/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.4277683]

Hey /lit/ I wanted to ask you a question. Not trying to start some /pol/ argument. But do you feel that Judaism is an obsolete religion?

inb4 all religions are obsolete

wat I mean is, is there anything Judaism offers that one can't find in a tradition like Christianity or Islam, whose worldviews are more universal than Judaism's more ethnocentric approach, contains all the basic Judaic spiritual elements and even holy figures and generally speaking having created far more in the way of civilization in their historical run. I'm not really bashing the religion, it just seems it mostly survives because Jews born in it choose to keep it alive and define themselves by it because they were born Jewish.

[Anonymous No.4277696]

>>4277683
>it just seems it mostly survives because Jews born in it choose to keep it alive and define themselves by it because they were born Jewish.

Yea, like every other religious family upbringing.

[Anonymous No.4277713]

>>4277696

Well, it seems like Jewish people don't have a huge conversion rate because religion, race and ethnicity are tied together more strongly in the religion.

Plus, the other Abrahamic religions were able to spread and create civilization because of their more missionary attitude and universal approach to salvation and things like that.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.4277719]

>>4277683
All theism is obsolete. Including capitalism.

>Anticipates odd ironic fashion critique

[Anonymous No.4277728]

If you want spiritual fulfillment, Judaism has pretty much always been awful. Since at least the Second Temple period, it's been incredibly formulaic and legalistic, basically just the Hebrews' version of ritual and social law, no more or less "religious" than Irish customary law in the Middle Ages. It's only because of the diaspora and their privileged position due to Christianity and Islam being "successors" that they took that stodgy, ossified structure and adapted it, through a Rabbinical exegetical tradition which was already becoming dominant as the spiritual component (really the sole "religious" component) of Hebrew culture in Roman times, to be anything more than a regional set of ritual norms. Springing up around that basic Hebrew discourse, which was a kernel of cultural continuity in the heavily itinerant and international Jewish medieval diaspora, was Kevin MacDonald's group evolutionary strategy, which is now the container within which sit both the Rabbinical tradition, which now only needs to be practiced at a trickle by super-specialists, and the formulaic ritual element which is a simple folk culture.

Jews have never been and could never have been interested in evangelising. They were a regional cult that would have passed out of existence if not for being uniquely given the opportunity to form a "diaspora people". Their religion is barely a religion; even in the Middle Ages the best rabbis were basically just freeform deistic philosophers rather than theologians. If you want the Abrahamic Godhead you have to get it from the real practitioners of Abrahamic "religion", i.e. Christ and Muhammad.

[Anonymous No.4277729]

>>4277683

they don't evangelize at all i don't think you can even convert to judaism. There's also not that many existing jews so basically yes OP

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.4277733]

>>4277713
So you think proselytizing makes religion relevant, and if you don't proselytizing you are obsolete and "creating civilization"

This a sunday school homework thread?

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.4277737]

>>4277713
So you think proselytizing makes religion relevant, and if you don't proselytize you are obsolete and not "creating civilization"

This a sunday school homework thread?

[Anonymous No.4277770]

>>4277683
>is there anything Judaism offers that one can't find in a tradition like Christianity or Islam
Yes, a justification for rabid racism and xenophobia.

[Anonymous No.4277779]

>>4277737

>So you think proselytizing makes religion relevant

No, but in terms of survival and the ability to encourage human progress both spiritually and practically, I think Judaism kinda falls a little flat.

[Anonymous No.4277796]

>>4277779
i kind of feel that christianity and islam created too fucking much. better to have just the scaffolding. a really organized cult with little necessary meaning, but you can go really deep (that is, practice philosophy) if you feel like it and still call it "judaism", "shintoism"... maybe even "hinduism". i don't like my rules to be obvious or even terribly important, but i think humanity is benefited by engaging in group ritual.

[Anonymous No.4277802]

>>4277779
Practically speaking (since you used the word obsolete):
The Jewish religion only cares for the Jewish state, to preserve the Jewish tradition and to increase prosperity of the Jewish people.
The Jews are gods chosen people after all.
The sad thing is that some Jews take this literally, and incite anti-Semitism upon themselves.

[Anonymous No.4277799]

>>4277729
>i don't think you can even convert to judaism
you don't think, huh? no, you don't.

[Anonymous No.4277807]

>>4277729
>i don't think you can even convert to judaism

One most certainly can. Jewish communities don't, by and large, proselytize or seek converts, however.

