History of Judaism & Israel

[Tez3]

I'm not in the least scientific so things have to be put in simple terms for me but I can understand that genes are shared by groups of people and it's not a big deal. I don't see why it's impossible to believe that a group of people who lived in Europe should have DNA that proves they orginate in the Middle East. There's nothing mystical about that.
Now whether that proves they are entitled to live there again may well be another argument altogether but I'm put my heart on my sleeve and you know where I stand on that. It's not much to be allowed to live somewhere where you came from and there's nowhere else for you to go as was the case for many Jews. If people don't think the Jews should have been allowed to settle in Israel after the last war just where do you think they should have gone, back to Germany? To the USSR? Where should the displaced and countryless Jews gone? Why not back to the land they came from, after all how many times have people said 'go back to where you came from'.

It's not a claim actually based on DNA, its based on many things that have been already mentioned. Saying we were making the claim based on DNA was putting words into our mouths.

The DNA question came up when the claim was made that the European Jews weren't actually Jewish but Christians who converted. The DNA proves they were from the Middle East and not from European Christians. It was being said that Jews who came from Europe weren't actually Jews and therefore had no claim on Israel, it wasn't that we were using the DNA claim to prove Israel was ours! We used it to prove that the Jews of Europe were actually descended from the Jews of the Middle East. Others are trying to cloud the issue by claiming we are using a magic 'Jewish gene' ( you know you have it when it shouts oy vay) to prove that the Jewish people are special. Nope, different groups of people share DNA, there's nothing special in that and we aren't claiming we have special powers ( quite the opposite the 'Jewish' gene also makes us lousy at drinking alcohol in any quantities).

Other things being implied were that there were no Jews left only Arabs in Isreal, one of our claims to Israel is in fact that a great deal of the land was actually owned by Jews and other Jews should have the right to settle on that land, possession 9/10s etc lol! As I've said the Jews never went away in Israel, many have lived there for generations and generations. It was never a case of a people descending on a land where there were no Jews, what land wasn't originally owned by Jews was sold to them by eager Arabs.

 

[elder999]

. Saying we were making the claim based on DNA was putting words into our mouths..

I never said Jews were making any claims based on DNA-just that the DNA points to their coming fromt he Middle East.

Pretty sure that gene isn't identified by jumping up and saying oy vey!

It says mazel tov! :lfao:

 

[CanuckMA]

I never said Jews were making any claims based on DNA-just that the DNA points to their coming fromt he Middle East.

Pretty sure that gene isn't identified by jumping up and saying oy vey!

It says mazel tov! :lfao:

It's easy to identify. There's a little bit missing at the end. :uhyeah:

 

[Makalakumu]

THings get a bit more complicated when examining Jewish mitochondrial DNA,for just the reasons that you've stated, but I'm surprised at a fellow scientist throwing the word "impossible" around so blithely, Scott-especially considering that biology isn't even my field....:lol:

Impossible = highly unlikely. Jeez, my semantic-MINDED friend, talking with you is like boxing with someone with a good jab.

 

[CanuckMA]

Impossible = highly unlikely. Jeez, my semantic-nazi friend, talking with you is like boxing with someone with a good jab.

First, throwing the nazi word at any time is dubious. Using it to a Jew during a discussion of Jews is in bad taste.

Moreover, Impossible does not equate to highly unlikely. Impossible means that is simply cannot be. Highly unlikely means that while there is a possibility, the odds are long.

As a scientist, I assume that precision is paramount.

You're also arguing with Jews. We have a multi-thousand year old tradition of analyzing every single word in a text. :ultracool

 

[elder999]

Impossible = highly unlikely. Jeez, my semantic-nazi friend, talking with you is like boxing with someone with a good jab.

Probably should have said "semantic-mazi" with the quotes, there...:lol:

highly unlikely="improbable.", not impossible.

In any case, based on what I've posted that exactly what you've called "impossible," is, in fact demonstrably probable.

.

You're also arguing with Jews. We have a multi-thousand year old tradition of analyzing every single word in a text. :ultracool

I'm not Jewish, though I'm probably on your side of this part of the argument.

 

[Makalakumu]

Believe what you wish. The fact that you use the word Palestine not Israel shows where your sympathies lie.

My sympathies? I decided to be un-PC and say Palestine. I have nothing against Jews or any other religion. I do not support the war crimes on either side, however, and I think the two people's are stuck in a dreadful cycle of violence.

In regards to Polish History, well, it's just part of the the accepted history. The Khazars are part of it, initiating the first wave of conversions. Christians converting to Judaism because it afforded them a chance at better life is part of it. It's not hard to understand, imagine some starving Christian peasant seeing the Jews live in the towns owning their own homes, growing their own food, owning businesses, essentially being prosperous. This initiated the second wave of conversions in the Middle Ages.

Later, the Jewish prosperity was used against the Jews by the Swedes and the Russians. They crafted propaganda that basically stated that the Jews owned everything, that the king was basically a Jew, and the religion was blamed for all of Polands ills. That pretty much ended the relative prosperity that Jews found in Poland.

http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&ke...ooks&hvadid=3135107991&ref=pd_sl_75ny2rpjmh_b

Here's another book that lays it all out again. It's historical fiction, but if you've read Michener, you'll know that he actually went to Poland and spoke to all of the experts in order to get all of the details right.

And that encompasses all I know and have read on the matter. Did the mass conversions really happen? I don't know, but it seems that a great many Polish experts in history seem to think so. I also know that if this is true, then the claim that all Jews directly tie back to Israel (see I can be PC) is false.

Here's what I want to know. Suppose that this is true, does it really matter all that much? Could one simply say, oh sure, lots of Jews converted from other lands, but our primary homeland is still Israel? For some reason that I don't understand, there seems to be a focus on purity or at least a sanctity of bloodline.

 

[Makalakumu]

First, throwing the nazi word at any time is dubious. Using it to a Jew during a discussion of Jews is in bad taste.

Moreover, Impossible does not equate to highly unlikely. Impossible means that is simply cannot be. Highly unlikely means that while there is a possibility, the odds are long.

As a scientist, I assume that precision is paramount.

You're also arguing with Jews. We have a multi-thousand year old tradition of analyzing every single word in a text. :ultracool

That was meant to be a joke. I won't tell anyone to lighten up, so I'll apologize. That is a fair rebuke.

Lots of scientists use impossible in the fashion that I've used it, with the idea that impossible doesn't really exist, it represents one end of a scale of improbability.

 

[Makalakumu]

Interesting how science can be a trump card when it supports ones politics and questionable when it doesn't. Especially when you see it in a person claiming to be a scientist.

IMO, "science" has been corrupted by political influence and this has turned the whole industry on it's end. Politicians have learned that attaching the word "science" to a thing suddenly gives it more merit and they can always find someone with the proper piece of paper to do the work for some money. It's a sad state of affairs and I'm not sure how to turn that ship around.

 

[CanuckMA]

I'm not Jewish, though I'm probably on your side of this part of the argument.

But you argue like one.


I have a sharp knife... :lfao:

 

[Archangel M]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars#Debate_about_Khazar_conversion_to_Judaism

The theory that all or most Ashkenazi ("European") Jews might be descended from Khazars (rather than Semitic groups in the Middle East) dates back to the racial studies of late nineteenth century Europe, and was frequently cited to assert that most modern Jews are not descended from Israelites and/or to refute Israeli claims to Palestine. It was first publicly proposed in lecture given by the racial-theorist Ernest Renan on January 27, 1883, titled "Judaism as a Race and as Religion."[38] It was repeated in articles in The Dearborn Independent in 1923 and 1925, and popularized by racial theorist Lothrop Stoddard in a 1926 article in the Forum titled "The Pedigree of Judah", where he argued that Ashkenazi Jews were a mix of people, of which the Khazars were a primary element.[19][39] Stoddard's views were "based on nineteenth and twentieth-century concepts of race, in which small variations on facial features as well as presumed accompanying character traits were deemed to pass from generation to generation, subject only to the corrupting effects of marriage with members of other groups, the result of which would lower the superior stock without raising the inferior partners."[40] This theory was adopted by British Israelites, who saw it as a means of invalidating the claims of Jews (rather than themselves) to be the true descendants of the ancient Israelites, and was supported by early anti-Zionists.[19][39]

...

Bernard Lewis stated in 1999:
This theory… is supported by no evidence whatsoever. It has long since been abandoned by all serious scholars in the field, including those in Arab countries, where the Khazar theory is little used except in occasional political polemics.[24]

Perhaps your reference to the Nazis is in close goosestep with your adherence to this theory.

 

[CanuckMA]

In regards to Polish History, well, it's just part of the the accepted history. The Khazars are part of it, initiating the first wave of conversions. Christians converting to Judaism because it afforded them a chance at better life is part of it. It's not hard to understand, imagine some starving Christian peasant seeing the Jews live in the towns owning their own homes, growing their own food, owning businesses, essentially being prosperous. This initiated the second wave of conversions in the Middle Ages.

It is not accepted by credible historians.

And the consensus about the Khazars is the the populace did not convert.

The most likely reason for the Khazars, who were not Europeans anyway, to make Judaism the 'officail' religion was likely to try to maintain religious sovereignty against their neighbours, Xtians and Muslims, while not beeing branded heretics.

There was a time of large immigration from Europe into Greater Poland. But never mass conversions.

While there were Jewish villages, shtetls, where Jews owned the businesses, outside they were nothing. Hardly the conditions that a Xtian in a Xtian country would want to attach itself to. Plus for a Xtian, that would be like devolving.

Here's another book that lays it all out again. It's historical fiction, but if you've read Michener, you'll know that he actually went to Poland and spoke to all of the experts in order to get all of the details right.

I've read Michener. I like him. But his novels, while seemingly well researched, are hardly the stuff of history. He'll take the smallest thing and go on a flight of fancy.

And that encompasses all I know and have read on the matter. Did the mass conversions really happen? I don't know, but it seems that a great many Polish experts in history seem to think so. I also know that if this is true, then the claim that all Jews directly tie back to Israel (see I can be PC) is false.

Here's what I want to know. Suppose that this is true, does it really matter all that much? Could one simply say, oh sure, lots of Jews converted from other lands, but our primary homeland is still Israel? For some reason that I don't understand, there seems to be a focus on purity or at least a sanctity of bloodline.

Nothing to do with sanctity of bloodline. Can you understand how falacies like the Khazars have been used for the past 60 years to de-legimitize our claim to Israel? You start with mass conversions in Europe to proceed to Ashkenazi Jews are just European, to statements like Helen Thomas just made, to the Arab world using it to justify the destruction of Israel.

 

[Makalakumu]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars#Debate_about_Khazar_conversion_to_Judaism



Perhaps your reference to the Nazis is in close goosestep with your adherence to this theory.

I was totally ignorant about how controversial this topic was. About the only thing I can say is that I read Michener and read some history books and they concurred. That said I concede my position in this discussion.

 

[CanuckMA]

Or will there be 40 more posts on Jewish genetics?

Well we do have the best jeans because Levi Strauss was one of us. :ultracool

 

[Tez3]

OK. This is the THIRD post concerning Reuters faking pictures of the "Peaceful"terrorist sympathizers. Can we get back to the topic? Or will there be 40 more posts on Jewish genetics?

It was a geneuine discussion though!

 

[Makalakumu]

On the BBC news (which is pro Arab btw) it showed the Turkish television report of all the coffins of those killed arriving in Turkey, 9 of them. They are being buried in Turkey.

If that really was all of the coffins, then that settles it. The point is that you've got to take what the MSM offers with a chunk of rock salt. Even the BBC is not above taking video of nine coffins and claiming that this was all there was. There may still have been more killed, we simply don't know.

Oh and the Jews are the natives in Israel, they didn't leave Israel, they were invaded several times by various nations but always there's been Jews in Israel, the number swelled of course with immigration but always Jews have owned land, lived and died in Israel. Many, many thousands actually, thoughout the land. Jesus was a Jew remember, living in Israel called by the Romans Palestine, no Muslims around then, just Jews and the invaders. The Muslim invaders came later, so did the Christian Crusaders, the Turks and the British but always Jews were living there.

Who is anyone to 'give' Israel to it's original people? Perhaps Britain as the original 'owners' of America should 'give' back the land to it's original owners the native Americans? Americans certainly led by example there didn't they? don't throw stones when you live in a glass house.

This might be a side issue, but something I've always wondered is how can a religion be a race? In Poland and Germany, at various times, large numbers of people converted to Judaism. Many of the Israelis now, came from this stock. How can anyone consider these people to be the natives of Palestine?

How many Jews (or Israelis) can really trace back their lineage to Jews that lived in Palestine?

 

[Tez3]

If that really was all of the coffins, then that settles it. The point is that you've got to take what the MSM offers with a chunk of rock salt. Even the BBC is not above taking video of nine coffins and claiming that this was all there was. There may still have been more killed, we simply don't know.



This might be a side issue, but something I've always wondered is how can a religion be a race? In Poland and Germany, at various times, large numbers of people converted to Judaism. Many of the Israelis now, came from this stock. How can anyone consider these people to be the natives of Palestine?

How many Jews (or Israelis) can really trace back their lineage to Jews that lived in Palestine?

I didn't say the BBC reported only 9 coffins, I said the Turks reported nine coffins and they have a dog in this fight as the 'protestors' were funded by them, it's in their interest to say there were more killed not less.

Large numbers of people converted to Judaism? Really? where did you get that from? Very few people want to convert to Judaism as it usually means getting killed or at the very least kicked out of your country. I think your research is faulty there. I have no knowledge of large numbers converting, why would they when hated so much by the Christians? Give me a year or even a century this happened because I can assure you that didn't happen. Individual conversions on marriage more than likely but there were no large scale conversions. However between 1800 and 1810 one tenth of the German population converted to Christianity not the other way around. Fifty out of the 405 Jewish families in Berlin converted.

The natives of Israel are the Jews, what, did you think every single Jew from Jesus' time upped and left the country? A great many left as slaves, to other parts of the known world at the time but Jews have always lived in Israel, long before the Arabs arrived. Have a look at Jewish history, Jews were still in Israel when the Crusaders were there,they were still there at the end of the First World War and they were still thee after the Second World War. Jews have always been in Israel. Why wouldn't they be?