Non-Jewish supporters?

[muman613]

http://www.jewfaq.org/whoisjew.htm

Who is a Jew?

A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism.

It is important to note that being a Jew has nothing to do with what you believe or what you do. A person born to non-Jewish parents who has not undergone the formal process of conversion but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew, even in the eyes of the most liberal movements of Judaism, and a person born to a Jewish mother who is an atheist and never practices the Jewish religion is still a Jew, even in the eyes of the ultra-Orthodox. In this sense, Judaism is more like a nationality than like other religions, and being Jewish is like a citizenship. See What Is Judaism?

This has been established since the earliest days of Judaism. In the Torah, you will see many references to "the strangers who dwell among you" or "righteous proselytes" or "righteous strangers." These are various classifications of non-Jews who lived among Jews, adopting some or all of the beliefs and practices of Judaism without going through the formal process of conversion and becoming Jews. Once a person has converted to Judaism, he is not referred to by any special term; he is as much a Jew as anyone born Jewish.

Although all Jewish movements agree on these general principles, there are occasional disputes as to whether a particular individual is a Jew. Most of these disputes fall into one of two categories.

First, traditional Judaism maintains that a person is a Jew if his mother is a Jew, regardless of who his father is. The liberal movements, on the other hand, consider a person to be Jewish if either of his parents was Jewish and the child was raised Jewish. Thus, if the child of a Jewish father and a Christian mother is raised Jewish, the child is a Jew according to the Reform movement, but not according to the Orthodox movement. On the other hand, if the child of a Christian father and a Jewish mother is not raised Jewish, the child is a Jew according to the Orthodox movement, but not according to the Reform movement! The matter becomes even more complicated, because the status of that children's children also comes into question.

Second, the more traditional movements do not always acknowledge the validity of conversions by the more liberal movements. The more modern movements do not always follow the procedures required by the more traditional movements, thereby invalidating the conversion. In addition, Orthodoxy does not accept the authority of Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist rabbis to perform conversions, and the Conservative movement has debated whether to accept the authority of Reform rabbis.

About Matrilineal Descent

Many people have asked me why traditional Judaism uses matrilineal descent to determine Jewish status, when in all other things (tribal affiliation, priestly status, royalty, etc.) we use patrilineal descent.

The Torah does not specifically state anywhere that matrilineal descent should be used; however, there are several passages in the Torah where it is understood that the child of a Jewish woman and a non-Jewish man is a Jew, and several other passages where it is understood that the child of a non-Jewish woman and a Jewish man is not a Jew.

In Deuteronomy 7:1-5, in expressing the prohibition against intermarriage, G-d says "he [i.e., the non-Jewish male spouse] will cause your child to turn away from Me and they will worship the gods of others." No such concern is expressed about the child of a non-Jewish female spouse. From this, we infer that the child of a non-Jewish male spouse is Jewish (and can therefore be turned away from Judaism), but the child of a non-Jewish female spouse is not Jewish (and therefore turning away is not an issue).

Leviticus 24:10 speaks of the son of an Israelite woman and an Egyptian man as being "among the community of Israel" (i.e., a Jew).

On the other hand, in Ezra 10:2-3, the Jews returning to Israel vowed to put aside their non-Jewish wives and the children born to those wives. They could not have put aside those children if those children were Jews.

Several people have written to me asking about King David: was he a Jew, given that one of his female ancestors, Ruth, was not a Jew? This conclusion is based on two faulty premises: first of all, Ruth was a Jew, and even if she wasn't, that would not affect David's status as a Jew. Ruth converted to Judaism before marrying Boaz and bearing Obed. See Ruth 1:16, where Ruth states her intention to convert. After Ruth converted, she was a Jew, and all of her children born after the conversion were Jewish as well. But even if Ruth were not Jewish at the time Obed was born, that would not affect King David's status as a Jew, because Ruth is an ancestor of David's father, not of David's mother, and David's Jewish status is determined by his mother.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Everybody is right here; "part-Jewish" is a way of someone expressing their ancestry and nothing more. It has no halachic standing. Either you are Jewish or you aren't.

[Axel]

The Torah is what made the Jewish people Jewish. The Torah mandates that Judaism is passed through the mother.

Can you give me a quote?

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

No, that's not what I said.

You said Jews are a nation/people, I said Jews share similar DNA. Jews are varied in about 3 groups and that's about it. Ashkenazi, Sefardic and Mizrahi are all considered Jewish. You can only be classifed into these categories if you have a Jewish parent, aka share a similar DNA.

You just made this up.  There are more than those 3 groups, but either way, that it is based on "one parent" is something you arbitrarily thought up.

Yes Jews are a nation.  I did not say they are a "race."   That would be purely genetic.  But that's a modern-day term that does not apply.

 In other words, if the mother is Jewish (even if the father is not), the person is Jewish.  If the mother is NOT Jewish (even if the father is) the person is not Jewish.

So G-d said that a Jew can only go by the mother? why would someone whom invented DNA make such a rule?

Because it's not based on DNA.  Who says it is?  You made this idea up.   It was based on the mother.   Fact of life.  Take it up with G-d...

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

You admit that traditionally the Jewish people define themselves as a nation through the mother.

Traditionally Jewish people also practice Hasidisim, but it's got nothing to do with the actual religion nor classification of race. 

No, Hasidism goes back only about 300 years tops.  So how exactly does that classify as "traditionally" ? 

But I would not agree that it has "nothing" to do with Judaism.  That is ridiculous.   And that it has nothing to do with race is also interesting for you to say because neither is Jewish nationhood based on race.   So in that way, with some kind of warped logic, I guess it's similar to hasidism.

So who are you or me or anyone else to change that or to say that they are going to be a Jew anyway even not through the mother.

Many liberal Jews and denominations are now ageeing that the father also counts. I don't understand how in the eyes of traditional Jews a convert counts more than someone with a Jewish father, grandmother and grandfather.

Because that is how it has always been.  It is determined by the mother or conversion.  Nothing else.  So what I don't understand is why you expect us to change when that is how it is defined.  What I don't understand is why these other reformists have decided they can change the definition as of about 100 years ago or less.   There is no such thing as "liberal denominations" in Judaism.  There are not denominations.  It's not the church.    Either one goes by Jewish law or he doesn't.   Reform in recent years has tried to make up it's own new invented Jewish law.   That is not legitimate.   And they only included those with a Jewish father because the reform "synagogues" were losing membership.   

That's like telling MENSA you're a member even though they repeatedly tell you you don't meet their criteria and have to be selected in order to join (not to imply anything about you personally)....

Race is not MENSA and not something you control or ask to join.

But the Jewish nation is not based on "race."   That is why you have so many Jews of different skin colors and racial compositions.  Because they are a Jew based on something else.  Not skin color or facial features.  They are Jews based on maternal lineage or conversion.   But you missed the point I was making.   MENSA is also not something you control or ask to join.  You either fit the criteria or you don't.  If not, then tough luck.   Same here.  But at least here, you can convert in order to join the Jewish people.  You can't just force Mensa to accept you.

I will repeat, tradition does not refine DNA, it defines it.

It defines it?  What defines what?   This was not decipherable.

Human definitions, in my eyes, are worthless.

But when you said

You can only be classifed into these categories if you have a Jewish parent, aka share a similar DNA

   THAT was a human definition that you arbitrarily decided on.   You are being inconsistent.  You allow for your own human definitions, but not the ones you don't like.   In any event, the definition of the Jewish people as defined by matrilineal descent is from the Torah.

A gentile with a Jewish father is only a non-Jew in the eyes of other Jews, which is pretty sad. 

You yourself acknowledge he's a non-Jew by calling him a gentile!  But there is nothing wrong with being a gentile.  Especially if one is a righteous gentile and helps the Jewish people or supports Israel, that is a great thing!  But that doesn't make a person Jewish.   

And there's nothing wrong with that.  G-d made them a beautiful gentile.

Think about this also, how does having a Jewish mother devalue the gentile father? in science, a child can take the DNA of both parents depending on which one has stronger genes.

  First off it's not a value judgement so I'm not sure what you mean by devalue.  And again you are defining it by DNA and science.   G-d did not say, "the Jewish people will be defined by 19th century sociologists' definition of race." 

How does mere tradition change that?

MERE   tradition?   I notice now that since you have run out of arguments as to why you think you can replace tradition, instead you now belittle tradition itself (much like the reformists).   "Mere" tradition is based on our Divine revelation received at Sinai thousands of years ago.   You do not negate that because you feel like it.  That is arbitrary.

This tradition dates back to a time before DNA tests, when you couldn't always know who the real father was.

So what?  What bearing does this have on whether membership in a nation is based on father or mother?   If it was simply that, the sages would have included an exception where the father is known to be a Jew.  But they did no such thing.

[muman613]

The Torah is what made the Jewish people Jewish. The Torah mandates that Judaism is passed through the mother.

Can you give me a quote?

Are you joking? You know what the Torah is?

It is the five books of Moses which is the story about the creation of the Jewish nation. Without the Torah there would be no such thing as a Jew.

If you would like to hear others, like Rabbis, express this idea I am sure I can find several quotes.

http://www.ou.org/about/judaism/torah.htm
http://www.torah.org/learning/perceptions/5759/vaera.html

http://www.shemayisrael.co.il/parsha/kahn/archives/bamidbar69.htm

The Torah was given to the Jewish people through three mediums: fire, water and the wilderness. Man is formed from the four elements: fire, wind (spirit), water and earth. After the sin of Adam and Eve, the negative aspect of the elements became part of them. The connection between the element of wind (spirit) and the ability to talk is hinted to at the creation of man. The negative aspects of the element of water represent man's lust for worldly pleasures. And the negative aspects of earth represent depression with one's situation. The reference to the sixth day alludes to the sixth day of the month of Sivan. In order to be worthy to receive the Torah, the Jewish people had to restore the other three elements as well. The Jewish people restored the aspect of laziness represented by the element of earth. With humbleness the Jewish people restored the element of fire. The Jewish people were united in their readiness to accept G'd's Torah and rectified their personal cravings for pleasure represented by the element of water. In order to merit getting the Torah, with which they could restore the element of wind (spirit), the Jewish people first had to restore the other three elements of fire, water and earth represented by the wilderness. Every Jew has the ability to connect with the revelation at Mount Sinai and get closer to his personal completeness.

And I already gave you quotes concerning what Torah says about the child of a non-Jewish woman and a Jewish man. Such a child is not considered Jewish by Written Torah, and it expressly not Jewish according to Oral law, and by tradition, and custom.

[muman613]

Here is a good explanation...

http://www.beingjewish.com/identity/whoisajew.html

Who Is a Jew, According to the Torah?

How do we define who is a born Jew and who is not? If one of your parents is not Jewish, are you still Jewish?

This subject is a hotly debated one, especially among the non-Orthodox Jewish groups, but I don't really intend to discuss the politics of it very much. I want to simply explain the Orthodox stance, and demonstrate that it is the original Jewish definition.

The original and current Jewish definition of a born Jew is someone whose mother is Jewish. Even though the Torah forbids a Jewish woman to marry a Gentile man, if she does, her children will still be Jewish.

The Torah also forbids a Jewish man to marry a Gentile woman, and if he does, his children by that woman will not be Jewish.

This annoys a great many people who wish to consider themselves Jewish, despite their non-Jewish mother. It is not my intention to annoy anyone. It is my intention to explain Judaism, and not to rationalize any dilution or changes in Jewish Law.

Please understand: if you are in that position, I hear your pain, and I understand and feel it. In no way do I claim that you do not have a Jewish heart, or Jewish feelings, or perhaps even the potential of a Jewish soul. I cannot know these things.

The question of being a Jew, however, is not the same thing, unfortunately. Having a Jewish heart and Jewish feelings does not make someone Jewish. One has to be Jewish according to Jewish Law.

A young woman (I'll call her Sheila) wrote me a while back, complaining about this concept. Her father is Jewish, but her mother is not. She demanded that I prove that the Torah attaches a persons Jewish lineage to the mother. Here are her arguments, and my responses to them.

Sheila wrote me: I am VERY upset to hear that people who are Jewish only by their father's side are not considered by the Orthodox to be Jewish, when in the Torah it firmly states that the father is the leader of the house and all the stories in Torah talked about Jacob, Isaac, Abraham, Moses, etc.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Leader of the house." In any case, there is no indication that the Leader of the household passes along nationality. Tribal affiliation, yes, but not nationality. Let me demonstrate.

Were the Matriarchs Jewish? The answer is yes. (Of course, the word "Jewish" is not exactly the right word to use, since the word "Jew" came about only later, because of the Tribe of Judah, but never mind that for now. "Jewish" is the easiest term to use for this discussion, so we'll use that word.) The Matriarchs, Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, Leah, Bilha, and Zilpah, were all just as Jewish as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

What made Abraham Jewish? What made Sarah Jewish? Abraham's father and mother were not Jewish. Sarah's father or mother were not Jewish. What made Abraham and Sarah Jewish?

Abraham and Sarah were both Jewish because they converted.

Okay, then why was Isaac Jewish? Was it because his father was Jewish, or because his mother was Jewish? How can you tell? Does it make a difference, if they were both Jewish?

You might ask me, who says that Sarah was Jewish? It's pretty logical that Sarah was just as Jewish as Abraham, but in case you're not convinced, read my article "Was King David Jewish?" You'll find the link below.

For that matter, why wasn't Ishmael Jewish? His father was Abraham. Yet only Isaac became the ancestor of the Jews. Was it because Isaac's mother (Sarah) was Jewish, and Ishmael's mother (Hagar) was not? No, that is not the reason. It was because Isaac chose to serve Hashem, and Ishmael did not.

But according to you, Sheila, since you say that being Jewish is passed along by the father, Ishmael should also have been Jewish. Yet he was not. Apparently, being Jewish was passed along some other way. Was it through the mother? No, it wasn't that either, and I'll prove it.