[Anonymous No.4277813]

>>4277807
i've always heard it as that they don't want you to have to deal with the bullshit they have to deal with
like monasteries ignoring potential novices on the steps for a few days, you have to be real serious about it before they take you in

[Anonymous No.4277812]

>>4277683
Yes, OP. And it's also a religion without any decent Architecture. I suggest you read The Antichrist.

[Anonymous No.4277814]

>>4277683
>>4277779
The requirement that all Jews be able to read the Torah in Hebrew actually gave them a huge leg up, because it required them to be able to read in a time where literacy was relatively rare. Some historians think the resulting emphasis on education was what allowed them to survive as a people.

[Anonymous No.4277834]

>>4277802

I get that, but I guess I'm speaking in terms of what it offers to humanity as a whole as opposed to a section of humanity.

It seems Christianity, Islam, even non-Abrahamic ones like Buddhism are stronger mainly because their more universal worldviews encouraged more progress.

[Anonymous No.4277841]

>>4277683

Judaism is now obsolete because of Christianity, the one true religion.

Your level of mad is now 10, my level of deal with it is also 10.

[Anonymous No.4277845]

>>4277813

It's more, I think, about the view of the relationship with God. Whereas proselytizing religions (like Christianity and Islam) believe in a universalizable relationship with their deities, and a salvific purpose, which they consider themselves to have a duty to reveal to as many people as possible; Judaism, generally, sees a people's relationship with God as a matter between them and the deity: in practice, this means that, while there is a set of rules for Jews to follow (and some try to impose their understandong of the right way of doing things on other Jews), it is possible for other peoples to have different relationships with God, so conversion and proselytizing is not an imperative.

[Anonymous No.4277846]

>>4277841
why would anybody be mad about this
why would anybody bother to say this
we know christians think their religion is truth
this thread is rather about whether judaism is useless for self-development, or of interest somehow in a way that would not be immediately apparent

[Anonymous No.4277851]

>>4277845
yes, of course
that is what i meant but better said
"why deal with all the laws and bullshit when you can already know god without forswearing cheeseburgers", i didn't mean "why deal with the discrimination" or whatever, but i guess that is a thing as well

[Anonymous No.4277912]

From what I understand about judaism, it's more cultural than religious. I'm Jewish by blood, but never got a chance to learn about the religion. So recently I became curious about what it's actually about. I found out that it mostly has to do with living day by day & very little has to do with after death. And apparently, many that follow the religion believe in things such as reincarnation. My grandma told me that in judaism, there is also no devil, no hell, not even really a heaven. Not for humans to go to after death anyways.

[Anonymous No.4277922]

>>4277845

I would argue that the universalizable outlook of Christianity and Islam allowed the members of those religions to contribute more to the progress of humankind as a whole though, both in terms of spirituality and in terms of the more material progress of civilization.

The universal approach allowed them to spread more easily and they in turn absorbed much of the cultural and even religious traditions they encountered into their own and so were able to utilize the wealth and knowledge of other civilizations and advance in the cultural, spiritual and material spheres of life more than their Jewish counterparts. Also, that more missionary drive helped in some ways to fuel, I think, a desire to seek knowledge in general.

[Anonymous No.4277927]

>>4277729
From what I understand, you can convert. The reason that the view that you could only be Jewish if you were born Jewish has to do with the cultural aspect of it. Back then, there weren't DNA tests or a way to prove who your father was, but they knew who your mother was. If your mother was Jewish, you were Jewish.

[Anonymous No.4277941]

>>4277927

You can "convert," but I don't think it's understood as conversion in the Christian or Islamic sense. Rather you're just a Gentile on a better path and not obligated to follow all the rules of the Torah.

[Anonymous No.4277956]

>>4277954

Yeah, but my understanding is that there's a different set of rules for Gentiles.

[Anonymous No.4277954]

>>4277941
not true
they need to make damn sure their future begetters are kosher

[Anonymous No.4277967]

>>4277956
i dunno man, get me a source, i've heard otherwise
http://www.wikihow.com/Convert-to-Judaism
i've seen converted wives be the most crazy about the jewish thing because they had to study that shit and so take it mad seriously

[Anonymous No.4278082]

>>4277719
>theism is capitalism
who let the continentals out?

[Anonymous No.4278099]

Judaism had a brief Hellenized period, but the Maccabees and finally the rise of Christianity put an end to that. Then they just went full pharisee and never recovered.

[Anonymous No.4278101]

>>4278099

Well, you could say that when Judaism Hellenized, it set the stage for Christianity until eventually Hellenized Judaism and Christianity were virtually one in the same.

[Anonymous No.4279068]

>>4277922
>I would argue that the universalizable outlook of Christianity and Islam allowed the members of those religions to contribute more to the progress of humankind

Others would say that it led to them doing more harm, because Christian-Islamic universalism can lead believers to construct non-believers as inherently inferior (to the point of barely human), to the idea that anyone who knows about their creeds but doesn't follow them is evil, and to such things as forced conversion and warfare in the name of "God" or "Christendom".

OTOH, one could argue that the Judaic traditions of close study and debate have been a significant influence on European (and derivative) scholarly and legal traditions.

[Anonymous No.4279074]

>>4277967
>i've seen converted wives be the most crazy about the jewish thing because they had to study that shit and so take it mad seriously

Converts often seem to take the traditions, rules, and culture of their adopted religion at least as, or more, seriously, that those raised in it. Some of this could be the aspect of choice; some a desire (sometimes subconscious) to fit in.

[Anonymous No.4279106]

>>4277927
>>4277941

The point, I think, is that Judaism (like Islam, to a degree) is different from Christianity as understood in the modern "West". Christians are generally regarded as those who profess a certain set of beliefs, and / or follow a certain set of practices. There is an element of that to Judaism too; however, Jewish identity is also familial / ethnic in a way modern, western Christianity isn't. We wouldn't regard a child of an Anglican priest, who had attended church schools, but later rejected or become skeptical about belief in gods, as a Christian: we'd define such a person by their present beliefs and practices (as atheist, or agnostic, or whatever). But the child of Jewish parents would still be considered Jewish even if s/he were not particularly religious or observant; indeed, even if s/he were, for all practical purposes, atheist. To put it simply, one can be (for example) an atheist Jew; one cannot (at least according to mainstream identities) be an atheist Christian. In Christianity, professed belief is decisive; in Judaism, familial and ethnic roots are also a factor.

Interestingly / disturbingly, a similar distinction informed early twentieth century European views of Judaism. Anti-Semitism was prevalent in many parts of the continent; however, whereas in Britain (for example), "Jewish" was regarded essentially as a religious identity (i. e., an identitiy based on what one believed, and what one practised), in other parts, notably Nazi Germany, it was regarded as much or more as an ethnic identity (i. e., an identity based on ancestry).

[Anonymous No.4279145]

>>4279068

>who is Socrates

I wouldn't engage in strict historical reductionism like that.

[Anonymous No.4279157]

>>4279106
Well, at the same time, Jewish also was an ethnic identity in continental Europe, especially Germany and points east. I mean, it's not wrong to say that. Jews were part of an ethnic group in much the same way that Czechs or Ukrainians or Ruthenians or Slovaks were. It's more complicated, yes, because of the religious aspect, and the lack of a homeland, but it was not necessarily wrong to think about Jews in terms of ethnicity.

[Anonymous No.4279298]

>>4279157

I didn't say it was "wrong"; just that the Anglophone world in particular seems to see Judaism as ("just") a religious identity; the continent and especially Central and Eastern Europe as both religious and ethnic (more in line with Jewish self-identification by ancestry, in a sense).

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.4279776]

>>4278082
Capitalism is faith based. Money isn't real. Resources and labor are. Capitalism is just a tool, and its being used, rather consistently, to support classism and all its evils.

[Anonymous No.4279994]

>>4279776

Are you a girl?

[Anonymous No.4280006]

>>4277683
jews are pretty cool imo
if i had to join a religion i'd join judaism

[Anonymous No.4280012]

>>4277728
>getting bad at the jews for being legalistic
lol this is like insulting christianity for caring too much about love and social equality

[Anonymous No.4280013]

>>4280006

Impossible. You have to be born into it.

[Anonymous No.4280017]

>>4280013
i'm jewish from my mom's side
i asked this jewish guy i worked with told me i could become jewish if i get sick of being a goy

[Anonymous No.4280029]

>>4277683
Judaism has a number of ideas and practices that the other Abrahamics do not agree with, and vice versa, so if you agree with the Jewish precepts but not the others, then it's not obsolete.

[Anonymous No.4280042]

>>4279776
lol you should educate yourself on what "money" actually is and the origins of it. money used to represent actual goods in an economy, at least until the state made it fiat.

farmer grows corn and wants shoes, so he has to go to the shoemaker and exchange his corn for some shoes, money was invented to make this process easier.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.4280060]

>>4280013
Khazaria would like to have a word with you.

>>4280042
Your smarm is like a jellyfish picking a fight in a desert
>money used to represent actual goods in an economy
I know it does honey. Its a tool that could, and has to some extent, help society, but its being misused, A LOT, these days. Wake up.

>>4279994
Why?

