Can a Jew be a Christian and still be a Jew?

[Az]

Jews did suffer more oppression than others, but that's just the way things worked then. One of the most hospitable places for jews was, without doubt the center of the Ottoman empire.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Heresson


I don't consider Jews especially opressed in history, except for last century. And when they had a chance to opress and force conversions of others, they did it (Idumea or whatever this region was called; Nagran and Yemen).

Idumean conversion was considered invalid by most later rabbinic authorities, IIUC, because of force involved. That was an action of the (by then) barely legitimate Hasmoneans. And after that there really arent any cases (I dont think that isolated jewish "kingdoms" in Yemen and elsewhere are that well documented - in any case the leaders were usually converts who hadnt absorbed normative Judaism very deeply, AFAIK)

Hence the following joke:

A group of Jews in Czarist Russia are sitting around debating politics. This is a group of friends who meet for such debate regularly (not unlike 'poly) At the tavern where they meet a non-Jew is following their discussions. One of the Jews asserts that Jews are morally superior. The non-Jew laughs, and says "we cheat in business - but so do you. We beat our wives - but so do you. How are you superior?" After much agitated discussion, they respond "Hunting. Gentiles hunt and kill poor defenseless animals, and we Jews dont hunt" To which their non-Jewish friend laughs and replies "thats because our Czar in his infinite wisdom doesnt allow you to won guns!" This causes great consternation.

The next day the Jews return to the tavern, and announce to their non-Jewish friend that they are leaving for the holy land, to help in the building of a Jewish state. Their non-Jewish friend is surprised "but why, youve always been happy here in our little town?"
To which they reply - "we need to show that even where we ARE allowed to own guns, we still wont hunt"


The rest as we say is history. We havent done quite as well about "not hunting" as we perhaps had hoped, but I think we've still managed to show that Jewish values (mediated through socialism) have had an impact.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Azazel
Jews did suffer more oppression than others, but that's just the way things worked then. One of the most hospitable places for jews was, without doubt the center of the Ottoman empire.

the ottoman empire was certainly better than most other muslim as well as christian states for Jews. and it was a place of refuge from 1490 through 1700 (Poland was also a place of refuge in the middle ages, BTW) but in the 1800's when europe was moving towards democracy and equality, the ottomans lagged behind. they abolished dhimmi status only under european pressure, and this aroused reactionary discontent. Discontent which never quite went away. Discontent that inspires millions across the muslim world right now.

Im not denying the postive Jewish experience under the ottomans. But there is a tendency by some to say that the conditions under Islam were just fine for Jews, and that it was Zionism that messed that up. And that teh Jews have nothing to fear from a renewed Kalifate, if only theyd give up this Zionism thing. Its all patently false.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Edan


No it isn't. They didn't suffer as much as Jews in the Christian world, and there were certain times when Jews were able to live peacefully (albeit as second class citizens), but there were also massacres, destruction of synagogues and forced conversions that occured in places like Spain, North Africa and the Middle East (eg. the razing of the Jewish quarter and murdering of 5,000 Jews in Granada in the 11th century.)

The main difference is these were aberations, not the rule. The special taxes on Jews weren't for Jews alone, but for Christians as well. Furthermore, with the exception of a specific period in Moorish Spain (in fact, most of the time the Jews of Spain were treated better than the Catholics by the Moors) , Moslem progroms against the Jews were always accompanied by attacks on Christians as well. In the majority of cases, it wasn't that they were Jewish that got Jews in trouble. It was that they weren't Moslems. Christians hated Jews for being Jews.

Let's face it, anyone in any country who didn't practice the state faith was a second class citizen. Jews weren't special in this regard in Moslem countries, and they were certainly a lot better off than pagans. The Hindus have far more reason to complain about how the Moslems treated them than the Jews ever will, even when including today's troubles.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
But there is a tendency by some to say that the conditions under Islam were just fine for Jews, and that it was Zionism that messed that up.

There is a greater tendency to extend the current Arab-Israeli troubles backwards in history, as if a few isolated aberations over fourteen hundred years somehow mean the Jews of the Moslem world were oppressed. Today's troubles have everything to do with Zionism and nothing to do with a "historical" tendency to oppress the Jews by Moslems. The Jewish golden ages weren't among the Khazars or the Maccabees or King David. They were in Moorish Spain and the Ottoman Empire.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


The main difference is these were aberations, not the rule. The special taxes on Jews weren't for Jews alone, but for Christians as well. Furthermore, with the exception of a specific period in Moorish Spain (in fact, most of the time the Jews of Spain were treated better than the Catholics by the Moors) , Moslem progroms against the Jews were always accompanied by attacks on Christians as well. In the majority of cases, it wasn't that they were Jewish that got Jews in trouble. It was that they weren't Moslems. Christians hated Jews for being Jews.

Let's face it, anyone in any country who didn't practice the state faith was a second class citizen. Jews weren't special in this regard in Moslem countries, and they were certainly a lot better off than pagans. The Hindus have far more reason to complain about how the Moslems treated them than the Jews ever will, even when including today's troubles.

Need i remind you that the expulsion of the Jews from Spain was accompanied by the expulsion of Muslims from Spain? And that Spanish hatred of Jews was matched by Spanish hatred of muslims. And i dont need to tell you what christians did to pagans wherever they found them.

I will admit that there was a special edge to Christian anti-semitism, going back to biblical roots. But Dhimmii status WAS discrimination, and was frequently quite oppressive, and is NOT a heritage of tolerance. That Christians were subjected to it as well does not change that fact.

[chequita guevara]

Damn server outtages.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


There is a greater tendency to extend the current Arab-Israeli troubles backwards in history, as if a few isolated aberations over fourteen hundred years somehow mean the Jews of the Moslem world were oppressed. Today's troubles have everything to do with Zionism and nothing to do with a "historical" tendency to oppress the Jews by Moslems. The Jewish golden ages weren't among the Khazars or the Maccabees or King David. They were in Moorish Spain and the Ottoman Empire.

both tendencies are incorrect. The current troubles are not an extension of things going on since the 7th century. They do have roots that go back before Zionist settlement in the region (notably to conditions in the 19thc, when cultural opportunities, economic interests, and politics led many Jews in North Africa, Iraq and elsewhere to identify with western imperalist powers, gaining resentment from locals) , and conditions under Islam were oppressive.

Jewish Golden ages -

King David - most early biblical lit from this era (whether or not KD was an historic personage)
Maccabees - late biblical lit, apocryphal lit, early dead sea scrolls, early development of halacha.
Spain - golden age, but in Christian as well as Muslim spain. More likely to cultural ferment on the frontier of the 2 worlds then to muslim benevolence
Ottomans - little cultural creativity, other than Tzfat mystics. During this period much greater cultural activity in eastern and western christian europe, bith traditional and modernizing.

[Heresson]

hardly better than Christians under muslims - massacres in Germany in the 1200's, massacres associated with the passage of crusaders through europe. Expulsion from england in the 1290's. Massacres associated with the black death. Expulsion from France in the 1390's. Expulsions from various German states. Expulsion from Spain and Portugal in the 1490's. Massacres in Ukraine in the 1690's.

