Talk:Tribe of Judah

message: Why are the "slaves brought to the U.S." notable members of the Tribe of Judah. This is a misleading unsourced extreme minority viewpoint thrown in probably to push some point of view. If anything, the "slaves brought to the U.S." should be listed under "modern descendants" not "notable members" (which should list individuals). If it were up to me, I think "slaves brought to the U.S." should be removed entirely from this article. 
Also, with all due respect to Yechezkel Landau, whom I'm sure is well known in some circles, he is much less "notable" than Biblical figures such as  Judah, Caleb, Boaz, Jesse, Absalom, Solomon, Hezekiah, Josiah, and Isaiah, none of whom apparently merited mention of this list of "notable members". So I added the above mentioned individuals. Personally I think its a bit silly to have a list of "notable members" of the main tribe of the Old Testimate. While I understand that not everyone who reads wikipedia has read the Bible, from reading the article people should get the idea that pretty much a lot of important characters from the Old Testimate are going to be notable members of the Tribe of Judah. Michael.passman 08:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable Members??? 

message: Being a descendant of David, wasn't Jesus of the tribe of Judah?
I think he should be in that list. He certainly was a notable person then, and people still discuss him even now. 
--Davidmichell 12:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jesus Christ 

message: This looks like original research. Please bring reliable verifiable sources. ←Humus sapiens ну? 12:01, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Proof please. See WP:CITE. A quote if possible would be nice. Nasser is not an authority on Jewish history. ←Humus sapiens ну? 21:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  African slaves 

message: It is certainly true and it was certainly prophesied.  What is also true is Genesis 10 clearly states Ashkenaz descended from Japheth and not from Shem.  The word Ashkenazi Jew is an oxymoron.  They descended from the converted Khazars. See The Thirteenth Tribe by Arthur Koestler.
:BS - crz crztalk 02:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern Members 

message: But the great majority are not of the tribe of Judah.  When the Romans burned the second temple, it was those who could afford the trip out of Israel who made it, the poor stayed behind.  They didn't have a choice.  Because only people from the tribe of Levi could be priests, naturally they were the richest in ancient Israel.  That whole story of the diaspora, simply doesn't make any sense; Rome was going to spend the ancient equivalent of billions of dollars to displace an entire group of people?  The Babylonian captivity makes sense; because it's easier to march "local" people to your own country than it is to ship them.  Rome needed those ships to fight pirates,  not to mention trade.  To spend all those resources simply to remove Jews, to spend all those seafaring vessels, simply doesn't make any logical sense.  Like the Greeks, although brutal, the Romans were a practical bunch.
The majority of Ashkenazi can't be descended from the tribe of Judah, the reason being, the presence of the Coahim gene.  In a significant percentage of Jewish males across the world, it is very common.  It is also common in many "nonjewish" groups such as Italians and southern Spaniards.  It is true that the tribe of Judah was the most numerous, but, most were killed fighting the Romans, and whatever remained of them was finished off by the Muslims in later centuries.  Besides, other genetic evidence points to the fact that the overpowering majority of Ashkenazi Jews descend only from four women; please check any genetic literature on the Jews.  I don't need to source it, you can find it practically anywhere that deals with the subject.  The high incidence of the Coahim gene in Italy, which only occurs in the tribe of Levi, the fact that the Levites were the richest Jews in Roman times (and arguably the most corrupt), and that Rome would not spend billions in ships and shipping to remove the majority of the Jews from that land, leads me to question the notion that the majority of Jews come from the tribe of Judah.  The majority being of course, the Ashkenazi.  At least, for the time being.
At the risk of sounding unscientific, correct me if I'm wrong but, did not Jacob curse Levi by saying he would scatter his descendants?  The descendants of Judah stayed in the middle east, the vast majority in Iraq.  Iraq is not that far away from Israel.  It was the Ashkenazi who were scattered all across the globe, confirming Jacob's curse.  If true, then, boy, those curses by Jewish patriarchs are something to fear, all things considered.  Please revise that assumption; I checked sources 9 through 12 and none of them say the majority of Jews descend from the tribe of Judah.  What the sources said, at least the clearly written ones, that the entire Jewish people were NAMED after the tribe of Judah, but, the sources didn't say they DESCEND from them.  Again; please take into consideration the fact that the majority of Ashkenazi descend from only four women, and the Sephardic populations in Spain, which were relatively small compared to those of other parts of Europe put together (like for example Russia).  Take into consideration the high incidence of the Coahim gene, which occurs only among the descendants of Aaron, the descendants of Aaron being, what else?  Levites.  Coincidence?  I don't think so; the fact of the matter is, the wealthy Levites turned tail and ran, while the tribe of Judah stayed and fought, getting slaughtered by the Roman army in the process.  Again; the high incidence of the Coahim gene in Italy and Spain points to the fact that the majority of today's Ashkenazi Jews are Levites, not Judeans.
The Babylonians took the entire royal family of David hostage and, pardon my slang here but it was a big ass family.  With polygamy being, not at all uncommon for much of the Semitic world's history, it is quite possible that a very large bulk of Iraqi Jews descend from David himself.  Again; that family of his was a big ass family, and the man is very well known for being a womanizer.  Not all of them, but arguably a significant portion.
I typed too much; all I ask is that you please revise that and look at your sources again.
thanks.
stardingo747 —Preceding comment was added at 13:04, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Ashkenazi are indeed descended from ancient Hebrews 

message: In Judaism maternal lineage is more important regarding ethnicity, but the religion says the Messiah is supposed to be a male descendant of David, descended from David himself.  If every Jew had strictly only maternal descent, the Messiah would never even be born.  Frankly I don't see how Messiah prophecy, and lineage issues make any sense.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.63.78.78 (talk) 14:41, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Be careful; in pointing that out, you are violating a sacred cow of ashkenazi Jewry.  Remember that currently the ruling elite of Israel are ashkenazi Jews; if the Messiah does appear I highly doubt they will welcome him with open arms.  Provided you believe in that stuff; I'm not 100%, given the enormity of the universe.  So, after the Messiah is done redeeming the world will he redeem planet Vulcan too?  I'm just saying; its a big universe.  I have never been comfortable with the idea of geocentrism; also, if alien civilizations do exist do THEY believe in God and do THEY believe in the Jewish Messiah?  Tough questions, that most religions don't address.  Of course, the sheer size of the universe is no reason to be an atheist; if anything its sheer enormity, means that by physical law, it could not have had a natural origin.  The Big Bang theory more or less makes logical sense, if it is viewed as an antimater explosion.  Anti matter, does not obey the laws of time, an "explosion" of a super concentrated atom, could create an enormous universe in "seconds."  The problem with that argument though is, that even with the "instantaneous" nature of anti matter, it still does not take into account that to assume that is how the universe was made, is to assume human perception can take in its enormity.  Even with mathematics involved, numbers operate within equation parameters, the result, may be a number that goes on forever, but the logic to acquire said number, operates within strict limits, which alone ensure an improper perception of the universe.  Thus by all logic it would APPEAR, it would appear I'm not saying that's how it is, that Einstein's unified field theory, can not be solved.  There are too many limits with the way math is structured; you have parameters and logic, within parameters and logic, trying to encompas the enormity of the cosmos down to the tiniest quark.  How just working the numbers alone did not kill Einstein, THAT, is a mystery right there.  All the same I like people like you, who ask tough questions; in ancient times, the tyrants, were people like the Levite priests, or the Aryan peoples of Iran who corrupted Hinduism, and used religion to tyranize and control.  In the middle ages, the Catholic Church in Europe, the Pagan Priests of the Americas, and the Buddhist priests of China, all used religious dogma to control people, and destroy all who opposed them.  In modern times, there is a different kind of dogma, not by those who hold religious power, but by the public.  What the 21st century suffers from is "democratic dogma."  That is, dogma, by majority concensus; no one forces anyone to believe anything anymore, even in the world of Islam the attitudes of young people are changing.  People believe what they agree to believe, and they force others to believe what they believe by the strength of their numbers thus, it could be argued that the modern danger, is bovine masses dogma.  Everyone believes but no one questions, and those who question are ostracized or ignored.  But you're different; sometimes its good to BE different.  67.148.120.90 (talk) 02:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maternal Lineage 

message: What is the notability and connection for the coat of arms image (currently labeled with "Portuguese sketch. The English name is Judah.")? This appears to be a self-created image out of the imagination of some author. It does not seem to have any biblical basis, nor any historical significance, it is in Portuguese rather than any language that could understandably be connected with this WP article, and I am not sure what information this contributes/adds to this article. It would seem reasonable to remove this image. — al-Shimoni (talk) 01:35, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Three weeks have passed and so far no response to the above. I went ahead and removed it. If you disagree, please respond to the above to discuss this before reädding it. Many thanks. — al-Shimoni (talk) 04:32, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coat of Arms Image 

message: Are we insane? Will be better "part of a series on the History of Israel" or are we idiots?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.154.196.54 (talk) 00:41, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: ¿Part of a series on the History of the Palestinian territories?

