Nuggets from "Judgment Day: Islam, Israel, and the Nations" by Dave Hunt

Nuggets from "Judgment Day: Islam, Israel, and the Nations" by Dave Hunt

How could the descendants of Ishmael, who didn't even live in "Palestine," claim descent from the "original Palestinians"? They couldn't. Clearly, Arabs could not possibly be descendants of the original inhabitants of Canaan. Such contradictions do not provide a good foundation for the claims of today's "Palestinians." Yet the world accepts these fantasies as the basis of a settlement they intend to impose upon Israel, whose legitimate ancestral claims to that land go back four thousand years!

If "Palestine" is so important to the Arabs, why is it not mentioned once in their holy book the Qur'an? The word is used four times in the Bible but never refers either to the land of Canaan or to Israel. The Hebrew word from which it is translated is pelensheth. It referred to a small region also known as Philistia, the land of the Pelishtee, or Philistines. Philistia was in the same location but a bit larger than the Gaza Strip of today, named after the Philisitine city of Gaza. Their other cities were Ashdod, Gath (home of Goliath), Gerar, and Ekron. This is true history, of which the Qur'an kinows nothing.

The Philistines were not a Semitic people like the Arabs but had invaded Canaan by sea from across the Mediterranean and occupied that particular area before the Israelites arrived. They were not the "original inhabitants of the land" (as today's "Palestinians" claim their ancestors were) but displaced certain Canaanites just as they were themselves eventually displaced by Israel. Arab "Palestinians" (who are Semites) living there today can claim neither ethnic, linguistic, nor historical relationship to the Philistines, nor can they justify on any other basis calling themselves Palestinians.