Talk:Jews/Archive 8

message: I just want to say that I have always thought this article much to large and rambling. The title is "Jew" which is a title for a dictionary entry for a start. The Title should be Jews. It is fairly simple to define. The openning should be the traditional interpretation of who Jews are, then we should move through time indicateing when new movements arose and how they defined who Jews are. There is room for every POV currently observed in the present atrticle to be presented in unbiased report-style language as if written by a neutral observer. The article can be reduced in length and a lot of "see also" pages linked at the bottom. This time lets not omit ANY group which considers itself Jewish. Lets just make an unbiased report about each movement in chronological order with neutral language. Otherwise, leave it as it was. Zestauferov 11:44, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Re: "lets not omit ANY group which considers itself Jewish", there are all sorts of groups today who claim to be Jews; for example, a number of Christian groups claim to be Jewish, or "true" Jews, based on their theology that belief in Jesus is what makes someone a true Jew.  However, these groups have no historical relationship to the people commonly known as Jews, and who are described in this article. Jayjg 16:26, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Thats the problem, they should be in the article. If you want a section for groups not widely considered to be Jews, but who call themselves Jews, thats fine, but its wrong to exclude them. I would point out that you already discuss people not considered to be Jews by most Jews (reletives of Jews who intermarried) as well as those who insist they are not Jews ("turkic" russian karites). Sam [Spade] 19:14, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is that they shouldn't be in the article; the article discusses a specific people, and possibly (and quite incidentally) others related to them.  As for the "turkic" stuff, that's just a POV attempt on the part of some modern converts to Karaism to dissociate themselves from other Karaites. Jayjg 19:52, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Simplification

message: Firstly I am glad to see that the necessary changes were made. Since then however some new additions have been made which appear at minimum to be POV. see:
*the relationship between the different "types" of Jews in Israel flucutuates to both the positive and the negative side.
*assimilation always brings about the destruction of a peoples
The first is strange and needs better explanation, the second is hopelessly POV. Sam [Spade] 15:28, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: "If looked at purely in the aspects of the physical world, assimilation always brings about the destruction of a peoples.  Accordingly, relating to the spiritual, or Heavenly aspect of Jewish tradition, God showed discontent for the Children of Israel (as a nation) for failing to adhere to the commandments (the Torah).  In religious Jewish thought, the Heavens, or World to Come, and Earth, this World, are connected to and intertwined with each other, so that what happens here affects the Heavenly Realm, and what happens in the Heavens affects this World.  Thus, the exiles, destruction, as well as all aspects of positive national and individual occurences (liberation from slavery in Egypt) are manifestations of the inter-relationship between Heaven and Earth, and ultimately, of God's will.  According to Jewish teaching, the Temple in Jerusalem will be rebuilt when spiritual and physical benevolence occur, culminating in the Messianic Age, or the (first and only) coming of the Messiah, which will usher in an era of peace and human unity under God."
Not sure what can be salvaged, but have at it. Sam [Spade] 15:37, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  From article 

message: *Jew#.22Jew.22_in_Israel_and_Israeli_law
*Jew#View_of_the_State_of_Israel
These two sections need to be condenced or merged, so as not to repeat information. Sam [Spade] 19:12, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Jayjg 20:11, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge? 

message: From the article:
:Generally, Jews who have been raised as non-Jews would be expected to make some sort of public sign that they are returning to Judaism, for instance engaging in a course in Jewish Torah education, joining a synagogue, observing the Jewish Sabbath and festivals, keeping kosher, having an adult bar mitzvah ceremony, and a variety of other observances. If not circumcised, males are required to have a brit milah (ritual circumcision).
Do we have any reference or statistic for that? What does raised "non-Jewish" mean? Raised in another religion? raised as an atheist? raised as  culturally Jewish without religious education? And who would "expect" "some sort of public sign"? A synagogue? The secular Jewish community? A prospective Yiddishe mother-in-law? How much of a "public sign"? There are an awfully lot of people accepted as Jews who don't know a word of Torah, attend shul, observe Shabbos but do eat traif. Would a Jewish returnee showing up at Temple be expected to make some kind of representation before being allowed in the door? -- Cecropia | Talk 19:15, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that's a paragraph I'm still wrestling with.  I haven't really liked it since I first noticed it, and I've already cut it down a little, but it still seems over-wordy.  Raised "non-Jewish" I think in this context means "raised in another faith" or "raised without the knowledge one is a Jew".  All those various things these people are asked to do aren't really documented anywhere, and are certainly not formalized.  OTOH, some returning "apostates" are definitely asked to go to a mikvah, even if they don't have to formally convert.  I'm going to try to figure out who originally wrote the paragaph, that may help. Jayjg 19:38, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: Ah, I see, the material was inserted on Dec 24, 2003.  I understand better why it was placed there; I'm going to try another re-write attempt. Jayjg 19:56, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Return of the Prodigal 

message: This whole article will never be finished because it is a constant see-saw between traditional (i.e. orthodox) and revisionist ideas in all shapes and forms. We need a neutral presentation of both sides of the coin under clear sub-headdings and neither should cross over onto the otrher's territory. The problems are arising because the discussion attempts to paint a picture of one Jewish people which is unrealistic.Zestauferov 20:44, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Jfdwolf would you like to give a reason why you reverted my edit? Do you claim that Judaism is nothing more than a religion?Zestauferov 23:25, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Seesaw

message: With all due respect, folks, for some time we have been arguing over trivial differences here and doing little to appreciably improve the article. Most of the edits have amounted to gonig back and forth over the same ground. There is probably plenty that could be done with this article, but this isn't it. Also, there are certainly all sorts of Jewish-related topics that could use some serious work.
May I suggest that rather than argue repeatedly over the same matters, that each of the people who is significantly involved in this article would do well to indicate here on the talk page what they would see as up to three areas where the article could be strengthened, either through broader (or narrower!) coverage, improved citations, parts they really thing need a serious rewrite, etc. and we can see if we can get consensus on pursuing some of these rather than playing tug-of-war? -- Jmabel 00:58, Aug 24, 2004 (UTC)
I think the whole article needs shortening for a start. and I would like to keep a clear distinction between orthodox and non-orthodox views instead of this farce of tying to present a non-existant wholistic view.Zestauferov 16:47, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been working hard at that, Jmabel. Jayjg 04:22, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: Sorry, for that as you can see I have moved the discussion under another headding.Zestauferov 16:53, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  5 Jews ==> 6 opinions