Let's look at the next generation. Why was Jacob Jewish, when Esau was not? They both had the same mother, and the same father! The reason is because Jacob served Hashem, and Esau did not, and thus Hashem chose Jacob, but did not choose Esau.

All of Jacob's children served Hashem, and therefore Hashem chose all of them.

So we see that the Biblical stories of our ancestors do not show that Jewishness was passed along by the father (or the mother). There is no evidence of that at all.

When we, the children of Israel, stood at Mount Sinai and accepted the Torah, we accepted new Laws that we had never been expected to keep until then. And from then on, Jewish lineage was passed down by the mother, whether or not one accepted Judaism. (And I will prove that below, with Hashem's help.)

As to the stories in the Torah, there are stories of the Matriarchs as well. Our Mother Sarah, exactly like our Father Abraham, was a convert to Judaism. So was Rebecca, because her parents were not Jewish.

So why do most of the stories focus on the men? It is not because they were the carriers of Jewish nationality. It was because the stories that the Torah wants to teach us most often happened with the men. But there are plenty of stories about the women as well.

The stories of the Torah are not there to tell us simply how we are descended from Jews. That is not important, because we can all just convert if we wanted to. Besides, a simple lineage chart would suffice. The stories are there to teach us lessons, not to tell us how we are descended from Jews.

The stories also teach us that we will always carry the merits of our ancestors. Plus they give us object lessons to try to emulate.

Sheila wrote me again: Nowhere in the Torah does it state that only the mother is the passer of the Jewish blood.

And where does it say that the father is? But I shall demonstrate, with Hashem's help, that the Torah does say that the mother carries the Jewish lineage.

When the Torah speaks of the Law against marrying a non-Jew (Deuteronomy 7:3), here is what the Torah says:

    Do not intermarry with them; do not give your daughter to his son, and do not take his daughter for your son.

    For he will cause your son to turn away from Me, and they will worship the gods of others....

Now, that second verse is strange. The first verse gives the two possible examples: your daughter may not marry a Gentile man, and your son may not marry a Gentile woman. Both are forbidden, and both are mentioned in the first verse.

But the second verse cites only one example. "For he will cause your son to turn away from me...."

Okay, so which example is the Torah talking about? Let's try them in order.

Number 1: Let's say your daughter married a Gentile man. So why does the Torah say "He will cause your SON..." Who is the son? Shouldn't it say "He will turn your DAUGHTER away?"

Okay, so let's try the second possibility: your son married a Gentile woman. Again, why does the Torah say "HE will turn your son away?" It should say "SHE will turn your son away from Me...."

So we need to understand this. Who is this "he," and who is this "son?"

Well, what does the Torah means when it uses the word "son?" Let's look at some examples:

Exodus 2:18. "And they came to their father Re'uel." But they were the daughters of Jethro! (Jethro was also known as Chovev, as we see from Judges 4:11.) Why does the Torah call them the daughters of Re'uel? Re'uel was Jethro's father (Numbers 10:29), and we often find that the Torah calls a grandfather a father, and a grandson a son.

Genesis 20:12. "Furthermore, she is indeed my sister, my father's daughter, though not my mother's daughter, and she became my wife." Abraham was explaining that he had not lied. But was Sarah really his father's daughter? In fact, Sarah was his niece, the daughter of his brother. Therefore, Sarah was the daughter of Terach, her grandfather. So in a sense she was Abraham's sister.

And this is why Abraham told his nephew Lot "we are brothers..." (Genesis 13:8). The grandson of my father is like the son of my father. And that makes him my brother.

Genesis 29:5. Jacob asked the people of the city "Do you know Lavan the son of Nachor?" But Lavan was the grandson of Nachor, not the son of Nachor! Lavan was the son of Besu-el, who was the son of Nachor. In fact, Rebecca, Lavan's sister, told Eliezer "I am the daughter of Besu-el, who was the son of Milkah the wife of Nachor" (Genesis 24:24). So why did Jacob call Lavan the son of Nachor, when Lavan was the grandson of Nachor? Because a grandson is considered like a son.

But is this true of all a person's children? What if you your daughter marries a gentile man, and has a son. Is that child also considered your son?

Well, the Torah seems to say that it is. Where? In the verse we started with, in Deuteronomy 7:4. The Torah says "For he will cause your son to turn away." Who is "he?" Who does it mean by "your son?"

"He" means the Gentile son-in-law. Your son means your daughter's son. Since your daughter is Jewish, her daughter is Jewish. But your Gentile son-in-law might turn your grandson away from Hashem. In other words, if you let your daughter marry a Gentile, your son-in-law will cause your grandson to turn away from Hashem.

But what if it's your son who married a Gentile woman? Well, the Torah does not say "she will turn your son away from Hashem." The Torah does not warn us that the Gentile woman will turn the Jewish man away from Hashem. Why not? I'm not sure, but perhaps it's because if your son marries a gentile woman, he has already turned away from Hashem!

Okay, but what about your son's children? Won't their Gentile mother turn them away from Hashem? The answer is that the children of a Gentile mother are not Jewish in the first place, so the Torah is not worried about them being turned away from Hashem.

To make it clear: why doesn't the Torah say "she will turn your son away from Hashem?" Why isn't the Torah worried that your Gentile daughter-in-law will turn your grandson away from G-d? The answer is because the son of your Gentile daughter-in-law is not Jewish, and he is not considered your grandson (or son) at all.

Sheila asked: Do you decide what G-d accepts??

To which I responded: Of course not. We follow what the Torah teaches.

And Sheila wrote: But, men in power have decided to take away some of the laws of Torah.

And I answered her: But that doesn't make sense. If it were because men wanted power, then they would have given themselves the power of lineage. Instead, according to you they gave the power of Jewish lineage to the women!

Sheila wrote: I want to be Jewish for no other reason except than because I believe it and feel it stir in my heart.

Good, that is a beautiful thing. Then do it the right way. Do it the Torah way.

[Axel]

You just made this up.  There are more than those 3 groups, but either way, that it is based on "one parent" is something you arbitrarily thought up.

Sure, there could be more. Can you name some of these groups? I mean, ethnicities that define a person as Jewish? That it is based on one parent, I thought up? err, how do I say this, look at your argument. My argument is that a mother doesn't make someone more Jewish than a father. I don't care what tradition says, tradition has nothing to do with science.

Because it's not based on DNA.  Who says it is?  You made this idea up.   It was based on the mother.

Not based on DNA, based on mother. Makes sense.

[Axel]

Are you joking?

Why would I be joking? You claim that the Torah says that Jews must go by the mother, I'm asking for proof for this claim. Not text observing the Torah, but an actual rule that says Jews MUST go by mother and mother only.

[muman613]

Are you joking?

Why would I be joking? You claim that the Torah says that Jews must go by the mother, I'm asking for proof for this claim. Not text observing the Torah, but an actual rule that says Jews MUST go by mother and mother only.

You obviously mock the Jewish religion. The Oral law has been quoted to you yet you insist on seeing it in the written Torah. Don't you realize that there are two parts to the revelation at Sinai? I am not going to get into heretical arguments here.

The Jewish law, not just tradition, is that Judaism is the trait passed through the mother. You don't want to believe so you are trying to mock the Jewish religion. Just about everything in Written Torah doesn't make sense without the clarification of Oral law. I can give you many examples of this yet I think that you will not listen.

Will you argue that Torah sanctions Lesbian relationships? Don't you know that Written Torah doesn't expressly forbid this relationship? Only through Oral law which interprets the passage of "Not immitating the ways of the Mitzrim" as commanding no woman to woman sexual relationships... I will leave it with this simple example of Oral law explaining the written law. If you don't accept Judaism then there is nothing more I will explain to you.

[muman613]

Hear a Rabbi explain the Talmudic source for Matrilinear Descent:

http://ohr.edu/ask_db/ask_main.php/202/Q1/

    Dear Rabbi,

    What is the halachic source of matrilineal descent? Why are we set against patrilineal descent when all of our ancestors in the Torah are referred to as so and so son of so and so, referring only to the father's name?

Dear John Doe,

In the time of the Patriarchs it appears that descent followed the father. However, the period of the Patriarchs was before the giving of the Torah on Mount Sinai. It was only with the revelation on Sinai that the Jewish people received their legal system. Therefore it is impossible to bring Halachic, legal proofs from the Patriarchs. Our source for Halacha is the Written and Oral Torah.

The Mishna in Tractate Kiddushin 66b states that if a child's mother is not Jewish, then the child is not Jewish.

The Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 68b, derives this Halacha from a verse in Deuteronomy 7:1-5, which also contains the prohibition against intermarriage. "When the L-rd your G-d brings you to the land that you will inherit, many nations will fall away before you; the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Prizites, the Hivites and the Jebusites... And you shall not marry with them; do not give your daughters to his sons and do not take his daughters for your sons. For he will turn your son away from me and they will worship other gods...." The Talmud points out that the verse only seems to be concerned with the son of the Israelite woman being turned away, "for he (the gentile)" will turn your son away. It does not seem to be concerned that "she (the gentile) will turn your son away." The implication is that the son of the Jewish woman and gentile man is still considered "your (the Jewish grandfather in this case) son," but in the case of a gentile woman married to a Jewish man, the child is not considered "your son" and therefore there is no concern about his turning away. This follows Rashi and Tosfot Ri Hazaken in their explanation of the Gemara.

Tosfot (ad loc. "Amar krah") offers a number of different methods of derivation from the verse, but agrees with the conclusion. This law is also found in the Mishna in Yevamot (ch. 2, 21a): "He counts as a brother in every respect unless he was the son of a maidservant or of a gentile woman."

This halacha is codified in the Code of Jewish Law, Even HaEzer 8:5, and in Maimonides' Mishneh Torah, Laws of Forbidden Relationships, 15:4. Maimonides states: "This is the general rule: The status of an offspring from a gentile man or from a gentile woman is the same as his mother's; we disregard the father."

Another source in the Torah is the verse in Leviticus 24:10: "the son of an Israelite woman went out - and he was the son of an Egyptian man." This person is described as being "in the midst of the community of Israel" - in other words, Jewish.

Probably the most explicit verse against patrilineal descent is in the book of Ezra 10:2-3: Some of the Jews who had returned from the exile declare, "We have trespassed against our G-d and have taken foreign wives of the people of the land. Yet, there is hope in Israel concerning this thing. Therefore, let us make a covenant with our G-d to put away all the wives and such as are born to them, according to the counsel of the L-rd and of those who assemble at the commandment of G-d; let it be done according to the law."

Sources are also in Midrash Rabbah, Numbers, 19, and Jerusalem Talmud, Kiddushin 3:12.

Do we ignore the father completely? Certainly not. The father is the one who determines what tribe the child is from. That is: Kohen, Levi, Yisrael. Also, in determining royalty and other leadership roles among the Jewish people we go from father to son.


   

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

This guy Axel is very suspicious. Look at his comments over in the Klansman thread.

[muman613]

This guy Axel is very suspicious. Look at his comments over in the Klansman thread.

It is suspicious to me too... It seems like this guy is just concerned with $Hitler standards of Jewish identity...

[Axel]

No, Hasidism goes back only about 300 years tops.

That's my point, it was a tradition invented by Jews not long ago. Does this then mean that a non-Hasidic Jew is not Jewish? no. The mother tradition just happens to be older and more ingrained.

It is determined by the mother or conversion.  Nothing else.

This might be religion, I'm talking about race. If a person is born of a Jewish father, they can still be considered part-Jewish, because "Jewish" is a race. Albeit a varied race, so you can get technical and reffer to them as Ashkenazis or watever.

But the Jewish nation is not based on "race."

Ahh what world are you looking at? Jewish is an ethnicity like Arab. Maybe the original Jewish roots began as a multi-racial tribe, through secluded breeding Jews created a sub-ethnicity known around the world. We are Semites above all.

It defines it?  What defines what?   This was not decipherable.

Tradition does not define DNA.

Human definitions, in my eyes, are worthless.

But when you said

You can only be classifed into these categories if you have a Jewish parent, aka share a similar DNA

   

THAT was a human definition that you arbitrarily decided on.   You are being inconsistent.  You allow for your own human definitions, but not the ones you don't like.   In any event, the definition of the Jewish people as defined by matrilineal descent is from the Torah.

I'll rephrase. Human definition is worthless, scientific definition is not.

You yourself acknowledge he's a non-Jew by calling him a gentile!  But there is nothing wrong with being a gentile.  Especially if one is a righteous gentile and helps the Jewish people or supports Israel, that is a great thing!  But that doesn't make a person Jewish.

Well I call him a gentile so you can relate, replace gentile with "white European" for example and then you will get what I'm saying. I believe being Jewish is through race, that's our argument I suppose.

MERE   tradition?   I notice now that since you have run out of arguments as to why you think you can replace tradition, instead you now belittle tradition itself (much like the reformists).   "Mere" tradition is based on our Divine revelation received at Sinai thousands of years ago.   You do not negate that because you feel like it.  That is arbitrary.

I mean mere tradition compared to science. Tradition begins at a time where people don't have the same knowledge we do.

So what?  What bearing does this have on whether membership in a nation is based on father or mother?

I'm explaining some reasons why this tradition came to exist. And why we can change it with newer understanding and knowledge.

You're basically arguing that being Jewish is not an ethnicity, that anyone can be a Jew as long as they either convert or have a mother who identifies as a Jew.

But then-

1. There can be no anti-semites, since Jews can be anything, not just Semites.

2. Jews don't have a claim to Israel, since there's no proof that they are even related to the original tribe. One can argue that Israel simply belongs to people who practice Judaism, but that's would debunk the argument that the land once belonged to Israeli-Jews some thousand years ago.

3. Debunks the fact that Jews are a seperate ethnicity to gentiles. So the fact that we have Goldbergs, Brodskys and Steinbergs with similar facial features, happening to be Jews, is a pure coincidence.

4. People with a Jewish father are "goy".

5. Debunks the fact that people with Ashkenazi parents can benefit from the Ashkenazi intelligence. Albeit can sound supremacist, it's been proven time and time again. Most child prodigies are Ashkenazi, the group with the highest IQ in Israel are Eastern European Ashkenazis, who also hold most power, 8/10 celebrated Jewish minds belong to Ashkenazis, 80% of Jewish billionaires are Ashkenazi etc,. All this due to selective breeding of Jews who suffered pogroms and discrimination. So you see, anyone who is an Ashkenazi is a relative of the Jews of Europe.

If you want to shatter my definition of a Jew, you must seperate Ashkenazis from Jews, Sephardis from Jews and Mizrahi of Jews whom btw, all share a similar genetic trait linked back to ancient Israel (one of my arguments supporting Jewish owndership of Israel).

[muman613]

And LISTEN everyone who is reading this. I am of the belief that only a Jewish mother can produce Jewish children. It is not genetic in any sense.

It is difficult for me to have this belief, it is not as easy as everyone thinks. I have to personally disown my own brothers children, who survived him after his death on 9/11. It is sad for me, so hard to believe... But this is the fact in this world. I do not believe this life is meant to be easy. Everyone makes mistakes in his or her life, but I cannot accept my brothers children as Jewish. My brother married a non-Jew and therefore both of his kids are not Jews. In the eight years since his death I have never met these children. My deep wish is that some day they will seek me in order to learn of their fathers childhood faith. My mother, their grandma, has tried to instill some Jewish identity in them... But I have told her that they would need to convert in order to be recognized as a Jew.

I am not making the rules. I am just living them.

[muman613]

Axel,

What is your argument? You want to talk about genetics? Or do you want to talk about who a Jew is?

Genetics is passed through both parents... There is no argument there...

But who is a Jew? That is not negotiable.


Israel is the land promised to the Jews... Not just those whose genetics are traced back. We believe that all Jews have some original Jewish blood. But we also have a strong belief in the Jewish soul.

[Axel]

You obviously mock the Jewish religion. The Oral law has been quoted to you yet you insist on seeing it in the written Torah. Don't you realize that there are two parts to the revelation at Sinai? I am not going to get into heretical arguments here.

The Jewish law, not just tradition, is that Judaism is the trait passed through the mother. You don't want to believe so you are trying to mock the Jewish religion. Just about everything in Written Torah doesn't make sense without the clarification of Oral law. I can give you many examples of this yet I think that you will not listen.

Will you argue that Torah sanctions Lesbian relationships? Don't you know that Written Torah doesn't expressly forbid this relationship? Only through Oral law which interprets the passage of "Not immitating the ways of the Mitzrim" as commanding no woman to woman sexual relationships... I will leave it with this simple example of Oral law explaining the written law. If you don't accept Judaism then there is nothing more I will explain to you.

I'm not mocking it, I'll tell you right now I don't know much about it. I was raised in a secular Jewish family who gave up most of their beliefs during the 100 year communist revolution.

What you say about Lesbians for example, well why wouldn't I argue this? I don't mean to offend anyone here, but if I was a leftist arguing for gay rights, my first tactic would be to point out that nowhere does the holy book denounce homosexuality, it would then be your duty to prove the evidence against that.

So all I'm asking is where it's a golden rule that you are not a Jew if your mother is a non-Jew.

I'm against people with Jewish fathers feeling left out because of this tradition which says only through the mother. Sure they can convert, but they would always see themselves as converts and not relatives of Abraham.

[Axel]

This guy Axel is very suspicious. Look at his comments over in the Klansman thread.

What about it? I'm against a woman betraying her lover, just because of his slightly murky past.

[muman613]

You obviously mock the Jewish religion. The Oral law has been quoted to you yet you insist on seeing it in the written Torah. Don't you realize that there are two parts to the revelation at Sinai? I am not going to get into heretical arguments here.

The Jewish law, not just tradition, is that Judaism is the trait passed through the mother. You don't want to believe so you are trying to mock the Jewish religion. Just about everything in Written Torah doesn't make sense without the clarification of Oral law. I can give you many examples of this yet I think that you will not listen.

Will you argue that Torah sanctions Lesbian relationships? Don't you know that Written Torah doesn't expressly forbid this relationship? Only through Oral law which interprets the passage of "Not immitating the ways of the Mitzrim" as commanding no woman to woman sexual relationships... I will leave it with this simple example of Oral law explaining the written law. If you don't accept Judaism then there is nothing more I will explain to you.

I'm not mocking it, I'll tell you right now I don't know much about it. I was raised in a secular Jewish family who gave up most of their beliefs during the 100 year communist revolution.

What you say about Lesbians for example, well why wouldn't I argue this? I don't mean to offend anyone here, but if I was a leftist arguing for gay rights, my first tactic would be to point out that nowhere does the holy book denounce homosexuality, it would then be your duty to prove the evidence against that.

So all I'm asking is where it's a golden rule that you are not a Jew if your mother is a non-Jew.

I'm against people with Jewish fathers feeling left out because of this tradition which says only through the mother. Sure they can convert, but they would always see themselves as converts and not relatives of Abraham.

The issue is that there is something special about marrying within your own people. The Torah which has kept the Jewish people a people for 1000s of years has told us men to only marry Jewish women. This is because we then can have Jewish children. If there is no difference then why should we keep within our faith? As I have quoted several times, our L-rd has commanded us to remain loyal to him and 'not turn astray'. It has been shown that Jews brought up in mixed-religion marriages often do not carry on the religion, leading to total assimiliation within 2 generations. The Jewish nation has the vision of the future where all Jews will gather in Israel and witness the coming of the Moshiach.

I don't expect a Jew from Russia to understand. I was just explaining this to a friend the other night about how I don't hold a Russian member of my synagogue to a high standard of religion because he grew up in Soviet Union. They were brutal to all religions and especially to the Jews.

Please try to learn about the Jewish faith if you find it in yourself. We have a long, hard, but great story and a future which can be glorious.

[Axel]

Axel,

What is your argument?

My argument is that being Jewish is an ethnicity. We are a certain Semitic group that is labelled as the Jewish people, the descendants of Abraham.

Someone who happens to have a White mother and a Semitic Jewish father, is therefore half-Jewish, something Orthodox Jews don't believe in.

I will also admit that I believe a person with Jewish mother and White father is also half-Jewish.

[muman613]

Axel,

What is your argument?

My argument is that being Jewish is an ethnicity. We are a certain Semitic group that is labelled as the Jewish people, the descendants of Abraham.

Someone who happens to have a White mother and a Semitic Jewish father, is therefore half-Jewish, something Orthodox Jews don't believe in.

I will also admit that I believe a person with Jewish mother and White father is also half-Jewish.

Ok, so these are your beliefs... As you admitted it is not the way of the Jewish people to decide like that...

It is established that the way to determine the religion of the child is through the mother. Personal beliefs are fine but they don't always reveal the truth.

[Spectator]

I don't expect a Jew from Russia to understand. I was just explaining this to a friend the other night about how I don't hold a Russian member of my synagogue to a high standard of religion because he grew up in Soviet Union. They were brutal to all religions and especially to the Jews.

Hey, there are lots of observant Jews who were born in Soviet Union, including myself

[Spectator]

Axel,

What is your argument?

My argument is that being Jewish is an ethnicity. We are a certain Semitic group that is labelled as the Jewish people, the descendants of Abraham.

Someone who happens to have a White mother and a Semitic Jewish father, is therefore half-Jewish, something Orthodox Jews don't believe in.

I will also admit that I believe a person with Jewish mother and White father is also half-Jewish.

So you are a.. racist

[Axel]

The issue is that there is something special about marrying within your own people. The Torah which has kept the Jewish people a people for 1000s of years has told us men to only marry Jewish women. This is because we then can have Jewish children. If there is no difference then why should we keep within our faith? As I have quoted several times, our L-rd has commanded us to remain loyal to him and 'not turn astray'.

I can understand that, but at the same time why cannot a Jewish man have a child with a Gentile woman and still have a child sypmathetic to his Jewish roots? it would make no difference, because as I said, I don't see any difference in a child being born of a mother and father.

For example, I am almost identical to my father in looks and everything.

Point is, why would a Jewish mother with a Gentile father be more faithful to the Jewish religion?

Sounds like nothing more than a way to keep the Jewish blood flowing, by encouraging Jewish men to marry Jewish women. Not a bad thing, but makes no difference if it's a father or mother.

It has been shown that Jews brought up in mixed-religion marriages often do not carry on the religion, leading to total assimiliation within 2 generations. The Jewish nation has the vision of the future where all Jews will gather in Israel and witness the coming of the Moshiach.

Which brings me back to the point, why would a Jewish mother and a Christian father make any difference if it was the other way around?

I don't expect a Jew from Russia to understand.

I understand, I just strongly disagree.

I was just explaining this to a friend the other night about how I don't hold a Russian member of my synagogue to a high standard of religion because he grew up in Soviet Union.

I really don't like the idea of Jews looking down on other Jews. This was common between German Jews and Eastern European Jews once, you know, before the holocaust. If we worked together we would be better off.

[Axel]

So you are a.. racist

...Please explain this logic to me?