Talk:Who is a Jew?

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Portal:Judaism
 Judaism Portal
Who is a Jew? is part of WikiProject Judaism, a project to improve all articles related to Judaism. If you would like to help improve this and other articles related to the subject, consider joining the project. All interested editors are welcome. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Judaism articles.
Project Judaism To-do:

Contents

[edit] Archives

[edit] Black people article request

I am a contributor to the Black People article and I am doing a study on something that is irking me about the debate on that article. I took a compromising approach, and using this article as a good example, I created an article called Who is black. Someone changed it to Definitions of black people. I am here asking the contributors here a simple question. What would go through your mind and how would it feel if someone (especially a non-Jew) changed THIS article from Who is a Jew to Definitions of Jewish people. I felt that it would be condescending and offensive to Jews to "define" instead of "asking" them this. It feels to "define" would assume they (Jews) are less than capable of expressing their complexities from their own POV, which obviously must occur for this article to make any sense. Something about "definitions" seems to smack of arrogance (esp. if changed by a non-Jew). It also diminishes the objectivity of the article as such a subject inherently implies there is no cut-and-dry way to define. What do you think? --Zaphnathpaaneah 02:28, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Dark skin was obviously noticed throughout history, but the concept of race did not exist before several hundred years ago and so Black as an ethnic idenity did not exist. And the reason the article is not called "Who is Black" like the "Who is Jewish" article, is because this article is better than the "who is Jewish" article because it provides a list of cited and varied definitions from people of different races (plus extensive criticism), and thus can have an encyclopedic title. "Who is Black?" is a question, not a title for an encyclopedia artice. "Who is Jewish" should also be changed.__Whatdoyou 15:26, 21 October 2006 (UTC) (reposted by --Zaphnathpaaneah 16:06, 21 October 2006 (UTC) from Talk:Black People
It's cowardly to half-way do something. Someone changed the title to "controversies" of Jewish identity. It's like they don't want to offend Jewish contributors with ignorance, but they have no problem offending Black people with the same ignornace. Bravo to the cowardice! --Zaphnathpaaneah 16:21, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

The title is a translation of "Mihu Yehudi?" (hebrew), the classic formulation of this question. The title has been disputed several times and discuss at length. It is a strong consensus that the title is correct. This article disscuss not only the definiton of who is a Jew but disscuss the discussion itself. Jon513 12:21, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Great, I couldn't agree more. I am applying this principle on the Who is Black article which is a translation of the english phrase "Who is black?", yet someone wants to change the title to "Definitions of Black people". I am sure the people here would be offended to read that as the title of this article, yes? --Zaphnathpaaneah 06:27, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

That is an idiotic (I'm sorry) analogy here. "Mihu Yehudi?" which translates into English as "Who is a Jew?" is different than asking "Who is Black?" in English twice. —Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Higher Percentage of Gays/Lesbians Found in Modern Jews -- Research

I'm wondering if anyone has come across any serious scholarly research that has examined the fact that Jews tend to be quite overrepresented amongst the gay and lesbian populations in the modern World, particularly in the USA and Western Europe. I have read about this on certain Jewish websites and in a couple Jewish newsletters/newspapers, but have yet to find any academic research on this matter. I know that the worldwide Jewish community is generally very gay/lesbian friendly, but I am looking for information/statistics that have has confirmed the noticeably higher incidence of homosexuality/lesbianism in the (mostly secular) Jewish population. Thank you for any information that you can provide. --205.188.117.73 16:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have no idea from where comes this idea. Gay and Lesbians are around 2-4% of the population of each country, and there is no indication that the situation is different in Israel, where the population by large is not exactly more friendly to Gays than in Europe or USA. French Jews, as I know, are also usually not very gay friendly. But they are mostly North African Jews and there seems to be a strong difference between Ashkenazim and Sefaradim on the issue, and of course between religious and non or less religious Jews. Benjil 10:05, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I'm afraid this sort of question is a bit outside the scope of this article. You might want to address this sort of inquery to Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism. Best, --Shirahadasha 19:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
At the risk of one more off-topic remark: probably only among non-Orthodox Ashkenazis, and probably not a higher percentage of gays, just a higher percentage who are out. I'm sure you'd find the same among Unitarians and any other relatively open and accepting communities. - Jmabel | Talk 00:00, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Jmabel is probably right. This is an issue of preselection: Jews tend to embrace education, self-knowledge and honesty, and American reform Judaism tends to be more accepting of people who are different (at least in terms of sexual identity), so I don't think there are MORE gay Jews - just more people who are Jewish admit / declare their homosexuality. Moehong 00:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ethnic Jew, redux

Okay since non religious people can be considered Jews because their family practices it I'd like someone to answer my question. Tell me, if a black family converts to Judaism and have a kid does that make the kid an "ethnic Jew"?

If the mother was Jewish (even by conversion) when the child is born, the child is Jewish. If the parents converted after the child is born the child must accept his conversion when he or she becomes of age. The fact that they are black is inconsequential. Jon513 17:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
But if the child has to accept his conversion when he becomes of age, why then make him participate actively in religious ceremony (but this is the case for many other religions), and why do a circumcision on baby boys when they can't say a word. If the child once adult refuse for any reason to convert to judaism, he can't go back this surgery act. Well I really understand the importance of this act in Israel 3000 years ago, it was an obvious an clever hygenist decision. Without making a long discussion, would it be possible that some jewish parents decide to not do any circumcision on their child until this one decide to accept his conversion? or is this idea totally against the rules or jewish values? 84.239.219.71 10:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
It wouldn't make the child an "ethnic Jew", but it would make the child a Jew, certainly. Mad Jack 17:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Color is entirely beside the point. The Ethiopian Jews are black.
Halakha and the prevailing concept of ethnicity don't sit entirely easily together in the matter of conversion. Halakha defines how one becomes a Jew; the prevailing concept of ethnicity doesn't generally allow for a person becoming part of an ethnic group, although some transitions happen more easily than others. - Jmabel | Talk 06:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Judaism, the traditional religion/ideology, simply doesn't have or recognize a concept such as an ethnic Jew. Moreover, liberal and secularized branches of Judaism tend to be particularly sensitive to discrimination issues. Hence, there simply is no notable school of thought within Judaism or Jewish culture that has an "ethnic Jew" concept for which such a statement would hold. Such an attitude may possibly describe some outsiders' views of Jews (sources, please), but it doesn't describe Judaism's or Jews' views. Best --Shirahadasha 09:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jewish Ethnicity

Perhaps it is important to note that Jews have not interbred with their host countries, thus preserving a large part of their original Semitic ethnicity. --Smnioffe 02:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Without re-writing your question, it may be considered more polite and more accurate to state that "some Jewish people have not mixed." Many, many, many have.

[edit] Jewish Because of Persecution

Would it be possible to include some discussion of Jewish identity (religious or secular) being re-enforced by persecution, esp. the Shoah?

[edit] Judaism is faith not RACE

Jews are people whom adhere to the Jewish faith…in another word Judaism is faith like Christianity Buddhism, and Islam NOT race…. Thanks to this DNA age it is found recently most of Jews don’t have the same DNA . Ethiopian Jews for example don’t have similarities with German Jews and most of the Jews are not even Semite…It is actually more proven that Arabs and especially the Palestinians have Identical share with their DNA ..and most important Haplogroup J1( that Define some one a Semite or not and from priestly lineage of Aaron ) is more frequent Found in the Levant, mainly in the Bedouin tribes (62,5%) and Palestinian Arabs (38,4%) than 14.6% of the Ashkenazim and 11.9% of the Sephardic results (Semino et al. 2004) a study that shows that most these so called Jews are not related to Ethnic 12 tribes of Israel. Only jews from Blood line of Jacob is called Israelite, and not vice versa217.42.216.204 21:40, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Judaism is a faith, but Jewish identity is ethno-religious. I've restored the correct text. ←Humus sapiens ну? 23:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
My father is Jewish, while I am an agnostic. However I strongly identify myself with the Jewish people, because although I do not practice Judaism, I do share the culture and ethnicity. My father was born in Russia and as a child experienced anti-Semitism. People could tell he was Jewish by his appearance, his hair was darker and curlier than most, his skin was tanner and his nose was larger. Many physical traits people stereotypically attribute to Jews are often true. This is because over many generations, due to religion and discrimination of the Jewish people, intermarriage has historically been very low. Additionally, historically few people have converted to the religion. Thus, the genetic makeup of the first Semitic Jewish people living in the middle-east has been largely preserved in many modern Jews, whose family comes from a Jewish lineage. However, over the past century intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews has gone up significantly. In a few more hundred years the Jewish ethnicity will probably mostly dissolve. DNA testing has been done and proved thats Jews are ethnically related: http://www.aish.com/societywork/sciencenature/Jewish_Genes.asp --Smnioffe 22:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


Jews have no one single Ethnicity, There are Ashkenazi Sephardic, Ethiopians Chinese , Mizrahem, and so on. So they are not one people….BUT Peoples different Ethnics. Each Jewish group Carries its Own DNA profile that is more Closely related to people whom they live with, than to each others.

When you say that ’’ historically few people have converted to the religion’’ that is utterly WRONG, Because Khazars ( Turk Origins lived in today Russia ) are among the Gentiles (Not Israelites in Origins) whom converted to Judaism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazar81.153.69.171 16:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)


Yes, there were conversions outside of the Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jewish group, however those are rare exceptions. The vast majority of Jewish people are of Sephardic and Ashkenazi descent. I am not talking about others such as African and Asian Jews especially since they are a minority amongst Jews. But ethnic Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews are ethnically related to one another and to the original Semitic tribe who were the first to adopt Judaism. Again, this has been proved by DNA research, and I strongly believe that this should be included in this article. http://www.aish.com/societywork/sciencenature/Jewish_Genes.asp--Smnioffe 21:40, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Ashkenazi whom are 80% of jews are not Semitic race they are the Russians Turk Khazars81.153.69.171 00:11, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
That’s just not true. I am a Russian Jew and was born in Russia. My family's ancestors lived in Germany before Russia. Almost all Russian Jews have German or Hebrew last names. The Khazars have almost fully dissolved, and not necessarily into modern Jews. Even if a portion of the Khazars blood is in modern Jews, it is extremely miniscule.--Smnioffe 02:47, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Does the problem to answer to "is jew a faith or a ethnic group..." comes also from this: in the begining of jew history the word jew was used in the same time to describe a tribe, or a group of people, and their religion? Then century after century a group of jew can somehow still be considered as linked to the first jewish (persecution, way of becoming jewish which for some or many jewish familly meant to get married with another jew...), but lot of other jew are just converted. This is a very hard question and I believe that people will never be agree on this definition according to their own opinion.84.239.219.71 10:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
If i understand your question correctly, then yes, that IS part of the ongoing discussion. However, we're not trying to answer the question, merely document the debate. (It would be more accurate to understand this page as not being unlike the Talmud, where various rabbis saw a question and recorded their debates trough time as well, though the metaphor isn't a perfect comparitive.) ThuranX 23:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] It is Zionism Not YHWH that define Judaism Race Not Faith

After defining Jews as race not Faith, Zionism like Nazism Calling for a PURE Jewish state just like Nazis calling for PURE..ARAYAN State. But it is openly obvious that Jews are not one race but races. Recent DNA test shows that Palestinians Lebanese Syrians have genetically more blood related to Ancients Israelites...that if they are not the Israelites. Zionism is making Judaism Race not Faith so to establish an ethno-cratic Secular not Religious state of Israel based on Race that Contradict the Laws of YHWH. Zionism definition of Judaism is Not Kosher81.153.69.171 10:28, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

That has nothing to do with Zionism. Facts are facts. Don't twist things because of your personal anti-zionist sentiments. The DNA test you write about states that some Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians and other Arabic middle eastern peoples have small traces of the ancient Israelites blood. However, modern Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews have mostly the same genes as the ancient Israelites did. Refer to the article I linked to before. --Smnioffe 14:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lack of representation for the "inclusive" view...?

Why is there no mention of the idea that everyone is a Jew, though obviously to differing extents.

Probably for the same reason that there is no mention of the idea that no one is a Jew, or that everyone is a Martian. - Jmabel | Talk 19:36, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Distinguish between the term Jew and Israelite, they are not the same.

Please do distinguish between Jew and Israelite Every one can be a Jew because Judaism is a faith, but not any one is Israelite, because Israelite is a definition of race. Israelites were 12 ethnic tribes coming from man Jacob.

And Only the Israelites are the ones whom the bible is taking about.

Therefore any one not Israelite even being a Jew (believer in Judaism ) is considered to be a Gentile.

when we talk about Israelite we talk about Race , tribes (12 tribes) Ethnics of the DNA shared from Jacob.

Any one being Hindu ,Muslim, Buddahist, Christian, Shinto, jew, Satanist and even Atheist come from the man Named Jacob ( Israel) he or she then named Israelite regarding of his or her Faith.

Therefore I suggest to fetch and check the DNA of any one who think is from the man named Jacob (Israel) to Validate his/ her Claim. how about that?.81.153.67.74 21:55, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello, the section involved is called Divine revelation in Judaism. The point of view you are describing may be your personal point of view, but you would need reliable sources that it is a recognized viewpoint on the subject of Divine revelation in Judaism. Wikipedia describes viewpoints published in reliable sources whether or not editors personally think them correct. See our verification policy. Best, --Shirahadasha 23:38, 13 January 2007 (UTC).


Hello

I hope you would not take my previous response as being too blunt. and I do apologize if being so.

Since you have aske me of Reliable source , Here I would like to Provide it from the bible DIVINE revelation.

GEN 17:19 {and I will establish my covenant with[ him/Issac] for an everlasting covenant, [and] with his [seeds] after him.Gen17: 19 .

The Covenant in Gen17:19 is only for Isaac and his Blood Line seeds alone .It is even “Excluding”, Abraham , Ishmael whom they both had a First covenant in GEN 17:9 , and Sarah and…. and anyone not in Isaac blood line).

when we talk about Israelite we talk about Race , tribes (12 tribes) Ethnics of the DNA shared from Jacob.

Any one not Israelite is considered to be a Gentile unless having Israelite DNA / seeds of Issac in order to be in Covenant in Gen17:19.

Once again I really hope that you would not find my comments as being too blunt, and instead take them for what they truly are.

Thank you.81.152.236.23 00:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, in this situation, the bible is not considered a reliable source. Although that section MIGHT be useful as the premise opening a section, and then addressing the dichotomoies of the two labels, and the construance thereof in the modern era, the bible cannot function as a WP:RS for answering the question. ThuranX 01:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I think we can answer this question without having to get into a debate on the religious authority of the Bible. The current article is based on a contemporary dispute. The Bible doesn't tell us about what people today do; many people don't follow it. We need contemporary sources to tell us what is happening today. In addition, you appear to have a particular interpretation of the Bible on this subject. Not everyone interprets the Bible this way. Best, --Shirahadasha 18:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello

The Point regarding GEN 17:9 ,and Gen17:19 is Clear need No interpretation. Israelites are Race, any one coming from line Jacob bin Issac is Israelite.86.145.71.200 01:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Please read the introducory policies for Wikipedia. This is an encyclopedia, and relies upon reliable sources and citation to create neutral articles documenting worthy topics. Wikipedia is not designed nor purposed for proselytizing, pushign agendas, or looking for fights online. ThuranX 01:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

If the bible is not reliable source ! then Please accept my apology.

cheers and regards.86.145.71.200 09:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article naming

Isn't there a better name for this? The titles of encyclopedia articles should not be in the form of a question. There must be some noun or noun phrase used to describe this question? Unless there is some tremendous reason not, "Who is a Jew?" would only be an appropriate title if it were the name of a book. —Centrx→talk • 21:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Centrx,
See the second sentence of the article:
The Hebrew phrase Mihu Yehudi ("?מיהו יהודי", "Who is a Jew?") came into widespread use when several high profile legal cases in Israel grappled with this subject after the founding of the Jewish state in 1948.
Also see the talk archives, especially [1], [2], [3], and [4]. Dbratton 22:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] lack of sources

While a small number things are sourced in this article (9 things), the majority of this article is still unsourced. The {{unreferenced}} has been added because of the lack of sources in most of the article.--Sefringle 04:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'genetic debate'...

A recent edit tot he page suggested it was a 'genetic debate'. Here's the diff for the revert: [5] . While I agre that this is poor phrasing, I do wonder if the genetic debate couldn't be characterized as either a 'scientific' or 'anthropological' debate, as there are definitely genetic roots oriented aspects of the debate. Opinons? ThuranX 22:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that there is any point of view (and certainly not one notable enough to be mentioned in the first sentence) about a genetic debate. Since everyone accepts converts as full Jews it is impossible for there to be a genetic component. Jon513 12:26, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
I was more interested in referring to the ashkenazi/sephardim shared genetics, as seen in incidence levels of Tay-sachs, as well as debates abotu the Khazar conversion and so on. There are sections of this page, and in the debates out there about it, and so it seemed of interest. In addition, there is talk of using genetics to determine if some of the distant peoples claiming jewishness are actually connected, like the Lemba, the Kai-feng, and so on. This is just a question about how to characterize the searches for jewishness through genetic mapping and testing and related stuff. Nothing too sserious, but the edit prompted the question in my mind. ThuranX 22:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/h/o/Talk%7EWho_is_a_Jew__8d0b.html"