They had a safe place in Poland. Except for that, yes, in many backward countries such as the ones in the west and Russia, they were treaten badly. But again, that's not all that special. Christians were massacring each other
for being of one or other nation, or one or other denomination. And not only.
As a Slav, I can feel especially discriminated through history, as Greek, German and Hungarian nations always were full of disdain towards Slavic people. Westeners don't know about such stuff like German attitude to Slavs. You think that
Hitler started it. Nope, it was a long tradition, dating back to Middle Ages. Even then, laws forbidding speaking Polish
were established for example; or Slavic people could not become citizens of some German cities; as clergy, and later, feudal authority was in German hands, German rules
were pretty brutal (as Byzantine in Balkans. How did German methods of conquest look? Like invitation of all the Slavic tribal leaders for a feast and poisoning them.
How did Byantine methods rule? When Justinian lost a battle thanks to Slavic contingent betrayal, He gathered and slaughtered dozens of thousands Slavs of Anatoly). Frederick II, known as "the Great", called once Poles "Iroquis of Europe", and in fact, that's how Slavic people were treaten for centuries by first Greek, later German and (less) Hungarian masters.
Slavic people were slaughtered and enslaved by Byzantines, Germans, Tatars...; in XIX century, of 14 Slavic nations, the largest ethnic group in Europe, only two were independant; also, this time, Hungarian and German attempts of expansion on their cost got stronger. Germans forbade Polish language in schools, offices and churches; at the start of XX century,
existance of any central Polish organisation was forbidden, and a Pole had to get a permission of local administration to buy a land or to build anything on it,
and had to sell it, if any German was interested in it.
The country officially supported financially German colonisation on Polish grounds. Western politic toward (mostly Slavic) eastern Europe was to push German expansion in this direction; and in the Hitler times, they sacrificed Czechs and later Poland for their safety (even at the end of the war, Churchill allowed himself racist comments about Poles and Czechs; during the war, Slavic people received several times bigger losses than Jews,
and they were next in line after Jews and Gypsies to extermination. Up to today, eastern Europe is treaten as barbaric, and its culture is in disregard, and the attitude was nicely shown by French president lately. German press offends Slavs in a racist way, mostly Poles, on and on, and no-one cries in their defense, while a smallest criticisement of Israel is treaten as a crime of antisemitism.
Examples of racial prejudices were even shown by high officials (one swedish ministry; "Poles come to Sweden to commit crimes") and are not punished in any way. Haider got popular in Karintia (once Slavic), also thanks to anti-Slovenian sentiment of that area etc.

I dare to claim that antisemitism isn't a serious threat today in Christian world, as after ww2 it will never get a big support. And any other negative sentiment can.

Sorry for so much blabling...
The thing I wish to say is that not only Jews were repeatedly mistreaten, and they seem to think they were.
They lived everywhere, so they got kicked from almost everyone.Such a distinct minority always gets negative attention

And of course the majority of Christians did not live in muslim countries

It's true, but not so obvious; Iraq, Marocco etc were full of Jews, while All the Arab-conquered lands (with exception
of Saudi Arabia, Oman and UAE and Central Asia and western India, Iran, which were minorly Christian) were once mostly, in most time clearly, Christian; later Turkish conquests, Anatoly and Balkans, were clearly Christian as well.

If it had "only" been limits in dress, limits in jobs, ghettoization the Jews would have been far better off.

Again, the same for eastern Christians.

When it comes to the treatement of Jews in Muslim world,
it was theoretically the same, but practically better than treatement of Christians there.

Idumean conversion was considered invalid by most later rabbinic authorities

Massacres on Jews by crusaders were done against local bishops' will, and still, it doesn't change the fact they were slaughtered.

(I dont think that isolated jewish "kingdoms" in Yemen and elsewhere are that well documented - in any case the leaders were usually converts who hadnt absorbed normative Judaism very deeply, AFAIK)

This case is well documented, I think a letter to or from Syrian bishop about this case was preserved; the case is also known by Muslim tradition.
When it comes to the later part, the same we can say about any Christian ruler or believer that did anything wrong to a Jew. A Christian should not do anything bad to anyone, so, if He did, He is not a true Christian.
And in fact, it is right.

The rest as we say is history. We havent done quite as well about "not hunting" as we perhaps had hoped, but I think we've still managed to show that Jewish values (mediated through socialism) have had an impact.

Indeed, Jews showed that an agressive nationalism, egoism and lack of respect to other cultures can be nicely transitioned through XIX to XXI century without a change.

Poland was also a place of refuge in the middle ages, BTW

In fact, 80% of Jewish population lived in Poland - up till partages. And it all started with a king who allowed them in. He is said to have had a Jewish lover, and he had children only with her. Some stayed Jewish. And he was the last of the dinasty on the throne. Imagine, perhaps one of You is the last son of the first Christian Polish dinasty... How nice would it have been...

(sorry for such a long post)

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Heresson


H - They had a safe place in Poland. Except for that, yes, in many backward countries such as the ones in the west and Russia, they were treaten badly. But again, that's not all that special.

LOTM - they had a safe place in poland largely because Poland was backward - they were invited in to provide a merchant class and develop the country, something no longer required to the west, where a gentile merchant class was developing.


H - Christians were massacring each other
for being of one or other nation, or one or other denomination.

LOTM - But the jews were not participating in a rivalry of nations. They were a weak minority, without a state, who were persecuted almost everywhere.

history of German and Magyar anti-slavism>


LOTM - yes its too bad. Of course the Ukrainians and Byelorussians have some stories about what the Poles did to them. And in fact Polish nationalists were historically friendly to Magyar nationalism, at least in the 19th C. They seem to have overlooked the Slovaks.
Indeed this whole suffering Slav thing relies on fudging the distinctions among different slavs.

In any case its not comparable to the Jews. Discrimination against them was supported by the Catholic Church, was official across all of pre-Reformation Europe.



H - I dare to claim that antisemitism isn't a serious threat today in Christian world, as after ww2 it will never get a big support. And any other negative sentiment can.

LOTM- well there arent many Jews left in the Christian world, outside the US. Theres certainly antisemitism in Russia. Not much in Eastern Europe, but then hardly any Jews there. "Even a Jew you cant kill twice"



H - Again, the same for eastern Christians.

When it comes to the treatement of Jews in Muslim world,
it was theoretically the same, but practically better than treatement of Christians there.

LOTM - treatment of christians in muslim lands was as dhimmis. You seem to think that medieval Poland was a land of "refuge" for the Jews. It was a land of refuge from massacre and expulsion only. They were still subjected to discrimination and legal limitations of all kinds. What rights were Christians deprived of as dhimmis that Jews in Poland were given?


H - Massacres on Jews by crusaders were done against local bishops' will, and still, it doesn't change the fact they were slaughtered.

LOTM - massacre was out, but ghettoization, armbands, etc were all church policy. Again your attempt to justify what was done for centuries to Jews in christian europe, with a poorly documented case from the very different classical world, strikes me as disingenous. Do you really care about the Idumeans??? Are you, like a fan of their culture??? Or is it just that you can use them to say "anti-semitism is nothing special, the Jews did the same kind of thing when they had power" Do we really need to get into the geopolitical situation of the Hasmonean kingdom???? Why not just say that anti-semitism is profoundly evil.



This case is well documented, I think a letter to or from Syrian bishop about this case was preserved; the case is also known by Muslim tradition.
When it comes to the later part, the same we can say about any Christian ruler or believer that did anything wrong to a Jew. A Christian should not do anything bad to anyone, so, if He did, He is not a true Christian.
And in fact, it is right.



Indeed, Jews showed that an agressive nationalism, egoism and lack of respect to other cultures can be nicely transitioned through XIX to XXI century without a change.


LOTM - what the hell does this mean. Jews nationalism is essentially defensive, it has been no more egoist than any other nation's, and there is plenty of multiculturalism in Israel. I suggest you visit.

Is criticsim of Israel necessarily anti-semitism? of course not. But when its highly generalized and like the above, and when the author finds it necessary to write a long rant trying to show that the Jews were not more persecuted than other people over 2 thousand years, it certainly makes me think that person has issues with the Jews have not NOTHING to do with how fast Israel should withdraw from West Bank settlements.



In fact, 80% of Jewish population lived in Poland - up till partages. And it all started with a king who allowed them in. He is said to have had a Jewish lover, and he had children only with her. Some stayed Jewish. And he was the last of the dinasty on the throne. Imagine, perhaps one of You is the last son of the first Christian Polish dinasty... How nice would it have been...

LOTM - perhaps its me. And i dont really care.

[Edan]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
In the majority of cases, it wasn't that they were Jewish that got Jews in trouble. It was that they weren't Moslems. Christians hated Jews for being Jews.

And why should that matter? Simply because the Muslim world was an equal opportunity oppressor doesn't make the claim that Jews "suffered from little oppression in the Muslim world" any more correct.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

The Hindus have far more reason to complain about how the Moslems treated them than the Jews ever will, even when including today's troubles.

Actually Hindus were treated fairly well by the Moghuls until the reign of Aurangzeb, a viscious zealot. They had not been discriminated against, and had generally held many of the administrative posts in the governments. Aurangzeb though wanted a more Islamically pure nation, and began to persecute the Hindus. The first to revolt against him were in fact some Muslim governors within his empire. They fought him because his laws strained relationships within their provinces.

[Heresson]

LOTM - they had a safe place in poland largely because Poland was backward - they were invited in to provide a merchant class and develop the country, something no longer required to the west, where a gentile merchant class was developing.

H
It's not completely backwardness, just lack of people. But yes, poland was on a lower economical level than western nations. What's the point? I ment tolerance backwardness, not economical.

LOTM - But the jews were not participating in a rivalry of nations. They were a weak minority, without a state, who were persecuted almost everywhere.

H
As I mentioned, most of Slavs were deprived of their states for the most of history, but I know; except for Polish cities, Jews weren't majority anywhere.
But their dispersion or whatever it is called had some good aspects as well, as it allowed them trade activity and didn't leave them in a hand of one system only.

LOTM - yes its too bad. Of course the Ukrainians and Byelorussians have some stories about what the Poles did to them.

H
During the middle war times, to some extent, and the cossacks in XVII century perhaps; but believe me, Poles have as many reasons to complain, as ethnical clearings by Ukrainians during ww2, with over 100 000 victims
(up to 20 000 Ukrainians in Polish revenge on the other side of Bug, though), as Ukrainian acts of terror in the middlewar, as the massacre of Huma? in XVIII century and cossack atrocities earlier, as that the practically all disputed areas fell to Ukraine eventually...
Again, it's not the thing we were discussing. Poles had no undermensh approach to eastern nations. The best they thought
of them, just as Russians, as of orthodox Poles.

LOTM
And in fact Polish nationalists were historically friendly to Magyar nationalism, at least in the 19th C. They seem to have overlooked the Slovaks.

That's true, but Slovaks overlooked our interests as well.
Slavs in that time were looking for Russian help. That not quite fitted Poles, who had no reason for supporting allies of one of their two greatest enemies.

Indeed this whole suffering Slav thing relies on fudging the distinctions among different slavs.

Mind to tell me more about it? I mean it, as I don't understand why are You saying something like that

In any case its not comparable to the Jews. Discrimination against them was supported by the Catholic Church, was official across all of pre-Reformation Europe.

What's the difference by who it was supported?
Anyway, Slavs, as a religion group, were persecuted by the church as well. Heard of any remaining Slavic pagans?
Again, Slavs and all the other northern pagans were even more persecuted, as their religion was completely destroyed, why yours was preserved.
OK, I'm trolling again a bit...
But the point is that, relatively, judaism wasn't treaten worse than other religion just for being judaism.
but it was treaten better than any non-monotheistic religion by the other ones. That doesn't mean Jews haven't suffered. And as a constant minority, they had more suffering than persecuting in their overall history than Christianity or Islam.

LOTM- well there arent many Jews left in the Christian world, outside the US. Theres certainly antisemitism in Russia. Not much in Eastern Europe, but then hardly any Jews there. "Even a Jew you cant kill twice"

H
And...?
Certain national groups dislike each other sometimes.
French and the Dutch laugh of poor Belgians, Germans
disdain Poles, Poles have a bad sentiment towards Russians and Germans... It may pass, but perhaps it will
pass not... Why do You expect that everyone should love
Jews? Jews were in contact with many nations, so many nations feel a sentiment to them; no-one feels anything
towards San Marinians...

LOTM - treatment of christians in muslim lands was as dhimmis. You seem to think that medieval Poland was a land of "refuge" for the Jews. It was a land of refuge from massacre and expulsion only. They were still subjected to discrimination and legal limitations of all kinds. What rights were Christians deprived of as dhimmis that Jews in Poland were given?

hm...
-building new sinagogues
-repairing old ones
-having sinagogues even higher than churches
-dressing as they wished
-lower taxes
-they could ride a horse
You must know, that Jewish situation WAS good. In fact, better than Christian citizens of cities, because Jews weren't considered a potential enemy by the gentry.

LOTM - massacre was out, but ghettoization, armbands, etc were all church policy. Again your attempt to justify what was done for centuries to Jews in christian europe, with a poorly documented case from the very different classical world, strikes me as disingenous. Do you really care about the Idumeans??
Are you, like a fan of their culture???

H
No, should I be to say that someone did harm to them?
Why do You seem to think that being emotionally tied to one side makes You more objective?
Of course, I use this and Yemenian example because these are the only times Jews were majority
(Khazars... I know, but even there, Jews weren't a definite majority) and could show their tolerance. They didn't. I did not discuss medieval situation only
And I'm not justifying anything... I'm just pointing that when having a chance, Jews didn't act wonderfully either

LOTM
Or is it just that you can use them to say "anti-semitism is nothing special, the Jews did the same kind of thing when they had power"

In fact, that's what I want to say. Whay is it so bad?

LOTM
Do we really need to get into the geopolitical situation of the Hasmonean kingdom???? Why not just say that anti-semitism is profoundly evil.

H
Oh, of course it is. Just I don't believe that there is a need for separation of antisemitism of any other national prejudice and mistreatement. In this meaning, yes,
I find anti-semitism nothing THAT special, a specific kind
of the thing mentioned above, but still, nothing unique.
Separating anti-semitism from general sin of national prejudice I regard as giving yourself special rights, and no-one deserves them.

LOTM - what the hell does this mean. Jews nationalism is essentially defensive, it has been no more egoist than any other nation's, and there is plenty of multiculturalism in Israel. I suggest you visit.

H
he he he, it was a little troll.
I think Israel does all the awful thing it does because it thinks, and perhaps it is right, that that's the only way to survive. It's self-defence in your view, and perhaps that's why it's overreacted. The only GIANT fault of Israel is that it was created. But I don't blame Jews for that. They had a right to expect their own state, and they wanted it in the place it once existed - that's pretty natural. That the place was already taken, it's the problem. But I think the Jewish creators of Israel, had a right not to be objective, as a side of the future conflict. It's the British that made a very bad move, by Balfour declaration.

LOTM
Is criticsim of Israel necessarily anti-semitism? of course not. But when its highly generalized and like the above, and when the author finds it necessary to write a long rant trying to show that the Jews were not more persecuted than other people over 2 thousand years, it certainly makes me think that person has issues with the Jews have not NOTHING to do with how fast Israel should withdraw from West Bank settlements.

H
Why?
The same I could write that everyone who mentions
Jewish sufferings in discusion over Israel is not objective.

LOTM - perhaps its me. And i dont really care.

H
A bit rude, again.

[lord of the mark]

"I find anti-semitism nothing THAT special, a specific kind
of the thing mentioned above, but still, nothing unique"

Anti-semitism was a persistent, destructive phenomenon directed against a weak minorty for hundreds of years. There is nothing comparable in european history. If you want to look at numbers murdered relative to population or numbers expelled relative to population you can. The hatred was an animating force in western culture, even where persecutions were not taking place. Even where NO Jews lived. (EG Merchant of Venice is an anti-semitic play - written when there were NO Jews in England - any anti-Polish plays by Shakespeare?)

Im sorry you cant see this. I do not intend to discuss it further.

[GePap]

Can anyone hre point to me one single state with a state religion in which those who did NOT follow that religion were treated as equal prior to the 1800's in Europe? Anyone? Anyone at all?

Jews under Muslims suffered less than Jews under Christians, if only becuase of the part in hte Q'uran about people of the book. As it were, Christians under Muslims did better than Muslims under Christians prior to the 1800's.