message: This article cites religious texts as a true factual source, which does a grave disservice to the reader. I respectfully request the current editors to make the difference between religious claims and fact bright and clear. Right now it's reading like religious propaganda which is wholly inappropriate. Lexlex (傻) (talk) 07:10, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Religious texts as cited source

message: Is there any historical, non-Biblical reference to a Kingdom of Judah, Kingdom of Israel, or a Unified Kingdom at all? As best as I can tell, the region was conquered from the decentralized Cannanite peoples by Egypt in the 11th C. BCE, and remained (with various levels of autonomy) under Egyptian control until the 8th C. BCE when it was conquered by the Neo-Assyrian Empire, and then later by the Roman Republic in the 1st C. BCE. As far as I can find from any scholarly resource that doesn't directly cite Judeo-Christian religious texts, is that there is no point in time where the region was not under the control of a foreign ruler. There simply isn't a period for the Kingdom of Judah to have existed.  If anyone can please find any credible, non-religious, reference to the subject of this article and update the page accordingly. Gawain VIII (talk) 06:02, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The very nature of your question seems to push a blatant violation of WP policy, namely Wikipedia:No original research, since you wish to overlook the historical records of the Jewish nation recorded in the canonical Hebrew Bible in favour of your own personal theory. The Hebrew Bible contains 24 books that were compiled at different periods of time in history, and describe contemporary events during the reigns of various Israelite judges and kings, their exile and their return to the land. But as for non-biblical sources, Josephus, in his seminal work, Antiquity of the Jews - Flavius Josephus Against Apion, mentions an old Phoenician historian named Dius, whose writings (Phoenician History) were still extant in Josephus' days (circa 90 CE), and where he writes explicitly about Solomon, when he was king of Jerusalem, who sent problems to Hirom to be solved, and desired he would send others back for him to solve (See Flavius Josephus Against Apion, Book 1:17).Davidbena (talk) 10:54, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Davidbena, if a religious text is used as a primary source here, it makes this article a religious story with the same historical validity as the origin of Superman. Interesting, sure, but not factual. It should be using historical records as primary sources, not religious texts. The research is out there, why isn't it entered here? This is an important article. Lexlex (talk) 06:51, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The Bible is a reliable source, even in Wikipedia's sense of the term, about what the Bible says. And what the Bible says is almost always notable on Bible-related topics. So there should be summaries in this article of what the Bible says about the Tribe of Benjamin. But there should also be references that explain how scholars see the same questions. Right now, I'm working on adding in scholarly stuff.Alephb (talk) 03:02, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extra-biblical, historical source? 

message: I don’t see any mentions on this article saying it’s mythical or historical. CycoMa (talk) 04:54, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: "According to the Hebrew Bible", "Biblical account", "According to the Torah", "As depicted by the Deuteronomists and post-exilic writers," "Ethiopia's traditions". IMO that points in one direction. If there are sources that discuss this from a historical perspective, they are not in the article. Apart from the mention of Finkelstein. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:21, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this historical? 

