Took a turn for the better
(media.scored.co)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (36)
sorted by:
"Jewish" means "being a Jew", how could it mean anything else?
Ioudaios in Latin is Judaeus, which in 900s France was elided to Ju meaning the same thing and referring to the same people, which through many spellings became standardized as Jew.
For there to be a difference between Judeans/Judahites and Jews, there would need to be two different peoples that never merged, but we only see one polity that at times accepted outsiders who converted, were circumcised, and intermarried. There is no historical scenario where there were two different peoples of this description.
The Magi didn't mock Jesus by calling him King of the Jews in Matt. 2:2.
Goyim is plural, we're goyim, you're a goy.
I've been asking for years if anyone has evidence that Jews are not Judeans/Judahites, and nobody has it. It turns out that the first people to say that Ashkenazi did not have 100% Jewish blood were Jews in the first place (Judah Halevi, Abraham ibn Daud, and Isaac Levinsohn from Ukraine). They were hoping that by making that admission they'd get less persecution, but over time it made them more persecuted. You're not perpetuating a narrative written by Ashkenazi Jews, are you?
So jews changed its meaning to suit their agenda, like always. Thanks for supporting my claim and clarifying, rabbi. Keep that kvetching energy up!
I never said it changed its meaning, so you changed my meaning. Ju means Judaeus and is the same word as Jew. Would you like a linguistics course? Or would you like to do what nobody here has ever done and explain who the two people-groups are that you imagine existed side by side?
By your logic would and wood are the same. lmao Silly rabbi. Your little hat might be glued on too tight.
So you do need a course in linguistics because you don't know the difference between convergent homonyms and etymologically pedigreed variants. Do you want the links?