Comments
1 - 20 of 30 Comments Last updated Apr 6, 2012
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Mar 30, 2012
 
Why Jews are Called Jews

The reason why we are called Jews, and that we come from the Tribe of Judah, it is all based on God's promise to David that his Tribe (of Judah) would remain as a lamp in Jerusalem forever.(I Kings 11:36)

The reason for this promise is that it was in the desings of God to reject the Tabernacle of Joseph, aka Ephraim, aka the Ten Tribes of Israel and confirm Judah as the Tribe promised to David to stay forever. That's in Psalm 78:67-69.

Then, after this was done, by the time the Assyrians conquered the Kingdom of the North, aka Israel, that was taken to Assyria and the whole population replaced with Gentiles from Assyria, Israel had been lost forever amongst the nations and assimilated with the Gentiles. That was in the year 721 BCE.

About 100 years later, 131 to be precise, if we take from Josephus in his "The Antiquities of the Jews", Judah was conquered by the Babylonians and taken for a temporary exile of 70 years. But prior to the conquest of Judah by Babylon, about two thirds of the Levites and a few thousands from the other Tribes had escaped to Judah in the South to become one with the Jewish People. That was the moratorium span of time when, to become a Jew, one did not have to convert.

After the exile was over, Judah returned to the Land of Israel as one people and one nation only. The Tribal system was over. Only Judah was in the whole land of Israel; eventually, North and South, as the population grew in number. That's how the Jews got the name from, and Judaism had originated from. The Ten Tribes had got lost forever.(Eze. 37:22)

Ben
Eric

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Mar 30, 2012
 
Or, the Romans used the name to describe people who lived in Judea.
Frijoles

Madison, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Mar 30, 2012
 
Reference in Zachariah 8:23

23 Thus saith the LORD of hosts: In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold, out of all the languages of the nations, shall even take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying: We will go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.'

"ish yehudi"

I'd imagine the word is used in other passages somewhere in the tanakh as well

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Mar 30, 2012
 
second century BC aramaic use as far as i've learned.
Which brings it not so much to the question as to where it is used but when the pen was put to the horizontal scroll.
1king 15: O.T. speak 'Israel and Judah', HB 'between Rehoboam and Jeroboam'.
I might even surmise that the text could read Samaria or Omri, and for Judah (Yehudah) Gibeah or Jebus.
Since yesterday i was thinking where does Judah-Yehuda actually come from?

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Mar 30, 2012
 
Esther the first mention. The wiki article has an extensive article about historicity etc.
Arab'ya was the first mention of probable assorted travelers along the old traderoute. east-who
Arabya thus in old Iranian those of the east/who (travel )east.
We know it is an invented language since no older old persian exists.
Ya hudah- who good gift/blessed gift
Ye hudat-those of good mores
Those of the blessed gift. Either good vazals or remembered as such or specifically Esthers story.
Ya then taken in it's strict grammatical way.
http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/eieol/...
Frijoles

Madison, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Mar 31, 2012
 
Pretty sure Zechariah was before Esther by a few years

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Apr 3, 2012
 
Biblical encylopedia:
http://books.google.nl/books...
The Judahite state is different from the Judaic temple-rule(redemption) after the exile.
They could have been contemporary as in Zecharia spanning more of the history.(Dr. Mill's general sound principle of history determining prophesy and not be determined by it. Though plenty are the ancient rules that had oracles and organs deciding their actions! But all we have to work with is actual history.)

- In another topic i suggested that the improbable timeline of the bible should be read as f.i. 120 years from/in the life of so and so this was written/happened, which brings it closer to actual history and archeology.

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Apr 3, 2012
 
http://www.biblequery.org/Bible/BibleCanon/Wh...
They contain lots of historical errors but the catholic church declared them 'true' i.e. divinely inspired and thus following the line of the accepted gospelers. 398 AD (see text) and concily of Trent.
Prayer of Mannaseh and additions to Esther occur more or less in the same timeframe.
All apocrypha were first written in Greek, and are not acknowledged by protestants and jews.

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Apr 3, 2012
 
Since they crop up in the lot of silly discussions:
Antilegomena, a direct transliteration from the Greek αντ ιλε γόμ ενα , refers to written texts whose authenticity or value is disputed.[1]

Eusebius in his Church History written c. 325 used the term for those Christian scriptures that were "disputed" or literally those works which were "spoken against" in Early Christianity, before the closure of the New Testament canon. This group is distinct from the notha ("spurious" or "rejected writings") and the Homologoumena ("accepted writings" such as the Canonical gospels). These Antilegomena or "disputed writings" were widely read in the Early Church and included the Epistle of James, the Epistle of Jude, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, the Apocalypse of John, the Gospel according to the Hebrews, the Acts of Paul, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Epistle of Barnabas and the Didache.[2][3]

source wiki

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Apr 3, 2012
 
Of that same vain:
Christians continued to use the Septuagint, for there was no assertion of a cessation of inspiration among Christians or Jewish Christians, unlike the Talmud (Soṭah 48b) which considers Malachi to be the last prophet of Judaism.

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Apr 3, 2012
 
Apropos the topic: because f.i. middle english dropped the -d.
The name starts in the story of Leah giving birth and reflecting in the name 'praise to yah'(odah).

Late Antiquity In some places in the Talmud the word Israel(ite) refers to somebody who is Jewish but does not necessarily practice Judaism as a religion: "An Israel(ite) even though he has sinned is still an Israel(ite)" (Tractate Sanhedrin 44a). More commonly the Talmud uses the term Bnei Yisrael, i.e. "Children of Israel",("Israel " being the name of the third patriarch Jacob, father of the sons that would form the twelve tribes of Israel, which he was given and took after wrestling with an angel, see Genesis 32:28-29 [5]) to refer to Jews. According to the Talmud then, there is no distinction between "religious Jews" and "secular Jews."

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Apr 3, 2012
 
Eric wrote:
Or, the Romans used the name to describe people who lived in Judea.
-------

Jews were called Jews even more than 400 years before the Romans arrived in Israel.
Ben

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Apr 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Frijoles wrote:
Reference in Zachariah 8:23
23 Thus saith the LORD of hosts: In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold, out of all the languages of the nations, shall even take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying: We will go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.'
"ish yehudi"
I'd imagine the word is used in other passages somewhere in the tanakh as well
-------

According to the translation of the Bible I am using, it says,
"Thus says the Lord of hosts: In those days ten men of every nationality, speaking different tongues, shall take hold, yes, take hold of EVERY JEW by the edge of his garment and say,'Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.'" "Of every Jew" means the whole Jewish People. "Of him that is a Jew" according to your translation, gives the sense of Replacement Theology. Not good.
Ben

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Apr 3, 2012
 

Judged:

1

MAAT wrote:
Of that same vain:
Christians continued to use the Septuagint, for there was no assertion of a cessation of inspiration among Christians or Jewish Christians, unlike the Talmud (Soṭah 48b) which considers Malachi to be the last prophet of Judaism.
----------

IMHO, Malachi was not the name of a prophet but a term to mean messenger or angel of the Covenant.(Mal. 3:1-5) According to the famous Philosopher Baruch de Spinoza, Malachi was a reference to Ezra who returned ahead of the main body of returnees from exile in Babylon, with 42 thousand Jews to prepare the Temple and the Levites for the return of Everlasting Righteousness which was known at the time as the Shechinah.(Dan. 9:24)
Ben

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Apr 3, 2012
 
MAAT wrote:
Apropos the topic: because f.i. middle english dropped the -d.
The name starts in the story of Leah giving birth and reflecting in the name 'praise to yah'(odah).
Late Antiquity In some places in the Talmud the word Israel(ite) refers to somebody who is Jewish but does not necessarily practice Judaism as a religion: "An Israel(ite) even though he has sinned is still an Israel(ite)" (Tractate Sanhedrin 44a). More commonly the Talmud uses the term Bnei Yisrael, i.e. "Children of Israel",("Israel " being the name of the third patriarch Jacob, father of the sons that would form the twelve tribes of Israel, which he was given and took after wrestling with an angel, see Genesis 32:28-29 [5]) to refer to Jews. According to the Talmud then, there is no distinction between "religious Jews" and "secular Jews."
--------

I agree with you that there is no distinction between "religious Jews" and "secular Jews." We are all Jews, no matter the intensity of our dedication; only as long as one does not confess allegiance to the tenets of another religion, when one ceases being a Jew.

And with regards to the Israelites, who existed as a separated nation, aka, the Kingdom of the North, they no longer exist. They have been Divinely rejected, while Judah was confirmed on behalf of David.(Psalm 78:67-69; I kings 11:36)
Ben

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Apr 3, 2012
 
Just interesting:
Biblical texts do attest to Yahweh and EL as different gods sanctioned by early Israel. For example, Genesis 49:24-25 presents a series of EL epithets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18. This passage does not show the relative status of the two gods in early Israel, only that they could be named separately in the same poem. More helpful is the text of the Septuagint and one of the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QDeut) for Deuteronomy 32:8-9, which cast Yahweh in the role of one of the divine sons, understood as fathered by EL, called Elyon in the first line.

When the Most High (Elyon) allotted peoples for inheritance,
When He divided up humanity,
He fixed the boundaries for peoples,
According to the number of the divine sons:
For Yahwehs portion is his people,
Jacob His own inheritance

The traditional Hebrew text (MT) perhaps reflects a discomfort with this polytheistic theology of Israel, for it shows in the fourth line not sons of EL but sons of Israel. This passage, with the Septuagint and Dead Sea Scroll reading, presents a cosmic order in which each deity received its own nation. Israel was the nation which Yahweh received, yet El was the head of this pantheon and Yahweh only one of its members. This reading points to an old phase of Israels religion when EL held a pre-eminent position apart from the status of Yahweh. Apparently, originally EL was Israels chief god, as suggested by the personal name, Israel. Then when the cult of Yahweh became more important in the land of early Israel, the view reflected in Deuteronomy 32:8-9 served as a mode to accommodate this religious development.
----------

Origins of Biblical Monotheism (P. 143), Mark S. Smith (Oxford University Press 2001).

----------
It is interesting that the Old Testament has no qualms in equating Yahweh with EL, something which stands in marked contrast to its vehement opposition to Baal, let alone the equation of Yahweh with Baal (cf. Hos. 2.18 [ET 16]). This must reflect a favourable judgement on ELs characteristic attributes: as supreme deity, creator god and one possessed of wisdom, EL was deemed wholly fit to be equated with Yahweh. Baal on the other hand, was not only subordinate to the chief god EL, but was also considered to be dead in the underworld for half the year, something hardly compatible with Yahweh, who will neither slumber nor sleep(Ps. 121.4).
--------
On the origin and also Asher(a)'s role and function as dediated domain for religious practices. I also looked into petroglyphs.

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Apr 3, 2012
 
http://www.britam.org/mael/Mael5Asher.html
Not high-end reearch but easy reading.
Goal Asher tribe was to unite.
The premisse is that Asher became confused with Ashur(Assyria) and the indo-european ideas and mores and thus expunged.

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Apr 3, 2012
 
Hmm had the wrong i.e.messie line there for a moment.

http://ynefesh.com/2011/07/22/war-against-the ...
Moses.Torah never states that any such thing was executed.
Later Jerubbaal-Gideon destroys the midianites. Jdg.7

According to some theologists/linguists Moses got the faith from the Midianites.(Quite compelling)
So apart from the reading the question is whether later redacting happened to make Jah exclusive to the Judahite nation?

|#32767
23 min ago http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/H ...
...crucial to their national identity...learned the religion from the Midianites...

|#32768
17 min ago (never mind the source)
http://www.awitness.org/contrabib/torah/balaa ...
David related to Moab.
The war against Moab get's redacted/changed into Midian.

And with Gidion and Gibeon we get back to the tribe of Manasse.

Midian lies in NW arabia, in the HB it's projected to be in Upper-jordan...where we normally place Moab.

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Apr 4, 2012
 
MAAT wrote:
Just interesting:
Biblical texts do attest to Yahweh and EL as different gods sanctioned by early Israel. For example, Genesis 49:24-25 presents a series of EL epithets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18. This passage does not show the relative status of the two gods in early Israel, only that they could be named separately in the same poem. More helpful is the text of the Septuagint and one of the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QDeut) for Deuteronomy 32:8-9, which cast Yahweh in the role of one of the divine sons, understood as fathered by EL, called Elyon in the first line.
It is interesting that the Old Testament has no qualms in equating Yahweh with EL, something which stands in marked contrast to its vehement opposition to Baal, let alone the equation of Yahweh with Baal (cf. Hos. 2.18 [ET 16]). This must reflect a favourable judgement on ELs characteristic attributes: as supreme deity, creator god and one possessed of wisdom, EL was deemed wholly fit to be equated with Yahweh. Baal on the other hand, was not only subordinate to the chief god EL, but was also considered to be dead in the underworld for half the year, something hardly compatible with Yahweh, who will neither slumber nor sleep(Ps. 121.4).
-----

Sorry, but I see no divergence of the Jewish monotheistic idea of God with what you try to convey in this post of yours, even after I read the quotes you mention above. The coincidence of the pagan use of "El" with the ancient idea of the Israelite use of the same can be explained in terms of the following:

WHY ELOHIM IF ADONAI IS ABSOLUTELY ONE?

Christians in general misunderstand the word Elohim when using it as an evidence for plurality in God. Trinity, that is. As time can be considered chronologically, and also psychologically, a word can also be looked at grammatically in terms of plurality of itself or psychologically as the plural related to it. I'll explain in more simpler words.

The word Elohim does mean plural but not of itself. I mean, of the subject, but of the object it points to. For example, Elohim barah et hashamaim..." If Elohim, the subject, was a word meant to be itself in the plural, the verb would by necessity have to follow the plural as in "baru," (created).

Let's take Abraham as an example to illustrate this case. Afterwards we will return to Elohim.

We all know that originally, Abraham's name was Abram, and the name change was effected by occasion of the Covenant between himself and God, when the reason for the change was that Abraham would be the father of a host of nations.(Gen. 17:4,5) So, does the word Abraham mean plural? Yes, but not of the subject (Abraham) who continued to be one person. However, Abraham meant plural but of the object or "many nations."

Now, back to Elohim, there was a time in the very beginning, when the Hebrews considered God to be a local God: The God of the Hebrews, in opposite to the gods of the other nations. When they came to the enlightenment through their understanding that God was absolutely One, and that He was the God of the whole Earth, the God of all the nations, they also came to understand that the plurality of Elohim was related to the object (the nations) and not of the subject, or Himself, Who remained absolutely One.

Grammatically, the singular for God is El, and the plural Elim, and not Elohim. Therefore, there is no plurality in Elohim per se but in what He relates to. The conclusion is that God is absolutely One and not a Trinity or Duality. Besides, God is also incorporeal, and there can be no plurality in incorporeality.
Ben

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Apr 4, 2012
 
Well you are not talking to a christian, so i would rather consider the babylonian (generally speaking) root of the 'creation' story.

But for further reading and an explanation that is more satifying:
http://hos.oztorah.org/shofar/articles/elohim...

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

7 Users are viewing the Judaism Forum right now

Search the Judaism Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Who Is Allah? (Aug '07) 22 min El Cid 200,117
Does evil exist? 33 min believer 1
How hard is it for a jew to become a non-jew? 1 hr believer 1
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 5 hr scirocco 68,453
Response to Bill O'Reilly: Jesus Didn't Start a... 8 hr True Christian witness 42
Messianism is a mess (Dec '10) Wed xian_kim 3,426
Termnon by Bertrand Lerique Wed Lecteur Reader 1
•••
•••