message: Today’s Jews of all variety are likely a mix of all 12 tribes in different proportions.  Ashkenazi, Sephardic, Mizrahi etc. doesn’t designate ancient tribe, only where those populations were historically living after the diaspora.  The majority are likely descended from Judah, Benjamin and Levi as they made up the majority of the Southern Kingdom.  But not everyone from the “Lost Tribes” were really lost as many settled in Judah after the Assyrians fell.  They were likely remixed into the larger Jewish population.  Today, no tribal links really remain.  Although some claim to know they are Levite’s, but that is suspect and likely more tradition.
Yea, that response is absurd.  Ashkenazi Jews are not from any specific tribe.  They are a subset of ethnic Jews who likely entered Europe through Rome.  Over the course of centuries they migrated through what is now France, what was then Gaul, and settling in different locations along the way.  They spent a great deal of time in the Rhine Valley.  That area of today’s France and Germany was eventually called “Ashkenaz” as there was thought to be some connection between Gomer and the Germanic people groups who lived there.  After living in this area and the low lands, for centuries, these Jews were eventually kicked out by ruling Royalty.  They dispersed in different directions, with the majority moving East, eventually settling in what is today Poland and Lithuania, where they were accepted for a long period.  As they grew in population they began settling all over Central and Eastern Europe, wherever they were allowed to at relative time periods.  Some went to Britain, others Iberia, Italy and Ottoman territories.  But most settled in Central and Eastern Europe where they lived until the holocaust in WW2.  Now they make up most of the worlds Jews, although since emigrating to the US, Israel, England, Australia and other countries, post WW2, they are again intermixing with Jews from across the world.  Today there is far less separation between Jewish communities as Ashkenazi, Sephardic, Mizrahi and other Jewish populations are recombining to form a more modern, homogenous Jewish people.  Soon, such differentiation will be mostly obsolete as an ethnic identifier.  Even today, the worlds Jews can again be considered one people.
No Jews today really know what tribe their ancestors originated from.  The Kohens/Levites are thought to be of the tribe of Levi, but that is more tradition than fact.  In all likelihood, today’s Jews are all a mixture of ALL the ancient tribes, even the supposed “Lost Tribes”.  After the fall of Israel to the Assyrians, it is completely likely many from the “Lost Tribes”, made their way back to the Kingdom of Judah and remixed with those living in Judah. Judah was named for the tribe of Judah, of which King David is thought to be descended.  But Jews today are called “Jews” because they came from the Land of Judah or Judea, not because they are all from the tribe of Judah.  There is no longer any real Jewish tribal destination.  All though some isolated populations, such as in India, China, Ethiopia and other generally non Jewish locations, claim to know what tribe they descend from because they have been isolated from the majority of Jewish populations for so long.  This is possible, but still just a theory of tradition more than fact.
While most Jews are thought to be mostly from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi, because they supposedly made up the majority of the population in the Southern Kingdom, it is wholly likely different percentages of Ancient Israelites from all 12 tribes lived in the Southern Kingdom and thus their descendants are likely all mixed up in the larger Jewish population of today.
JarbeeChesschi July 8, 2020
Correction to the above
Genesis 10:1-3
  Descendants of Noah
     1 Now these are the records of the generations of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah; and sons were born to them after the flood.
     2 The sons of Japheth were Gomer and Magog and Madai and Javan and Tubal and Meshech and Tiras.
     3 The sons of Gomer were Ashkenaz and Riphath and Togarmah.
1 Chronicles 1:1-6
  Historical Records From Adam to Abraham
   To Noah’s Sons
     1 Adam, Seth, Enosh,
     2 Kenan, Mahalalel, Jared,
     3 Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Noah.
     4 The sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
   The Japhethites
     5 The sons of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshek, and Tiras.
     6 The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah.
   The Semites
    24 Shem, Arphaxad, Shelah,
    25 Eber, Peleg, Reu,
    26 Serug, Nahor, Terah
    27 and Abram (that is, Abraham).
According to the religious narrative of the Hebrew Bible, the Israelites' origin is traced back to the biblical patriarchs and matriarchs Abraham, the first Hebrew and a descendant of Shem, and his wife Sarah, through their son Isaac and his wife Rebecca, and their son Jacob (who was later called Israel, whence they derive their name) with his wives Leah and Rachel and the handmaids Zilpah and Bilhah. Ashkenazi "Jews" may be Jewish by their adopted religion, at best, but they are NOT Jewish by bloodline because they are not descendants of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob. Before establishing communities along the Rhine River in Western Germany and in Northern France, the Ashkenazim were somewhat nomadic Slavic peoples in the northern Caucasus Mountain regions (e.g., Poland, Lithuania, Russia, Georgia). Georgians call themselves Kartvelebi (ქართველები), their land Sakartvelo (საქართველო), and their language Kartuli (ქართული). According to The Georgian Chronicles, the ancestor of the Kartvelian people was Kartlos, the son of Ashkenaz and great-grandson of the Biblical Japheth. The entire region was settled by Japhethites. Ashkenaz was the first son of Gomer and a Japhetic patriarch in the Table of Nations. In rabbinic literature, the kingdom of Ashkenaz was first associated with the Scythian region, then later with the Slavic territories, and, from the 11th century onwards, with Germany and northern Europe. This is why they cannot directly trace their lineage to any of the tribes of Israel except maybe through marriage. This is not an anti-Semitic statement; firstly, because they are Japhethites, not Semites; and secondly, because I hold no ill will towards them whatsoever. There is way too much misinformation and too many opinions on this page, and the record needed to be clarified.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.196.114.63 (talk) 13:00, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment