Talk:Historical persecution by Jews

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Jewish history. An attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardized and up-to-date resource for all articles related to Jewish history. If you would like to help improve this and other articles related to the subject, also consider joining the project. All interested editors are welcome. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Jewish history articles.

Project Jewish history To-do: edit purge watch Here are some tasks you can do: Requests: History of the Jews in the Land of Israel Copyedit: International response to the Holocaust, Henry Cohen (? add categories), History of the Jews during World War II, Antisemitism Cleanup: Xueta (quite a mess) Stubs: Category:Jewish history stubs, Category:Jewish biography stubs NPOV: Category:Hasmoneans Other: Review: Föhrenwald (expanded) Translate: from German: Judensau

Contents 1 More Information? 2 POV? 3 Recent Edits 4 Schism vs. persecution 5 Monotheism and Tolerance 5.1 Another Source 6 Is this article a recreation and a WP:CSD G4 candidate? 7 Title?

[edit] More Information?

This article is extremely short and shallow compared to articles Historical Persecution by Christiansand Historical persecution by Muslims. Can it be expanded? Count de Chagny 01:37, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't you think there is a good reason why this article is so much shorter? Beit Or 07:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

• Let's watch out PoV's here. If anyone has further examples of this topic with references, feel free to add them, it certainly shouldn't be expanded however simply for the sake of expansion. -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 15:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV?

I have added a POV tag to this article, because its very premise seems desperately POV. I'm not really sure what can be done about this. If it cannot be improved, I move that this article be sent to AFD. Others' opinions welcome. Charlie 11:27, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

We have Historical Persecution by Christians, Historical persecution by Muslims. So, it is not POV in the sense you mean. --Aminz 12:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I overreacted, perhaps. But I still think that much of the content is very POV. For example: "They found zealot militarism contradictory with the teachings of Jesus." Charlie 12:12, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, you will note that both of those articles have had their neutrality questioned as well. Part of it, I think, arises from the idea of naming an article this way; in that the name itself, of each of the articles, seems to indicate an inherent POV. Charlie 12:20, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

"zealot militarism" is quoted word by word from the source. If you have access to JSTOR, please see the article here [1].

I tried to be neutral (e.g. I wrote one complete paragraph on the defence of Judaism in the section related to Christianity). But you are right, these articles like Criticism of X articles are inherently POV. But that doesn't justify POV tag. Of course, I will not remove the POV tag for a few days waiting for specific neutrality problems that you might want to point out. Cheers, --Aminz 12:36, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Aminz, I think this article should be deleted, because it's the same subject matter as this one, and as you can see, there was a strong consensus to delete it. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:32, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

• I'm on the fence on this one. I see clearly how it could be used as a tool by PoV-Pushers and WP:POINT addicts and how it could quickly become the subject of edit warring. However, I've found that I have been able to remove much of the PoV from it, and turn it into a fairly respectable article... as much as the subject allows. I do see the merit of the subject, however, I think it may be a better idea to simply include this information in articles that already exist. Hasmonean Dynasty, Relations between Catholicism and Judaism, etc. -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 22:03, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

We can make one big article on Religous Persecution and include Historical Persecution by Christians, Historical persecution by Muslims as well as this article all together. And Jews were truly victims but not because they were nicer than others. No, simply because for whatever reason they happened to be not in the power. That's it all.

If you would like to go for an AfD, that's your choice. But at the same time, one should go for an RfC for other two articles.--Aminz 22:32, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recent Edits

1. Would you please source: "This however is controversial as only certain segments of the community ever accepted Bar Kokhba as the Messiah, while many Rabbis scorned such a proposition." The sources I've seen said otherwise. So, please source it (I've added it to the article).

2. Regarding "Between 70-135 CE rabbinical leaders, during the Yavnian Period, as the Rabbis adapted Judaism to the reality of the destruction of the Second Temple (which previously had been the focus of the religion), they adopted measures which excluded "Christian-Jews" or "Jewish-Christians" from normative Judaism. ^{[citation needed] [1]} However, some of these people would remain at the fringes of the Jewish community, eventually to become part of the early Karaite movement under the leadership of Benjamin al-Qumisi.^{[citation needed]}"

I have kept it but please source it. That the Rabbis were adapting "Judaism to the reality of the destruction of the Second Temple" needs to be sourced. Similarly, "some of these people would remain at the fringes of the Jewish community, eventually to become part of the early Karaite movement under the leadership of Benjamin al-Qumisi." also needs to be sourced. Thanks.

3. I restored the last paragraph by Fox, he doesn't argue that persecution didn't happen. It did but he argues after 70A.D. --Aminz 22:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

• All of my edits are from Shaye Cohen's book "From the Maccabees to the Mishnah" which is why I added it to the references section at the bottom. Regarding the part about the Bar Kokhba rebellion and it being the "turning point". There are two issues with that section. First of all, your edit says that the 'Bar Kokhba rebellion of 70ce...." Bar Kokhba wasn't alive in 70CE, and his rebellion took place in the 200s. The second problem is that it is simply not a turning point for Jewish/Christian relations. By that time, most followers of Christ identified with the Catholic Church rather than as "Jewish-Christians" or "Christian-Jews" those few that did still identify with Judaism, as I said before, would soon join the Karaites. -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 07:20, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Chabuk, can you please send me an email so that in reply I can attach the article I am using. Then we can check and figure out what the source of confusion is. My sources seem to support my statements. Thanks --Aminz 07:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, can you please cite the page number of the source "From the Maccabees to the Mishnah" you are using. Thanks --Aminz 08:00, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• Aminz, if your source is telling you that the Bar Kokhba revolt occured in 70ce, I don't need to see it to telly ou that it is grossly inaccurate and certainly not a reliable source. As our own Wikipedia article says, Bar Kokhba's Revolt took place in the 200s. Look at any reliable book of history, Jewish or not, and they will agree with me. -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 17:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• It was 135 CE, actually. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 17:54, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• Right, my point still stands though. -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 17:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Schism vs. persecution

Religions routinely go through schisms and reformations. The controversies in that section were within Jewish community. The early Christians (Jesus, the apostles, Peter, Paul, gospel writers, etc.) were all Jewish. What's next, are we going to present bickering between Jewish denominations as "Historical Persecution by Jews"? The section "Jewish persecution of early Christians" looks like someone is trying to make a WP:POINT. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 12:15, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• Good call Humus. I hadn't been looking at it that way, but you're right. -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 17:22, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Jewish persecution of Jewish people should also be covered here as Christian persecution of Christians is covered in the relevant article. --Aminz 22:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

So article to include every persection by any Jew of anyone for any reason? Its sounding like the reason is this. That you create the article as part of psychology issue to make things even about Muhammad and Banu Qurayza. Trying to show look the Jews already the persecutors! now cant find anything to put here SO are saying well lets include these other things. Article should DELETE because its about the psychology issue not encyclopedia.Opiner 01:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Opiner, there is no connection whatsoever between this article and Banu Qurayza. --Aminz 04:48, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Monotheism and Tolerance

The section which was removed [2] is illuminative and important. More specific quotes connecting this to Judaism (except the ones Cohen provides to show relation between monotheism and persecution of non-conforming religions) can be found as well. Bernard Lewis points out that:

"Polytheism was essentially tolerant, each group worshiping its own god or gods, offering no objection to the worship of others. Indeed, one might have been willing to offer at least a pinch of incense to some alien god, in courtesy as a visitor or, even at home, in deference to a suzerain."

--Aminz 04:47, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Are you guys following the new version of Battlestar Gallactica? The Cylons are representing monotheists. --Aminz 06:25, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• That section, which I didn't even see before it was removed, is blatantly false. I'm not sure who this person is, but in all my research (as a religious studies/jewish studies major) I have never heard such a claim. I think what you're trying to get at however, is that the modern notion of "tolerance" did not exist in the ANE (ancient near east). However, that is simply because with a few notable exceptions (Antiochus IV Epiphanes, Idumeans, Early persecution of Xians by the Romans, etc), everyone simply left well enough alone. There were so many Gods from so many different places, that religious persecution simply did not occur to most people. This didn't really change in the Levant until the crusades, since the Pact of Umar kept things pretty quiet before then. -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 06:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Please read this [3] (you need gmail account for that). Mark Cohen, the writer of the book, is a respected academic and a Jew. I can find sources talking specifically about Monotheism, Judaism and Tolerance.--Aminz 06:45, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• Just because he's Jewish doesn't automatically make him an authority. As I say, the end is correct, but the means of the argument are complete nonsense. -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 06:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Please read his article Mark Cohen. I have read some of his works. He is well-versed in Bible and I felt that in the arguments he sides with Judaism --Aminz 06:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• It's not about taking sides it's about reliable sources and generally accepted theories. -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 07:00, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I try to find other sources. Please let me know what do you think of Bernard Lewis? --Aminz 07:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

General ramblings on tolerance are not relevant to the topic of persecution by Jews. Try some other article; tolerance, for example. Beit Or 07:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

It is explaining the theorical reasons for intolerance. Why isn't it relevant to this article? --Aminz 07:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

As I said, try it elsewhere. Beit Or 07:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Chabuk, please have a look at this [4]. It is The Oxford Handbook of Jewish Studies which is a reliable source. --Aminz 07:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• 1. I agree with Beit Or. 2) Aminz, regarding your source, you conveniently left out a crucial word; medieval. This article is discussing ancient persecution. What's more, the quote you're using is referring to Christian persecution of Jews. The Jews didn't (read: couldn't) persecute anyone in the middle ages. Good try though. -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 07:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Chabuk, please be merciful to me. Mark Cohen, in the above source [5] , says: "Thus it is not surprising that the Medieval Islam should have persecuted non-Muslims just as Medieval Christianity persecuted Jews (and also Muslims) and as Judaism should have persecuted pagan Idumeans, forcibly converting them to Judaism. It is about pre-modern times (before John Locke). --Aminz 07:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Chabuk, I remember another scholar while admitting this point was adding that on the other hand, the Hebrew Bible, reflecting the characterestic of God, commands tolerance. We can add that as well. --Aminz 07:19, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• Now you're mixing your sources. First you show me the Oxford one, then the Crescent/Cross one. No one is denying that the Hasmoneans persecuted the Idumeans, but to be perfectly honest, it's no more notable than as a footnote on the general "Jewish History" page as a historical curiosity - to use it as some sort of vindication is not being honest. Regarding the Bible commanding tolerance, you're ignoring our point here. It's that the whole issue is not relevant, partly also as OR. -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 07:23, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Please have a look at my edit at 06:45, 28 December 2006 (UTC). I showed Crescent/Cross one first. The Crescent/Cross one is making the link between persecution of non-conforming religions and monotheism clear. --Aminz 07:26, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Chabuk, the article is about persecution. I believe the article should not only report particular instances of persecution but explain reasons, if any, for the persecutions. --Aminz 07:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• If you can find a reliable source that tells us why the Hasmoneans forced the Idumeans to convert to Judaism, beyond the mere conjecture we've seen so far, I would have no problem with its inclusion. -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 07:41, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Please have a look at the following page from The Cambridge History of Judaism [6]. Thanks (the reason for forced conversion, the source claims, was probably Exodus 23:31-3 and Deuteronomy 23:7) --Aminz 07:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Extrapolating one act by one Hasmonean king on Judaism is essentially political campaigning. To discuss the requirements of the Jewish law regarding contacts with people of other religions, you must refer to the standard compilation of the Jewish law. Beit Or 07:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with that. One should distinguish between Judiasm and different interpretations of it in different times. It is Particular Jews reading the sacred scriptures in a way. If John Hyrcanus, Mainmoind or any other scholar understands the scripture in a way, it is their interpretation. Nothing is fixed. --Aminz 08:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

You seem to have misunderstood my point. First, actions of individual Jews are not always in conformity with the requirements of the Jewish law. Secondly, even when they are, you must still refer to the Jewish in order to understand their deeds properly. Beit Or 08:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I didn't claim that the Bible wanted John Hyrcanus to conquer specific lands for its prophecies to be fulfilled. It was only John's understanding. And of course this article is about persecution by "Jews". But the point here is that monotheism of Judiasm, like that of Christianity and Islam, made them intolerant. For this reason, Cohen says: Thus it is not surprising that ... Judaism should have persecuted pagan Idumeans, forcibly converting them to Judaism. --Aminz 08:21, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Another Source

The following link makes the connection between exclusiveness and tolerance stronger: [7]

The themes of exclusivity and tolerance have played a unique role in the relation between Jews and non-Jews. Behind them stand the various strands of Hebrew history which depict God on the one hand as wiping out all who stand in the way of Israel's conquest, and on the other hand commanding Israel to do so. The oldest norm for the way in which Israel is to relate to other nations is: Do not come to terms with them; do not make peace with them.

As G. Schmitt has demonstrated, the basic theme of the Old Testament and one which has remained a ruling principle in Judaism is that exclusiveness does not yield to tolerance. This is one of the reasons why Judaism continues to survive with such rigour and tenacity.

If exclusiveness leads to intolerance it is also true that exclusiveness is the characteristic found offensive most often. Intolerance has been rejected by the majority of devout Jews because it contradicts the view of Jahew found in Isaiah and many other parts of the Old Testament...

--Aminz 10:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is this article a recreation and a WP:CSD G4 candidate?

I remember there was an article called Religious persecution by Jews which was

1. Nominated for deletion and closed (by yours truly) as "no consensus->keep" stirring up a huge amount of discussion and argument.
2. Deleted by another admin stirring up some more discussion and argument.
3. Restored and renominated and kept (without so much argument)
4. Split off into two articles which both died with a whimper, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ancient persecution of non-Jews by Jews and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Contemporary persecution of non-Jews by Jews, without any controversy.

Can anyone with admin access please compare this article with the deleted Ancient persecution of non-Jews by Jews and determine if this is a speedy deletion candidate per the "recreation" rule of CSD? Thanks, Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Please explain which article you believe should address the topic of Jewish persecution of non-Jewish people. I hope that no one is seriously suggesting deletion of all articles on Jewish persecution wwhile keeping articles on Christian persecution of non-Christians, Muslim persecution of non-Muslims, etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.99.72.69 (talk • contribs).

Unfortunately, yes they are. The earlier articles were deleted following the most extraordinary and hysterical campaign I have ever known. While I fully understand concerns that such articles might become breeding grounds for antisemitic myths, there was no evidence that I could see that the articles had done so, or was likely to. Paul B 10:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Title?

What's the rationale for the title "Ancient historical persecution by Jews" (which makes the opening sentence not make sense by the way)? Is it designed to keep out discussion of 20th/21st century controversies? Or is that for another article? Bwithh 00:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)