There is the evidence.

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
Um... pretty sure the scholarly consensus is that he was a Galilean Jew, and for most practical purposes the terms Israelite, Hebrew, and Jew, in his day were synonymous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Serryah

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
110,062
11,700
113
Low Earth Orbit
Um... pretty sure the scholarly consensus is that he was a Galilean Jew, and for most practical purposes the terms Israelite, Hebrew, and Jew, in his day were synonymous.
Ummm no. Read Kings and Kings II. Judeans (Jews) went off on a tangent from the Israelites. Calling Jesus "King of the Jews" was an insult. Jesus was to reunite the tribes.

Therefore there is no Judeo-Christian anything.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
That’s a view I’ve never encountered before. Every reference I can find affirms his Jewishness, born to Jews, raised in the faith, identified as a rabbi, observant of the Law, and so on, even the famous Last Supper appears to have been a Passover Seder, which only Jews would celebrate.
 

Serryah

Executive Branch Member
Dec 3, 2008
9,078
2,103
113
New Brunswick
That’s a view I’ve never encountered before. Every reference I can find affirms his Jewishness, born to Jews, raised in the faith, identified as a rabbi, observant of the Law, and so on, even the famous Last Supper appears to have been a Passover Seder, which only Jews would celebrate.

I don't know who thinks Jesus wasn't a Jew, but he was.



I think trying to claim that Jesus wasn't a Jew - and his followers weren't Jews - is trying to rewrite history, or trying to separate the idea of Jesus being from the Jewish faith so Christianity seems more "pure", or something? I don't know.

But Jesus was a Jew.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
110,062
11,700
113
Low Earth Orbit
That’s a view I’ve never encountered before. Every reference I can find affirms his Jewishness, born to Jews, raised in the faith, identified as a rabbi, observant of the Law, and so on, even the famous Last Supper appears to have been a Passover Seder, which only Jews would celebrate.
Nope. Nope and nope. Judea and Israel weren't one in the same he wasnt Judean. "Jew" was a 4th Century term for Judeans.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
No, I can't agree with you, I think you're conflating etymology with religion and ethnicity. The Encyclopedia Britannica has this to say about it at : https://www.britannica.com/topic/Jew-people

"Jew, Hebrew Yĕhūdhī or Yehudi, any person whose religion is Judaism. In the broader sense of the term, a Jew is any person belonging to the worldwide group that constitutes, through descent or conversion, a continuation of the ancient Jewish people, who were themselves descendants of the Hebrews of the Bible (Old Testament). In ancient times, a Yĕhūdhī was originally a member of Judah—i.e., either of the tribe of Judah (one of the 12 tribes that took possession of the Promised Land) or of the subsequent Kingdom of Judah (in contrast to the rival Kingdom of Israel to the north). The Jewish people as a whole, initially called Hebrews (ʿIvrim), were known as Israelites (Yisreʾelim) from the time of their entrance into the Holy Land to the end of the Babylonian Exile (538 bce). Thereafter, the term Yĕhūdhī (Latin: Judaeus; French: Juif; German: Jude; and English: Jew) was used to signify all adherents of Judaism, because the survivors of the Exile (former inhabitants of the Kingdom of Judah) were the only Israelites who had retained their distinctive identity. (The 10 tribes of the northern kingdom of Israel had been dispersed after the Assyrian conquest of 721 bce and were gradually assimilated by other peoples.) The term Jew is thus derived through the Latin Judaeus and the Greek Ioudaios from the Hebrew Yĕhūdhī. "

The two kingdoms referred to there were long extinct by Jesus' time, and unless you're going to try arguing that the dispersed and assimilated ten tribes of the Kingdom of Israel were not adherents of Judaism at the time the kingdom existed, when the books of I and II Kings you referred me to clearly indicate they were, and that Jesus descends from them. you haven't got a case. It's true that the word Jew derives from Judah, and the name was applied to all of them because they were the only identifiable descendants of the original ancient Hebrews. All the people of the Kingdom of Israel were lost to history after the Assyrian destruction of the kingdom, you're using an extinct geographic reference from long before Jesus' time that has no bearing on the question.

In other words, Jesus in the terminology of his time, and ours, was a Jew.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Serryah

Torch light

House Member
Dec 4, 2017
3,530
151
63
Really? ALL of them? Certainly there are racists among the Jews, I've met some, but there are racists in every group, including Muslims. All that claim does is underline your own prejudice against them. I doubt you even know any, there can't be many of them hanging around in whatever blighted Islamic theocracy you live in.

I didn't say they did, and it's not true, writings from all eras of Jewish history acknowledge there's an afterlife. The Torah identifies a sort of shadowy underworld called Sheol, and the rabbinical tradition is quite clear about Heaven, it's open to all the righteous of any faith tradition, it's not the gated community open only to the true believers that Christianity and Islam claim. But there's no Hell in Judaism, another thing I like about it.

You can hardly judge them for that, You wouldn't believe claims from groups that have persecuted you mercilessly for as long as they've existed. The history of Christian and Islamic persecution of the Jews is shameful. Christianity has tempered its persecution in recent centuries, though it was only in the 1960s that the Catholic Church withdrew its dogma about Jews being the killers of Christ, and there are large numbers in the Islamic world still calling for the extermination of Jews, a sentiment you've come pretty close to expressing yourself. If I were a Jew, I wouldn't believe Christian or Islamic claims either. I don't anyway, but not for that reason.
I guessed you are a Jew, from the first time you transgressed on my person, and you spoke harshly to me and some of my friends maybe before.
Anyhow:
1- I did not say all of them, but generally speaking yes. This is their general evil conduct which let most people dislike them.
2- It is not up to Jews, Christians, or Muslims: what and how is the Next Life. But it is up to God Who told in the Quran (and in the Bible) that the one who associates anything or anyone with God in worship and devotion... such one will lose in the Next Life.
3- The persecution of Jews (and other religious sects) was not because of the Jews were good and acting well, and not because they are poor men, but because of their evil and wrongdoing and transgression and cheating which they work towards people in general, or else they would have been liked and respected.
In addition, God set the tyrants on Jews (and others) because of their wrongdoing, blasphemy, idolatry (or associating others with God Almighty), and their ungodliness, as a part of His punishment for the idolaters, the wrongdoers, and the blasphemers.
 
Last edited:

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
56,043
7,295
113
Washington DC
Your god is a joke. He is too weak to work his will in the world. That's why all he's got is vague threats of how he's gonna get you after you die.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
110,062
11,700
113
Low Earth Orbit
No, I can't agree with you, I think you're conflating etymology with religion and ethnicity. The Encyclopedia Britannica has this to say about it at : https://www.britannica.com/topic/Jew-people

"Jew, Hebrew Yĕhūdhī or Yehudi, any person whose religion is Judaism. In the broader sense of the term, a Jew is any person belonging to the worldwide group that constitutes, through descent or conversion, a continuation of the ancient Jewish people, who were themselves descendants of the Hebrews of the Bible (Old Testament). In ancient times, a Yĕhūdhī was originally a member of Judah—i.e., either of the tribe of Judah (one of the 12 tribes that took possession of the Promised Land) or of the subsequent Kingdom of Judah (in contrast to the rival Kingdom of Israel to the north). The Jewish people as a whole, initially called Hebrews (ʿIvrim), were known as Israelites (Yisreʾelim) from the time of their entrance into the Holy Land to the end of the Babylonian Exile (538 bce). Thereafter, the term Yĕhūdhī (Latin: Judaeus; French: Juif; German: Jude; and English: Jew) was used to signify all adherents of Judaism, because the survivors of the Exile (former inhabitants of the Kingdom of Judah) were the only Israelites who had retained their distinctive identity. (The 10 tribes of the northern kingdom of Israel had been dispersed after the Assyrian conquest of 721 bce and were gradually assimilated by other peoples.) The term Jew is thus derived through the Latin Judaeus and the Greek Ioudaios from the Hebrew Yĕhūdhī. "

The two kingdoms referred to there were long extinct by Jesus' time, and unless you're going to try arguing that the dispersed and assimilated ten tribes of the Kingdom of Israel were not adherents of Judaism at the time the kingdom existed, when the books of I and II Kings you referred me to clearly indicate they were, and that Jesus descends from them. you haven't got a case. It's true that the word Jew derives from Judah, and the name was applied to all of them because they were the only identifiable descendants of the original ancient Hebrews. All the people of the Kingdom of Israel were lost to history after the Assyrian destruction of the kingdom, you're using an extinct geographic reference from long before Jesus' time that has no bearing on the question.

In other words, Jesus in the terminology of his time, and ours, was a Jew.
Did you read Kings and Kings II or youre sticking with encyclopedia Britainca?

Distinguishing between insider and outsider groups and their differing nomenclatures is essential for accurate interpretation and translation. Jesus and his earliest followers, evidence demonstrates, were called `Israelites', `Galileans' or `Nazoreans' by their fellow Israelites. `Israel', `Israelites' were the preferred terms of self-designation among members of the house of Israel when addressing other members—not `'Ιουδαιος', `Jew' or `Judaism'. Modern interpreters and translators of the Bible, it is argued, should respect and follow this insider preference. 'Ιουδαιος , an outsider coinage, is best rendered `Judaean', not `Jew', to reflect the explicit or implied connection with Judaea. It was employed by Israelites when addressing outsiders as an accommodation to outsider usage. The concepts `Jew', `Jewish' and `Christian' as understood today are shaped more by fourth century rather than first-century CE realities and hence should be avoided as anachronistic designations for first-century persons or groups. Use of `Christian' is best restricted to its three NT appearances. The use of appropriate nomenclature is crucial for minimizing historical and social inaccuracies and misunderstandings.
 

Torch light

House Member
Dec 4, 2017
3,530
151
63
No, I can't agree with you, I think you're conflating etymology with religion and ethnicity. The Encyclopedia Britannica has this to say about it at : https://www.britannica.com/topic/Jew-people

"Jew, Hebrew Yĕhūdhī or Yehudi, any person whose religion is Judaism. In the broader sense of the term, a Jew is any person belonging to the worldwide group that constitutes, through descent or conversion, a continuation of the ancient Jewish people, who were themselves descendants of the Hebrews of the Bible (Old Testament). In ancient times, a Yĕhūdhī was originally a member of Judah—i.e., either of the tribe of Judah (one of the 12 tribes that took possession of the Promised Land) or of the subsequent Kingdom of Judah (in contrast to the rival Kingdom of Israel to the north). The Jewish people as a whole, initially called Hebrews (ʿIvrim), were known as Israelites (Yisreʾelim) from the time of their entrance into the Holy Land to the end of the Babylonian Exile (538 bce). Thereafter, the term Yĕhūdhī (Latin: Judaeus; French: Juif; German: Jude; and English: Jew) was used to signify all adherents of Judaism, because the survivors of the Exile (former inhabitants of the Kingdom of Judah) were the only Israelites who had retained their distinctive identity. (The 10 tribes of the northern kingdom of Israel had been dispersed after the Assyrian conquest of 721 bce and were gradually assimilated by other peoples.) The term Jew is thus derived through the Latin Judaeus and the Greek Ioudaios from the Hebrew Yĕhūdhī. "

The two kingdoms referred to there were long extinct by Jesus' time, and unless you're going to try arguing that the dispersed and assimilated ten tribes of the Kingdom of Israel were not adherents of Judaism at the time the kingdom existed, when the books of I and II Kings you referred me to clearly indicate they were, and that Jesus descends from them. you haven't got a case. It's true that the word Jew derives from Judah, and the name was applied to all of them because they were the only identifiable descendants of the original ancient Hebrews. All the people of the Kingdom of Israel were lost to history after the Assyrian destruction of the kingdom, you're using an extinct geographic reference from long before Jesus' time that has no bearing on the question.

