Nadene Goldfoot
I had high hopes for the Jerusalem series of 6, advertised by CNN, and was shocked by their 1st presentation. Probably most people will think it was terrific and will be mystified by what I noticed. Maybe I'm more sensitive when it was presented by a non-Jewish group; no rabbis or biblical commentators that I know of.
My first surprise was possibly quite true, and made me wonder. The comment was that today's Palestinians are saying that they came from the Jebusites. They were brought up when first talking about King David who chose Jerusalem to be his capital. In the early books of the Torah, Jerusalem was first called Jebus after the people inhabiting it before David. The Jebusites were a Canaanite people settled in Palestine prior to the Israelite conquest of Moses via Joshua. Canaanites were divided into 11 peoples who occupied the area betwen the Nile and the Euphrates (Gen.10:15-19). They had created city-states. Jacob, son of Isaac, son of Abraham, had lived in Canaan when a drought drove him with his family of 70 to Egypt where they had lived and were eventually taken into slavery for a period of 400 years. Moses led them back home.
The Jebusites lived in the hill region, principally around Jebus. Although Joshua defeated a Jebusite-led coalition, Jerusalem was occupied only in the reign of David. The last Jebusite king was apparently Araunah, named in II Samuel 24:15. The Jebusites remained in the city under David and became tributary under Solomon. In the course of time, they appear to have been assimilated. There wasn't a state of Jebusites, merely a city taking this name. We do not hear of it again.
There are no remains like bones to test to see if Palestinians can claim ancestors that were Jebusites. In fact, we Jews are more likely to be carrying their genes than anyone else. As for the Palestinians, I believe that Joan Peter's research for her book, From Time Immemorial, does the best research of all as to where Palestinians came from, and she lists the actual neighboring countries. No one can really go back to the Jebusites. Besides that, the Arabs did not enter the land that early, more likely came after Mohammad had died in 632 CE.
Moving on, CNN did well to go back to 1,000 BCE. Their subject was Saul, son of Kish from the tribe of Benjamin, who became Israel's 1st king. It was Saul's sword bearer, David, from the tribe of Judah, that we differ completely about. I felt that they made David out as a terrible person and king ! They used his dallying with Bathsheba as evidence and of having her husband killed so that he could marry her, a woman who became pregnant by him.
My Jewish comment, is that this happened more than 3,000 years ago as David ruled from 1010 to 970 BCE, and that all this information was from the Bible, open information, showing how human David was, and this is quite a revelation as to ancient history. Most people hid their faults, presenting themselves as being perfect. David was loved by the Jewish people. He is revered by Jews today who study their history, and certainly Israelis have great respect and love for him who also know their history. Check out Egypt. They erased walls that were not flattering to their pharaohs. Our history hides nothing. It reads like a soap opera. That's something to admire. We may squirm, but on first reading, can use it as a lesson to help us act better. Most of us are related to these biblical people, so these are our ancestors.
A commentator mentioned David's wives rebelling at Bathsheba's entrance to David's life. I count that Bathsheba was his 3rd wife out of a total of 9 wives. Two wives might argue among themselves but rebelling? They knew he'd take more wives. The 1st two were Michal and then Abigail. David and Michal had no children. Michal was the younger daughter of King Saul. Abigail's 1st husband, Nabal, had died and then she married David. She won David's pardon for Nabal's churlishness by her gifts and conciliatory words. Read I Samuel 25 about it. CNN's writers were overly exaggerating about his bad points and not saying much at all about his positive points other than he managed to unite the 12 tribes which most likely was quite a feat in itself.
As a former teacher in Israel for 4 years in Safed holding dual citizenship and as an old Jewish lady who had taught Sunday School, I was getting quite edgy at this point. I was thinking of the song I learned in Haifa's Ulpan-Da-vid, Melekh Yisrael, chai, chai, vic ay ain-ooh."..... ("David, king of Israel, lives, lives," ......) certainly in our hearts; memory going back to 1980.
Then we get to King Solomon, David and Bathsheba's son, "and the sky did fall on my head, Chicken Little". The picture painted of Solomon was terrible! This is the king that was so wise, and CNN held that against him by the very story of his best wisdom; choosing the real mother of a child between 2 women who both claimed they were the real mother. His decision of telling them to divide the child in two, which brought out the real mother immediately was made out to be showing his "ruthlessness." Never in my life would I consider such a thought. It brought out his wisdom of finding the mother who really loved the child who would give up the claim if it brought about its death. It made me think of how clever he had been. I knew he wouldn't have allowed it to happen. Only CNN's commentator, who was of Middle East nationality, I believe, not Jewish, who always commented so negatively.
Solomon was again called ruthless and was also said to have wanted to be greater than his father, and was like a despot. They spoke of the Temple and that a mosque sat over the 2nd Temple, which we also know. Did they mention that since David had to fight for the land that Joshua told them they had inherited , Solomon was able to build the Temple because he hadn't been involved in any wars? No. No, I don't think anyone consulted with RASHI on this Series. They reiterated that Solomon did not even provide a peaceful kingdom-he the king allowed to build the Temple because he had not been involved in any wars..not peaceful enough for CNN.
Incidentally, RASHI (1040-1105 , the famous French biblical commentator, is a direct descendant of King David. DNA testing backs up his claim and his pedigree. I'm related to Rashi by 3 avenues. So are many many other Jews.
Well, I have faith and I'm furious over this presentation. At a time of so much anti-Semitism going on all over the world, it only gives Jews and Israel a bad picture. The commentators see us in such a bad light through what they have dug up, it really knocks my socks off.
"The history of Jerusalem is a very complicated story," says Laura Schor, a professor of history at Hunter College, in the CNN series. "And if you don't know it in its complexity, it's very hard to understand what's going on there today." That is true; people need to know a lot more, but.....to learn from competent sources, not critics.
Wow, and presenting the Jews in such glowing terms! I do hope she was too busy teaching to have written the script of this presentation. She also served as the executive director of Hadassah and was the founding dean of the Macaulay Honors College from its inception in 2001 until its first class graduated in 2005. Dr. Schor is on the boards of the Hadassah-Brandeis Institute, the Macaulay Honors College Foundation Board, and the Slim Peace Board. I do wonder if Dr. Schor oversaw this presentation. I have been a member of Hadassah, a women's Zionist organization of America founded in 1912 by Henrietta Szold with the object to raise the standard of health in disease-ridden Palestine; to encourage the development of Jewish life in America, and to foster the Jewish ideal. I don't think this showing fostered the Jewish ideal or even was encouraging to Jews living in America. It was criticizing our heroes, David and his son, Solomon when we Jews more likely praise them.
Resource;
CNN's 1st of series of Jerusalem 7/18/2021
The New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia
