The Troubled History of Jews
Nazar Khan November 17, 2004
#35 Posted by Nina7 on November 18, 2004 4:19:00 pm
Mantolives,
``no amount of pain that such a realization carries with it, can justify the kind of glee that this guy exhibits... that you appear to celebrate it only discredits you. A true refusenik operates within not without his people... you can either stand on the sidelines and cheer on the humiliation heaped at your people ... or you can join in a struggle to revitalize the spirit which would put an end to any future humiliation of the kind.``
very well said. hamidm needs to have a more constructive and contextual outlook.
So was St Paul a contemperory of Jesus or wrote 3 hundred years later? was he one of the Aposotles as well? ...confused.
``no amount of pain that such a realization carries with it, can justify the kind of glee that this guy exhibits... that you appear to celebrate it only discredits you. A true refusenik operates within not without his people... you can either stand on the sidelines and cheer on the humiliation heaped at your people ... or you can join in a struggle to revitalize the spirit which would put an end to any future humiliation of the kind.``
very well said. hamidm needs to have a more constructive and contextual outlook.
So was St Paul a contemperory of Jesus or wrote 3 hundred years later? was he one of the Aposotles as well? ...confused.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#34 Posted by wahi_to on November 18, 2004 4:18:03 pm
interesting read but not a objective analysis. author is not detailing all the facts and taking a pro-jewish stance. let me point out few things in the article that are questionable:
author contends that in 1948 UN resolution called for creation of Israel and the arabs should have accepted that. what is missing is that under the British rule of Palestine, there was a gradual illegal immigraion of arms and people by Jews into palestine. Upon withdrawal of British from Palestine, David Ben Gurion declared the Jewish state. Following the declaration, arab nations attacked palestine to stop the creation of a jewish state. Egyptians armoured vehicles were in the vicinity of Jerusalem when USA interfered and halted Egyptians offense. Then UN came into play and implicitly accepted the occupation and partition of Palestine. Regarding Jerusalem, Jordan got East Jerusalem and Israel got west Jerusalem. The point is that Israel did not just came into being by a UN resolution, it was fought by jews to take over another country and they were successful in doing so with the help of western powers. (read ``O Jerusalem`` by Larry Collins, Dominique Lapierre to validate these facts)
Author suggests that Islam and Christianity are a reformed version of Judaism. Now that is a over simplified statement that is largely a opinion of the author. There are distinct, major differences in the three faiths and I would conted that core beliefs of the three faiths are different; trinity in christainity, zakat in islam, acceptance of all prophets in islam, rejection of all prophets by jews.
Author contends ``Since the 14th century, the Muslim societies have been in a steady decline by virtue of their regressive and non-progressive nature;``. I am totally unclear as to how author came up with 14th century date. By 1707 Aurangzeb had set up the largest mughal empire in India. Turkish empire reached its zenith in mid 16th century during the time of Suleiman.
The question that Jewish people must ask themselves and the author should also think about is ``WHY have been jewish people persecuted since the time of inception of Judaism?`` To blame it all on the other party would be narrow-minded and simplistic.
When Herzl theorized a jewish state, he envisioned a state that is at peace with its neighbours (read The Jeiwsh State by Theodor Herzl). Have the jews followed that vision?
author contends that in 1948 UN resolution called for creation of Israel and the arabs should have accepted that. what is missing is that under the British rule of Palestine, there was a gradual illegal immigraion of arms and people by Jews into palestine. Upon withdrawal of British from Palestine, David Ben Gurion declared the Jewish state. Following the declaration, arab nations attacked palestine to stop the creation of a jewish state. Egyptians armoured vehicles were in the vicinity of Jerusalem when USA interfered and halted Egyptians offense. Then UN came into play and implicitly accepted the occupation and partition of Palestine. Regarding Jerusalem, Jordan got East Jerusalem and Israel got west Jerusalem. The point is that Israel did not just came into being by a UN resolution, it was fought by jews to take over another country and they were successful in doing so with the help of western powers. (read ``O Jerusalem`` by Larry Collins, Dominique Lapierre to validate these facts)
Author suggests that Islam and Christianity are a reformed version of Judaism. Now that is a over simplified statement that is largely a opinion of the author. There are distinct, major differences in the three faiths and I would conted that core beliefs of the three faiths are different; trinity in christainity, zakat in islam, acceptance of all prophets in islam, rejection of all prophets by jews.
Author contends ``Since the 14th century, the Muslim societies have been in a steady decline by virtue of their regressive and non-progressive nature;``. I am totally unclear as to how author came up with 14th century date. By 1707 Aurangzeb had set up the largest mughal empire in India. Turkish empire reached its zenith in mid 16th century during the time of Suleiman.
The question that Jewish people must ask themselves and the author should also think about is ``WHY have been jewish people persecuted since the time of inception of Judaism?`` To blame it all on the other party would be narrow-minded and simplistic.
When Herzl theorized a jewish state, he envisioned a state that is at peace with its neighbours (read The Jeiwsh State by Theodor Herzl). Have the jews followed that vision?
#33 Posted by Blasphemer on November 18, 2004 4:18:02 pm
Vertex
[Well, the fact that the Jewish tribes sided with those intent on the genocide of the Muslims also tells us that not all was hunky-dory, nor were the Jews always a benevolent or ``peaceful`` presence, or that they themselves didn`t inflict ``rough times`` on other people]
Well, the fact that the Muslims actually carried out the genocide of those Jewish tribes, not the other way round, tells us who was really hunky and who was really dory ;-)
And so a template was set that has lasted to the modern day.
[Well, the fact that the Jewish tribes sided with those intent on the genocide of the Muslims also tells us that not all was hunky-dory, nor were the Jews always a benevolent or ``peaceful`` presence, or that they themselves didn`t inflict ``rough times`` on other people]
Well, the fact that the Muslims actually carried out the genocide of those Jewish tribes, not the other way round, tells us who was really hunky and who was really dory ;-)
And so a template was set that has lasted to the modern day.
#32 Posted by hamidm2 on November 18, 2004 4:15:40 pm
ylh,
..... ok .... the only thing i can do is educate my kids and see if between the two of them they can come up with a nobel prize ............ but seriously speaking, this past glory thing about the golden age of islam and all that crap is just that - crap !.......... rhazes, averroes, avicenna, etc were great scholars inspite of being muslims, not because of islam ......... there were great persian, arab, greek, chinese and hindoo scholars before gabriel defied the laws of physics to travel from a galaxy far far away ................. muslims talking about past glories and trying to draw inspiration from them is about as useful as the american indians talking about their ancestors and then doing a rain dance to take a shower !
............ i agree with you that the particular site is sort of distasteful in that it makes fun of abdul and his pet camel, but the fact of the matter remains that a few million jews have contributed more to science and culture than the billion muslims who uselessly inhabit this planet .............. and the way things are going, we are in for at least another three to four hundred years of ignorance ..............sad, but true
..... ok .... the only thing i can do is educate my kids and see if between the two of them they can come up with a nobel prize ............ but seriously speaking, this past glory thing about the golden age of islam and all that crap is just that - crap !.......... rhazes, averroes, avicenna, etc were great scholars inspite of being muslims, not because of islam ......... there were great persian, arab, greek, chinese and hindoo scholars before gabriel defied the laws of physics to travel from a galaxy far far away ................. muslims talking about past glories and trying to draw inspiration from them is about as useful as the american indians talking about their ancestors and then doing a rain dance to take a shower !
............ i agree with you that the particular site is sort of distasteful in that it makes fun of abdul and his pet camel, but the fact of the matter remains that a few million jews have contributed more to science and culture than the billion muslims who uselessly inhabit this planet .............. and the way things are going, we are in for at least another three to four hundred years of ignorance ..............sad, but true
#31 Posted by SyedAhmed on November 18, 2004 4:15:40 pm
re:#23
Mantolives writes...
First of all the Christian Bible is both the old testament and the new testament .... >the ``Torah`` only forms a small part of the Old testament... Old testament contains several >other books that precede and follow Moses and Torah... to name a few... Psalms of >David, Book of Genesis, Book Macabees, Book Job etc...
According to Jewish theologians the Torah ( the Law) refers to the 5 books of Moses
1. genesis
2. Exodus
3. LEviticus
4. Numbers
5. Deutronimy
But the `` written Torah`` - ie the book found in synogues consists both the of Torah ( the 5 book of moses) + Nevi`m ( the story of the prohets - Joshua, Judges Samuel etc etc) + Kethuvim ( Pslams+ proverbs+ Job etc etc) the last being writings of the Jewish politicans ie Saul, David, Solomon etc etc ( The Jews dont consider them as prophets buts as kings)
So the ``written Torah`` = ``old testament`` of the bible is a correct assesment...... Consequently the Torah is used to refer both to the 5 books of Moses as well as The ``written Torah`` which is essentially the Old Testament.
In essence the Old testament is ``the Collected works of Hebrew Prophets``
Similarly... the New testament has contribution from several different writers....
Torah by contrast was a book of laws... the confusion that is created is when one equates the ``Bible`` with the ``Quran``...
An Islamic equivalent of Bible will be: Quran + all books of Hadis + Sayings of the 4 >caliphs + sayings of 10 favorite companions + the fiqhs of the 5 jurists
I think the above is an incorrect statement .....
The Torah = Quran + Hadith + Sayings of the 4 caliphs ..... is probably a more accurate description......
The Jew`s have an additional book called the ``Oral Torah`` - also Known as The Talmund (in written from) which would be more like the fiqhs of the 5 jurists......
In addition the heve the books of the midrashim - which equate to stories of the Jewish tradition which is equivalent to sayings of the companions of the prophets .......
Hope that clarifies things........
Mantolives writes...
First of all the Christian Bible is both the old testament and the new testament .... >the ``Torah`` only forms a small part of the Old testament... Old testament contains several >other books that precede and follow Moses and Torah... to name a few... Psalms of >David, Book of Genesis, Book Macabees, Book Job etc...
According to Jewish theologians the Torah ( the Law) refers to the 5 books of Moses
1. genesis
2. Exodus
3. LEviticus
4. Numbers
5. Deutronimy
But the `` written Torah`` - ie the book found in synogues consists both the of Torah ( the 5 book of moses) + Nevi`m ( the story of the prohets - Joshua, Judges Samuel etc etc) + Kethuvim ( Pslams+ proverbs+ Job etc etc) the last being writings of the Jewish politicans ie Saul, David, Solomon etc etc ( The Jews dont consider them as prophets buts as kings)
So the ``written Torah`` = ``old testament`` of the bible is a correct assesment...... Consequently the Torah is used to refer both to the 5 books of Moses as well as The ``written Torah`` which is essentially the Old Testament.
In essence the Old testament is ``the Collected works of Hebrew Prophets``
Similarly... the New testament has contribution from several different writers....
Torah by contrast was a book of laws... the confusion that is created is when one equates the ``Bible`` with the ``Quran``...
An Islamic equivalent of Bible will be: Quran + all books of Hadis + Sayings of the 4 >caliphs + sayings of 10 favorite companions + the fiqhs of the 5 jurists
I think the above is an incorrect statement .....
The Torah = Quran + Hadith + Sayings of the 4 caliphs ..... is probably a more accurate description......
The Jew`s have an additional book called the ``Oral Torah`` - also Known as The Talmund (in written from) which would be more like the fiqhs of the 5 jurists......
In addition the heve the books of the midrashim - which equate to stories of the Jewish tradition which is equivalent to sayings of the companions of the prophets .......
Hope that clarifies things........
#30 Posted by SyedAhmed on November 18, 2004 4:15:39 pm
One possible reason the Jews were not a very popular people was their fiercely independent streak which constantly led them into conflict ( often divinely reinforced) - with the Egyptians, the philistines ( not to be confused with the palestinians), the assyrians, the Babylonians, The Persians ( the story of ruth), and later on with the Greeks ( alexander brutally supressed them) and with the Romans who finally dispersed them often forcibly as slaves.....
The Jewish people always had a very strong intellectual tradition ( something the Muslims need to emulate ) and that combined with a propensity to trade and be involved in monetary flows and transaction - concentrated wealth and power in their hands in a far greater proportion to their population . This combined with a strong preservation instinct to preserve their distinct cultural, linguistic and religious identity often set them apart from the native population.....
The Jewish population has always been very strong in terms of monetary lending and finance ( a strong propensity to save) - and were the informal bankers and money lenders from posterity - Consequently they were relatively affluent - which the general population associated with ``usury`` and stories of Jesus trying to get rid of the money lenders`s in the Temple, medieval shakepearean plays about shylock, the prophet`s ban on ``usury in Medina... , and the strong influence of the rothschilds and other Jewish bankers in the european economy - often made them unpopular ....... The Pathans association with moneylending in the subcontinent has also been used as a link as one of the lost jewish tribes - holds little water since the pathans are a non-semitic people unlike the jewish people......
just some thoughts.......
The Jewish people always had a very strong intellectual tradition ( something the Muslims need to emulate ) and that combined with a propensity to trade and be involved in monetary flows and transaction - concentrated wealth and power in their hands in a far greater proportion to their population . This combined with a strong preservation instinct to preserve their distinct cultural, linguistic and religious identity often set them apart from the native population.....
The Jewish population has always been very strong in terms of monetary lending and finance ( a strong propensity to save) - and were the informal bankers and money lenders from posterity - Consequently they were relatively affluent - which the general population associated with ``usury`` and stories of Jesus trying to get rid of the money lenders`s in the Temple, medieval shakepearean plays about shylock, the prophet`s ban on ``usury in Medina... , and the strong influence of the rothschilds and other Jewish bankers in the european economy - often made them unpopular ....... The Pathans association with moneylending in the subcontinent has also been used as a link as one of the lost jewish tribes - holds little water since the pathans are a non-semitic people unlike the jewish people......
just some thoughts.......
#29 Posted by dost_mittar on November 18, 2004 12:29:09 pm
ijazgul:
I stand corrected on the original 12-apostle part. My comment re. circumcision was based on a thoroughly researched 3-hour ABC documentary on Jesus and Paul by Peter Jennings. I also did some googling and found this on a christian website http://www.sentex.net/~tcc/gal.html (it seems to suggest that there was an unsettled question before Paul):
``In the Book of Galatians, Paul answers the question: ``Is it necessary to be circumcised in order to be saved?`` (Acts 15:1). Why did Paul feel compelled to answer this question? Simply because this question was of primary importance to believers of the early church, both Jewish and Gentile (Gal 2:1-5).
Paul`s letter is addressed to the churches of Galatia (Gal. 1:2) where there were both Jewish and Gentile believers. Some of the Jewish believers incorrectly taught the Gentile believers that they must be circumcised:
Gal. 6:12-13: ``As many as desire to make a good showing in the flesh, these try to compel you to be circumcised, only that they may not suffer persecution for the cross of Christ. For not even those who are circumcised keep the law, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may glory in your flesh.``
I stand corrected on the original 12-apostle part. My comment re. circumcision was based on a thoroughly researched 3-hour ABC documentary on Jesus and Paul by Peter Jennings. I also did some googling and found this on a christian website http://www.sentex.net/~tcc/gal.html (it seems to suggest that there was an unsettled question before Paul):
``In the Book of Galatians, Paul answers the question: ``Is it necessary to be circumcised in order to be saved?`` (Acts 15:1). Why did Paul feel compelled to answer this question? Simply because this question was of primary importance to believers of the early church, both Jewish and Gentile (Gal 2:1-5).
Paul`s letter is addressed to the churches of Galatia (Gal. 1:2) where there were both Jewish and Gentile believers. Some of the Jewish believers incorrectly taught the Gentile believers that they must be circumcised:
Gal. 6:12-13: ``As many as desire to make a good showing in the flesh, these try to compel you to be circumcised, only that they may not suffer persecution for the cross of Christ. For not even those who are circumcised keep the law, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may glory in your flesh.``
#28 Posted by tintingem on November 18, 2004 9:47:52 am
Nazar,
A very interesting read.
From what I know (and very little too) of history, Muslims brought on the problem of Jews and Israel upon themselves due to their own foolishness. When muslims ruled Spain, the Jews lived among them and were a rich people. For a certain war, Muslims needed money which they borrowed from the Jews and struck a deal with them. If the Muslims lost the war, they would have to pay back the Jews the amount with 100% interest (or land, I`m not sure). And that is what led to the rise of the Jewish community and was one of the reasons of the downfall of Muslim rule in Spain.
Please correct me if I`m wrong.
A very interesting read.
From what I know (and very little too) of history, Muslims brought on the problem of Jews and Israel upon themselves due to their own foolishness. When muslims ruled Spain, the Jews lived among them and were a rich people. For a certain war, Muslims needed money which they borrowed from the Jews and struck a deal with them. If the Muslims lost the war, they would have to pay back the Jews the amount with 100% interest (or land, I`m not sure). And that is what led to the rise of the Jewish community and was one of the reasons of the downfall of Muslim rule in Spain.
Please correct me if I`m wrong.
#27 Posted by tintingem on November 18, 2004 9:47:52 am
Nazar,
A very interesting read.
From what I know (and very little too) of history, Muslims brought on the problem of Jews and Israel upon themselves due to their own foolishness. When muslims ruled Spain, the Jews lived among them and were a rich people. For a certain war, Muslims needed money which they borrowed from the Jews and struck a deal with them. If the Muslims lost the war, they would have to pay back the Jews the amount with 100% interest (or land, I`m not sure). And that is what led to the rise of the Jewish community and was one of the reasons of the downfall of Muslim rule in Spain.
Please correct me if I`m wrong.
A very interesting read.
From what I know (and very little too) of history, Muslims brought on the problem of Jews and Israel upon themselves due to their own foolishness. When muslims ruled Spain, the Jews lived among them and were a rich people. For a certain war, Muslims needed money which they borrowed from the Jews and struck a deal with them. If the Muslims lost the war, they would have to pay back the Jews the amount with 100% interest (or land, I`m not sure). And that is what led to the rise of the Jewish community and was one of the reasons of the downfall of Muslim rule in Spain.
Please correct me if I`m wrong.
#26 Posted by aquaris on November 18, 2004 9:47:51 am
Correct me If I am wrong.......Even in Quran.... One gets the distinct feeling.....that...
God wants Bani-Israel More than any One......else...So many time he sent Messenger/Prophets for them... ( thats what we know from Quran .... Other Nations are either sparingly mentioned.... Or not mentioned at all In quran so we really don`t know except for Messenger/Prophets sent into Jews )...... and there is a distinct tone of God wanting to actually Salvage Jews More than any one else...
Again please correct me If I am wrong in My perceptions....
#25 Posted by MantoLives on November 18, 2004 9:47:51 am
This article offers nothing new... but it is refreshing to see an attempt at an open minded perspective about the jews from a fellow Pakistani.
``After 300 years of his death, one of his apostles Paul writes the New Testament (the Christian Bible), the first half of which is the Old Testament – the Jewish Torah.``
First of all the Christian Bible is both the old testament and the new testament .... the ``Torah`` only forms a small part of the Old testament... Old testament contains several other books that precede and follow Moses and Torah... to name a few... Psalms of David, Book of Genesis, Book Macabees, Book Job etc...
In essence the Old testament is ``the Collected works of Hebrew Prophets``
Similarly... the New testament has contribution from several different writers....
Torah by contrast was a book of laws... the confusion that is created is when one equates the ``Bible`` with the ``Quran``...
An Islamic equivalent of Bible will be: Quran + all books of Hadis + Sayings of the 4 caliphs + sayings of 10 favorite companions + the fiqhs of the 5 jurists
``After 300 years of his death, one of his apostles Paul writes the New Testament (the Christian Bible), the first half of which is the Old Testament – the Jewish Torah.``
First of all the Christian Bible is both the old testament and the new testament .... the ``Torah`` only forms a small part of the Old testament... Old testament contains several other books that precede and follow Moses and Torah... to name a few... Psalms of David, Book of Genesis, Book Macabees, Book Job etc...
In essence the Old testament is ``the Collected works of Hebrew Prophets``
Similarly... the New testament has contribution from several different writers....
Torah by contrast was a book of laws... the confusion that is created is when one equates the ``Bible`` with the ``Quran``...
An Islamic equivalent of Bible will be: Quran + all books of Hadis + Sayings of the 4 caliphs + sayings of 10 favorite companions + the fiqhs of the 5 jurists
#24 Posted by aquaris on November 18, 2004 9:47:51 am
``St Paul was one of the contemporaries of Jesus Christ, a Jew, Pharasee and a Roman citizen``
Well I do not think this is the case....Infact on a forum I have seen a debate regarding...Paul that whether he should be considered or Not.. ... as the author of New Testamont at all
http://www.comparative-religion.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1308
#23 Posted by M.B.Z.Isphahani on November 18, 2004 9:47:51 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#22 Posted by M.B.Z.Isphahani on November 18, 2004 9:47:51 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#21 Posted by MantoLives on November 18, 2004 9:47:26 am
hamidm2....
After a visit to the website put up by you, I must say that I am sick to my stomach... and for different very contradictory reasons.... The first immediate reaction is ofcourse pity and self loathing, which you also suffer from...
But my second reaction is one of disgust with those who made that website. There is no denying that the Arab-Muslim world has been on the decline for the last 400 years or so... every civilization/culture/people has to go through an evolution... and this is a certain stage for the Arab-Muslim civilizational construct right now... As Hoodbhoy once wrote that if Aliens were going to come down in the 10th century, they would find Arabs to be most advanced people on earth.... so who do you think would have won the most nobel prizes from 901-1100? Ever heard of Rhazes, Averroes, Avicenna, etc... they are the icons of Western civilization... all Arabs... so obviously the person who made the website would never win a nobel prize himself or herself, because of the apparent handicap.
But that is past glory and the Arabs (and Muslims) have to live in the present... and they are the scum today... so they face this humiliation... they are led astray by a bunch of reactionary bigoted Mullahs.... However... no amount of pain that such a realization carries with it, can justify the kind of glee that this guy exhibits... that you appear to celebrate it only discredits you. A true refusenik operates within not without his people... you can either stand on the sidelines and cheer on the humiliation heaped at your people ... or you can join in a struggle to revitalize the spirit which would put an end to any future humiliation of the kind.
-YLH
#20 Posted by jang on November 18, 2004 9:47:26 am
the list of attcks on the chosen people reads like RSS description of indian history (mostly un-savory foreign invasions). gandiv, pls get your quiver ready.
interestingly i have found that while buying homes, indians have the follwing choice for neighbors. banjara, or other real-estate folks can perhasp comment.
1. jewish
2. armenian
3. liberal educated wasps
4. south indians
5. chinese
6. north indians
...
and so on. many other groups are simply left out.
interestingly i have found that while buying homes, indians have the follwing choice for neighbors. banjara, or other real-estate folks can perhasp comment.
1. jewish
2. armenian
3. liberal educated wasps
4. south indians
5. chinese
6. north indians
...
and so on. many other groups are simply left out.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- thinkingstorm: BJ2 can't see two... Fathers and Daughters
- BJ2: And I have seen... Fathers and Daughters
- BJ2: Meira, trust me. I... Fathers and Daughters
- barristerakc: Re: # 77 classical... MQM - History and
- adamkhan: Mantolives: Talking of the time... Living Gandhi and King
- adamkhan: Mantolives: The concept of badal... Living Gandhi and King
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 125 Arjun...... Living Gandhi and King
- ahmedmadani: It appears just like... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