In other words, Jesus in the terminology of his time, and ours, was a Jew.
There is a difference between 'Jews' and 'Israelites' or Children of Israel.

Children of Israel (or Prophet Jacob's descendants) are the twelve tribes descending from the twelve sons of Jacob.

The Jews are the followers of Prophet Moses; i,e. before Moses there were no Jews, but after the Torah was revealed, the Jews were found.
The word is related to a word in the Quran 7: 156, about Moses praying God: where the word "hudna" with its root is related to the word "yehood": the word in the aya means: we have turned to You in repentance.

Quran 7: 156, which means:
"And assign to us, in this World, a good [grace], and in the Next World [a good life]; we have turned to You with repentance."
quran-ayat.com/pret/7.htm#a7_156

Therefore, depending on this great aya and its interpretation, the word Yehood (Jews) means: those who turn to God in repentance.

While the word "Muslims" means those who submit themselves to God in compliance.
And the word Nasara or Nazareth (for Christians) in my opinion: (could be correct or wrong) it means the 'helpers', as Jesus Christ said to them, as in the Quran 3: 52, which means:
(But when Jesus 'perceived and knew' the unbelief of the [Children of Israel, and that they denied him,] he said: "Who will be my helpers for [the cause of] God['s religion]?"
The intimate followers [: the disciples] said: "We are the helpers of God ['s religion]; we believe in God [alone, and that Jesus is His messenger];
so bear witness you [Jesus] that we have submitted [ourselves to God's commands and to that which you have brought to us from God.]")

The details of this great aya and its interpretation is here:
quran-ayat.com/pret/3.htm#a3_52
 
Last edited:

Torch light

House Member
Dec 4, 2017
3,530
151
63
N.B. The names of the heavenly religions originally are related to God Almighty and Most Gracious:
1- Abraham and his followers were called "hanifs" which means: they are against idolatry and devoted to God alone with no associate with Him.
This continued till the coming of Moses and the revelation of the Torah.
2- Followers of Moses were called Yehood or Jews: which means: they return to God with repentance.
3- Followers of Jesus were called Nessara: theChristians: which means: they were the helpers of Jesus for God's religion.
4- Followers of Mohammed are called Muslims: it means: they submit themselves to God with compliance.
 

Greg99

New Member
Jul 3, 2023
4
1
3
There is a difference between 'Jews' and 'Israelites' or Children of Israel.

Children of Israel (or Prophet Jacob's descendants) are the twelve tribes descending from the twelve sons of Jacob.

The Jews are the followers of Prophet Moses; i,e. before Moses there were no Jews, but after the Torah was revealed, the Jews were found.
The word is related to a word in the Quran 7: 156, about Moses praying God: where the word "hudna" with its root is related to the word "yehood": the word in the aya means: we have turned to You in repentance.

Quran 7: 156, which means:
"And assign to us, in this World, a good [grace], and in the Next World [a good life]; we have turned to You with repentance."
quran-ayat.com/pret/7.htm#a7_156 zaza-casino.net

Therefore, depending on this great aya and its interpretation, the word Yehood (Jews) means: those who turn to God in repentance.

While the word "Muslims" means those who submit themselves to God in compliance.
And the word Nasara or Nazareth (for Christians) in my opinion: (could be correct or wrong) it means the 'helpers', as Jesus Christ said to them, as in the Quran 3: 52, which means:
(But when Jesus 'perceived and knew' the unbelief of the [Children of Israel, and that they denied him,] he said: "Who will be my helpers for [the cause of] God['s religion]?"
The intimate followers [: the disciples] said: "We are the helpers of God ['s religion]; we believe in God [alone, and that Jesus is His messenger];
so bear witness you [Jesus] that we have submitted [ourselves to God's commands and to that which you have brought to us from God.]")

The details of this great aya and its interpretation is here:
quran-ayat.com/pret/3.htm#a3_52
The term "Yehood" is indeed related to the word "hudna," which means "to turn to God in repentance." This is why some people believe that the term "Yehood" refers to those who have turned to God in repentance.
However, it is important to note that there is no single, agreed-upon definition of the term "Jew." Some people use the term to refer to anyone who is ethnically Jewish, regardless of their religious beliefs. Others use the term to refer to anyone who follows the religion of Judaism, regardless of their ethnicity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: petros

55Mercury

rigid member
May 31, 2007
4,272
989
113
In addition, God set the tyrants on Jews (and others) because of their wrongdoing, blasphemy, idolatry (or associating others with God Almighty), and their ungodliness, as a part of His punishment for the idolaters, the wrongdoers, and the blasphemers.
did you happen at all to notice what God did to nazis and the German people for their part in the persecution of Jews?

you might want to tread lightly in your foolish bent
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
I guessed you are a Jew, from the first time you transgressed on my person, and you spoke harshly to me and some of my friends maybe before.
No I'm not a Jew, nor have I transgressed on your person, or spoken to any of your friends. You're wrong again, as usual. Certainly I've been harshly critical of your willful ignorance and bigotry, of which the rest of your post provides a fine example, but that's not what transgression means.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Serryah

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
Did you read Kings and Kings II or youre sticking with encyclopedia Britainca?
Yes I've read them, they're about the history of the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah from the time of King David's passing to the Babylonian captivity. The original question was about Jesus' Jewishness, I don't see how the destruction of those kingdoms centuries before Jesus' time has any bearing on that. Nor do I see how what the early followers of Jesus called themselves has any bearing on it either, the issue is whether he was born into Judaism, and everything I've found affirms that he was. And no, I'm not sticking with the Britannica, it's just one example of the sort of thing I found when searching for information about Jesus being a Jew, as I indicated in an earlier post.
... evidence demonstrates...
I didn't find any. It would be helpful if you could provide some if you're going to claim it exists. As far as I've ever been able to discover, we have almost no documentation about the earliest days of the movement that followed Jesus, just a few rather testy references in some Roman writings about what nuisances his followers were. The earliest I've come across is the epistle of Clement, the bishop of Rome toward the end of the 1st century, usually dated around 96 CE. I haven't read it, but what I've read about it contains no indication of Jesus' followers calling themselves `Israelites', `Galileans' or `Nazoreans.'
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
110,062
11,700
113
Low Earth Orbit
Yes I've read them, they're about the history of the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah from the time of King David's passing to the Babylonian captivity. The original question was about Jesus' Jewishness, I don't see how the destruction of those kingdoms centuries before Jesus' time has any bearing on that. Nor do I see how what the early followers of Jesus called themselves has any bearing on it either, the issue is whether he was born into Judaism, and everything I've found affirms that he was. And no, I'm not sticking with the Britannica, it's just one example of the sort of thing I found when searching for information about Jesus being a Jew, as I indicated in an earlier post.

I didn't find any. It would be helpful if you could provide some if you're going to claim it exists. As far as I've ever been able to discover, we have almost no documentation about the earliest days of the movement that followed Jesus, just a few rather testy references in some Roman writings about what nuisances his followers were. The earliest I've come across is the epistle of Clement, the bishop of Rome toward the end of the 1st century, usually dated around 96 CE. I haven't read it, but what I've read about it contains no indication of Jesus' followers calling themselves `Israelites', `Galileans' or `Nazoreans.'
So you should be aware of the split into two groups. Judeans (Second Temple) and Israelites (First Temple). Two different religions.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
That’s not how I read it. The first and second temples existed some centuries apart, but there’s a continuity of religious tradition between them, from the first one built by Solomon and destroyed by the Babylonians and its rebuilding after the return from captivity. Judaism evolved over the centuries but its a stretch to call them different religions.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
110,062
11,700
113
Low Earth Orbit
That’s not how I read it. The first and second temples existed some centuries apart, but there’s a continuity of religious tradition between them, from the first one built by Solomon and destroyed by the Babylonians and its rebuilding after the return from captivity. Judaism evolved over the centuries but its a stretch to call them different religions.
Yahwism and Judaism weren't compatible.

So which tribes were Jesus sent to reunite?