Who/What is a Jew?

[boyntonstu]

If you name the tail of a dog a 'leg', how many legs does a dog have?

Can you eat hamburgers and call yourself a Vegetarian?

Can you believe in Jesus and be a Jew?

If you say that you are a Jew, are you a Jew?

What does it "take" to be a Jew?

Is being 'Jewish' close to being a Jew or synonymous with being a Jew?

Is is the same as in "I'll meet you at 6 ish"?

Where did this word originate?

I never heard of Catholicish, Christianish, etc.

What is a Jew?

[Thunder]

don't you think a topic should be limited to at most, 5 questions?

[billw]

Someone who answers a question with a question?

[marksman]

Jew (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/jew)
–noun
1. one of a scattered group of people that traces its descent from the Biblical Hebrews or from postexilic adherents of Judaism; Israelite.
2. a person whose religion is Judaism.
3. a subject of the ancient kingdom of Judah.[QUOTE=boyntonstu;5465313]

If you name the tail of a dog a 'leg', how many legs does a dog have?
According to the "you" in the sentence, five. According to normal definitions of the word, four (unless the dog is an amputee.)

Can you eat hamburgers and call yourself a Vegetarian?
You can call yourself anything you like. Whether anybody accepts your definition is another matter.

Can you believe in Jesus and be a Jew?
According to whom?

If you say that you are a Jew, are you a Jew?
You are by your own definition. Probably not by any others.

What does it "take" to be a Jew?
According to whom?

Is being 'Jewish' close to being a Jew or synonymous with being a Jew?
According to whom?

Is is the same as in "I'll meet you at 6 ish"?
No. Being Jewish is not the same as being 6. Although some Jews are six.

Where did this word originate?
-ish is a Greek suffix.

What is a Jew?
According to whom?

[Hokulele]

To the OP, why does it matter to you?

This is a weird thread.

[Darth Rotor]

If you name the tail of a dog a 'leg', how many legs does a dog have?
Four
Can you eat hamburgers and call yourself a Vegetarian?
Yes, but people would make fun of you for being an idiot.
Can you believe in Jesus and be a Jew?
If by "believe in Jesus" you mean Jesus as son of God and Divine ... no, if by Jew you mean one who practices the religion of Judaism. This is a core disagreement between the two religions of Christianity and Judaism.
If you say that you are a Jew, are you a Jew?

Ask your mother. She'll know.
What does it "take" to be a Jew?
Ask a Rabbi.
Is being 'Jewish' close to being a Jew or synonymous with being a Jew?
Seems similar to us Gentiles. :p
Is is the same as in "I'll meet you at 6 ish"?
No.
Where did this word originate?
What word? Jew? I seem to recall it came from Judah. Might be wrong.

As to "Catholicish" the adjective "catholic" is what morphed into a noun, not the other way around. Sorry, you lose that one.
What is a Jew?
Someone who is Jewish, of course.

DR

[Phrost]

I see the point here; I've asked the same question before. Is it an ethnicity, a religion, both? Can you truly be a Jew if you're a red-headed Irishman who converted, or will you only be "part" Jew.

I ask out of an honest desire for understanding.

[Thunder]

Can you truly be a Jew if you're a red-headed Irishman who converted, or will you only be "part" Jew.


Moses married an Arab. his children were considered Jews.

does this answer your question?

[Phrost]

So it's not an ethnicity? If someone discriminates against said Mr. Seamus O'leary for being a Jew, is it racism?

[Vic Vega]

I see the point here; I've asked the same question before. Is it an ethnicity, a religion, both? Can you truly be a Jew if you're a red-headed Irishman who converted, or will you only be "part" Jew.

I ask out of an honest desire for understanding.


It is both a religion and an ethnic group according to the definition of "ethnic", but Jews can obviously be any nationality or race.

Yes, you can convert from anything and be a full-fleged Jew. If you want to be accepted as a Jew by just about all Jews, you would want to convert with an Orthodox Rabbi. You also could convert with a Conservative or Reform Rabbi. Each conversion process will be different with Orthodox being the most rigorous followed by Conservative, then Reform. All conversions will take quite a bit of time and study.

You can't simply be a Jew because you want to or because you say you are. At least you won't be Jewish according to Jews.

[Vic Vega]

So it's not an ethnicity? If someone discriminates against said Mr. Seamus O'leary for being a Jew, is it racism?

It is an ethnicity technically, though many people won't think of it that way.

Not racism. Jews can be of any race. It would be anti-semitism.

[Vic Vega]

Moses married an Arab. his children were considered Jews.

does this answer your question?

They wouldn't be today. Unless she converted, of course!

:D

[Thunder]

the one thing that bothers me, is that Jews consider themselves to be an ethnic group, in almost EVERY situation. they want to be treated like every other ethnic group...including the right to self-determination. well, that's all fine and dandy.

but, Jews also believe, that if a Jew believes in Jesus, he forfeits his Jewishness. There is no other ethnic group on Earth, that has such a rule. Ethnicity cannot be "lost" or forfeited.

So, if being Jewish is TRULY an ethnicity, then you cannot lose it or give it up, and Jews who convert to Christianity or Islam or Buddhism remain Jews.

But, if you CAN lose your Jewishness, by accepting another faith, then Judaism is NOT an ethnicity, and is simply a religion.

Only a religion can be abandoned, gave up, or forefeited.

so...which is it?

:)

[Doctor Evil]

I see the point here; I've asked the same question before. Is it an ethnicity, a religion, both? Can you truly be a Jew if you're a red-headed Irishman who converted, or will you only be "part" Jew.

I ask out of an honest desire for understanding.

It is both, due to a peculiar history in which both were more or less synonymous. A convert is a Jew, as well as someone born to a Jewish family, as long as he/she does not convert to a different religion.

But, and it is a big but, when you gather around several Jews you would get several different opinions about this. (Or any other question, for that matter.) Also, there is the question of conversion according to which branch of Judaism. For instance, Orthodox Jews would not recognize conversion done by a reform Rabbi.

[Thunder]

I believe there should be two distinctive labels:

1. "Jewish" to reflect the faith, religion, etc.

2. "Hebrew" to reflect the ethnicity, secular culture, language, etc.

One can give up their Jewishness..and lose it...by conversion. But they would stay "Hebrew"...due to their lineage and ethnicity.

[Darth Rotor]

I believe there should be two distinctive labels:

1. "Jewish" to reflect the faith, religion, etc.

2. "Hebrew" to reflect the ethnicity, secular culture, language, etc.

One can give up their Jewishness..and lose it...by conversion. But they would stay "Hebrew"...due to their lineage and ethnicity.
Let us know how your reform of this works out, OK? :)

Seems a reasonable approach ...

[Thunder]

Let us know how your reform of this works out, OK? :)

Seems a reasonable approach ...

what do you expect from me? this is just a debate forum.

its not a NGO trying to change the world.

p.s....I think you have a problem with me. and that is your problem. :)

[KodeBlue]

Gee when I first saw the title of this thread I thought it would be some glurgy-sweet poem along the lines of "What is a Mom?" or "I am your Nation's Flag"...

[Hokulele]

I see the point here; I've asked the same question before. Is it an ethnicity, a religion, both? Can you truly be a Jew if you're a red-headed Irishman who converted, or will you only be "part" Jew.

I ask out of an honest desire for understanding.


Here's an analogy:

Is female a sex or a gender? If you were born male and underwent surgery and therapy, can you truly be female?

The only decent answer is "It depends on context."

This is why I asked the OP why it matters to him/her. Knowing the context in which these types of questions are asked helps generate better answers.

[Piscivore]

"Who or what is a Jew?" asked Cindy Lou Who.
"Can anyone be, or only Hebrews?
Does one have to be kosher, or just not a Goy?
What about a girl who thinks she's a boy?
Was Jesus a Jew, is he anymore?
When he got nailed up did that go out the door?
I have to know, what does it all mean?
Thinking about this is turning me green.
I can't puzzle it out, it's making me blue-
'Cause I don't really know; should I be hating you?"

[Björn Toulouse]

....What is a Jew?


Depends upon whom you ask. From the New Living Translation of the New Testament:


Rom 2:28-29 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rom&c=2&t=NLT)


For you are not a true Jew just because you were born of Jewish parents or because you have gone through the Jewish ceremony of circumcision.

No, a true Jew is one whose heart is right with God. And true circumcision is not a cutting of the body but a change of heart produced by God's Spirit. Whoever has that kind of change seeks praise from God, not from people.

[FedUpWithFaith]

Even though my mother's side of the family is Jewish, I've never understood exactly what a Jew is. Supposedly, according to Jewish law, you're a Jew if your mother is. But historically I found out that this was originally a Roman dictate Jews absorbed - though this is disputed.

My Jewish uncle, a survivor of the holocaust once asked me what I thought a Jew was. I said that reflecting on history, Jews appear to be good oven tinder.

He was not amused. But my mother laughed.

[bruto]

So it's not an ethnicity? If someone discriminates against said Mr. Seamus O'leary for being a Jew, is it racism?In Seamus O'Leary's hypothetical case, I would think it's religious discrimination, just as bigots of another stripe might discriminate against his brother for being a Catholic.

[Thunder]

My Jewish uncle, a survivor of the holocaust once asked me what I thought a Jew was. I said that reflecting on history, Jews appear to be good oven tinder.

He was not amused. But my mother laughed.

haaaa!!!!!!!!!! not funny.

;)

[Eyeron]

Sometimes when the burger is so tasty I substitute the word hum for ham.

[Pinkymcfatfat]

What if we were to go by genetics? Certain groups of Jews do carry different genetic markers...unfortunately, one of them is for Tay-Sachs.

[Frank Newgent]

A Lebanese on their way to Cairo?

[godless dave]

It's almost as if human concepts of ethnicity and religion don't have exact, precise meanings, and any attempt to classify people in those terms is ultimately subjective. Wow, what a revelation.

[Hux]

Sammy Davis Jr. became a Jew. Its a religion not a racial issue.

[quarky]

Sammy Davis Jr. became a Jew. Its a religion not a racial issue.

Yeah, but he only had one eye.

[Thunder]

like i said, if Jews really wanted themselves to be seen purely as an ethnicity, with all the rights that other ethnicities are afforded (self-determination), than they can't apply the "love Jesus and you stop being a Jew" rule.

ethnicities cannot be abandoned or stripped away. only religions can.

[hgc]

Moses married an Arab. his children were considered Jews.

does this answer your question?


Moses is a fictional character whose supposed timeframe of existence probably pre-dates any conceptions of "Arab" or "Jew" (which, by the way, are not mutually exclusive).

[hgc]

I believe there should be two distinctive labels:

1. "Jewish" to reflect the faith, religion, etc.

2. "Hebrew" to reflect the ethnicity, secular culture, language, etc.

One can give up their Jewishness..and lose it...by conversion. But they would stay "Hebrew"...due to their lineage and ethnicity.


The distinction already exists:

1. Jewishness is an ethnicity.

2. Judaism is a religion.

[Thunder]

The distinction already exists:

1. Jewishness is an ethnicity.

2. Judaism is a religion.

many Jews argue that a Jew stops being a Jew, when they believe in Jesus and get baptized.

if this is the case, then Jews are the only ethnicity on Earth that have a ideological litmus test for belonging to the group.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

What if we were to go by genetics? Certain groups of Jews do carry different genetic markers...unfortunately, one of them is for Tay-Sachs.
And then surprise! we find other groups of people with Hexosaminidase A deficiency. French Canadians. Louisiana Cajuns. Japanese. Another race marker gets all mixed up.

Who's happy about it? Those of us with Genzyme stock.

~~ Paul

[godless dave]

like i said, if Jews really wanted themselves to be seen purely as an ethnicity, with all the rights that other ethnicities are afforded (self-determination),

Who says they do?

For many people, ethnicity and religious belief are intertwined. You're thinking of them as distinct, non-overlapping concepts. That's not always the case.

[godless dave]

many Jews argue that a Jew stops being a Jew, when they believe in Jesus and get baptized.

if this is the case, then Jews are the only ethnicity on Earth that have a ideological litmus test for belonging to the group.


The only ethnicity? Are you sure? Ever been to Northern Ireland?

[Thunder]

The only ethnicity? Are you sure? Ever been to Northern Ireland?

yup.

[godless dave]

Then you know that for many people in Northern Ireland, the terms "Catholic" and "Protestant" have as much to do with their national identity as their religious beliefs.

[Thunder]

Then you know that for many people in Northern Ireland, the terms "Catholic" and "Protestant" have as much to do with their national identity as their religious beliefs.

I am also aware, that true Ulster-Scots, who immigrated from Scotland centuries ago, are Presbyterian.

Have YOU been to Northern Ireland?

[godless dave]

I am also aware, that true Ulster-Scots, who immigrated from Scotland centuries ago, are Presbyterian.


Presbyterians are Protestants. Are you saying their national identity has nothing to do with their religious identity?

[Bri]

but, Jews also believe, that if a Jew believes in Jesus, he forfeits his Jewishness. There is no other ethnic group on Earth, that has such a rule. Ethnicity cannot be "lost" or forfeited.

The problem is that the word has two different definitions. The word commonly refers to a religion and not an ethnicity since someone of any ethnicity can be a Jew if she or he converted or if her or his mother is Jewish. However, a less common definition of the word refers to a descendant of one of the 12 tribes of Israel and in that regard can be used to refer to a specific ethnic group.

Where did you hear that if a Jew believes in Jesus he forfeits his Jewishness? If I'm not mistaken, once you're a Jew, you're always considered a Jew according to the Jewish religion, regardless of what you believe and even if you convert to another religion.

-Bri

[hgc]

Where did you hear that if a Jew believes in Jesus he forfeits his Jewishness? If I'm not mistaken, once you're a Jew, you're always considered a Jew according to the Jewish religion, regardless of what you believe and even if you convert to another religion.

-Bri


That's the way I always understood it. But then, this whole discussion reminds me of how definition of religion is ultimately a personal belief. This realization came with the controversy in the 90's over Mahmood Abdul-Rauf (formerly Chris Jackson), an NBA player with the Denver Nuggets at the time, who, due to his religious beliefs, started to refuse to stand for the national anthem before games. The league's most prominent Muslim at the time, Hakeem Olajuwon, countered that there is nothing in their shared religion that precludes standing for the US national anthem. I thought at the time, who the hell is Olajuwon to lecture Abdul-Rauf about his own religious beliefs? They're whatever each person says they are.

Now my religious beliefs are atheistic, but as a Jew (and as a person), I don't think that just because an ethnic Jew professes to be a Christian, he stops being a Jew -- even if he wishes to no longer be considered a Jew.

[boyntonstu]

That's the way I always understood it. But then, this whole discussion reminds me of how definition of religion is ultimately a personal belief. This realization came with the controversy in the 90's over Mahmood Abdul-Rauf (formerly Chris Jackson), an NBA player with the Denver Nuggets at the time, who, due to his religious beliefs, started to refuse to stand for the national anthem before games. The league's most prominent Muslim at the time, Hakeem Olajuwon, countered that there is nothing in their shared religion that precludes standing for the US national anthem. I thought at the time, who the hell is Olajuwon to lecture Abdul-Rauf about his own religious beliefs? They're whatever each person says they are.

Now my religious beliefs are atheistic, but as a Jew (and as a person), I don't think that just because an ethnic Jew professes to be a Christian, he stops being a Jew -- even if he wishes to no longer be considered a Jew.

A Christian Catholic converts to Judaism.

A few years later, s/he converts to become a Protestant.

Is s/he still a Jew?

BtW It is possible to be an Atheist Jew. (No Jew is ever asked what s/he believes.)

However, I do not think it is possible to be a Christian or Islamic Atheist.

[Thunder]

A Christian Catholic converts to Judaism.

A few years later, s/he converts to become a Protestant.

Is s/he still a Jew?

not in my mind.

[hgc]

A Christian Catholic converts to Judaism.

A few years later, s/he converts to become a Protestant.

Is s/he still a Jew?


Don't know; don't care. What do you think?

BtW It is possible to be an Atheist Jew.


Yes.

(No Jew is ever asked what s/he believes.)


Huh?


However, I do not think it is possible to be a Christian or Islamic Atheist.


Depends on how much someone assigns these labels to ethnicity.

[boyntonstu]

Huh?



In Judaism, in Synagogues, in all ceremonies, no Jew is ever asked what s/he believes.

In the Godfather movie, the Priest asks, "Do you believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost".

Answer "No" and the Baptism ceases.

"What do you believe?' , never occurs in religious ceremonies.

A question of this type may occur in conversations between friends.

I hope that this answers your Huh? question.

[marksman]

boyntontsu,

Could you stop being coy and explain what you really want to discuss here? Do you want to talk about traditional definitions of Judaism according to religious law? According to civil law? Do you want to talk about the line between ethnicity and religion? Do you want to compare how different sects define Judaism? Do you want a poll about each individual's personal definition of the word? Do you want to talk about the shifting vagaries of defining terms in English? What's this thread supposed to be about?

[Thunder]

In the Godfather movie, the Priest asks, "Do you believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost".


um...

#1. its a movie.

#2. its a rhetorical question.

#2. what is your agenda with this thread?

[Bri]

A Christian Catholic converts to Judaism.

A few years later, s/he converts to become a Protestant.

Is s/he still a Jew?

The question isn't what the person considers him or herself. A person can consider himself a cat if he wants to, even though nobody else will consider him to be a cat.

If I'm not mistaken, according to the Jewish religion it's difficult to become a member, but more difficult (maybe impossible) to no longer be a member.

So to answer your question, the person who converts to Judaism and then becomes a Protestant would still be considered Jewish according to most Jews, even though Protestants would likely consider the person Protestant. Not only that, but if the person happens to be female, any children she might have after becoming Protestant would still be considered Jewish according to most Jews.

From a Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_is_a_Jew%3F#Jews_who_have_practised_another_fa ith) on the subject:

Judaism has a category for those who are Jewish but who do not practice or who do not accept the tenets of Judaism, whether or not they have converted to another religion. The traditional view regarding these individuals, known as Meshumadim (Hebrew: משומדים), is that they are Jewish; however, there is much debate in the rabbinic literature regarding their status vis-a-vis the application of Jewish law and their participation in Jewish ritual;[34] but not to their status as Jews.

A Jew who leaves Judaism is free to return to the faith at any time. In general, no formal ceremony or declaration is required to return to Jewish practices. All movements of Judaism welcome the return to Judaism of those who have left, or been raised in another faith. When returning to Judaism, these individuals would be expected to abandon their previous practices and adopt Jewish customs.

The same rules in principle apply to the matrilineal descendants of such persons, though some rabbinical authorities may require stricter proof of Jewish descent than others...

However, also from the same article:

Another example of the issues involved is the case of converts to Judaism who cease to practice Judaism (whether or not they still regard themselves as Jewish), do not accept or follow halakha, or now adhere to another religion. Technically, such a person remains Jewish, like all Jews, provided that the original conversion is valid. However, in some recent cases, Haredi rabbinical authorities, as well as the current Religious Zionist Israeli Chief Rabbinate, have taken the view that a given convert's lapse from Orthodox Jewish observance is evidence that he or she cannot, even at the time of the conversion, have had the full intention to observe the commandments, and that the conversion must therefore have been invalid.

-Bri

[boyntonstu]

um...

#1. its a movie. Yes, but the infant Baptism scene follows the Catholic practice.

You said that you are a Jew.

Have you ever been asked "Do you believe?" by any Rabbi in any formal occasion?

#2. its a rhetorical question.

#2. what is your agenda with this thread? Education and discussion.

[marksman]

Education and discussion about what? I don't know what context this discussion is supposed to have. You're not being clear about the context.

[Thunder]

You said that you are a Jew.

Have you ever been asked "Do you believe?" by any Rabbi in any formal occasion?
.

I can only speak for myself, but yes...I am a Jew.

And no, Rabbis never ask me "what do you believe?". Rabbis speak with authority.

When they say the words "And God said", they assume that his congregation accepts this to be a fact.

[boyntonstu]

I can only speak for myself, but yes...I am a Jew.

And no, Rabbis never ask me "what do you believe?". Rabbis speak with authority.

When they say the words "And God said", they assume that his congregation accepts this to be a fact.


"Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved" has no equivalent in Judaism.

A Rabbi can assume anything, but he will never ask.

Some Rabbis talk about the Adam an Eve myth story.

It does not matter.

[quarky]

I've heard "Jew" used as a verb, as in "I Jewed him down ten bucks".

As an adjective, there's "Jewey", as in "My new boyfriend has Jewey hair."

The definition of Jew is only going to get more vague. In my little world, I know 10 kids that are from Jew/goy matings.

[Thunder]

"Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved" has no equivalent in Judaism.

A Rabbi can assume anything, but he will never ask.

Some Rabbis talk about the Adam an Eve myth story.

It does not matter.

one cannot claim that the Land of Israel was given by God to the Jewish people, in an everlasting Covenant, and yet believe that the Bible is a myth. Just letting you know.

[boyntonstu]

one cannot claim that the Land of Israel was given by God to the Jewish people, in an everlasting Covenant, and yet believe that the Bible is a myth. Just letting you know.


I agree, but it still does not matter.

The Jewish Myth, recorded thousands of years ago, is the claim.

If anyone else had the historical claim, they would have a point.

They don't.

Jerusalem isn't mentioned in the Koran.

[Jono]

"Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved" has no equivalent in Judaism.


Well, for the purpose of helping oneself to get a place in the afterlife of Judaism, there are the seven laws of Noah for gentiles et al to follow, without the need to convert.

[boyntonstu]

Well, for the purpose of helping oneself to get a place in the afterlife of Judaism, there are the seven laws of Noah for gentiles et al to follow, without the need to convert.

Indeed!

Noahides.

See: http://www.noahide.org/


Jews allow for everyone (Goyem) to go to wherever Jews go with a less burdensome path to follow.

I believe that the 7 Laws of Noah are reasonable.

[Thunder]

Jerusalem isn't mentioned in the Koran.

sure it is. its called "Al-Quds".

and Jerusalem is NOT in the Hebrew scriptures.

we call it "Yerooshalayim". its not the same word...just like with Islam.

[Thunder]

I believe that the 7 Laws of Noah are reasonable.

who are we tell to the Goys that they can't bow down before a statue???

do you know how many Jews have a picture of Menachem Schneerson on their wall?

isn't that ALSO a form of idolatry?

[boyntonstu]

sure it is. its called "Al-Quds".

and Jerusalem is NOT in the Hebrew scriptures.

we call it "Yerooshalayim". its not the same word...just like with Islam.


Jerusalem = Yerooshalayim = same city in the Hebrew Bible and today.


Al-Quds = Jerusalem TODAY.

Search the Koran for Al-Quds = Jerusalem here (or anywhere)

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/k/koran/simple.html

As I said previously Al-Quds = Jerusalem is not in the Koran.

A little knowledge can be misleading.

[Jono]

As I said previously Al-Quds = Jerusalem is not in the Koran.

A little knowledge can be misleading.

Well, while I am not sure wether or not an equivalent word for Jerusalem is in the Koran, it does talk about the city.

[boyntonstu]

Well, while I am not sure wether or not an equivalent word for Jerusalem is in the Koran, it does talk about the city.


I challenge you to prove it.

[FireGarden]

Jerusalem = Yerooshalayim = same city in the Hebrew Bible and today.


Al-Quds = Jerusalem TODAY.

Search the Koran for Al-Quds = Jerusalem here (or anywhere)

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/k/koran/simple.html

As I said previously Al-Quds = Jerusalem is not in the Koran.

According to the Quran -- Moses was a Muslim. So was Solomon, so it is not surprising to see his temple referred to as a mosque by your source in the chapter "Children of Israel":
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=429259

[17.7] If you do good, you will do good for your own souls, and if you do evil, it shall be for them. So when the second promise came (We raised another people) that they may bring you to grief and that they may enter the mosque as they entered it the first time, and that they might destroy whatever they gained ascendancy over with utter destruction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon's_Temple

Completed in 960 BCE, it was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BCE. The Second Temple was subsequently built on the same site, and was destroyed in 70 CE. Jewish eschatology commonly includes the belief that a Third Temple will be built.

Sacred texts gives the Arabic, an English translation and a transliteration into the Roman alphabet:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/quran/01701.htm

In verse 7, you will see the word "almasjida" -- "masjid" is a mosque.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosque

So the Quran refers to Islamic places of worship in the places the Israelites called home. No actual use of the word "Jerusalem", though. Is that good enough?



There is another reference to Jerusalem in the Quran, though again not by name:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/quran/00217.htm

The above verse talks about the direction Muslims face during prayer. Originally, it was Jerusalem.


And, back to the original topic, here's an interesting site:
http://www.jews-for-allah.org/

[Thunder]

I challenge you to prove it.

I have a Koran, and I will prove it. Give me some time.

[Thunder]

Indeed, Jerusalem does not appear in the Koran, except in the Night Journey chapter.

But, the idea that the Koran, which holds the Hebrew prophets in the highest of high esteems, would not consider Jerusalem to be a Holy place, is preposterous. Do you see how many times the Koran mentions David, Solomon, Moses, and the other Hebrew prophets??

it beyond clear as day, that Islam considers these men to be holy men. the Koran also discusses God's covenant with the Israelitees, giving them the land of Canaan as long as they live up to God's covenant.

Furthermore, the Koran seems to be much less of a history book, then the Gospels and the Tanakh. It is understandable if Jerusalem is not mentioned. Either way, I see no reason to believe that Mohammed did not consider Jerusalem to be a holy place.

[Jono]

I challenge you to prove it.

Allright. Are you familiar where and how the Koran talks about the jews being expelled from a certain city? First, by Nebuchadnezzar (heard of him have ya?), then by Titus (familiar with the First and Second Diaspora are ya?). Furthermore, lest we forget, the discussed reunion of gathering back at this city after two milleniums.

We already know this concerned Jerusalem and the israelites thereof. Or, do you mean to argue that the Koran referred to another city and that it was simply by chance it talked about the exact same events, echoed in scripture and history et al, which we all know involved Jerusalem?

Fyi, the Five Books of Moses doesn't mention 'Jerusalem' either, but it does talk about it nevertheless (the two halfs of it, 'Yere' and the other part, 'Shalem').

[boyntonstu]

Allright. Are you familiar where and how the Koran talks about the jews being expelled from a certain city? First, by Nebuchadnezzar (heard of him have ya?), then by Titus (familiar with the First and Second Diaspora are ya?). Furthermore, lest we forget, the discussed reunion of gathering back at this city after two milleniums.

