ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2020 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, October 09, 2013

Jews who are not Jews

It appears neither the Semitic origin theory of the Ashkenazi "Jews" nor the Khazar theory are genetically correct:
The origins of Ashkenazi Jews remain highly controversial. Like Judaism, mitochondrial DNA is passed along the maternal line. Its variation in the Ashkenazim is highly distinctive, with four major and numerous minor founders. However, due to their rarity in the general population, these founders have been difficult to trace to a source. Here we show that all four major founders, ~40% of Ashkenazi mtDNA variation, have ancestry in prehistoric Europe, rather than the Near East or Caucasus. Furthermore, most of the remaining minor founders share a similar deep European ancestry. Thus the great majority of Ashkenazi maternal lineages were not brought from the Levant, as commonly supposed, nor recruited in the Caucasus, as sometimes suggested, but assimilated within Europe.

Overall, we estimate that most (>80%) Ashkenazi mtDNAs were assimilated within Europe. Few derive from a Near Eastern source, and despite the recent revival of the ‘Khazar hypothesis’, virtually none are likely to have ancestry in the North Caucasus. Therefore, whereas on the male side there may have been a significant Near Eastern (and possibly east European/Caucasian) component in Ashkenazi ancestry, the maternal lineages mainly trace back to prehistoric Western Europe. These results emphasize the importance of recruitment of local women and conversion in the formation of Ashkenazi communities, and represent a significant step in the detailed reconstruction of Ashkenazi genealogical history.
I thought it was interesting that Doron Behar, the scientist responsible for the claim that the four most common mitochondrial DNA lineages came from the Near East "said he disagreed with Dr. Richards’ conclusions but declined to explain his reason."  Notice that even on the male side, the most that can be said is that there "may have been" a Near Eastern connection; that's a remarkably strong negative statement given the potential sensitivities on the subject.

The fascinating thing is that instead of being of Israelite descent, the Ashkenazis may actually be Italians, as their closest genetic match appears to be Northern Italians. Which would certainly put an interesting spin on the concept of the Third Rome in Jerusalem. It might also help explain the historical Italian affinity for Ashkenazis during WWII, as 80 percent of Italy's Ashkenazis survived the Nazi persecution despite the German military occupation.

Labels:

138 Comments:

Anonymous dh October 09, 2013 1:09 PM  

It might also help explain the historical Italian affinity for Ashkenazis during WWII, as 80 percent of Italy's Ashkenazis survived the Nazi persecution despite the German military occupation.

That is a really fascinating aspect of WWII history I did not know. Can you recommend any reading on the topic?

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 1:10 PM  

This is irrelevant. A convert is just as much a Jew as someone who isn't.

Your Italian comment is interesting since at one point almost 10% of the roman world was Jewish and many had Jewish sympathies.

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 1:12 PM  

Obviously genetic science is anti semitic

Blogger Krul October 09, 2013 1:14 PM  

Genetics aren't completely irrelevent, FUBAR. This shows that the messiah will be Sephardic, for example, since he must be a descendant of David.

If you believe in that sort of thing, that is.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 1:16 PM  

>80% is not 100%. So there are Ashkenazis that can be true descendants of King David. If the Messiah is Sephardic, that is fine.

What would Jesus be considered?

Anonymous WaterBoy October 09, 2013 1:18 PM  

So much for the "unwanted guests" theory in Europe -- they're simply returning home.

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 1:19 PM  

This is irrelevant. A convert is just as much a Jew as someone who isn't.

It's highly relevant, for many of the zionist claims to the holy land rest on biblical promises made to Abraham and his descendents. If the present occupants are not the descendents of Abraham, those claims are much more murky.

Anonymous Daniel October 09, 2013 1:21 PM  

Hoblets are raciss.

Anonymous VD October 09, 2013 1:22 PM  

This is irrelevant. A convert is just as much a Jew as someone who isn't.

Not genetically. And do you claim that an atheist or a Christian cannot be a Jew?

Blogger Krul October 09, 2013 1:23 PM  

FUBAR Nation Ben - What would Jesus be considered?

Jesus lived before the distinction between Ashkenazi and Sephardic. He predated Rabbinic Judaism itself, in fact. I consider Him the messiah of course, but Christianity is OT here.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 1:24 PM  

That's not true, Josh. Converts are Jews just as much as the descendants of Moses. You fail to understand that the promises made to Abraham apply to converts, according to Jewish law. If you want to cite Christian theology, there will be no resolution to the issue.

Anonymous DrTorch October 09, 2013 1:24 PM  

It would seem that being a neanderthal isn't an insult on one's intelligence.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 1:25 PM  

An atheist or Christian is a Jew if they were born one, meaning the mother is Jewish or they converted via Orthodox Judaism.

Anonymous Mr. Nightstick October 09, 2013 1:25 PM  

If the present occupants are not the descendants of Abraham, those claims are much more murky.

But to be a descendant of Abraham only requires that one ancestor also be a descendant of Abraham.

Blogger Krul October 09, 2013 1:28 PM  

FUBAR Nation Ben - You fail to understand that the promises made to Abraham apply to converts, according to Jewish law.

Really? I had no idea. Does this mean that the Muslim descendants of Ishmael are entitled to nothing according to Jewish law, despite their physical ancestry?

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 1:29 PM  

Krul, Muslims are entitled to whatever the Bible laid out for them.

Anonymous MrGreenMan October 09, 2013 1:36 PM  

It does lend some credence to the idea that the Ashkenazi are so similar in intelligence profile to northern Europeans - they are a hybridization - and it also does tend to make the stuff we've heard for a very long time, from the establishment of the modern Israeli state, of their own little "miscegenation" with Ashkenazi with Mizrahi/Sephardic marriages being frowned upon, kind of funny. I remember reading something from a Sephardic Arab Jew talking about his time in the transition camps and being considered not part of Jewish society, looked down upon for being Sephardic and not Ashkenazi (and therefore, stupid, lazy, etc) - there is some dark humor about who is the real Jew and Israeli.

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 1:39 PM  

Krul, Muslims are entitled to whatever the Bible laid out for them

What about the promises God made to Abraham before he had children?

Blogger Krul October 09, 2013 1:40 PM  

Wait... Does this mean that anti-semites of European descent are not, in fact, racist?

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 1:40 PM  

I don't know that one Josh. Consult your local orthodox rabbi.

Anonymous Libertarians to the Camps October 09, 2013 1:41 PM  

Ashkenazi jews are mud people from the Levant.

Another eggs are good for you, eggs are bad for you "science" article.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 1:44 PM  

Eggs are good for you.

Blogger Krul October 09, 2013 1:45 PM  

FUBAR - Krul, Muslims are entitled to whatever the Bible laid out for them.

That doesn't really answer the question.

So here's God talking to Abraham: The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you (Gen 17:8). So you're telling me that "descendants" there applies to Jewish converts who are not physical descendants of Abraham, correct?

Now my question is this. Does this promise apply to physical descendants of Abraham who are not Jews?

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian October 09, 2013 1:46 PM  

I hate Ashke Nazis.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 1:48 PM  

That's a very interesting question Krul. To be honest I don't know the answer.

Blogger Krul October 09, 2013 1:56 PM  

Genesis 17:9 (the very next verse) - Then God said to Abraham, “As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come.

*facepalm* I should really read ahead before I ask questions with obvious answers.

Anonymous TLM October 09, 2013 1:57 PM  

So Tony Soprano was right a few years ago in the episode where he claimed Italians are just Jews with better food.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 1:58 PM  

Need to brush up on reading the Bible.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 1:59 PM  

Tony Soprano was right when he threatened to cut of Shlomo's manhood that Romans are still here.

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 1:59 PM  

I don't know that one Josh. Consult your local orthodox rabbi.

Oh, so we can't just look at the Bible and figure out amongst ourselves what the words mean?

See, the promises of God to Abraham in Genesis 12-15 are made before he has children. And they're made to him and his offspring. Which includes the children of Ishmael.

Anonymous Macho October 09, 2013 2:01 PM  

I don't know how far back they are going but could this have something to do with the middle ages genetic bottleneck? Maybe there was a big die off (caused by the black plague among other things) and the population rebounded via intermarriage, thus explaining why they are largely European, at least on the maternal side.

Anonymous Anonymous October 09, 2013 2:03 PM  

Only the maternal DNA is heavily Italian. Paternal lineage is definitely near eastern. Saying Ashkenazi jews are "Italian" is like saying mulattos are "white".

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 2:05 PM  

*facepalm* I should really read ahead before I ask questions with obvious answers.

That's generally a good idea.

However, regarding God's covenant with the Jews, wouldn't the whole killing the Messiah thing break that? Or at least call it into question?

Anonymous patrick kelly October 09, 2013 2:15 PM  

@Josh:"Oh, so we can't just look at the Bible and figure out amongst ourselves what the words mean?"

Due to my experience reading such discussions here and in other blogs I'm inclined to say "no".

Anonymous Vidad October 09, 2013 2:16 PM  

"wouldn't the whole killing the Messiah thing break that?"

Heh heh.

Anonymous Vidad October 09, 2013 2:17 PM  

Now we're going to find out that Vox is actually a Jewish person-of-color. Doubleplusgoodrace.

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 2:19 PM  

Due to my experience reading such discussions here and in other blogs I'm inclined to say "no".

I don't find the following argument convincing:

The Bible says x

What about y, how does that apply to x?

I don't know, ask a rabbi.

Much better to just lead with "the rabbis say x" next time.

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 2:21 PM  

Now we're going to find out that Vox is actually a Jewish person-of-color. Doubleplusgoodrace.

He can always be a transracial Jew (self identifying as Jewish). You need to check your cisracial privilege.

Anonymous Toddy Cat October 09, 2013 2:42 PM  

So Hitler gassed a bunch of Italians? I'll bet he's pissed.

Blogger Jew613 October 09, 2013 2:44 PM  

Really? I had no idea. Does this mean that the Muslim descendants of Ishmael are entitled to nothing according to Jewish law, despite their physical ancestry?

Only those descended from Yaakov have a share in the inheritance. Yishamel, Esav and all of Avraham's children besides Yitzhak were cut out of the inheritance.

This applies to physical descendants today who only have patrilineal descent.

I would also point out that King David was descended from a convert, Ruth, and it was not a problem.

Anonymous Anonymous October 09, 2013 3:07 PM  

"So here's God talking to Abraham: The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you (Gen 17:8). So you're telling me that "descendants" there applies to Jewish converts who are not physical descendants of Abraham, correct? "

You tell us - are the Arabs descended from Abraham *through Isaac and Jacob*? Because those are the only folks with a physical promise to the land.

Anonymous Anonymous October 09, 2013 3:09 PM  

"So Hitler gassed a bunch of Italians? I'll bet he's pissed."

Nah, prob'ly not.

Anonymous Porky October 09, 2013 3:33 PM  

dh: "That is a really fascinating aspect of WWII history I did not know. Can you recommend any reading on the topic?"

Looking for a few pointers, Herr Kapo?

Anonymous 11B October 09, 2013 3:34 PM  

Only the maternal DNA is heavily Italian. Paternal lineage is definitely near eastern. Saying Ashkenazi jews are "Italian" is like saying mulattos are "white".

Read Vox's post when he wrote, "Notice that even on the male side, the most that can be said is that there "may have been" a Near Eastern connection; that's a remarkably strong negative statement given the potential sensitivities on the subject."

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 3:37 PM  

Oh man, if most of the Jews are actually white, Wheeler, scoob, and grinder are gonna be pissed.

Blogger Robert What? October 09, 2013 3:39 PM  

Being of Ashkenazi descent myself, I have never believed Ashkenazi were descended from the ancient Israelites, as romantic as that sounds. Them most likely descendants are the Palestinian Christians.

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 3:46 PM  

Them most likely descendants are the Palestinian Christians.

They don't count though, for any number of reasons I'm sure...

Anonymous TJ October 09, 2013 3:53 PM  


Maybe we are getting closer to finding the imposters.

REV 3:9
Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

Blogger Krul October 09, 2013 3:54 PM  

Josh - However, regarding God's covenant with the Jews, wouldn't the whole killing the Messiah thing break that? Or at least call it into question?

Gen 17:10 - This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised.

Killing the Messiah would not break this particular covenant, it seems.

Blogger Revelation Means Hope October 09, 2013 3:56 PM  

Jesus had 3 questionable women in His bloodline.
Ruth, a Moabite - David's great grandmother if I recall correctly.
Tamar - a Canaanite woman who pretended to be a prostitute to get pregnant with Judah's child. Also David's ancestor.
Rahab - a prostitute of Jericho. David's great great grandmother. Amorite or more likely Moabite.

Blogger dienw October 09, 2013 3:57 PM  

The Ashkenazi name itself tells you they are not semitic:
Gen 10:2 The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.
Gen 10:3 And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah.

And the name Khazar tells you who they are: when the Khazars converted to the Talmudic religion - Judaism - their king sent out a letter which declared that the Khazars were descended from Togarmah.

Anonymous jay c October 09, 2013 4:05 PM  

I haven't read this article so can't comment much on it, but I remember reading a study maybe ten years ago or so that found two sets of evidences that all Jews worldwide were related going back 2500-3000 years. First was a set of genetic markers (not the Cohen markers) that was much more common among Jewish populations all over the world than among non-Jewish. Second was common ancestry with some northern ME groups, such as the Kurds. Despite having a large amount of genetic admixture, Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews shared both of these characteristics.

All of which might hold more weight if I could find and reference the study. Oh, well.

One thing both studies support is that history is patriarchal. All of it. God's method of determining nationality is through paternal ancestry, not maternal.

Blogger dienw October 09, 2013 4:10 PM  

The Sephardic Jews are Edomites, not Israelites.
Who are the people in the land of Israel Known as Jews?
...
Why the Modern Jews Are Not God’s Chosen People

Anonymous JC October 09, 2013 4:11 PM  

So Hitler gassed a bunch of Italians? I'll bet he's pissed.

You just made me chortle at work. Stop that.

Anonymous dh October 09, 2013 4:25 PM  

Looking for a few pointers, Herr Kapo?

I just don't think that Italian aspects of WWII history get a lot of attention. It's all German, all the time.

Anonymous Apeman October 09, 2013 4:30 PM  

I don't have a dog in this fight one way or another. But I would be careful with the whole "The science is settled" thing. A big flaw of this study is that it assumes that current near eastern populations represent population types back in the days of Israel. There is several other assumptions in the study that strike me as being dubious.

I think this sort of thing strikes people as being more plausible who don't know their per-classical history. The Sea People is the first thing that came to my mind when I saw this study. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Peoples#Trojan_hypothesis

Blogger Unknown October 09, 2013 4:34 PM  

Correct me if I am wrong (Right, that would never happen in this forum).

The Ashkenazi issue is usually brought up by those who try and make the point that modern day Israel isn't really the Biblical prophesied regathering of Israel. It's been while since I read Koestler's 'The Thirteen Tribe' but the argument advanced usually goes something like; since most Israelis are Ashkenazi in origin then they aren't in the genetic lines of Abraham and David so it is permissible to not support modern day (Zionist) Israel. And modern day Israel can't be the fulfillment of a regathered Israel prophecies within the Bible.

In my mind then, the significance of this genetic survey is that it confirms that while the Ashkenazi lineage is significant, it is not so pervasive as to lend support to the supposition that 'Israeli Jews are all Ashkenazi and thus modern Israel is not the regathered Israel which is still in the future.'

Again, in my estimate, such evidence is another pillar of support for those of us who look at modern Israel as a fulfillment of prophecy and the future recipient of the fulfillment of God's promises to the Jewish people (i.e. descendants of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and David).

Of course I know I am completely disregarding the 'Spiritual Israel' debate here.

Anonymous nick digger October 09, 2013 4:36 PM  

RobertW: Them most likely descendants are the Palestinian Christians.

Josh: They don't count though, for any number of reasons I'm sure...

Reason #1: "Ishmael and Esau have no claim of inheritance; they got jewed, fair and square". Rabbi Cyndi and her life partner said so.

I find it intriguing that a religion's founding fathers' most notable acts were to screw over their elder brothers. I wonder if the followers take this is a source of shame, or pride, or if it was simply written as a convenient excuse for why "this is ours, not yours, now fuck off goy."

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 4:50 PM  

Nick, you should be careful with your words. Even the worst people in the Bible were great compared to the downfallen of today.

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 4:53 PM  

I wonder if the followers take this is a source of shame, or pride, or if it was simply written as a convenient excuse for why "this is ours, not yours, now fuck off goy."

To quote a recently deceased rabbi:

Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world—only to serve the People of Israel. Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat.

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 4:55 PM  

Nick, you should be careful with your words. Even the worst people in the Bible were great compared to the downfallen of today.

Like Ahab, Jezebel, and Herod?

Anonymous nick digger October 09, 2013 5:00 PM  

You're right, FUBAR. That would be the "jaywalking" of Hell.

"So, what're ya in for?"
"Unpardonable sin. [exhales smoke] Blasphemy of Jacob."

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 5:00 PM  

Josh, Ahab repented. It is my opinion that is wrong to compare yourself to these people.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 5:02 PM  

Josh, are you suggesting that I agree with this rabbi?

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 5:04 PM  

Josh, Ahab repented. It is my opinion that is wrong to compare yourself to these people.

Why?

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 5:05 PM  

Josh, are you suggesting that I agree with this rabbi?

No. Do you?

I don't even know of you're Jewish or not.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 5:11 PM  

I am Jewish.

1) The Bible is divine and was given to Moses. Even the worst people in the Bible, if they channeled their energies for good, would have been great.

2) I do not agree with this rabbi and think he will have to answer to God for his sins when he dies. Unfortunately, there are Jews who do view non-Jews with disdain, thinking that that's what the Messiah will bring.

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 5:23 PM  

Even the worst people in the Bible, if they channeled their energies for good, would have been great.

You know, satan is in the Bible...

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 5:24 PM  

Unfortunately, there are Jews who do view non-Jews with disdain, thinking that that's what the Messiah will bring.

They also though that two thousand years ago, when He did come.

Maybe that's why they had Him killed?

Blogger RobertT October 09, 2013 5:34 PM  

Whew.

Anonymous Johnycomelately October 09, 2013 5:46 PM  

Interesting that Josephus mentioned that the Essenes were Jews by birth, the implication of course being that even then others were not.

Anonymous civilServant October 09, 2013 5:48 PM  

Maybe that's why they had Him killed?

"Luke 4:16 And He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up; and as was His custom, He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath, and stood up to read. 17 And the [e]book of the prophet Isaiah was handed to Him. And He opened the [f]book and found the place where it was written,

18 “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me,
Because He anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor.
He has sent Me to proclaim release to the captives,
And recovery of sight to the blind,
To set free those who are oppressed,
19 To proclaim the favorable year of the Lord.”

20 And He closed the [g]book, gave it back to the attendant and sat down; and the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on Him. 21 And He began to say to them, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your [h]hearing.” 22 And all were [i]speaking well of Him, and wondering at the [j]gracious words which [k]were falling from His lips; and they were saying, “Is this not Joseph’s son?” 23 And He said to them, “No doubt you will quote this proverb to Me, ‘Physician, heal yourself! Whatever we heard was done at Capernaum, do here in your hometown as well.’” 24 And He said, “Truly I say to you, no prophet is welcome in his hometown. 25 But I say to you in truth, there were many widows in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the sky was shut up for three years and six months, when a great famine came over all the land; 26 and yet Elijah was sent to none of them, but only to [l]Zarephath, in the land of Sidon, to a woman who was a widow. 27 And there were many lepers in Israel in the time of Elisha the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, but only Naaman the Syrian.” 28 And all the people in the synagogue were filled with rage as they heard these things; 29 and they got up and drove Him out of the city, and led Him to the brow of the hill on which their city had been built, in order to throw Him down the cliff."

Anonymous Golf Pro October 09, 2013 5:51 PM  

"Wait... Does this mean that anti-semites of European descent are not, in fact, racist?"

No.

Blogger Markku October 09, 2013 5:53 PM  

Jesus read eBooks?

Anonymous Samuel Scott October 09, 2013 6:16 PM  

Well, this will be fun. Comments forthcoming.

Anonymous Samuel Scott October 09, 2013 6:30 PM  

The article basically said that Ashkenazi Jews generally have largely maternal lineage from non-Jews and paternal lineage from Jews. My response, "So, what?"

Here's the reason. The Tanakh (the "Old Testament") initially defined the Hebrews / Israelis by paternal descent. Judah son of Jacob (Israel) son of Issac son of Abraham. It was only a lot later that (official) Judaism defined Jews as anyone born of a Jewish mother (maternal descent). The reasons for the change are too complicated to go into here at the moment.

So, it's reasonable that a Jewish community hundreds or thousands of years ago would raise the children of Jewish fathers and non-Jewish mothers as Jews. And I don't see a problem. The tradition continued that way. (Male) Jews from the Middle East moved to Europe after the destruction of Judea, married (non-Jewish) women, and raised the children as Jews. So, they are Jews, in my opinion.

More comments shortly.

Anonymous Samuel Scott October 09, 2013 6:34 PM  

MrGreenMan October 09, 2013 1:36 PM

I remember reading something from a Sephardic Arab Jew talking about his time in the transition camps and being considered not part of Jewish society, looked down upon for being Sephardic and not Ashkenazi (and therefore, stupid, lazy, etc) - there is some dark humor about who is the real Jew and Israeli.


You should know that Sephardi Jews (or Mizrahi Jews) are now the majority in Israel, and their music and other types of culture dominate the country. Yes, there was some horrible racism back in the 1950s, but that was a long time ago. Israel is becoming more "Sephardi" and less "Ashkenazi" over the years as a result of higher birth-rates and more intermarriage.

Anonymous Samuel Scott October 09, 2013 6:39 PM  

Krul October 09, 2013 1:45 PM

Now my question is this. Does this promise apply to physical descendants of Abraham who are not Jews?


Immaterial. You have to look at the book from the tribal, Jewish context and not a universal, Christian context.

The Tanakh (the "Old Testament") was written by and for Hebrews / Jews. All the language and commandments and promises are meant only for Jews. (Which is why I laugh when Christians cite something and think it applies to them.)

As such, the author (whoever you deem it to be) is referring only to the future Hebrews / Israelites and not anyone else (such as the Arabs and/or Muslims).

Anonymous Samuel Scott October 09, 2013 6:43 PM  

Scott Laughlin October 09, 2013 4:34 PM

since most Israelis are Ashkenazi in origin


Not accurate. See my earlier comment.

Anonymous Vidad October 09, 2013 6:45 PM  

"Oh man, if most of the Jews are actually white, Wheeler, scoob, and grinder are gonna be pissed."

New research reveals the Ashkenazi were originally Spartans!

Anonymous Samuel Scott October 09, 2013 6:45 PM  

Josh October 09, 2013 4:53 PM

To quote a recently deceased rabbi:

Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world—only to serve the People of Israel. Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat.


Every religion has its nutjobs. This rabbi in no ways speaks for Judaism in general. You want me to cite some crazy Christian preachers and then make general claims about Christianity based on them?

Anonymous Johnycomelatel October 09, 2013 6:59 PM  

"The reasons for the change are too complicated to go into here at the moment."

Just say it.

Herod the Edomite murdered the Hasmoneans (who for some ungodly reason integrated the Edomites) and Mariamne was the last link to the royal blood line.

So who are the Jews, the Sephardic haplogroup Es of Cyrene, the Edomite Js, the Samaritan Js, the Mizrahi Js of Babylon or the Ashkenazi Ks?

Even the much vaunted Cohen priest line is linked to the Samaritans.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 6:59 PM  

Josh, Satan or the evil inclination, is necessary in this world. Without the temptation to do evil, man would not have the opportunity to overcome evil and become a saint.

Blogger Unknown October 09, 2013 7:03 PM  

Samuel Scott, I'm glad you weighed in on this.

You missed my point though, I was arguing against the argument that I discussed. I agree with you, it really doesn't matter.

For me the only value in this study is that it is evidence AGAINST the argument that some make (see njartist's comment earlier in the page) as some sort of false rational for anti-Semetic beliefs in a Christian setting.

--In His love

Anonymous Golf Pro October 09, 2013 7:18 PM  

"Satan or the evil inclination, is necessary in this world. Without the temptation to do evil, man would not have the opportunity to overcome evil and become a saint".

So, does this make the victims of the inquisition martyrs?

Anonymous Samuel Scott October 09, 2013 7:22 PM  

Johnycomelatel October 09, 2013 6:59 PM

So who are the Jews, the Sephardic haplogroup Es of Cyrene, the Edomite Js, the Samaritan Js, the Mizrahi Js of Babylon or the Ashkenazi Ks?


I don't necessarily agree with your breakdown, but I'll just say this:

Not even we Jews agree on "Who is a Jew"? The old joke: Five Jews, six opinions.

There are Jews descended from the Jews of ancient Judea, the Jews descended from the Jews of Persia and thereabouts, the Jews descended from mixed marriages of Europe, the Jews descended from Arab countries, the Jews of India and Ethiopia, the Jews who converted (or whose ancestors converted) into non-Orthodox streams of Judaism, the Jews whose fathers but not mothers are Jews but were raised as Jews, and a whole lot more.

It's infinitely complicated.

Anonymous CalvinistTroll October 09, 2013 7:51 PM  

"So, does this make the victims of the inquisition martyrs?"

Just the protestant ones.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 8:12 PM  

If they died sticking to their beliefs, yes, Golf Pro.

Anonymous scoobius dubious October 09, 2013 8:22 PM  

"So, does this make the victims of the inquisition martyrs?"

The Inquisition wasn't evil. And those it targeted weren't "victims".

You have a lot of historical work to do. As usual.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 8:27 PM  

What books do you recommend scoobius?

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 8:47 PM  

Every religion has its nutjobs. This rabbi in no ways speaks for Judaism in general. You want me to cite some crazy Christian preachers and then make general claims about Christianity based on them?

Of course he doesn't speak for all Jews. I never said he did. But there is a subset of Jews whose views he obviously did represent.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 8:51 PM  

That is true, Josh.

Anonymous Scooby shat his big boy pants October 09, 2013 9:04 PM  

"The Inquisition wasn't evil. And those it targeted weren't "victims"."

Hilarious assertion on your part.

The purpose of the Inquisition was to guarantee that those individuals who converted to Christianity remained orthodox.** Noble intentions, to be sure. However, the means by which those carried out can be reasonably argued as being immoral. The motives by Spanish monarchs to pursue this endeavor ranged from seizing valuable assets of convicted heretics (whether or not the evidence supported the charges) to removing potential opposition to crown authority to consolidating royal power to ensuring that the faith would be strictly adhered to.

Those convicted of heresy were to be burned alive. The reason? Cleanse their soul. In response to several tribunals throughout Spain that turned in essence deviated from the original purpose**, Sixtus IV promulgated a new bull categorically prohibiting the Inquisition's extension to Aragon, affirming that "many true and faithful Christians, because of the testimony of enemies, rivals, slaves and other low people—and still less appropriate—without tests of any kind, have been locked up in secular prisons, tortured and condemned like relapsed heretics, deprived of their goods and properties, and given over to the secular arm to be executed, at great danger to their souls, giving a pernicious example and causing scandal to many."

Blogger James Dixon October 09, 2013 9:10 PM  

> You want me to cite some crazy Christian preachers and then make general claims about Christianity based on them?

No, that's Ann's job. :)

Anonymous LES October 09, 2013 9:14 PM  

So, if my wife converted to Judaism before we had children would they be considered Jews? What if she converted to Judaism after our children were born? Would they be considered Jews then? It seems the Jews define who is a Jew to whatever suits them. Is Jewishness a race, ethnicity, a religion? Reminds me of the saying that the definition of an anti-Semite is anybody a Jew doesn't like.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben October 09, 2013 9:21 PM  

The children would only be Jewish if the mother converted before having children. Don't listen to Sam Scott. He may think that Reform and Conservative Judaism are legitimate instead of the heresies that they are.

Anonymous Josh October 09, 2013 9:24 PM  

Don't listen to Sam Scott. He may think that Reform and Conservative Judaism are legitimate instead of the heresies that they are.

HEY EVERYONE!

JOO FIGHT!

Blogger Ron October 09, 2013 9:26 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Markku October 09, 2013 10:08 PM  

(Which is why I laugh when Christians cite something and think it applies to them.)

It is basic, unambiguous Christianity though.

Rom 11:17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive shoot, were grafted in their place to share the richness of the olive tree,

(As you can see from the context, the natural branches are Jews, the wild shoots are gentiles, and the root is the promises of Old Testament.)

I know you don't believe it, but they aren't just making it up either. It's what Paul explicitly said; that gentile Christians share the promises now.

Anonymous Vidad October 09, 2013 10:13 PM  

"I know you don't believe it, but they aren't just making it up either. It's what Paul explicitly said; that gentile Christians share the promises now."

Yes. It's quite obvious.

I skimmed a Hal Lindsay book, however, where Mr. Lidsay claimed that was "replacement theology" and it led directly to Holocaust.

I don't know why anybody still listens to that guy... he's been wrong roughly 1.7 zillion times on his end times views.

Anonymous Idle Spectator October 09, 2013 10:42 PM  

You see Vox, now you know why I harped on Germans being neurotic. It explains the pedantic with rules, lack of common humor, science and engineering excellence. Germans and Austrians also have the highest IQ in Europe.

I am starting to suspect that common Jewish stereotype about the neuroticism is not because they are Jewish, but because they were GERMAN JEWS who immigrated. Even Yiddish is considered a High German language. Notice North Italy is heavily Germanic.


Just an Idle hunch...

Anonymous Aeoli Pera October 09, 2013 11:23 PM  

Idle,

Are you referring to the tribe of Dan stuff or neanderthal-aspie theory or something else?

Anonymous Aeoli Pera October 09, 2013 11:34 PM  

Related,

I checked the "highest IQ in Europe" claim with Google, and it seems that Italians have a higher average. Presumably the northerners are disproportionately ingenius.

Reminds me, I was going to joke that the Holocaust makes more sense now, 'cause I can't fucking stand Italians. But the moment passed.

Blogger Jordan179 October 10, 2013 12:10 AM  

However, regarding God's covenant with the Jews, wouldn't the whole killing the Messiah thing break that? Or at least call it into question?

It was not "the Jews" who killed Jesus. It was the Roman Empire. Which, if the Italian-origin theory is true, is sort of funny.

Anonymous fritz October 10, 2013 12:17 AM  

I'm sure someone living in Northern Italy would be fascinated that present modern Jewry may well be living right next door. On that topic, we should be more concerned with theology than ethnicity.

For those of us living in the "Land of the Free," we should be all the more concerned with Utah. Now you want to talk about interesting genetics? It just doesn't get anymore interesting that this ...

Mike and Gordon talk about ......................... stuff

Anonymous Jack Amok October 10, 2013 12:25 AM  

"Wait... Does this mean that anti-semites of European descent are not, in fact, racist?"

No.


Well of course not, according to Tad. They were still white men after all, and therefore raciss homophobes whatever they did.

Anonymous 11B October 10, 2013 1:13 AM  

"The Inquisition wasn't evil. And those it targeted weren't "victims"."

Hilarious assertion on your part.

The purpose of the Inquisition was to guarantee that those individuals who converted to Christianity remained orthodox.** Noble intentions, to be sure. However, the means by which those carried out can be reasonably argued as being immoral.


The Inquisition, like the Salem Witch Trials, gets way too much attention given the amount of victims relative to other historical events which were real atrocities. Vox has covered this in the past.

Anonymous Ricky Jordan October 10, 2013 2:17 AM  

Scientific support for the Khazarian Hypothesis:

http://gbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/5/1/61.full

Blogger Markku October 10, 2013 2:50 AM  

I skimmed a Hal Lindsay book, however, where Mr. Lidsay claimed that was "replacement theology" and it led directly to Holocaust.

No, replacement theology is when those original branches have no further purpose at all in God's plan.

Blogger Markku October 10, 2013 2:54 AM  

On the other hand, dispensationalism is when Jews can be still saved by Judaism. Both are horribly wrong. And it's pretty much 95% likely that a dispensationalist will call anyone who disagrees a replacement theologian, and a replacement theologian will call him dispensationalist.

Anonymous Moron Has A Sick Fixation With Fecal Metaphors October 10, 2013 5:26 AM  

Moron says:

"Hilarious assertion on your part."

Not at all. Not in the least.

Moron ignores the historical context, as well as the military, geo-strategic, and religious contexts of the times. But then again for leftists, it's ALWAYS either Birmingham Alabama in 1961, or Dachau in 1943. That's how their tiny brains operate.

"The purpose of the Inquisition was to guarantee that those individuals who converted to Christianity remained orthodox."

Vastly over-simplistic assertion. FAIL.

"However, the means by which those carried out can be reasonably argued as being immoral."

One argument among many; and moreover, an argument which relies on a modern perspective, and which ignores the original context. FAIL.

"seizing valuable assets of convicted heretics"

Well boo-hoo-hoo. As opposed to, what? Oh, that's right: centuries of eager collaboration with a hated enemy and invader who had seized the assets of ALL OF SPAIN!! You fucking idiot. There's this thing called human nature; maybe you'll bump into it some time, despite clearly not being human.

There's only one ethnic group in the world who would eagerly collaborate with a hated enemy, and profit handsomely off of the collaboration for CENTURIES, and then act surprised and indignant at the inevitable (and surprisingly mild) blowback when the other side won. Guess who that ethne is.

"Sixtus IV promulgated a new bull categorically prohibiting the Inquisition's extension to Aragon"

Proves my point. Very merciful attitude, all things considered. How many chief rabbis in Muslim Spain promulgated protests against an Islamic occupying regime that butchered and enslaved Christians by the hundreds of thousands, for centuries? **crickets** Well, it was good for the Jews and all that sort of thing. So, I guess it was OK. While it lasted.

Question for Moron: who butchered more people: the Inquisition over the course of several centuries, or blood-soaked Bolshevik Jews over the course of only two decades? Or even in say six months?

Don't bother, we all know the answer. Just like we all know you're a fucking idiot who spends a little time on Wikipedia and then thinks they actually know something.

"Victim." It is to laugh.


Blogger Daniel Heneghan October 10, 2013 6:10 AM  

The Samaritans were/are (there are still a few thousand self-identified Samaritans living in Israel) the descendants of the Israelites who remained in Israel after the sect that came to be knows as Jews went off to Babylon. When this sect returned to Israel as Jews they disdained the Israelites who had remained in Israel. Because the Jews were smarter/more cohesive, more aggressive they came to dominate Israel and its environs. Nevertheless, the Samaritans, as the Israelites who remained behind rather than go to Babylon came to be known, are true descendants of Abraham, at least as much as and probably more so than the Jews. The Palestinians, both Christian and Muslim, are the direct descendants of the Samaritans. Theologically, historically, genetically and logically, the Palestinians' claim to Israel is at least as strong as that of any Jew.

Anonymous Daniel October 10, 2013 6:11 AM  

The Samaritans were/are (there are still a few thousand self-identified Samaritans living in Israel) the descendants of the Israelites who remained in Israel after the sect that came to be knows as Jews went off to Babylon. When this sect returned to Israel as Jews they disdained the Israelites who had remained in Israel. Because the Jews were smarter/more cohesive, more aggressive they came to dominate Israel and its environs. Nevertheless, the Samaritans, as the Israelites who remained behind rather than go to Babylon came to be known, are true descendants of Abraham, at least as much as and probably more so than the Jews. The Palestinians, both Christian and Muslim, are the direct descendants of the Samaritans. Theologically, historically, genetically and logically, the Palestinians' claim to Israel is at least as strong as that of any Jew.

Anonymous A&A October 10, 2013 6:13 AM  

"Notice that even on the male side, the most that can be said is that there "may have been" a Near Eastern connection; that's a remarkably strong negative statement given the potential sensitivities on the subject."

VOX- when you look at the chart of near eastern populations. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_by_populations_of_Near_East ), you will see that roughly 40% of Ashkenazi males have the "J" haplotype, which is the most prevalant near eastern genetic marker and another roughly 20% have the "E" haplotype marker, which is the second most common near eastern genetic marker. On the other hand, the "R" (European) haplotype is around 15%. I have seen other studies with different percentages but the numbers in those studies are also in the same ballpark.

What is especially interesting is that Levantin Arabs (i.e., those from Israel, Jordan, Lebanan and Syria) have a similar breakdown to the Ashkenazi Jews.


Regarding Italians (maybe especially Northern Italians), keep in mind that they have an unusually high Semtic "J" haplotype genetic input (27% in the north central region, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_Italy ), which I imagine to come from ancient Phoenician/Carthaginian (i.e., Canaanite) colonization than mid-evil Arabic colonization.

Granted, historical consensus seems to agree that Ashkenazi Jews reached Germany during the time of Charlagmane via North/Central Italy, which especially in light of the report you are citing on the Female mtDNA seems to imply significant genetic import from that region, at least on the female side.

Also keep in mind that even though according to Jewish law, a child is automatically born Jewish if his mother was Jewish; nevertheless, tribal identification is always via the father (as is clear from the book of Numbers etc.) King David himself came from Moabites on his matrenal side (i.e., Ruth), whereas he was a direct descendant of Judah via his paternal lineage.

Blogger Markku October 10, 2013 6:37 AM  

Granted, historical consensus seems to agree that Ashkenazi Jews reached Germany

-What sort of Jews were there in Germany?
-Ask a Nazi.

Anonymous Karl Franz October 10, 2013 8:50 AM  

Cant we have them back? We can swop 1 jew for 10 arabs and and all the somalis they want. I know the arabs and somalis are very valuable as we in europe cannot get by without them, at least sometime in the future, so im told by the highest authority.

Blogger Jordan179 October 10, 2013 9:36 AM  

Question for Moron: who butchered more people: the Inquisition over the course of several centuries, or blood-soaked Bolshevik Jews over the course of only two decades? Or even in say six months?

Given that neither Lenin nor Stalin was Jewish, that the Soviets were anti-religious in general, and that Jews were one of the groups persecuted as an ethnic group by the Soviets, blaming the Red Holocaust on Jews is historically a bit dubious. It's of course true that Karl Marx, and some of Lenin's lackeys, were of Jewish descent. But then the same thing's probably true of the priests of the Inquisition.

In any case: yes, the Soviet Holocaust was far, far worse than the Spanish Inquisition. It's up there in the top half-dozen or so worst mass murders, along with those of the Red Chinese, the Nazi Germans, the Turks vs. the Armenians and Greeks, and the Cambodians (who get points for percentage of their own population killed). But to identify it with Judaism is just plain ignorant.

Anonymous E. PERLINE October 10, 2013 11:01 AM  

I thought Christians and Jews in Europe have been intermarrying for hundreds of years. That was what "Fiddler on the Roof" was all about. I don't know much about eugenics. Is it possible that a group like the Ashkenazis had the DNA bred out of them?

Anonymous Sir_Chancealot October 10, 2013 11:29 AM  

The older I get, the more that I think God took the Jewish people as the handicap.

Anonymous MikeM October 10, 2013 1:29 PM  

That mtDNA is derived from the matrilineal line has been known for some time. However, it is also obvious that patrilineal lineage is also a major factor in who is a Jew.

No one here to date has discussed the deportation of somewhere between 250K to 500K, mostly males, from the Northern Kingdom by the Assyrians. Neither have any discussed those who fled after AD 70 and the destruction of the Temple and the city of Jerusalem. It is also necessary to include the scattering that occurred after the failure of the Bar Kochba rebelliom in AD 135.

In each case, Jews were scattered to the winds. Most of them went North, but a significant portion fled to Egypt and eventually led to the founding of one of the most significant Jewish colonies.

Those males who were sent or voluntarily went North were going to have children by local women who were not of the 12 tribes. As a consequence, is is evident that matrilineal evidence is rather useless in defining who is an Israelite.

God told Abraham that his seed would be called in Isaac and not in his frirstborn son of the servant woman. Muslim pretensions aside they are not a part of the land promises. I must also add the Christian converts form any group are not a part of the land promises in any way. Paul made it clear as crystal that the believing Christian is neither Jew nor gentile.

If a person converts to Judaism, it is not really relevant in the sense that if he does not really believe in the God of Abraham,Isaac, and Jacob, then it is irrelevant since he will inherit nothing.

Anonymous civilServant October 10, 2013 1:31 PM  

Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world—only to serve the People of Israel. Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat.

Every religion has its nutjobs. This rabbi in no ways speaks for Judaism in general.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ovadia_Yoseph

"His funeral was the largest in the history of Israel, with over 850,000 attendees."

"Yosef was the CHIEF RABBI IN ISRAEL FOR 10 YEARS!!!" (Quoted from elsewhere. I assume it is true.)

Anonymous civilServant October 10, 2013 1:50 PM  

This rabbi in no ways speaks for Judaism in general.

From Googling "Ovadia Yoseph":

"Rabbi Ovadia Yosef's death robs Israel of spiritual and political powerhouse Rabbi Ovadia Yosef was a religious giant with an immense following."

"Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, who has died aged 93, was one of Israel’s most influential rabbis and the spiritual leader of the ultra-Orthodox religious party ..."

"Rabbi Chain Ovadia Yosef, unarguably the greatest Sephardi Torah sage and one of the most influential political leaders of the past 40 years,"

"Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, the Israeli sage who founded the Sephardic Orthodox Shas political party and exercised major influence on Jewish law,"

"Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, one of Israel's most influential religious and political leaders"

"Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, who died at age 93 in Jerusalem, wasn't just the most important rabbi in the world. He was a transformative figure in Israeli politics"

"Death of rabbi Ovadia Yosef, Israeli religious scholar and kingmaker, leaves huge void"

The picture of his funeral here is impressive.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/09/attending-rabbi-ovadia-yosef-s-funeral-as-a-secular-jewish-woman.html

Blogger dienw October 10, 2013 2:23 PM  

MikeM October 10, 2013 1:29 PM
No one here to date has discussed the deportation of somewhere between 250K to 500K, mostly males, from the Northern Kingdom by the Assyrians.
I have mentioned this either directly or when referring to the tribes' migration to northwestern Europe.
[The Assyrians followed us into Germany and the Babylonians migrated into Italy - and controls or is the Roman Catholic Church.]
The United States fulfilled the blessing of Jacob on Manasseh; England is Ephraim.
Here, let's see if you can handle the words of a prophet.

Anonymous Dr. Idle Spectator, Harvard Ethnology October 10, 2013 2:37 PM  

Idle,

Are you referring to the tribe of Dan stuff or neanderthal-aspie theory or something else?


You'll need to be more specific with the Dan reference.


I thought about that Neanderthal thing though. If Koanic's model is correct, then the proportionality of Thal and Melonhead should vary from place to place and country to country. I'd be interested to see where the concentration of the Melonheads was. I bet it was where the old Junker Prussian nobility centered.

Related,

I checked the "highest IQ in Europe" claim with Google, and it seems that Italians have a higher average. Presumably the northerners are disproportionately ingenius.

Reminds me, I was going to joke that the Holocaust makes more sense now, 'cause I can't fucking stand Italians. But the moment passed.


There's another study with almost the exact same list, but Germany and Austria are in the 102 position. The problem is none of these studies seem to give me a good MARGIN OF ERROR. So 3 IQ points could be meaningless here.

Blogger Jordan179 October 10, 2013 3:57 PM  

IQ tests are useful, but limited. In particular, they cannot test for genotypical intelligence, they test for phenotypical intelligence, and they can only test for certain stereotyped kinds of intelligence.

Consider this: IQ tests were invented in America during the Great War because the Army needed smart (or at least not too stupid) recruits in that conflict. During the late 1910's and early 1920's, they were first applied to large groups of people, and something was immediately discovered which aroused great concern.

It seemed that the recent groups of immigrants -- many from Italy, the Balkans and Eastern Europe -- were none too smart. Indeed, many averaged "mentally subnormal" and some had large numbers of "morons." This worried American legislators, and led in part to the immigration restrictions we imposed during the 1920's.

In 1941-42, we again needed to recruit soldiers, and we tested large groups of young men. We found something amazing. The very same immigrant groups who had tested with low IQ's in the early 1920's now tested with average to high IQ's in the early 1940's.

This presented a theoretical problem. Most of those tested (because of the reduction in immigration starting in the 1920's) were in fact the sons of the VERY SAME PEOPLE who had tested as below-average. What had happened here?

Two things.

(1) The early IQ tests made no accommodations for people with low English proficiency. If one spoke or read broken or no English, and hence did not UNDERSTAND THE TEST, well, tough. The first-generation immigrants of the early 20th century often spoke little English. Their children had picked up fluent English, and hence tended to understand the tests. This is an example of the (in retrospect) obvious errors that tend to occur in the early usage of a new method of testing.

(2) A subtler but more theoretically-meaningful difference, was that phenotypical intelligence is in part determined by environment during growth. The first-generation immigrants had been literally-starved of nutrients they needed to grow their brains, and in consequence had less well developed brains. The second-generation immigrants grew up in America, where food was relatively cheap (even during the Depression!) and in consequence were able to develop their full intellectual potentials.

Tests given later, during the 1950's-1970's, upon third generation Eastern and Southern European immigrants, often showed above-average IQ's. This may have been due to their having grown up in the wealthier post-Depression world, or due to still-greater acculturation.

Blogger Jordan179 October 10, 2013 4:01 PM  

Oh, and on "stereotypical" intelligence.

IQ tests are tests, and they have to be standardized in order to work. That means that they can only present a limited set of spatial, verbal, logical and mathematical problems, with only a very limited solution set of correct answers (usually, just one correct answer per problem).

The value of testing in this fashion is comparability of results. The problem is that it necessarily excludes certain higher human functions: specifically creativity (the skill we use in creating art, writing essays, or designing machinery). It also excludes empathy and sociability, which are important aptitudes enabling us to interact with other human beings.

So what we get as an IQ score is not "intelligence," but rather a limited subset of intelligences. This has some value -- obviously, verbal, spatial, logical and mathematical reasoning are vital to human beings -- but it should not be mistaken for the whole constellations of useful human mental powers.

Anonymous Aeoli Pera October 10, 2013 4:21 PM  

Idle,

"Tribe of Dan stuff" is the theory that the Israelite tribe of Dan took a little tour of Europe after getting the boot. They apparently left their name all over the place to mark their passage: Danube, Denmark, Danes, etc. I think they were supposed to have ended up in Britain.

I haven't actually looked into this, so I can't say much else about it.

Jordan,

No worries, I'm not new to the subject. Actually, it was a certain sort of intelligence (large group social ability) that got me off on this weirdo neanderthal stuff to begin with. Some high (verbal) IQ people are socially adapted and some aren't.

And yes, IQ gets kinda strange depending on where you are in the distribution. Below 90 or so all intelligences seem to be of approximately the same kinds (basic cognition, and social cognition). You don't meet a lot of people who are maxing out wordsums and yet can't learn to divide fractions. In the mid levels you start to see some specialization, and in the upper reaches of genius you see distinct personality types with certain commonalities.

Blogger Markku October 10, 2013 6:52 PM  

civilServant: heh heh, wham & bam

Anonymous Scooby shat his big boy pants October 10, 2013 8:19 PM  

To--Moron Has A Sick Fixation With Fecal Metaphors

“Moron ignores the historical context, as well as the military, geo-strategic, and religious contexts of the times.”

Had you carefully read my post rather than hyperventilate, the proper context was considered and applied.


“But then again for leftists, it's ALWAYS either Birmingham Alabama in 1961, or Dachau in 1943. That's how their tiny brains operate.”

So, anyone who responds to someone’s post in a way that YOU decide is leftist in nature is leftist? Gray matter, you lack.


“Vastly over-simplistic assertion. FAIL.”
“One argument among many; and moreover, an argument which relies on a modern perspective, and which ignores the original context. FAIL.”

Here at this blog, we engage in dialectic, not rhetoric. Please try again.


“There's only one ethnic group in the world who would eagerly collaborate with a hated enemy, and profit handsomely off of the collaboration for CENTURIES, and then act surprised and indignant at the inevitable (and surprisingly mild) blowback when the other side won. Guess who that ethne is.”



Scoobius, is this your handiwork?


“Proves my point. Very merciful attitude, all things considered.”

Sixtus IV’s primary concern was over the immorality of those involved for purposes other than religion. Immorality is NOT a modern perspective.

Blogger Jordan179 October 10, 2013 9:06 PM  

I am starting to suspect that common Jewish stereotype about the neuroticism is not because they are Jewish, but because they were GERMAN JEWS who immigrated. Even Yiddish is considered a High German language. Notice North Italy is heavily Germanic.

Well, yes. Culturally (and to a large extent biologically) speaking, the former German Jews -- and also some of the technically former Polish ones (frontiers have moved many times in that part of the world) -- are German. The former German Jews were very much town-dwellers and anciently tended to be bankers, merchants, artisans and scholars. This gave them a tradition of intellectual and professional work, which as opportunities opened up in the 19th century let them blossom into all sorts of specialized and high-paying fields.

Adolf Hitler, with his unerring instinct for picking the policy most disadvantageous in the long term to his adopted homeland of Germany, looked at this flourishing minority of about a million Germans, decided that they were to blame for everything wrong with Germany, and that Germany must emulate 15th-16th century Spain or 17th-century France and drive out or exterminate their most productive group. This worked for Germany about as well as it had done for Spain and France before her, reducing Germany to a very-much second-rate Power by simultaneously robbing the Germans of one of their sources of national greatness and searing it deeply into the national memory that Germans should never try to be great -- lest they be persecuted.

America thanks Hitler for this gift -- it worked out at least as well for us as did the rocket scientists.

Anonymous scoobius dubious October 10, 2013 11:05 PM  

"the proper context was considered and applied."

Had that been the case, I shouldn't have seen fit to mention that it was not. You're so wrong about all of this, you don't even know that you're wrong.

I don't have time to teach history classes here, you'll somehow just have to piece it together on your own.

"Here at this blog, we engage in dialectic, not rhetoric."

Says the guy making childish shit jokes.

Scooby is a friendly talking dog who says deliberately irritating things in the hopes of annoying various people who deserve to be annoyed. Scooby is not your teaching assistant. And you clearly need one.

Ciao, bello.


Anonymous MikeM October 11, 2013 12:02 AM  

British Israelitism is deader than last weeks dodo. It is based upon a flawed hermeneutic that decides that Gos's promises to Abraham and his seed to inherit the land from the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates river was in some preposterous way fulfilled. They always forget Acts 7 and the stoning of Steven where he declared that Abraham died not having received the promises if Gen. 12 and made into a covenant in
gen. 15. I do not doubt that there are many Isrealites in the lands you have mentioned, but there is only one land of Promise for all Israel and that is the boudaries specified above.

I should add that the argument about Americas founding, according to the article linked, in 9 AD some 24 years before the crucifixionof Jesus is really preposterous. I have no doubt that Scandanavians and others arrived on the American continent long long before Columbus or Amerigo Vespucci did, but that has zero bearing on who is a Jwew or an Israelite today.

Ultimately it is God and God alone who knows who his people are today. All of the rest is useless grasping at straws to find some sort of blessing apart from faith in Jesus the Messiah as Savior and Lord.

God is not blessing the Isles of Britain and He is certainly not blessing the US of A.

All attempt to usurp Gods promise to Israel through Abraham, Isaac, Jacob are futile. I should add that resistance to God's plan is also futile in extremis.

Anonymous Scooby shat his big boy pants October 11, 2013 12:03 AM  

"I don't have time to teach history classes here, you'll somehow just have to piece it together on your own."

Translation for...I am fucking lazy to engage in meaningful debate.


Evidence suggests from the time period that the Inquisition turned into a free-for-all. That is, those who converted to Christianity to avoid persecution were targeted for their land and their wealth. Gee, I wonder who those people were? It is unknown exactly how much
"coinage" was seized after they were tried and convicted by the Inquisition, although in one town (Guadaloupe), a royal residence was constructed from those "spoils". Moreover, there are various accounts of everyday Spaniards who wrote about the true intentions of the Inquisition. "They were burnt only for the money they had", a resident of Cuenca recalls.

Now, if you wish to take umbrage with these facts, please do so for the viewing audience.

Anonymous scoobius dubious October 11, 2013 2:49 AM  

"Translation for...I am fucking lazy to engage in meaningful debate."

When some idiot asshole addresses me with shit-minded insults, he doesn't get a 'meaningful debate'. He gets a bitch-slap across his ignorant monkey-hole, and then silence.

Guess what your wages are, fuckboy.




Anonymous hit-and-run October 11, 2013 5:02 AM  

"Adolf Hitler, with his unerring instinct for picking the policy most disadvantageous in the long term to his adopted homeland of Germany, looked at this flourishing minority of about a million Germans, decided that they were to blame for everything wrong with Germany, and that Germany must emulate 15th-16th century Spain or 17th-century France and drive out or exterminate their most productive group. This worked for Germany about as well as it had done for Spain and France before her, reducing Germany to a very-much second-rate Power by simultaneously robbing the Germans of one of their sources of national greatness and searing it deeply into the national memory that Germans should never try to be great -- lest they be persecuted."

Ah, but if you consider that:

1) Hitler was Roman Catholic
2) Roman Catholicism hates prosperity and loves poverty

From this perspective, Hitler knew what he was doing...

Anonymous Shagrat's Lineal Descendant on the mother's side (or father's, depending on the issue at hand) October 11, 2013 12:46 PM  

God (if He'll excuse the expression), I love checking out this blog at the start of the day. Where else can you find people squabbling about the historical application today of fairy tales written thousands of years ago in the Semitic Near East during the Iron Age, or defending the right of the Catholic Church to burn people alive for disputing the nature of the Trinity (but, hey, they didn't incinerate that many heretics, so what's the beef?).

You make me smile. Peace on, people!

Anonymous Scooby shat his big boy pants October 11, 2013 7:19 PM  

“When some idiot asshole addresses me with shit-minded insults, he doesn't get a 'meaningful debate'. He gets a bitch-slap across his ignorant monkey-hole, and then silence.”

I see you’re doubling down on ass-hattery. Perhaps you can reach the trifecta and claim top prize--Scalzi’s pink dress. Don’t worry, adjustments will be made for your floppy man-boobs.


“Guess what your wages are, fuckboy.”

I don’t have wages, I have my own investment portfolio that pays handsomely.

Anonymous MikeM October 11, 2013 8:58 PM  

Hitler was a Roman Catholic? That is one of stupidest things I have ever read.

Adolf Shicklegruber was a pagan to the core of his being and nothing else and any competent student of the man would know this.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts