsible for a terrible massacre of presumably innocent women and children at Ein Gedi. [p.9]"

Later in the book he discusses the influence of the Hatzofim (Israeli Scouts) who regularly took youth groups to Masada and produced various booklets and pamphlets about the fortress [p.109-110]

"An another stenciled document (not dated, but probably from 19651966 or 1967), distributed by the national headquarters of Hatzofim in Tel Aviv, the following information is provided to the traveler to Masada and Ein Gedi:


“At the beginning of the Great Revolt (66 A.D.) Masada was conquered by the deceit of Menachem Ben Yehuda from the Galilee. This conquest was, de facto, the signal for the general uprising. After the conquest the victors left to Jerusalem, where they became involved in inner feuds, in which Menachem was killed, and his relative, Elazar Ben-Yair, took command of Masada. [...]After two years, the first two fell, and the Romans went to Masada. They did not charge the fortress but, rather,systematically isolated it from the external world and in this way starved its defenders. Within four months the Romans built eight military camps from all sides of Masada. They built a siege ramp on the western side . . . and placed siege machines on top, with which they finally broke through the wall. And so a regular army of 8000 men [took over] a fortress that was held by 960 starving men, women, and children. . . . Legend has it that after all hope was lost, Elazar Ben-Yair made a momentous speech, after which they all committed suicide, the last one setting fire to all the buildings. Masada has remained until this day a symbol of Jewish heroism without compromise or retreat; and to this day we proclaim, as a symbol for our hopes for the stability and continued existence of our state, that ‘Masada shall not fall again!’ ”


He then notes:

This passage contains some interesting fabrications, two of which are glaring. The first concerns the “starvation” of the rebels on top of Masada. This is simply contrary to what Josephus Flavius tells us. The second is the transformation of Elazar Ben-Yair’s two speeches into one. [...] The usual omission of the massacre at Ein Gedi and a failure to admit the lack of a “Masada battle” is also found here, along with a total disregard of the fact that the Sicarii were on Masada.


Again, citing Neil Faulkner, where in his Introduction he writes, “ Zionists of Israel will be disconcerted to discover that the Jewish rebels of the first century bear more similarity to the Palestinian fighters of Hamas than they do soldiers of the Israeli Defence Force. In particular [...]those seeking a contribution to some specifically “Jewish history” for in truth there has never been a single “Jewish people”, nor an unchanging “Jewish tradition” and only nationalist myths can link Simon bar-Giora and Ariel Sharon across two thousand years.” [p. 8.]

Bearing in mind Yadin's former background in the Haganah [terrorists or freedom fighters take your pick] it is hardly surprising that, as Neil Silberman noted in his 1993 biography of Yadin "the drama of the Masada excavations and the virtuoso brilliance with which Yadin conveyed the discoveries to the public made the project as much an exercise in patriotic inspiration as in scientific research”[p.288]

OH NOES!!!!! She has attacked one of my FAVORITE stories of the Israeli Defense Forces told to me as we stood atop Masada overlooking the remains of the Roman Army encampments below!!!

(albeit, they explained it was "legend" that was under dispute)

[tabibito]

OH NOES!!!!! She has attacked one of my FAVORITE stories of the Israeli Defense Forces told to me as we stood atop Masada overlooking the remains of the Roman Army encampments below!!!

(albeit, they explained it was "legend" that was under dispute)

Yup - there's no way to prevail against an argument from disbelief: it is conclusive.

[rogue06]

None of the people you have mentioned are experts in this period of history and none of them are archaeologists. Simon “Si” Sheppard is a graduate in Political Science. Dean Smith is an amateur enthusiast who has written two pieces for an online magazine [one on the Sicarii and one on the 1982 British/Argentine Falklands War] Lon Abbot is an expert in his own field but has stepped outside his own discipline to comment on something upon which he is not qualified – he is neither an archaeologist nor a historian of this period. Nor do vague references to an article by someone with a Masters help.

Still waiting for you to offer up anyone, even a cab driver in Berlin, who supports your contention that slave labor was not used in the construction of the ramp. Anybody at all.

Yadin alleges that the ramp was built by Silva’s soldiers “with the help of thousands of Jewish prisoners of war” without a shred of any archaeological evidence to support that statement.

In her 2019 book Masada: From Jewish Revolt to Modern Myth Jodi Magness [a student of Yadin] notes [p.22] that Yadin’s “ excavations focused on the remains on Masada’s summit and largely ignored the Roman siege works. These remained virtually untouched until summer 1995, when I co-directed excavations in the siege works with three Israeli colleagues”. So Yadin was making a unfounded statement about the ramp when he had never fully excavated the Roman siege works.

On p.26 she notes that “at Masada the Romans sought to bring the siege to a swift resolution. To accomplish this, they had to move their troops and siege machinery up the steep, rocky slopes of the mountain and break through Herod’s fortification wall at the top. There were two paths to the top of Masada: the Snake Path on the east and another path on the west (today buried under the Roman ramp). Using these paths would have required the soldiers to climb up in single file while carrying their personal equipment as well as the battering ram, which had to be erected at the top to break through the Herodian casemate wall—all the while leaving the soldiers vulnerable to stones, boulders, and other projectiles thrown or fired by the defenders above. To solve this problem, Silva ordered his men to construct an assault ramp of dirt and stones, which ascended to the summit from a low white hill (called the Leuke by Josephus) at the foot of the western side of the mountain”. She then quotes Josephus’ War 7.306-7.

Attempting to take a former student saying that he "largely ignored the Roman siege works" which "remained virtually untouched" and turning that into that he never examined them is doing exactly what you have accused Yadin of doing -- "making a unfounded statement." If he had only worked on the summit then Magness would have said that. She doesn't.

But I guess that was all you could dredge up in all this time. Even if you take your "unfounded" conclusion at face value it does not refute Yadin's statement. You would think that if she found anything or knew of anything to refute Yadin, she would have presented it. And I'll assume if she did offer anything like that you would have offered it -- although given how badly you botched your false claim about the Roman tour guide company (smiley snicker.gif) I guess I could be wrong.

Once again if we look at Trajan’s Column [depicting a campaign only a mere forty years or so later] we see the legionaries doing the digging and building. No slaves are being used in military building operations despite the fact that local populations had been enslaved in the course of the campaign and so a ready supply was available..

point-and-laugh.gif

I gotta give you an "A" for audacity for trying to make what a totally different army under a different commander did nearly half a century later some sort of strong point. But that attempt at rhetorical judo was nothing but flailing.

Not only are we looking at different generals at different times, but battles fought 2860 km/1775 mi apart but also under very different conditions. The use of slaves might well depend on what conditions something being constructed is being done under. In Masada, as Yabin pointed out, they might have decided to use Jewish slaves to help build it and thus act as a human shield. In places where the Romans who were building something wouldn't be under constant assault from rocks and even boulders, they might very well decide to do it themselves. Especially more permanent structures like walls and bridges.

As an aside, for some things that would be the smart thing. Slave labor can, for instance, result in a weak spot in a wall being constructed and news of that weak spot getting to your enemies who might be the slaves kinsmen.

Magness also notes at p. 241 that Yadin was inclined to leap to unfounded conclusions. “Two rooms in the western palace contained hearths with large numbers of iron arrowheads and shafts. According to the transcripts, Yadin decided immediately that these must be stockpiles of weapons destroyed by the Jewish rebels to prevent them from falling into Roman hands, following Josephus’s account. However, Ben-Tor, the area supervisor, correctly interpreted these rooms as iron arrowhead workshops dating to the time of the revolt”. She continues that he was also somewhat precipitate regarding the remains of the “family” he discovered.

“Yadin’s moving account shows that he interpreted these remains in light of Josephus’s testimony. However, in recent years some scholars have questioned Josephus’s account of the mass suicide at Masada on both archaeological and literary grounds. For example, Joe Zias claims that the remains on the lower terrace of the northern palace do not belong to one family but instead are random bones brought to this spot by hyenas”

She concurs with Nachman Ben-Yehuda and notes “Yadin’s interpretation of the archaeological remains at Masada may have been impacted by his Zionist-nationalistic perspective” . She also cites Josephus "For not only were supplies conveyed from a distance, entailing hard labor for the Jews told off for this duty, but even water had to be brought into the camp, there being no spring in the neighborhood” (War 7.278). As Josephus indicates, Jewish slaves hauled the food and water." [p.24].

That is her only reference to slaves at Masada although she refers to Josephus later [p.164] “According to Josephus, the price of slaves in the Roman Empire dropped dramatically due to the glut created in the aftermath of the revolt."

So I guess in your world, it is inconceivable for some of those Jewish slaves that hauled the food and water to be put to work at the front of those building the ramp.

And once again, if she disagreed with Yadin this is where she would have said so. That she doesn't is telling.

In his 1995 book The Masada Myth: Collective Memory and Mythmaking in Israel the sociologist Nachman Ben-Yehuda notes the conditions that Yadin and his archaeological team encountered:

All sources about the excavations point out that the logistics of the operation were immense indeed, involving, among other things, taking care of food, water, housing, and equipment—all at a time when not even half-decent roads to Masada existed

Yet Yadin [your goodself and various others] are contending that nearly two thousand years earlier and facing that same hostile terrain but without modern transport and modern field communications, the Roman army decided to retain thousands of Jewish slaves to do the work of building the ramp. I ask again, is it likely?

All you have done is make the case that Masada represented a logistical hard nut to crack. That was why it was located where it is.

That it would be difficult is a given but we are talking about battle-hardened veteran Roman Legionnaires here. FWIU, that sort of task was right up their alley.

And again, you keep providing sources that offer up solutions to most if not all of the very objections you keep raising.

They didn't need to take a bunch of slaves with them specifically to work as laborers. Given that they didn't decide on a ramp until after they got there is indication they didn't. But they did have Jewish slaves carrying food and water. It wouldn't be too difficult to draft a portion of them into construction duty. And it isn't like they had a union that would complain.

You brought up how cheap and plentiful slaves were after the war so it would be no problem for them to get replacements to carry out more food and water as needed.

You earlier brought up someone who opined that the ramp took much less time and effort than we assume, which would greatly reduce all of your logistical objections.

I really don't have to say all that much because you're doing a pretty thorough job refuting yourself

In our very initial exchange I cited the archaeologist Gywn Davies who noted that “. So while no one is disputing that Jewish prisoners were used for carrying water and food to the camp the idea that thousands of prisoners/slaves were kept to build the ramp is arrant nonsense and is not supported by any archaeological or contemporary literary evidence.

You again produce sources indicating where a workforce for the ramp could be conscripted from. And as noted earlier, one of those you cited suggests that the ramp was easier to build than assumed which would naturally reduce the size of the workforce.

And while I don't presume expertise in building a earthen ramp to the summit of Masada, I would argue with Yadin over how many were needed. For the stated purpose you probably could get by with a couple hundred since all you needed was a human shield up front. And you don't need them at all for anything out of sling range. But that's just IMHO.

As the Marxist archaeologist and historian Neil Faulkner notes in his 2002 book Apocalypse: The Great Jewish Revolt Against Rome AD 66-73 “Though there has been some doubt cast on the truth of Josephus account [...] there seems little reason to doubt the basic factual record. At the very least the archaeology can do nothing to refute the written testimony, and there is no reason to assume the latter to be a concoction. Josephus had access to reliable contemporary sources, the Hellenist tradition of historical writing did not sanction wholesale fabrication, and the event described, while it may be exceptional, is certainly not incredible. [p.275]

Why did you feel the need to start off by denoting his political beliefs? I don't think I've ever seen you do that before?

Nobody argues that Josephus' account, even if 100% accurate, is by any means complete. Books could probably be written about the things he didn't mention (and probably have been). This is just a fairly weak example of argumentum ex silentio -- argument from silence.

Then there is the significance of The Masada Myth [again from Ben-Yehuda]

"At the time of the revolt, several ideological-political groups existed among the Jews. Two of these groups were the Zealots and the Sicarii. The Sicarii’s distinct feature was their use of political assassinations against both Romans and Jews. The Sicarii were disliked and were driven out of Jerusalem not by Romans but by other Jews a long time before the Roman army put the city under siege and destroyed it. The Sicarii fled to Masada. Thus, the group on top of Masada was a group of assassins, not Zealots. During their stay on Masada, the Sicarii raided nearby (Jewish) villages, killed the inhabitants, and took their food to Masada. They were responsible for a terrible massacre of presumably innocent women and children at Ein Gedi. [p.9]"

Later in the book he discusses the influence of the Hatzofim (Israeli Scouts) who regularly took youth groups to Masada and produced various booklets and pamphlets about the fortress [p.109-110]

"An another stenciled document (not dated, but probably from 19651966 or 1967), distributed by the national headquarters of Hatzofim in Tel Aviv, the following information is provided to the traveler to Masada and Ein Gedi:

“At the beginning of the Great Revolt (66 A.D.) Masada was conquered by the deceit of Menachem Ben Yehuda from the Galilee. This conquest was, de facto, the signal for the general uprising. After the conquest the victors left to Jerusalem, where they became involved in inner feuds, in which Menachem was killed, and his relative, Elazar Ben-Yair, took command of Masada. [...]After two years, the first two fell, and the Romans went to Masada. They did not charge the fortress but, rather,systematically isolated it from the external world and in this way starved its defenders. Within four months the Romans built eight military camps from all sides of Masada. They built a siege ramp on the western side . . . and placed siege machines on top, with which they finally broke through the wall. And so a regular army of 8000 men [took over] a fortress that was held by 960 starving men, women, and children. . . . Legend has it that after all hope was lost, Elazar Ben-Yair made a momentous speech, after which they all committed suicide, the last one setting fire to all the buildings. Masada has remained until this day a symbol of Jewish heroism without compromise or retreat; and to this day we proclaim, as a symbol for our hopes for the stability and continued existence of our state, that ‘Masada shall not fall again!’ ”


He then notes:

This passage contains some interesting fabrications, two of which are glaring. The first concerns the “starvation” of the rebels on top of Masada. This is simply contrary to what Josephus Flavius tells us. The second is the transformation of Elazar Ben-Yair’s two speeches into one. [...] The usual omission of the massacre at Ein Gedi and a failure to admit the lack of a “Masada battle” is also found here, along with a total disregard of the fact that the Sicarii were on Masada.


Again, citing Neil Faulkner, where in his Introduction he writes, “ Zionists of Israel will be disconcerted to discover that the Jewish rebels of the first century bear more similarity to the Palestinian fighters of Hamas than they do soldiers of the Israeli Defence Force. In particular [...]those seeking a contribution to some specifically “Jewish history” for in truth there has never been a single “Jewish people”, nor an unchanging “Jewish tradition” and only nationalist myths can link Simon bar-Giora and Ariel Sharon across two thousand years.” [p. 8.]

Bearing in mind Yadin's former background in the Haganah [terrorists or freedom fighters take your pick] it is hardly surprising that, as Neil Silberman noted in his 1993 biography of Yadin "the drama of the Masada excavations and the virtuoso brilliance with which Yadin conveyed the discoveries to the public made the project as much an exercise in patriotic inspiration as in scientific research”[p.288]

smiley yawn.gif

Sorry dosed off there. Can you please point to the relevant part in all of that?

[rogue06]

It was Christian nations, France, Poland, Austria, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands etc. Do you really imagine the Gestapo in occupied Europe could have identified the Jews and others without help?


Not in 1946.

Are you seriously arguing that the concentration camps the Nazis constructed in Poland were still operating in 1946?

[rogue06]

Well - after it was filtered through Martin Luther's writings about Jews, anyway.

Luther said some awful nasty things about the Jews, but Hitler's interest in what any Christian said was virtually negligible.

[rogue06]

(wow, Mrs McCurdy would really not like that long run-on sentence )

It just proviates that we be brudders.

[Cow Poke]

Are you seriously arguing that the concentration camps the Nazis constructed in Poland were still operating in 1946?

Yet another tactic...
When you can't dispute the main body of truth, try to divert to something peripheral.

[Cow Poke]

Still waiting for you to offer up anyone, even a cab driver...

All of the cab drivers in the world were dragged to court in Texas because they might have aided and abetted an abortion.

[tabibito]

Luther said some awful nasty things about the Jews, but Hitler's interest in what any Christian said was virtually negligible.

Unless he could press it to serve his own ends.