We already know this concerned Jerusalem and the israelites thereof. Or, do you mean to argue that the Koran referred to another city and that it was simply by chance it talked about the exact same events, echoed in scripture and history et al, which we all know involved Jerusalem?

Fyi, the Five Books of Moses doesn't mention 'Jerusalem' either, but it does talk about it nevertheless (the two halfs of it, 'Yere' and the other part, 'Shalem').


Muslims face Mecca when they pray.

In Israel they point their asses towards Jerusalem.

Do you know what that means to a Muslim?

"One comparison makes this point most clearly: Jerusalem appears in the Jewish Bible 669 times and Zion (which usually means Jerusalem, sometimes the Land of Israel) 154 times, or 823 times in all. The Christian Bible mentions Jerusalem 154 times and Zion 7 times. In contrast, the columnist Moshe Kohn notes, Jerusalem and Zion appear as frequently in the Qur'an "as they do in the Hindu Bhagavad-Gita, the Taoist Tao-Te Ching, the Buddhist Dhamapada and the Zoroastrian Zend Avesta"—which is to say, not once.

The city being of such evidently minor religious importance, why does it now loom so large for Muslims, to the point that a Muslim Zionism seems to be in the making across the Muslim world? Why do Palestinian demonstrators take to the streets shouting "We will sacrifice our blood and souls for you, Jerusalem" and their brethren in Jordan yell "We sacrifice our blood and soul for Al-Aqsa"? Why does King Fahd of Saudi Arabia call on Muslim states to protect "the holy city [that] belongs to all Muslims across the world"? Why did two surveys of American Muslims find Jerusalem their most pressing foreign policy issue?"

http://www.danielpipes.org/84/the-muslim-claim-to-jerusalem

[hgc]

At least now we know the point of this thread.

[Hux]

I need a Jew:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mm2v-FvgSNw

[Thunder]

In Israel they point their asses towards Jerusalem.

http://www.danielpipes.org/84/the-muslim-claim-to-jerusalem

do Muslims point their asses to Jerusalem, when they are west of Jerusalem?

and btw, Daniel Pipes is a rabid Islamophobe and a bigot. he is as much a good source on Islam as Eichmann was on Judaism.

[boyntonstu]

do Muslims point their asses to Jerusalem, when they are west of Jerusalem?

and btw, Daniel Pipes is a rabid Islamophobe and a bigot. he is as much a good source on Islam as Eichmann was on Judaism.


I believe in facts an not in sources.

He claimed:

"Jerusalem appears in the Jewish Bible 669 times"

Are you disagreeing with this specific claim?

You have made too many Bible errors to be credible.


I believe that Daniel Pipes would not quote Leviticus as you did.

(And when the obvious error was pointed out, he would have acknowledged it without hesitation).

Do you still believe it a Sin for a man to lie down with a woman?

[Thunder]

Do you still believe it a Sin for a man to lie down with a woman?

can you read?

[Thunder]

Do you still believe it a Sin for a man to lie down with a woman?

oops...look like I made a boo-boo.

but clearly, the Torah calls for homosexuals to be put to death. and it calls for children who curse their parents, to be put to death.

why don't Jews follow these laws?

[HansMustermann]

Ooh, I know, I know... it's someone who uses the force and has a lightsaber and... err... oh, you asked what is a Jew. Sorry.

[boyntonstu]

oops...look like I made a boo-boo.

but clearly, the Torah calls for homosexuals to be put to death. and it calls for children who curse their parents, to be put to death.

why don't Jews follow these laws?

For the same reason Christians eat shrimp.

[FireGarden]

Muslims face Mecca when they pray.

And before that, they faced Jerusalem -- as I noted above.

As for the wider point... Which land do you think is being referenced when the Quran talks of Israelites? Which Israelite places of worship were destroyed twice? I can think of only the Israelite temple in Jerusalem, which (being Israelite) is, you know, in Israel -- maybe? Perhaps Solomon built it in Yemen. You tell me.

But the Quran doesn't mention the city by name -- you have to be able to understand the references to things like Israelite temples. Do you think that means that no Muslim on Earth has any right to live there -- regardless of how many of their ancestors lived there?



At least now we know the point of this thread.

Well I do think we've been given a surprising clue. I was expecting something personal between boyntonstu and Parky.

[Thunder]

For the same reason Christians eat shrimp.

According to THEIR holy book, Gentile Christians are allowed to eat shellfish. Only Hebrew Christians have to follow the laws of kashrut.

[boyntonstu]

According to THEIR holy book, Gentile Christians are allowed to eat shellfish. Only Hebrew Christians have to follow the laws of kashrut.


Please point out chapter and verse that forbids homosexuality and allows eating shrimp.

[Thunder]

Please point out chapter and verse that forbids homosexuality and allows eating shrimp.

do you have a Bible? good.

try reading it sometime.

Leviticus chapter 20 gives the death penalty for practicing homosexuality.

In the Gospels, Jesus disavows the kosher laws by stating that "it is not what goes into you that makes you unclean, but what comes out of you (words and deeds), when questioned about kosher laws.

[bruto]

do you have a Bible? good.

try reading it sometime.

Leviticus chapter 20 gives the death penalty for practicing homosexuality.

In the Gospels, Jesus disavows the kosher laws by stating that "it is not what goes into you that makes you unclean, but what comes out of you (words and deeds), when questioned about kosher laws.But that disavowal was made by, for and to Hebrews, was it not? It was Jesus' own disciples who were accused of breaking the laws. There were clearly no Christians in existence at the time this is supposed to have been uttered. It requires at least some interpretation to suggest that this is an exemption for Gentile Christians alone. That's not to say the interpretation is not made by some, but it's a pretty tenuous bit of chapter and verse.

e.t.a I was accidentally conflating an earlier incident in which "the sabbath was made for man, etc." occurs, with Parky's reference, which comes from Mark 7, if you're looking for it. It can be read as a pretty thorough disavowal of at least certain of the O.T. laws, and a reprimand to the Pharisees for allowing the letter of those laws to overshadow the important ones.

Christians are all over the map in their interpretation of what parts of Hebrew law to hold onto. It's at best a matter of interpretation and at worst a joke.

[boyntonstu]

do you have a Bible? good.

try reading it sometime.

Leviticus chapter 20 gives the death penalty for practicing homosexuality.

In the Gospels, Jesus disavows the kosher laws by stating that "it is not what goes into you that makes you unclean, but what comes out of you (words and deeds), when questioned about kosher laws.

" 10 " 'If a man commits adultery with another man's wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death."

Should Tiger Woods be put to death?

Why focus on Homosexuality?

[Thunder]

" 10 " 'If a man commits adultery with another man's wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death."

Should Tiger Woods be put to death?


isn't it God's law? who are the Jews to pick and choose which one of God's law they are gonna obey?

hmmmmm?

[Jono]

Muslims face Mecca when they pray.

In Israel they point their asses towards Jerusalem.

Do you know what that means to a Muslim?

Thanks for ignoring an on-point response with sidestepping the very question I answered for your. The Koran might not necessarily mention Jerusalem by word, but it does talk about it.

[boyntonstu]

Thanks for ignoring an on-point response with sidestepping the very question I answered for your. The Koran might not necessarily mention Jerusalem by word, but it does talk about it.


The Koran might not necessarily mention Jerusalem by word, but it does talk about it.

Prove it. Show us a single eample.

How important was Jerusalem to Muslims during the writing of the Koran?

[marksman]

This is silly. Jerusalem became important to Islam because they believe Mohammed was taken there by an angel and physically ascended to heaven from that spot. Since the Quran was supposedly dictated by Mohammed, most of it would have been written before Mohammed's ascension, and thus wouldn't have mentioned it. That doesn't mean it's not important.

Similarly, Jerusalem is not mentioned at all in the Torah. Why? Because Jerusalem didn't exist yet, it is only referenced obliquely, at best. It is referenced in the Haftorah, of course, as that is the story of David selecting Jerusalem as his capital and of Solomon building the Temple there, and the subsequent mythic history of the city.

[Thunder]

How important was Jerusalem to Muslims during the writing of the Koran?

for more than 700 years, Jews were allowed to travel to and even live in Jerusalem. But yet, very very few ever did.

In fact, Jews were allowed to live in all of Palestine. But until the late 1800s, only a few thousand Jews lived there. Seems like the Jews didn't really worry about their ancient homeland anymore.

I guess Jerusalem and Palestine really aren't important to Jews then huh?

[FireGarden]

It is referenced in the Haftorah, of course, as that is the story of David selecting Jerusalem as his capital and of Solomon building the Temple there, and the subsequent mythic history of the city.

Do you mean like the destruction (twice) of the temple, as referenced in Quran [17:7] and quoted earlier?

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5474877&postcount=65

[Thunder]

How important was Jerusalem to Muslims during the writing of the Koran?

:D

[marksman]

Do you mean like the destruction (twice) of the temple, as referenced in Quran [17:7] and quoted earlier?

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5474877&postcount=65

Yes. That's exactly what I mean. (I hope you didn't think I was agreeing with boyntontsu that it's never written in the Quran.)

[FireGarden]

Yes. That's exactly what I mean. (I hope you didn't think I was agreeing with boyntontsu that it's never written in the Quran.)

Actually, I made my comment hoping that boyntonstu would acknowledge/explain the reference. Just a small hope, you understand, since he's missed it before.

Didn't mean to put you on his bandwagon.

[Thunder]

for 800 years, very few Jews moved to, let alone visited, Palestine and Jerusalem. I guess that means Jerusalem and Israel really wasn't that important to the Jewish people.

[boyntonstu]

for 800 years, very few Jews moved to, let alone visited, Palestine and Jerusalem. I guess that means Jerusalem and Israel really wasn't that important to the Jewish people.

What is the significance of Jerusalem to Jews and Muslims?


"Then, in 715, to build up the prestige of their dominions, the Ommaid caliphs concocted a masterstroke: they built a second mosque in Jerusalem, again on the Temple Mount, and called this one the Furthest Mosque (al-masjid al-aqsa, or Al-Aqsa Mosque), from a passage of the Qur'an (17:1) describing the Prophet Mohammed's Night Journey to heaven (isra'). With this, the Ommaids retroactively gave Jerusalem a role in Mohammed's life, a role that was entirely fictional since Mohammed never visited Jerusalem, died in 632, and the Al-Aqsa Mosque was not built until 715, eighty-three years after his death.

This association of Jerusalem with al-masjid al-aqsa fit into a wider Muslim tendency to identify place names found in the Qur'an with locations they coveted, and then to claim it and build a mosque to replace whatever was there before.

An 1854 report states Jerusalem's total population at 15,000, of which a majority (8,000) were Jews."

http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_early_palestine_jerusalem.php

[Thunder]

An 1854 report states Jerusalem's total population at 15,000, of which a majority (8,000) were Jews."

http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_early_palestine_jerusalem.php

that is a very generous estimate.

either way, before 1854, the Jews had not been the majority of Jerusalem since 135 A.D.

though Jews were allowed to move to Jerusalem and Palestine, very few actually did, since the Muslim take-over of the land from the Christians.

people who truly value a land, visit it on a regular basis or move to it in droves. Clearly, Israel and Jerusalem was not very important to the Jews, until the creation of Zionism in the late 1800s.

its just facts buddy. don't be offended by them.

[hgc]

All this flapdoodle about who held the city sacred millenia ago and what the population was in the middle of the 19th century is quite irrelevant. What matters is who lives there in the present day. That is why the Israeli government is so intent on changing those facts-on-the-ground in and around Jerusalem.

I can't see how any rational process of deciding the future of Jerusalem would consult the number of references to the city in one or another ancient book. You might as well slaughter a goat and read the guts.

[Jono]

Prove it. Show us a single eample.


Is this a merry-go-round? I did that the last time you asked me to "prove it", and by noting on two examples nonetheless. My question to you is 1) Do you deny that the Koran mentions these events? 2) Do you deny they are talking about Jerusalem. If you do, then what city is involved and talked about concerning these events?

[boyntonstu]

Is this a merry-go-round? I did that the last time you asked me to "prove it", and by noting on two examples nonetheless. My question to you is 1) Do you deny that the Koran mentions these events? 2) Do you deny they are talking about Jerusalem. If you do, then what city is involved and talked about concerning these events?

Offer: $1 million for Finding "Jerusalem" in the Koran

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2006/01/offer-1-million-for-finding-jerusalem-in-the

In the same spirit, I offer a million dollars to anyone who finds the name "Jerusalem" (Iliya, Al-Quds, Bayt al-Maqdis), in the Koran. Metaphors, similes, allegories, allusions, deductions, and implicit references do not count (and specifically, not 17:1), only an accepted proper name referring to that city, using the standard Egyptian text.

[Cainkane1]

If you name the tail of a dog a 'leg', how many legs does a dog have?

Can you eat hamburgers and call yourself a Vegetarian?

Can you believe in Jesus and be a Jew?

If you say that you are a Jew, are you a Jew?

What does it "take" to be a Jew?

Is being 'Jewish' close to being a Jew or synonymous with being a Jew?

Is is the same as in "I'll meet you at 6 ish"?

Where did this word originate?

I never heard of Catholicish, Christianish, etc.

What is a Jew?
A jew is a person who either by birth or conversion either identifies with or practises the various sects of the jewish faith.

[marksman]

Metaphors, similes, allegories, allusions, deductions, and implicit references do not count
Why not?

[boyntonstu]

Why not?

If you want to win $1,000,000 ask Mr. Pipes.

He writes for that place. You know which place I am thinking about, of course.

BTW The 'furthest mosque' built and named in Jerusalem was furthest from where?

On top of which religious place was the mosque built?

[Thunder]

On top of which religious place was the mosque built?

Muslims have lived in Jerusalem since the 8th century.

Their third most important mosque, is in Jerusalem.

I think they have the right to be there, and have a say in its future.

[marksman]

If you want to win $1,000,000 ask Mr. Pipes.
I have no desire to win his million dollars because of the ridiculous contrived limitation he puts on that contest. My question was directed at you: why are you refusing to accept metaphors, similes, allegories, allusions, deductions, and implicit references? Why did you adopt Mr. Pipes' limitations?

[boyntonstu]

Give us examples of metaphors, similes, allegories, allusions, deductions, and implicit references using the standard Egyptian text.

We will see how clearly they refer to Jerusalem.

[Thunder]

the word Jerusalem does not appear in the Koran

does that mean that Muslims have no right to live there....or the Palestinians have no right to control their neighborhoods in East Jerusalem?

of course not.

[Towlie]

(The original topic of this thread raises) an interesting question. You might summarize it as the Sammy Davis Jr. view vs. the Nazi view.

[marksman]

Give us examples of metaphors, similes, allegories, allusions, deductions, and implicit references using the standard Egyptian text.

We will see how clearly they refer to Jerusalem.

"And remember it was said to them: 'Dwell in this town and eat therein as ye wish, but say the word of humility and enter the gate in a posture of humility: We shall forgive you your faults; We shall increase (the portion of) those who do good.'"
-Qur'an, al-Araf, 7:161 (http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/007.qmt.html)

This passage is talking about the "town" in which the Israelites settled immediately following the Exodus (as mentioned in al-'Araf 7:160. That "town" is Jerusalem. In fact, the whole reason Pipes specifically forbids inclusion of this passage and allusions is because it's absolutely clear that this passage references Jerusalem in context.

[marksman]

Moreover, just as Jerusalem is not mentioned by name in the Quran, it is also not mentioned by name in the Torah. It is mentioned numerous times in the Haftorah and Talmud, just as it is mentioned numerous times in the Muslim Hadith.

[FireGarden]

On top of which religious place was the mosque built?

The Quran talks of a Mosque built by Solomon, who was a Muslim (like Moses).

[TheAnachronism]

" 10 " 'If a man commits adultery with another man's wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death."

Should Tiger Woods be put to death?

Why focus on Homosexuality?

If you really want an answer to this, I would ask someone who studies Christian apologetics. As a person of no faith myself, I find it amusing how people try to rationalize certain aspects of their faith.

I believe the most common answer as to why Christians do not follow Jewish kosher laws is that the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ absolved them of these responsibilities. In order to be saved, according to mainstream Christianity, one need only believe in the resurrection and accept Christ as savior. The letters of Paul from the NT make it clear that he believed Christians should not follow Jewish kosher law whatsoever, because doing so would mean that one believes that Christ's sacrifice was not sufficient for salvation; according to him, following those laws cannot redeem a person, only faith in Christ can.

So then, why do Christians still look to OT books like Leviticus when it's convenient for them? According to one person I asked, it's because some of those laws were obviously meant for Jews only and others were meant for everyone. Thus, the commandment not to eat shrimp is one that was meant only for Jews, and Christian do not have to--and even should not--follow it.

[boyntonstu]

The Quran talks of a Mosque built by Solomon, who was a Muslim (like Moses).

Moses was a Muslim in what year?


(This is the biggest news in religious history.)

[Towlie]

I've heard "Jew" used as a verb, as in "I Jewed him down ten bucks".Could there be some innocent Biblical justification (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+18%3A22-33&version=NIV) for that?

[FireGarden]

The Quran talks of a Mosque built by Solomon, who was a Muslim (like Moses).

Moses was a Muslim in what year?


(This is the biggest news in religious history.)

That's big news only if you haven't read the Quran.

I'm not saying it's true, but it is what is written in the Quran and what Muslims believe.

But I notice that you don't answer the main point: the Quran does refer to the Mosque/Temple built by Solomon. So, surely, that is a reference to Jerusalem.

source you provided earlier has a page on the chapter of the Quran titled: Children of Israel

It begins with the night journey and reaches the destruction of the Mosque/Temple by verse 7:
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=429259

[boyntonstu]

That's big news only if you haven't read the Quran.

I'm not saying it's true, but it is what is written in the Quran and what Muslims believe.

But I notice that you don't answer the main point: the Quran does refer to the Mosque/Temple built by Solomon. So, surely, that is a reference to Jerusalem.

source you provided earlier has a page on the chapter of the Quran titled: Children of Israel

It begins with the night journey and reaches the destruction of the Mosque/Temple by verse 7:
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=429259


This verse proves exactly what?

[17.7] If you do good, you will do good for your own souls, and if you do evil, it shall be for them. So when the second promise came (We raised another people) that they may bring you to grief and that they may enter the mosque as they entered it the first time, and that they might destroy whatever they gained ascendancy over with utter destruction.
[

Does it say that the Muslims love and own Jerusalem?

There is a new mosque in Miami.

Do Muslims have a right to possess Miami?

[boyntonstu]

This is silly. Jerusalem became important to Islam because they believe Mohammed was taken there by an angel and physically ascended to heaven from that spot. Since the Quran was supposedly dictated by Mohammed, most of it would have been written before Mohammed's ascension, and thus wouldn't have mentioned it. That doesn't mean it's not important.

Similarly, Jerusalem is not mentioned at all in the Torah. Why? Because Jerusalem didn't exist yet, it is only referenced obliquely, at best. It is referenced in the Haftorah, of course, as that is the story of David selecting Jerusalem as his capital and of Solomon building the Temple there, and the subsequent mythic history of the city.

From KJV (Christain)

1. Joshua 10:1
Now it came to pass, when Adonizedec king of Jerusalem had heard how Joshua had taken Ai, and had utterly destroyed it; as he had done to Jericho and her king, so he had done to Ai and her king; and how the inhabitants of Gibeon had made peace with Israel, and were among them;
Joshua 10:1-3 (in Context) Joshua 10 (Whole Chapter)
2. Joshua 10:3
Wherefore Adonizedec king of Jerusalem, sent unto Hoham king of Hebron, and unto Piram king of Jarmuth, and unto Japhia king of Lachish, and unto Debir king of Eglon, saying,
Joshua 10:2-4 (in Context) Joshua 10 (Whole Chapter)
3. Joshua 10:5
Therefore the five kings of the Amorites, the king of Jerusalem, the king of Hebron, the king of Jarmuth, the king of Lachish, the king of Eglon, gathered themselves together, and went up, they and all their hosts, and encamped before Gibeon, and made war against it.
Joshua 10:4-6 (in Context) Joshua 10 (Whole Chapter)
4. Joshua 10:23
And they did so, and brought forth those five kings unto him out of the cave, the king of Jerusalem, the king of Hebron, the king of Jarmuth, the king of Lachish, and the king of Eglon.
Joshua 10:22-24 (in Context) Joshua 10 (Whole Chapter)
5. Joshua 12:10
The king of Jerusalem, one; the king of Hebron, one;
Joshua 12:9-11 (in Context) Joshua 12 (Whole Chapter)
6. Joshua 15:8
And the border went up by the valley of the son of Hinnom unto the south side of the Jebusite; the same is Jerusalem: and the border went up to the top of the mountain that lieth before the valley of Hinnom westward, which is at the end of the valley of the giants northward:
Joshua 15:7-9 (in Context) Joshua 15 (Whole Chapter)
7. Joshua 15:63
As for the Jebusites the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day.
Joshua 15:62-63 (in Context) Joshua 15 (Whole Chapter)
8. Joshua 18:28
And Zelah, Eleph, and Jebusi, which is Jerusalem, Gibeath, and Kirjath; fourteen cities with their villages. This is the inheritance of the children of Benjamin according to their families.
Joshua 18:27-28 (in Context) Joshua 18 (Whole Chapter)
9. Judges 1:7
And Adonibezek said, Threescore and ten kings, having their thumbs and their great toes cut off, gathered their meat under my table: as I have done, so God hath requited me. And they brought him to Jerusalem, and there he died.
Judges 1:6-8 (in Context) Judges 1 (Whole Chapter)
10. Judges 1:8
Now the children of Judah had fought against Jerusalem, and had taken it, and smitten it with the edge of the sword, and set the city on fire.
Judges 1:7-9 (in Context) Judges 1 (Whole Chapter) ……..
499• Jeremiah 36:9
And it came to pass in the fifth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, in the ninth month, that they proclaimed a fast before the LORD to all the people in Jerusalem, and to all the people that came from the cities of Judah unto Jerusalem.
Jeremiah 36:8-10 (in Context) Jeremiah 36 (Whole Chapter)
500 • Jeremiah 36:31
And I will punish him and his seed and his servants for their iniquity; and I will bring upon them, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and upon the men of Judah, all the evil that I have pronounced against them; but they hearkened not.
Jeremiah 36:30-32 (in Context) Jeremiah 36 (Whole Chapter)

[boyntonstu]

That's big news only if you haven't read the Quran.

I'm not saying it's true, but it is what is written in the Quran and what Muslims believe.

But I notice that you don't answer the main point: the Quran does refer to the Mosque/Temple built by Solomon. So, surely, that is a reference to Jerusalem.

source you provided earlier has a page on the chapter of the Quran titled: Children of Israel

It begins with the night journey and reaches the destruction of the Mosque/Temple by verse 7:
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=429259



"I'm not saying it's true, but it is what is written in the Quran and what Muslims believe. "

Why would you repeat such nonsense and not mention your opinion?

My position is that up until recent times, Jerusalem was not on the minds of Muslims.

What else in the Koran is untrue?

[Thunder]

What else in the Koran is untrue?

The Torah says that God made the Universe in 7 days.

The Tanahk says that a man named Jonah survived inside a whale's belly.

The Torah says that a burning bush spoke to Moses. Clearly, Moses was smoking weed.

The Torah says that the sky rained frogs.

Clearly, the Torah and Tanahk is full of a lot of BS. Much more than the Koran. Or the NT.

[marksman]

The Book of Joshua is not in the Torah. After you criticized me for a minor grammatical error related to Bar Mitzvah, I'm surprised you'd make such a glaring error about what books comprise the Torah!

[marksman]

I'm also not sure how your reference to the Koran, written in the seventh century, evidences what was on Muslims' minds "until recent times". Up until 1918, Muslims controlled Jerusalem. So, to the extent that Muslims were governing the city, I would imagine it was on their minds a lot. And since it was in Muslim hands, I wouldn't think other Muslims were worrying much about it. (And after 1918, Muslims did make hay about no longer controlling Jerusalem. In fact, the fundamentalist Wahabbist movement gained a lot of ground by capitalizing on insecurities caused by the fall of the Ottoman Empire and loss of control over Jerusalem.)

But the history of Saladin and the Crusades does indicate that Muslims had Jerusalem on their minds between the Quran and fall of the Ottoman Empire. Do they have a stronger claim to the city than Jews do? I don't think that's an answerable question. But I really don't see how you've put forward anything cogent to support your point.

[boyntonstu]

The Book of Joshua is not in the Torah. After you criticized me for a minor grammatical error related to Bar Mitzvah, I'm surprised you'd make such a glaring error about what books comprise the Torah!

Torah
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The term "Torah" (Hebrew: תּוֹרָה, "teaching" or "instruction", sometimes translated as "law"[1]), refers either to the Five Books of Moses (or Pentateuch) or to the entirety of Judaism's founding legal and ethical religious texts.[2][3]


Live and learn!

[a_unique_person]

On top of which religious place was the mosque built?

On top of the religious place that was built by one of the biggest killers and oppressors of Jews in ancient history.

[boyntonstu]

On top of the religious place that was built by one of the biggest killers and oppressors of Jews in ancient history.


What is being said is that the last nation to occupy the place owns it.

Who might that be today?

[Thunder]

What is being said is that the last nation to occupy the place owns it.

Who might that be today?

how very....humanitarian of you.

The Christians own Europe. All you Jews.....out!!!!!!!

does that work for you?

[marksman]

The term "Torah" (Hebrew: תּוֹרָה, "teaching" or "instruction", sometimes translated as "law"[1]), refers either to the Five Books of Moses (or Pentateuch) or to the entirety of Judaism's founding legal and ethical religious texts.[2][3]
If you had gone to the links in footnotes 2 and 3, you would see that "Torah" is only used to reference the Haftorah by people who are ignorant of the distinction. People who claim to be knowledgeable of such things (like you) use the proper acronym: Tanakh.

Had you been someone who had said he didn't know about Judaism, I would have educated about it. In the future I will not make the error of thinking you are educated about Judaism.

That said, a comparison of Tanakh and Quran is inappropriate. The Quran are ostensibly the writings (or the dictations) of revelations Mohammed, just as the Torah (not the entire Tanakh) are the ostensible writings of the revelations of Moses. The rest of the Tanakh are collections of writings by others and compiled by Ezra the Scribe. The analogy to Islam is the Hadith, which are also the collected writings of people important to Islam other than Mohammed. The problem this poses to your argument is that the Hadith has numerous references to Jerusalem by name, just as Nevi'im and Ketuvim (the non-Torah portions of the Tanakh) do.

So now you're stuck with three equally unhelpful choices. If you insist on comparing all the Tanakh to only the Quran, you are making a false analogy. If you limit the comparison to only the Torah and Quran, then neithe rbook names Jerusalem. if you compare the Tanakh and Hadith, both mention Jerusalem by name.

[Thunder]

God raped a woman, the child was nailed to a stick, walked on water, raised several folks from death, and he was alive again within 36 hours after being buried. Is that enough B.S.?


The Old Testament spans more than 1,000 years of made of stories, fairy tales, pure insanity, and other BS.

and you have the chutzpah to attack the New Testament?

[HansMustermann]

Well, to be entirely fair, the NT is full of stuff where you have to wonder what they were smoking. Just read the description of Jesus in Revelation, and if that doesn't sound like an Ergot trip (identical to a LSD trip), I don't know what it sounds like.

Plus, the only non-pseudepigraphic parts being from two people who never met Jesus and didn't agree with his actual followers, kinda sets a certain standard of BS. It's at best at the standard of non-canon fanboy fanfic... if it weren't proclaimed canon at Nicaea. It even has later pseudepigraphic fanboy-fanfic inserted _in_ earlier pseudepigraphic fanboy-fanfic.

Plus, the list of surrealistic BS is far longer than what even Boyntonstu lists. It includes such stuff as:

- Matthew 27:51-53: at Jesus's death a massive Earthquake splits open many graves and resurrects a large number of people... except apparently they then wait patiently in their graves until Jesus's resurrection, before going into town to see their families and friends.

Needless to say, a whole bunch of dead raising and going to visit their friends in town would have been a major event, and mentioned in a lot of places. But actually nobody but Matthew mentions it. Likely one of the many pieces of BS that Matthew invented to make it all more miraculous.

-Matthew 21:1-7: not only it doesn't fit the other 3 gospels, but Matthew makes Jesus ride into town on two animals, like some kind of a circus performer. Likely based on a mis-reading of Zechariah 9:9, and in Matthew's zeal to add as much made-up BS as he could that fulfilled some OT prophecy or verse or whatever. Basically he seems to have scoured the Tanakh for stuff to add to his gospel, and sometimes with hillarious results, like the aforementioned stunt act.

- Matthew 2: not only it manages to be the only mention of an atrocity which couldn't have happened in Roman times, and is mentioned nowhere else, not even by Herod's detractors. (Again, apparently in his zeal to add made up BS to fulfill something he found in the Tanakh, this time Jeremiah 31:15 taken severely out of context.) But it also has Mary, Joseph and the newborn messiah flee to Egypt and _back_, all within the 40 days (prescribed purification period) until they bring him to the temple. (This time "fulfilling" a severely taken out of context Hosea 11:1.) And to top it off, it manages to severely contradict Luke 2:2 about the date: the first census had happened some 10 years after the death of Herod, and Quirinius only became governor of Syria well after Herod's death.

- people having to travel to the place of their birth for a census is utter BS, that's not how a Roman census worked

- both Matthew and Luke are simultaneously (A) the only two who mention virgin birth, _and_ (B) the two who trace conflicting genealogies of Joseph all the way back to David, so Jesus can fulfill the prophecy of being born of David's seed. If you noticed that Joseph was the only one there who carried David's "seed", and his "seed" was _not_ used in conceiving Jesus, one might wonder wtf was the point of those genealogies at all. Or whether the original stories there included the virgin birth at all: without that, yeah, it makes sense to trace the father's "seed" all the way to David, in fulfillment of the prophecy.

Etc, etc, etc.

I mean, FFS, they can't even agree on which day he was crucified, what did he say on the cross, to whom he appeared, etc.

So, yes, it may not cover the over 1000 years of insanity of the OT, but it seems to me like they did manage to match it for BS quite well anyway :p

[chuck4842]

lol! A jew jewed the lord

[Smiledriver]

From what I understand there are ethnic jews which is to say people born to jewish familys which may or may not believe in the tenents of judaism and there are religious jews which are commited to the tenents of judaism as a theism.

[Towlie]

lol! A jew jewed the lordYes he did. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+18%3A22-33&version=NIV)

[chuck4842]

Yes he did. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+18%3A22-33&version=NIV)

Thats so cool, thanks towlie, I knew the story but never read it myself. I didn't realize how gullible God could be, I can't get him to come down on the price of anything. You got great timing. I'm looking for my King James though to make sure. I've also heard, but haven't been able to verify, that the verb form comes from the Jewish people were misplaced so many times , they carried "Jewels" to trade and make purchases as like a universal currency acceptable in all lands,

[a_unique_person]

how very....humanitarian of you.

The Christians own Europe. All you Jews.....out!!!!!!!

does that work for you?

The problem with might is right is that it comes back to bite you one day.

[boyntonstu]

lol! A jew jewed the lord

If you are a Methodist and you bargained with the dealer for a new car, would it be correct to say that you Methodisted him down?

How about Blacked the dealer?

Chinesed the dealer?

Japaned the dealer?

[hgc]

If you are a Methodist and you bargained with the dealer for a new car, would it be correct to say that you Methodisted him down?

How about Blacked the dealer?

Chinesed the dealer?

Japaned the dealer?


No, Idiot. They all Jewed the dealer down. The verb speaks to the practice, not the practitioner.

[Thunder]

This is a very Jewish thread.

[Towlie]

If you are a Methodist and you bargained with the dealer for a new car, would it be correct to say that you Methodisted him down?

How about Blacked the dealer?

Chinesed the dealer?

Japaned the dealer?I never wanted to make any slurs against any ethnic group and I'm uncomfortable that I may have come dangerously close. All I really meant to do is share a discovery of mine (Genesis 18:22-33) that might explain where that expression came from.

As far as discussing popular expressions related to the other groups you listed, I'll reluctantly resist taking the bait.

[boyntonstu]

No, Idiot. They all Jewed the dealer down. The verb speaks to the practice, not the practitioner.

If you accept the bible as the source os the term "Jewed" from this:

27 Then Abraham spoke up again: "Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, though I am nothing but dust and ashes, 28 what if the number of the righteous is five less than fifty? Will you destroy the whole city because of five people?"

To "Jew" as given above, means an effort to save lives of people, not to save money.

I give credit to Abraham for having courage to argue with God on behalf of his fellow humans.


Please give us an example where "Jewed" is used in a complimentary manner.


Would you be proud to follow in Abraham's footsteps when it comes to "Jewing" for you fellow man?

[Towlie]

I give credit to Abraham for having courage to argue with God on behalf of his fellow humans.Me too, but I don't give credit to God for not being able to see where the discussion was going. You'd expect a Supreme Being to be better able to dominate the exchange. :p

[Towlie]

No, I don't. Someone made a joke. You think it's real. Very silly person.Actually, I'm serious about that. It very well could be where the expression came from. I was even thinking of suggesting it for a Mr. Deity episode (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzf8q9QHfhI).

[hgc]

Actually, I'm serious about that. It very well could be where the expression came from. I was even thinking of suggesting it for a Mr. Deity episode (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzf8q9QHfhI).


No, you couldn't possibly be serious about that, but OK, I won't tell boyntonstu.

Thanks for showing me Mr. Deity. That looks fun.

[marksman]

All I really meant to do is share a discovery of mine (Genesis 18:22-33) that might explain where that expression came from.

It doesn't. Abraham in the story isn't haggling money. One would not use "jew down" to describe someone bargaining to spare someone's life. It is used exclusively when haggling for money or other things of material value. It comes from the stereotype that Jews are mean and miserly.

[The Fallen Serpent]

It's almost as if human concepts of ethnicity and religion don't have exact, precise meanings, and any attempt to classify people in those terms is ultimately subjective. Wow, what a revelation.

This :p

Jewishness is even more than that. It is also a culture. Another concept that is difficult to classify and ultimately subjective.

As an ethnicity Jews are at least those lineages that appear to come out of the land of Judah during or after the Babylonian exile. I would define this time frame as surrounding Classical Antiquity including the Kingdom of Judah, Hasmonean Kingdom and Roman client state of Judah. A number of local lineages were folded into the Jewish ethnicity that did not claim descent from Israel as late as the 2nd century CE. This is not dissimilar to the ethnic integration that happened all over the world as late as the twentieth century with the formation of nation states or multi-national ethnicities that we recognize today. The jews in this regard may also be extended to include the Israeli/Samaritans and other smaller ethniticies that are related but almost always cuts off in regards to other closely related peoples such as Phoenicians and Arabians. This Jewish lineage has spread, almost always as a minority, into other sections of the eastern hemisphere where it mingles with the local ethnicities and forms new Jewish ethnicities. Those ethnicities that maintained their separate religion and culture into modern times are considered Jewish while those that were fully assimilated into local religions and cultures lost the appellation. Again, this is not dissimilar to how other ethnic classifications have come about.

The spread of Jewish culture and ancestory into Europe has resulted in most European ethnicities including the peoples of Classical Judah as their ancestors. This is held up with genetic testing but disputed by a number of religious and nationalists claims.

In modern times different organizations have different standards as to what count as ethnically Jewish. Some are excedingly strict and others are not. In the US and Israel there are a few million people who consider themselves Jewish ethnically but do not subscribe to religious Judaism. In the US ethnicity is fairly blurred by conceptions of nation states and continental races. It is often done from an Anglo-centric viewpoint and generally discounting the existence of multiple native ethnicities within a single nation-state. From this viewpoint Jews are seen as an ethnicity that lacked a homeland for many centuries. Most white Americans consider themselves to be of multiple ethnicities with one dominating.

As for ethnic Jews who become Christians or even Muslims, it really depends who you ask if they are still ethnically Jewish. Ask a secular Jew, they are still Jewish. Ask an Orthodox they are not. This is not unique to Jews however. The Nazis had classifications for Germans who opposed the Third Reich as giving up membership in the master race. There are individuals in the Irish conflict who consider members of the other side not really Irish. There have been groups in the US that consider being a Christian as necessary to being white. Muslim and Arab have certainly been blurred together among some circles. For instance Egyptians consider themselves Arabian in culture but Egyptian ethnically. Except for those who disagree consider all of Egypt to be Arabian ethnically. Gaza being dominated by Palestinains instead of ethnic Egyptians after the refugee influx lead to further difficulties in deciding what to do with the Gaza Strip.

So as to the question, "Who/What is a Jew?" it depends on who you ask. It also depends on the context.

If you need help, from 1935-1945 in Germany there was this handy chart (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Nuremberg_laws.jpg) to help you out.

[boyntonstu]

It doesn't. Abraham in the story isn't haggling money. One would not use "jew down" to describe someone bargaining to spare someone's life. It is used exclusively when haggling for money or other things of material value. It comes from the stereotype that Jews are mean and miserly.

Question: What religious group contributes proportionally more money to charities?

The answer is obvious.

What group has the stereotype of being extremely intelligent and wins a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes?

[hgc]

Question: Why do you keep asking pointless rhetorical questions?

The answer is obvious.

[Thunder]

Question: What religious group contributes proportionally more money to charities?

what do you want...a medal?

and how many of these vast Jewish donations go to non-Jewish charities huh????

thought so.

[bruto]

It doesn't. Abraham in the story isn't haggling money. One would not use "jew down" to describe someone bargaining to spare someone's life. It is used exclusively when haggling for money or other things of material value. It comes from the stereotype that Jews are mean and miserly.That's true, but I have also seen the term applied to the sodom and Gomorrah episode in what was, presumably, meant to be a humorous or ironic manner. I ran into it long ago in a poem I read as part of a college course on religious and ethical issues, where God remarks "don't Jew me down." Sorry I can't remember the source (it was 40+ years ago!), but I do remember that it existed in that context. That doesn't make the phrase any less offensive in ordinary discourse, of course, nor does it mean that this is its origin, but I can at least see where someone whose exposure to the phrase is very limited might have gotten it wrong.

[HansMustermann]

Question: What religious group contributes proportionally more money to charities?

The answer is obvious.

What group has the stereotype of being extremely intelligent and wins a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes?

Oooh, I know the answer to that one. It's Far East Asians, right? I mean, we actually have studies that show that the average IQ of Chinese immigrants in the US is above the US average, right?

Ahem. Now more seriously... Stereotypes are just stereotypes, and rarely actually correlate with race, much with less religion. For every study confirming such a stereotype there's at least one refutation showing that they used biased data (e.g., compared the IQ of suburban upper middle class Chinese to the farmers of the larger surrounding area) or outright fudged it.

If you have one that actually supports such a claim for Jews as objective, I'd be most interested to hear it. It would be the first for any race or ethnic group, ever.

Otherwise, if we're just basing judgments on just stereotypes, I'm affraid we'd have to take some unflattering ones as equally valid evidence too. Starting with the ancient Greek one that you guys in the middle east lack a backbone and are naturally only fit to be slaves. (While us germanics up north are dumber than a brick, apparently, and still only fit to be slaves. (What, you thought I was going to Goodwin it?;))) And I don't think you really want to open _that_ can of worms.

So basically welcome back to the human species. You're human too, same as the rest of us. Enjoy your stay.

[boyntonstu]

Oooh, I know the answer to that one. It's Far East Asians, right? I mean, we actually have studies that show that the average IQ of Chinese immigrants in the US is above the US average, right?

Ahem. Now more seriously... Stereotypes are just stereotypes, and rarely actually correlate with race, much with less religion. For every study confirming such a stereotype there's at least one refutation showing that they used biased data (e.g., compared the IQ of suburban upper middle class Chinese to the farmers of the larger surrounding area) or outright fudged it.

If you have one that actually supports such a claim for Jews as objective, I'd be most interested to hear it. It would be the first for any race or ethnic group, ever.

Otherwise, if we're just basing judgments on just stereotypes, I'm affraid we'd have to take some unflattering ones as equally valid evidence too. Starting with the ancient Greek one that you guys in the middle east lack a backbone and are naturally only fit to be slaves. (While us germanics up north are dumber than a brick, apparently, and still only fit to be slaves. (What, you thought I was going to Goodwin it?;))) And I don't think you really want to open _that_ can of worms.

So basically welcome back to the human species. You're human too, same as the rest of us. Enjoy your stay.

So compare: http://www.jinfo.org/Nobel_Prizes.html

At least 180 Jews and persons of half- or three-quarters-Jewish ancestry have been awarded the Nobel Prize,1 accounting for 22% of all individual recipients worldwide between 1901 and 2009, and constituting 36% of all US recipients during the same period. In the research fields of Chemistry, Economics, Physics, and Physiology/Medicine, the corresponding world and US percentages are 27% and 39%, respectively. Among women laureates in the four research fields, the Jewish percentages (world and US) are 38% and 50%, respectively.3

(Jews currently make up approximately 0.25% of the world's population and 2% of the US population.)

* Chemistry (31 prize winners, 20% of world total, 28% of US total)
* Economics (27 prize winners, 42% of world total, 56% of US total)
* Literature (13 prize winners, 12% of world total, 27% of US total)
* Peace (9 prize winners, 9% of world total, 10% of US total)4
* Physics (47 prize winners, 25% of world total, 36% of US total)
* Physiology or Medicine (53 prize winners, 27% of world total, 40% of US total)

See also data on "other Nobels":

* Jewish Recipients of the Kyoto Prize (25% of recipients)
* Jewish Recipients of the Wolf Foundation Prize (34% of recipients)
* Jewish Recipients of the US National Medal of Science (38% of recipients)

Based on the above, how would you stereotype Jews?

[The Fallen Serpent]

Based on the above, how would you stereotype Jews?

Fond of award ceremonies? Oh no, the Nobel Prize is a monetary award! Covetous Jews! Its been proven! :jaw-dropp

(btw I'm just being flippant and joking :p )

[HansMustermann]

So compare: http://www.jinfo.org/Nobel_Prizes.html

At least 180 Jews and persons of half- or three-quarters-Jewish ancestry have been awarded the Nobel Prize,1 accounting for 22% of all individual recipients worldwide between 1901 and 2009, and constituting 36% of all US recipients during the same period. In the research fields of Chemistry, Economics, Physics, and Physiology/Medicine, the corresponding world and US percentages are 27% and 39%, respectively. Among women laureates in the four research fields, the Jewish percentages (world and US) are 38% and 50%, respectively.3

(Jews currently make up approximately 0.25% of the world's population and 2% of the US population.)

* Chemistry (31 prize winners, 20% of world total, 28% of US total)
* Economics (27 prize winners, 42% of world total, 56% of US total)
* Literature (13 prize winners, 12% of world total, 27% of US total)
* Peace (9 prize winners, 9% of world total, 10% of US total)4
* Physics (47 prize winners, 25% of world total, 36% of US total)
* Physiology or Medicine (53 prize winners, 27% of world total, 40% of US total)

See also data on "other Nobels":

* Jewish Recipients of the Kyoto Prize (25% of recipients)
* Jewish Recipients of the Wolf Foundation Prize (34% of recipients)
* Jewish Recipients of the US National Medal of Science (38% of recipients)

Based on the above, how would you stereotype Jews?

I don't think that's a representative enough sample either way, being barely a blip in the total population. For every nobel prize winner of any ethnic groups, there'll be a million schmucks who can't even tie their shoes in less than two tries.

Again, the actual IQ studies do _not_ support an across the board superiority of any race or group.

Plus, half of that list is purely subjective stuff. Like "Peace", which for example Obama (mind you I otherwise like him) got before he actually did anything, pretty much for just not being Bush. Or literature, which is hardly an exact science.

Economics? That's not even an actual prize founded by Nobel, but what a heavily libertarian-leaning group of economists awards... for thinking like they do. Whop-de-do, now there comes a stereotype for Jews ;)

But at any rate it's a prize "in memory of Alfred Nobel" and which really doesn't have anything to do with the rest of the Nobel prizes than hijacking the name. Even some of its recipients basically say that economics is _not_ yet at the stage of being an exact science, and that this prize confers some people a fake authority in a field where they at most have an untested and untestable personal opinion.

Or you can twist it that if one minority group dominates the awards in a field to such an extent, despite any other provable claim to greatness, it can be simply that they award it preferentially to each other. As parky said, don't underestimate how things can be twisted around like that.

But generally, frankly, I don't think you want to support the idea that there _is_ a master race. Because if you actually manage to divide the world that neatly into us vs them, I can tell you what's going to happen. Everyone will side with _theirs_, not with yours.

I mean, I for one am all for equality and all, but if it comes down to that not being achievable and that one race _must_ be above the others, I'm going to vote for mine there not for yours. Just simple pragmatism, you know.

[Thunder]

indeed. arguing that Jews are smarter then everyone else has a great track record of getting Jews beaten up or killed.

who are the greatest people on Earth? the ones with the intelligence to be humble about it.

[HansMustermann]

Well, I wouldn't know about "track record", and at the darkest moments being humble didn't help much either. But at the very least it does play into some other non-flattering stereotypes about Jews, and, well, I think we're all better off without re-awakening that silliness.

[The Fallen Serpent]

Which is my point. Why promote even a positive stereotype? It just leads racial stratification which is something I would hope to avoid.

[boyntonstu]

Which is my point. Why promote even a positive stereotype? It just leads racial stratification which is something I would hope to avoid.

We should hate the Yankees because they win so many World Series?

We should hate the Kenyon Marathon winners?

The facts speak for themselves.

Certain groups do better in certain areas than others.

Perhaps it is because of cultural striving.

NBA players are usually Black.

I admire their accomplishments.

Jews, and Asians emphasize education.

Book stores per capita in Israel exceeds that of all Europe, South America and Africa.

Is that because they have more readers?

And yes, my Irish friends like to drink much more than my Jewish friends.

Why should a positive attribute cause hatred instead of admiration?

[HansMustermann]

Convincing people that someone else is a threat in any form or shape, is the bread and butter of racism, boyntonstu. Nobody goes and says "we should keep race X down because we like being the bosses of them", but "OMG, they're pushing us to the side, and taking our jobs, and favouring their own kind". Works like a charm.

So, yes, I'd say you don't want to over-promote the idea that (A) there _is_ a difference between races after all, and (B) you're over-represented in a domain, even Nobel Prizes.

Sad but true.

Substituting "culture" for "race" actually doesn't help much, because that's a substitution racists themselves increasingly do.

Additionally, there is a massive difference between "achievement" and "stereotype". Between the fact that some of your people are indeed smart and hard working, and pushing for a _stereotype_ there's a massive difference. The latter implies a bit more of a generalization than anyone can really support and is, frankly, offensive.

And again, I don't think you really want to push the idea that you can generalize from 180 people to a whole race/culture/group. Which is what stereotyping does. That's the kind of thing that got used to justify killing you guys, remember?

But anyway, generalizing from 180 people to a stereotype for 13 _million_ people is just plain old bogus.

Stereotyping "Jews are smart" implies an across the board difference that just isn't there. Even if there was a small delta in your favour in median IQ, it just wouldn't justify such a claim, because some people from one Gauss curve would still score higher than some from the other curve.

But the difference I know of, just isn't that way anyway. Last I heard some figures by country, Israel scored 94-95 median IQ on a scale calibrated so the UK gets 100. So if we were to bake _that_ into a stereotype, it would be more like "Jews are dumb".

Mind you, I don't believe that generalization either. I think some of your guys are very smart, and some are very dumb, and some are in between. Same as everywhere else. There just is no across-the-board thing that one can bake into a _stereotype_.

[FireGarden]

This verse proves exactly what?

[17.7] If you do good, you will do good for your own souls, and if you do evil, it shall be for them. So when the second promise came (We raised another people) that they may bring you to grief and that they may enter the mosque as they entered it the first time, and that they might destroy whatever they gained ascendancy over with utter destruction.
[

Does it say that the Muslims love and own Jerusalem?

You're moving goalposts. The point is that it is a reference to Jerusalem (though not by name) -- and you claimed there was no such reference in the Quran. You were wrong. End of story.

History shows Muslims' attitudes towards Jerusalem. And they certainly owned it at some times.

"I'm not saying it's true, but it is what is written in the Quran and what Muslims believe. "

Why would you repeat such nonsense and not mention your opinion?

Because the subject of debate is the contents of the Quran and what Muslims believe. But I do not regard Moses being a Muslim as nonsense. That doesn't make it true, either.

What else in the Koran is untrue?

It says there is a God.

My position is that up until recent times, Jerusalem was not on the minds of Muslims.

Your position is not supported by evidence.



btw,
I do agree with you regarding when people use "Jew" as a verb -- it is racist and wrong. But I've nothing to add to what Marksman said:

Abraham in the story isn't haggling money. One would not use "jew down" to describe someone bargaining to spare someone's life. It is used exclusively when haggling for money or other things of material value. It comes from the stereotype that Jews are mean and miserly.

[The Fallen Serpent]

Jews are smart! Except for the dumb ones.

Kenyans are fast! Except for the slow ones.

The Irish can drink! Except for the light weights. Like Irish American me ;) Though I am not as bad as this Scottsman I knew who could get blubbering-I-love-you-man-drunk off of a few beers. His son on the other hand could outdrink the bar while walking without sway and talking without slur.

Stereotypes just fall apart once you start accounting for more than a select handful of people. Confirmation bias if you only look at the handful of hits and ignore the 99% of misses.

Are there enough Jews in professional highly educated positions to be noticed as not matching the proportions of their populations when a minority? Yes. Is it enough to make a statistically significant statement about the Jewish people as a whole? No.

Cuba produces a higher number of physicians per capita than Israel does. Maybe we should adapt the old stereotype of Jewish doctors to Cuban doctors? Time for my Cuban Eye Surgey!

[ElightenMe]

So compare: http://www.jinfo.org/Nobel_Prizes.html

At least 180 Jews and persons of half- or three-quarters-Jewish ancestry have been awarded the Nobel Prize,1 accounting for 22% of all individual recipients worldwide between 1901 and 2009, and constituting 36% of all US recipients during the same period. In the research fields of Chemistry, Economics, Physics, and Physiology/Medicine, the corresponding world and US percentages are 27% and 39%, respectively. Among women laureates in the four research fields, the Jewish percentages (world and US) are 38% and 50%, respectively.3

(Jews currently make up approximately 0.25% of the world's population and 2% of the US population.)

* Chemistry (31 prize winners, 20% of world total, 28% of US total)
* Economics (27 prize winners, 42% of world total, 56% of US total)
* Literature (13 prize winners, 12% of world total, 27% of US total)
* Peace (9 prize winners, 9% of world total, 10% of US total)4
* Physics (47 prize winners, 25% of world total, 36% of US total)
* Physiology or Medicine (53 prize winners, 27% of world total, 40% of US total)

See also data on "other Nobels":

* Jewish Recipients of the Kyoto Prize (25% of recipients)
* Jewish Recipients of the Wolf Foundation Prize (34% of recipients)
* Jewish Recipients of the US National Medal of Science (38% of recipients)

Based on the above, how would you stereotype Jews?

More money... more money to spend on science.. more investment in science... more breakthrough discoveries.
# of Nobel Prizes/% of World Pop. is not equal to a measure of intelligence.

[chuck4842]

If you are a Methodist and you bargained with the dealer for a new car, would it be correct to say that you Methodisted him down?

How about Blacked the dealer?

Chinesed the dealer?

Japaned the dealer?

Wow, your the first I've met to pretend to not notice that jewish people have a tendency to keep a close eye on their money. Some people call it stereotyping but if they began the habit from a history of being broke it would be understandable. Blacks are known to wear bright new shoes , represent the majority of poverty, yet I've never seen one argue about the price of their shoes, they hand over the money and retrieve happily. Today the Jews of Israel are taking land illegally even if their actions cause global disturbances and disrupts peace everywhere. I know their land was taken from them too in history but then it didn't cause or risk world war.

[FireGarden]

Wow, your the first I've met to pretend to not notice that jewish people have a tendency to keep a close eye on their money.

Is this compared to some other people?
Chalk me down as the second person you've "met" who hasn't noticed a greater tendency among any group of people to watch their money.

[Towlie]

Were the Israeli security measures designed by Jews or by Goys?Neither, they were designed by Israelis. I'm with Parky on this one.

[chuck4842]

So compare: http://www.jinfo.org/Nobel_Prizes.html

At least 180 Jews and persons of half- or three-quarters-Jewish ancestry have been awarded the Nobel Prize,1 accounting for 22% of all individual recipients worldwide between 1901 and 2009, and constituting 36% of all US recipients during the same period. In the research fields of Chemistry, Economics, Physics, and Physiology/Medicine, the corresponding world and US percentages are 27% and 39%, respectively. Among women laureates in the four research fields, the Jewish percentages (world and US) are 38% and 50%, respectively.3

(Jews currently make up approximately 0.25% of the world's population and 2% of the US population.)

* Chemistry (31 prize winners, 20% of world total, 28% of US total)
* Economics (27 prize winners, 42% of world total, 56% of US total)
* Literature (13 prize winners, 12% of world total, 27% of US total)
* Peace (9 prize winners, 9% of world total, 10% of US total)4
* Physics (47 prize winners, 25% of world total, 36% of US total)
* Physiology or Medicine (53 prize winners, 27% of world total, 40% of US total)

See also data on "other Nobels":

* Jewish Recipients of the Kyoto Prize (25% of recipients)
* Jewish Recipients of the Wolf Foundation Prize (34% of recipients)
* Jewish Recipients of the US National Medal of Science (38% of recipients)

Based on the above, how would you stereotype Jews?

Well , were there Jews on the Nobel prize board? I found this on a genealogy website-" Jewish (Ashkenazic): ornamental name from German nobel ‘noble’." and Alfred Nobel was Swedish but the latin isn't as close. How does the inventor of dynamite become the greatest peace finder anywho?

[boyntonstu]

Neither, they were designed by Israelis. I'm with Parky on this one.


I agree.

They were designed by Israelis.

Israelis are the people of Israel.

Israel is the Jewish State in the Middle East.

Not all Israelis are Jews, but I am willing to bet that it was mostly if not all Jews who designed the security system to protect the state from Muslim terrorists.

[HansMustermann]

On the other hand, it also was a jew who did the first half the Great Purge to keep Stalin safe. (Until he accidentally angered Stalin and was purged himself.)

Really, you can't extrapolate from one data point to a whole population. Otherwise I'm equally entitled to extrapolate from the above data point.

Additionally, you said it yourself: it's a system designed to protect against Muslims, and where nobody cares if one inspector's prejudice gets a bunch of people searched for just coming to the airport with a piece of cloth on their head.

I'm not sure it's applicable to the USA or any other country.

For a start, the threats faced by the rest of the world aren't as nicely wrapped in a stereotype. E.g., Theodore Kaczynski (the unabomber) was a normal, white, third-generation American and an assistant-professor at a prestigious American university to boot. E.g., Timothy McVeigh (the author of the Oklahoma City bombing) was also a white, american-born American, and a military veteran and security guard to boot. It's not the kind of stuff that eyeball-based profiling will catch as easily.

Second, well, in the rest of the world you letting a bunch of people decide who to scan based on little more than their personal biases and prejudices, you'd have it escalated to the supreme court and struck down in no time. Just let the TSA provably search more muslims than anyone else, for no other reason than someone's unsupported eyeball-scan and biases, and you'd have a problem very fast. That in Israel it doesn't seem to be a problem... well, I'm not sure that's exactly the base for a positive stereotype ;)

Third, the two systems don't even serve the same purpose, sad to say, so comparing them is at best apples to oranges. The system used by the USA and, sad to say, imported by quite a few other western countries, is more about keeping the population scared and getting the politicians more power than about security. The TSA's job is basically to make a visible job of preventing some scary terrorist threat... never mind that there were exactly zero terrorist incidents in the year _before_ 9/11, or most years before them. The last actual hijacking before the 9/11 in the USA was in 1994, and even that by a disgruntled airline employee, not by a terrorist. So the whole TSA circus is akin to having a team of professional and very visible vampire-slayers, more to keep people scared of vampires than to actually combat a real threat.

Does it make it dumber than the Israeli system? It seems to me like it's been achieving its purpose very well. Granted, not the same purpose as the Israeli one, but nevertheless it did its job. So why would you judge it as dumber?

[Jono]

Well , were there Jews on the Nobel prize board? I found this on a genealogy website-" Jewish (Ashkenazic): ornamental name from German nobel ‘noble’." and Alfred Nobel was Swedish but the latin isn't as close. How does the inventor of dynamite become the greatest peace finder anywho?

The Nobel Committees (swedish ones), to my knowledge, haven't had anyone of jewish origin. The norweigan "Nobel Peace Prize" might have had, I can't say because I have no idea who sat or does sit in that committee.

And yes "Nobel" is the swedish word for "noble".

[Jono]

On the other hand, it also was a jew who did the first half the Great Purge to keep Stalin safe. (Until he accidentally angered Stalin and was purged himself.)

You mean Yagoda?

[Thunder]

I find it disgusting and pathetic that one can complain about anti-Semitism, and in the next breath argue that Jews are superior to non-Jews and call Gentiles "Goys".

It is either the zenith of hypocrisy, or something even more sinister.

[HansMustermann]

You mean Yagoda?

Yep.

[HansMustermann]

To parky's defense, though, Jude as it's pronounced in Germany (i.e., more like what you'd pronounce Yude and the final "e" isn't silent either), would indeed sound out of place in English. It's nothing like the English "Jude", and it would stand out. Not that there's something wrong with the word or its meanings in German, but you could start wondering why when speaking English only that one word isn't the English equivalent.

[quarky]

I'm a proud goy. I don't even wish I was a Jew anymore, frankly.

I did as a kid, because they got to play outside when I had to go to mass, yuck, plus they got presents for many days during Hanuka, and dreydals (jew tops that spun) were cool.

Now the perks seem less obvious, and I'm content to have no favor in God's eyes.

[The Fallen Serpent]

Goy can be insulting term just like "colored" or "barbarian" can be insulting terms, referring to everyone who does not belong to a proper group. The word being wide open does not mean is not an often an insult. This is from my experience with Jewish friends when we rag on each other. Normally I would ignore the term but i can see where others would get offended. Especially if it is used when trying to compare Jews to Gentiles as if Jews were better than the rest of humanity.

[boyntonstu]

Goy can be insulting term just like "colored" or "barbarian" can be insulting terms, referring to everyone who does not belong to a proper group. The word being wide open does not mean is not an often an insult. This is from my experience with Jewish friends when we rag on each other. Normally I would ignore the term but i can see where others would get offended. Especially if it is used when trying to compare Jews to Gentiles as if Jews were better than the rest of humanity.

"Can" be an insulting term, does not make it an insulting term.

A "square" guy is different than calling a person a "square".

""I'm a proud goy. I don't even wish I was a Jew anymore, frankly." by Quarky

Jews should be proud Jew because 182 of them won Nobel prizes.

182 is an amazing number

Why so many?

The rest of the world does not produce as any people per capita dedicated to serious endeavors to improve the world.

It is an amazing fact.

Perhaps religion plays a part.

Why would a Creationist study Science, since they think they know the answers?

[Jono]

I am a Jew. I grew up in a Orthodox Jewish neighborhood. I know for a fact that when Orthodox Jews use the term "goy" when speaking English, they mean it ONLY as an insult and in a derogatory way.

the meaning of "Goy" is that Gentiles are less than Jews, stupider than Jews, less important than Jews. Just as our friend in this thread seems to suggest.

It is 100% the same as "kike" or "Zhid" or "Jude" within an English conversation.

Yes it certainly is that for some, obviously, and it isn't odd as in contemporary lingo a lot of previously neutral words, so to speak, have recieved a derogatory spin. In Sweden the traditional word for immigrant is "invandrare". It has been used in so many negative contexts that now, the word as it is can provoce at times, hence a more recent (though still not as popular) term for them; "nysvensk" (new swede).
I can't recollect how many times I've heard a jewish character call a gentile one "goy" in Hollywood movies and sitcoms, which incidentally have a large proportions of jews involved in producing, direction et al. The context never once was a malicious one to my recollection however.

[Jono]

Why so many?

The rest of the world does not produce as any people per capita dedicated to serious endeavors to improve the world.

It is an amazing fact.

Perhaps religion plays a part.


One can speculate. It's not because the laurelates were necessarily 'smarter' than their co-workers or peers. Allthough I happen to give creedence to the ashkenazi jews at average having an .5-1. SD IQ higher than the norm (possibly due to a de facto positive history of eugenics).

Jews have a long history of being well versed in languages, legal and scholary (mostly theological) work and have traditionally focused much of their pride around success thereof. When most people were illiterate, most ashkenazi jews grew up in a household where they learned to read and write at an early age, discuss and debate their treasured history in the diaspora and often were, at least, bilingual.
As societies got be become slightly more secularised, with the advent of the Enlightment, Industrialization and the more open and available scientific fields, their specific focus might have shifted toward such fields, which correlates with the increase in jewish people found in academia et al where
Jewish people became increasingly numerous. For example, when Feynman went to Stanford because he was refused by Princeton (or was it the other way around?) due to their "jew-quota" of 10% had already been filled (which universities and colleges quickly were) that percentage was still quite high if going by the per capita proportions. And no this had very little to do with religion.

And neither do I believe the Nobel Committees to have favoured jewish scientists. As a curiosa, the countries who've recieved the most prizes per capita are; Island, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, UK, Austria, Ireland, Germany, Netherlands and at 11th place the US.

[chuck4842]

I've found the best way to find out who is really a Jew, is the one who accuses a person of being anti semitic for even the slightest criticism of the jewish community. They constantly are on the offensive when not even provoked. I'm a big fan of many jews like, Lewis Black, Seinfeld, Adam Sandler, and my favorite movie was Fiddler on the Roof, especially now that I have 3 daughters. But their culture is heavily racist, "gentiles" is similar to "infidels" to me. They will kick family members for marrying another race.

[bruto]

I've found the best way to find out who is really a Jew, is the one who accuses a person of being anti semitic for even the slightest criticism of the jewish community. They constantly are on the offensive when not even provoked. I'm a big fan of many jews like, Lewis Black, Seinfeld, Adam Sandler, and my favorite movie was Fiddler on the Roof, especially now that I have 3 daughters. But their culture is heavily racist, "gentiles" is similar to "infidels" to me. They will kick family members for marrying another race.So presumably the ones who don't behave as you suggest aren't "real" Jews? Sorry, Parky! You've been outed! Admit it, now. You're really a Scotsman in disguise.

[Thunder]

I can't recollect how many times I've heard a jewish character call a gentile one "goy" in Hollywood movies and sitcoms, which incidentally have a large proportions of jews involved in producing, direction et al.

I am talking about real life experiences. Not Hollywood.

I have heard Gentiles referred to as "Goys" many times. In fact, I myself have been called a Goy. And it was not meant to be a compliment.

[Thunder]

They will kick family members for marrying another race.

Yes. Intermarriage is very frowned upon. And yes, some Jews will even consider a Jewish relative who marries a non-Jew, to be "expired".

[boyntonstu]

Yes. Intermarriage is very frowned upon. And yes, some Jews will even consider a Jewish relative who marries a non-Jew, to be "expired".


If a Catholic marries a non-Catholic what does the Church allow?

What happens if a Muslim marries a non-Muslim?

Every group attempts to maintain its culture.

If you were a Black person how would you call the people who denied you privileges?

[chuck4842]

Yes. Intermarriage is very frowned upon. And yes, some Jews will even consider a Jewish relative who marries a non-Jew, to be "expired".

But this thread hasn't settled the question as to who is a real Jew yet, there are jews here aren't there? If you're a Jew settle the debate. Or do Jews expire even their own family not knowing for sure either? That would really raise the level of prejudice wouldn't it?

[Thunder]

A Jew is someone born of a Jewish mother. Or someone who converts to Judaism.

settled.

[chuck4842]

If halakha is the Jewish religious law, which says you're only jewish if your mother is, theres also conversion acceptances so no wonder its confusing. Does this mean the jewish keep record of the maternal side of the family all the way to Mary? Ok , maybe that wasn't funny, but I'm starting to believe that the jewish don't want to be known, which is understandable if you look back at the history full of persecution and dispersement of their people.

[HansMustermann]

boyntonstu, let me put this simply: if you want to brag, brag about what _you_ have achieved, not about just sharing a label with some prestigious people.

Because that's why stereotypes are wrong, and simultaneously why they're so popular. It allows some nobodies to claim superiority or anything else, based on no more than being born into the "right" group. There is no effort involved, there is no merit involved, it's just as simple as claiming "I'm an X and X are Y"... even when you're not. Doesn't matter if X is "white", "black", "american", "jew", "man", "woman", or whatever.

When nazis goostepped to their "master race" slogan, they too, if you looked at the individual people, 90% of them had done nothing in their lives to justify such a "master" claim. Most of them were a bunch of schmucks trying to get some automatic glory by just belonging to the "right" group, not by actually doing anything deserving that glory.

The fact is that even in areas where there is a sizeable and measurable difference between the median of two groups, e.g., physical strength in men vs women, _some_ women will be stronger than _some_ men. You still get to choose individual _people_, not apply stereotypes.

Do you understand that crucial point? _Individuals_ and individual _merits_, not stupid stereotypes.

You want to brag about nobel prizes? Well then freaking go earn one. That's when _you_ get any merit out of them. Ok, you're also allowed to brag if a relative won one. But that's it. Otherwise _you_ don't have any merit worth bragging in those prizes at all.

You want to brag about jewish doctors? Fine, then become one and earn your appreciation the old fashioned way. By actually having a good track record at curing people. Then _you_ get to brag about that medical skill. Or, again, I'm making an allowance for bragging about close relatives, but again about their actual achievements, not just about belonging to the vague group with the "right" label. Otherwise there is no medical skill that _you_ get to brag about.

It has nothing to do with being a jew or anything else. It just has to do with whether _you_ have any actual merits, or you're just trying to handwave your right to some undeserved glory for what someone _else_ did.

[HansMustermann]

Additionally, on what the heck would you base such a blanket claim to glory for a whole group?

Let me recap:

- Jews are not a race. There is no gene or set of genes that makes you a jew. Even for Ashkenazi, there are alleles which appear more often, but there is no common set that you could see on a DNA analysis and go "yep, that one is a jew, that other one isn't."

Anyway, you've agreed before that it's not a race.

- Jews are not necessarily followers of the same religion (as you've said, a lot are atheists, plus some are christian, etc)

- Jews don't all follow the same philosophy (e.g., a die-hard stalinist like Lazar Kaganovich or the guys who went and made a kibutz, will believe in very different values than the stereotypical jewish banker)

- Jews don't all have the same culture (really, a lot of custom stereotypes have to do with the country they came from, than really being "jewish")

- Jews don't even all have the same diet (even among mildly religious ones, there are plenty who'll eat a cheeseburger or think that pork and shrimp are ok if it's at a chinese restaurant)

- a lot of Jews don't even know they're Jews, were not raised as Jews, and really their only link is that their mom once had a Bat Mitzvah and that was the last time she ever had anything to do with jewishness or the jewish culture.

Etc.

So, pray tell, _what_ would give _everyone_ an across-the-board IQ lift to justify your stereotype? Magic? Just having the right label applied on you, gets your synapses working better like that?

Or were you just selflessly offering yourself as a counterexample to that stereotype you propose? ;)

[Thunder]

The only definition ALL Jews seem to be able to agree on...for the most part...is that a Jew is someone born of a Jewish mother or who converts to Judaism.

lets leave it at that.

:)

[marksman]

If halakha is the Jewish religious law, which says you're only jewish if your mother is, theres also conversion acceptances so no wonder its confusing. Does this mean the jewish keep record of the maternal side of the family all the way to Mary?
In theory, it should go back to the Exodus, but I doubt anybody goes back more than a few generations.

Ok , maybe that wasn't funny, but I'm starting to believe that the jewish don't want to be known, which is understandable if you look back at the history full of persecution and dispersement of their people.
Jews have found it very hard not to be known. Before the 1900's, observent Jews were easily distinguished by dress and hairstyle (and few non-observent Jews existed, unless they had converted to the dominant religion, at which point they stopped identifying as Jewish). Only in the last 130 years or so have non-observant Jews been able to try to assimilate in the general population without abandoning their religion entirely.

But for Judaism's purposes, if you can show that you converted, or that your mother or grandmother was Jewish, you'll be accepted as Jewish. Generally you can do this by producing her ketubah -- a marriage contract witnessed by a rabbi. If that's not available, you can find records at any synagogues she may have attended, or other public records that might identify her religion.

This occasionally does become an issue as we discovery pockets of people who pretended to convert, but practiced Judaism secretly (which did happen sometimes during the Spanish Inquisition). But that's an unusual circumstance.

[Jono]

So, pray tell, _what_ would give _everyone_ an across-the-board IQ lift to justify your stereotype? Magic? Just having the right label applied on you, gets your synapses working better like that?

Or were you just selflessly offering yourself as a counterexample to that stereotype you propose? ;)

Well, as I said earlier the ashkenazi can certainly be reasonably defined as an ethniticity, and the matter pertaining to g involved averages so the 'everyone' or 'individual' argument is not relevant. I know this wasn't your point of argument with boyuntotsu whatshisname, however if you are interested to read a bit more on this I'd like to recommend "Chance to Choice: Genetics and Justice".

[HansMustermann]

But _stereotype_ doesn't mean "small delta on the average", but a judgment made inherently upon a whole group. You can't say "Kenyans are fast" or "the Irish drink lots" without essentially having made that claim about every single member of the group with that label.

Plus, it's a purely useless judgment if it really doesn't mean more than "some are, some aren't." You're back to having to judge if the actual individual before you actually has those skills.

Even the ashkenazi would do well to show individual skills, and not just push a stereotype.

Even if I believed that there was an inherent delta in median IQ there, you'd need a pretty huge difference before applying a stereotype starts to be actually justified and not just bigotry.

But again I'm not aware of any study showing that for any race, that didn't end up being bogus.

Plus, let's put it like this: you know who's a good 15 points ahead of Israel in median IQ? (All measured and normed on the same scale too.) North Korea. Would anyone feel that if we started going "let's hire North Koreans instead of Jews, they're smarter" it would be a good, justified, reality-based stereotype? Or would you think it's an excuse for anti-semitism and denying some individuals a chance to show the actual skills they do have?

Besides, I don't see a problem with asking each individual to prove his actual talent and skill. I'm not going to stop a Jew from being a scientist, or doctor, or whatever else. I'm just saying I'll judge his own results instead of applying any stereotype. And if he does happen to actually have any genetic bonus, hey, it's just going to make that task easier for him, wouldn't it? There's no reason to apply some assumptions in advance.

[Skeptic]

Well, I dunno.

"Goy" was used as a term of abuse -- - but usually when applied to a Jew. The point of the insult is that so-and-so doesn't know more about Judaism than a non-Jew can be expected to, that is, that they are ignorant. It is certainly not equivalent to the N-word, being a much less strong word. At worst it's equivalent to "a fool".

P.S.

I know a non-Jewish lawyer who works for a mostly-Jewish law firm in NYC. He actually learned some Yiddish, and tells me he is called the "wonder Goy", and that they tell him that it's perfectly legitimate to employ him as long as he gets his shots and goes to the vet regularly...

[boyntonstu]

"Anyway, you've agreed before that it's not a race.

- Jews are not necessarily followers of the same religion (as you've said, a lot are atheists, plus some are christian, etc) "


A Jew who is a Christian?

Is that like A vegetarian who eats hamburgers?

[HansMustermann]

"Anyway, you've agreed before that it's not a race.

- Jews are not necessarily followers of the same religion (as you've said, a lot are atheists, plus some are christian, etc) "


A Jew who is a Christian?

Is that like A vegetarian who eats hamburgers?

I thought you counted by _descent_ not by _religion_ when you made some of your claims. E.g., the Nobel Prize one.

In fact, it was even worse than by descent, because you just counted "At least 180 Jews and persons of half- or three-quarters-Jewish ancestry have been awarded the Nobel Prize". Remember that quote? It's from your message #163, if you need refreshing your memory.

Basically you're including people who aren't even jewish by mother, in that count, or really don't even need more than two jewish grandparents... even if they're both grandfathers. It's enlarging any definition of jewishness, except that used by the Third Reich. And at any rate, there no mention of religion at all there.

So, yes, one of those could be Christian, born of Christian parents, and still be counted as a Jew in that claim for greatness.

Make up your mind. One or the other. You don't get to equivocate.

And if you think that "Christian Jew" sounds as stupid as "A vegetarian who eats hamburgers", well, then you can stop counting those. You introduced the kind of counting where that counts as a Jew, not I :p

[Jono]

But _stereotype_ doesn't mean "small delta on the average", but a judgment made inherently upon a whole group. You can't say "Kenyans are fast" or "the Irish drink lots" without essentially having made that claim about every single member of the group with that label.

I think one has to take into account that, despite the right or wrongs with stereotypes, such statements are made in a rather colloquial tone and doesn't, of course, involve every single member, but rather a contrast of tendencies based on an argument on the average or comparable difference in tendencies.

Plus, let's put it like this: you know who's a good 15 points ahead of Israel in median IQ? (All measured and normed on the same scale too.) North Korea. Would anyone feel that if we started going "let's hire North Koreans instead of Jews, they're smarter" it would be a good, justified, reality-based stereotype? Or would you think it's an excuse for anti-semitism and denying some individuals a chance to show the actual skills they do have?


Well first of all, there is a notable difference between "Israel" as a vestige in this context and ashkenazi jews.
On your additional note, I do not understand why you'd ask me that. I wasn't hinting on anything other than the fact that man is certainly not a species of animals where all variations thereof happen to be equally cognitivitely equipped inherently.

I'm just saying I'll judge his own results instead of applying any stereotype. And if he does happen to actually have any genetic bonus, hey, it's just going to make that task easier for him, wouldn't it? There's no reason to apply some assumptions in advance.

That is true. However similar generalisations happen all the time, just not always about something as 'controversial' as IQ as per group. The "yardstick of averages" so to speak is used everywhere, in pretty much every facett of society and used in turn six ways from sunday, in science/sociology/psychology/neurology/psychiatry/economy/politics et al to appropriate a probability and/or a tendency.

It simply means that, if going by individual competence, statistically if you go far enough you'd get a better result picking from the statistically preferred group, despite the context.

If we are to check people who'd be more sensitive to diabetics, statistically, we might for arguments sake find the polynesian group to be notably susceptible. However, this doesn't mean one should ignore by default any signs thereof if shown by a person from another ethnic group. Rather, we would simply expect more people of the polnesian ethniticity to show a higher tendency to develop diabetics, which is a useful 'average expected tendency-difference' to discover at that.

[boyntonstu]

I thought you counted by _descent_ not by _religion_ when you made some of your claims. E.g., the Nobel Prize one.

In fact, it was even worse than by descent, because you just counted "At least 180 Jews and persons of half- or three-quarters-Jewish ancestry have been awarded the Nobel Prize". Remember that quote? It's from your message #163, if you need refreshing your memory.

Basically you're including people who aren't even jewish by mother, in that count, or really don't even need more than two jewish grandparents... even if they're both grandfathers. It's enlarging any definition of jewishness, except that used by the Third Reich. And at any rate, there no mention of religion at all there.

So, yes, one of those could be Christian, born of Christian parents, and still be counted as a Jew in that claim for greatness.

Make up your mind. One or the other. You don't get to equivocate.

And if you think that "Christian Jew" sounds as stupid as "A vegetarian who eats hamburgers", well, then you can stop counting those. You introduced the kind of counting where that counts as a Jew, not I :p

The reference to 1/2 or 3/4 has to do with being raised in the culture, not genetic ancestry. If you had a Jewish grandmother who influenced you as a child, you would understand my point.

[HansMustermann]

The problem is that there's a very blurry line between colloquial tone and actual discrimination.

And that the way the human brain works, if you say something often enough, you actually start believing it. Really, in one experiment people were even asked to write an essay taking the side of the opposite party, being told that it's just for some other purpose. But upon being questioned a few weeks later, their opinions had actually shifted towards what they wrote.

So basically I do find stereotypes dangerous.

That said, I must qualify, if it wasn't obvious, that my only problem is really with "stereotype." Each race or nation or culture is certainly entitled to pride for its members achievements. If boyntonstu just wants to be proud of his fellow jews who won Nobel Prizes, I might even cheer along. But when he's pushing for "stereotype", that's when it starts to rub me the wrong way.

[HansMustermann]

The reference to 1/2 or 3/4 has to do with being raised in the culture, not genetic ancestry. If you had a Jewish grandmother who influenced you as a child, you would understand my point.

Which kind of jewish grandmother? The eastern european stereotype of the jewish woman who's obsessed with raising her children right until they're in the 50's, or the western "jewish princess" stereotype?

ETA: plus, it seems to me like you agreed that I can count "Christian Jews" as Jews, if they had a jewish grandmother, right?

[Thunder]

"Anyway, you've agreed before that it's not a race.

- Jews are not necessarily followers of the same religion (as you've said, a lot are atheists, plus some are christian, etc) "


A Jew who is a Christian?


Traditionally, and by Orthodox rules, Jews who stop practicing Judaism or who even convert to another faith, are still Jews..but apostates or heretics.

no conversion is necessary for these people to return to Judaism. and if the person is a woman, Orthodox Jews consider their children to also be Jews.

I think.

[Jono]

Traditionally, and by Orthodox rules, Jews who stop practicing Judaism or who even convert to another faith, are still Jews..but apostates or heretics.

no conversion is necessary for these people to return to Judaism. and if the person is a woman, Orthodox Jews consider their children to also be Jews.

I think.

Actually, there's even a 'clause' in Judaism, somewhere, that if ones life is at stake the person can renounce their faith through lipservice and convert to another religion to keep alive.
This happend, for example, during the Damascus trials (the ritual murder debacle) in the 19th century where a rabbi converted to Islam and confessed to this and that after reported torture. His father, who was (if I recall correctly) chief rabbi of Paris, mentioned this clause specifically as his guess for why his son had acted like so.

[ElightenMe]

Would you react to the English word Goy with violence?

If somebody called me an anti-semite, without basis and then called me a "Goy", I would.

[Tricky]

I've exiled many posts on this thread to AAH for bickering, responding to bickering, off-topic, responding to off topic and general ugliness. If your post was moved, that doesn't necessarily mean you did anything wrong but you got caught in the crunch.

Needless to say, this mod-box marks the point where we will take personal attacks and other types of bickering more seriously, so I strongly advise against them. Staying on topic will help a lot in that.

Thanks