[Anonymous No.4280068]

>>4280060

Just wondering

[Anonymous No.4280069]

>>4280013
99% of Ashkenazi are genetically related to Germanic populations

[Anonymous No.4280079]

>>4280060
>but its being misused, A LOT,

YES, its being misused by the state, the mortal enemy of the free market. The state is the source of the problems, not capitalism.

[Anonymous No.4280094]

>>4277728
>freeform deistic philosophers
cool people.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.4280107]

>>4280079
Libertarian pleeeez
The wealthy are the source of the problem with the state.
And when you try to bring up unions, "it happens on the left too" I point out that it IS capitalism that corrupts EVERYTHING.
I stand for putting power back in the hands of people.

[Anonymous No.4280140]

>>4279068

I'd that the missionary activities of the religions, generally speaking, allowed humankind to progress because the missionary attitude usually led to Christians/Muslims to inquire and seek knowledge to defend their religion against others as well as to convince people in new lands to convert. While some cultural traditions were wiped out, sometimes through violent means, many others were simply appropriated. The missionary and universalist attitudes of Buddhism, Christianity and Islam allowed the religions to not only spread, but allowed them to strengthen themselves through the absorbing and examine other traditions and make use of the knowledge they contained for the further advancement of their civilizations, not just on the intellectual and cultural, but also in the more practical areas of life which I don't is something Judaism has been able to match because of its more regional focus. Religions like Christianity, Islam and Buddhism didn't really have a strong concept of nationalism and the goals in those religions were the perfection and liberation of the human soul, regardless of background. So you have in these religions more emphasis on perfecting the human condition and recreating to the best extent one could manage the paradisaical realms of man's origin. And naturally as these religions spread, they had bigger populations to deal with which often compelled them to explore means of governance and means by which to improve the quality of life as well.

So you have a missionary attitude (how do we get these people to convert? I know, we'll study their traditions and translate our religion into language they can understand), a universal outlook that generally speaking didn't have strong concepts of racial or national identities, then you had the ideal of perfecting the human condition both individually and communally. Judaism didn't have these qualities as much since it's main concern was protection and cultivation of the Jewish people

[Anonymous No.4280575]

>>4277683
I'm Jewish and from what I understand (probably not as much as I think) Judaism isn't as influential a religion because were highly traditional with very few people. We only follow the Old Testament because when Jesus came on to the scene most of us decided he was the man with the plan and became Christian and went on to do great things but some us just didn't buy into it and stayed set in our Jewish ways. I'm pretty sure the reason we haven't really contributed anything is because there's not that much of us and for a while we just sort of laid low and hoped no one would notice us. And to further evaluate on tradition most of us are Jews because were born Jewish, yes, but Judaism isn't just a religion to us. It's more like a culture. It's an identity. For instance I'm of Ashkenazi (Eastern European) descent which means my family has different customs than a Sephardi (Western European) family, we discuss recent events in Jewish history at Synagogue as much as we do Talmudic (Israeli-Palestinian conflict, The Six-Day War, Ellis Island and Immigration to America) and we retain a lot of traditions from biblical times like staying Kosher and getting a Bris. Are we obsolete? Yea probably. But we aren't going to stop being Jews just because we are.

[Anonymous No.4281534]

>>4280140

It's simply not true that there's no racial / nationalist history in Christianity or Islam: the use of violent force against indigenous populations, as well as systems of inequality like apartheid in South Africa, were frequently justified as expanding "Christendom" or by reference to biblical texts and the supposed superiority of Christians. More recently, a Christian identity is a common feature of white supremacist groups, and of extreme nationalists in parts of Europe and elsewhere. Several employ millennial and apocalyptic notions drawn from Christian tradition. NB: I am not arguing that Christianity is inherently racist; just that it by no means excludes or prevents racism, and is sometimes used to support it. There is persistent evidence too of racism in predominantly Muslim societies: that of some Arabs towards black Africans has been noted of late.

Your argument that missionary activity "allowed humankind to progress" seems based centrally on the notion that the spread of Christianity (and Islam) is in itself "progress". This is at best extremely debatable. It also ignores or minimizes to an intolerable degree the suppression and loss of cultural traditions, and the actual harm done to people, in the name of spreading religion.

If you wanted to argue for the role of Christianity and Islam in "progress", a better basis would be their establishment of international languages allowing widespread spoken and written communication (Latin, Arabic), international networks and contacts, and institutions like the universities. Of course, especially in the case of the Christian world, these often began as places to train clergy, but they became centres and repositories of study and learning, and over time developed both traditions of rigorous and wide-ranging enquiry, and international contacts that assisted the dissemination of ideas.

[Anonymous No.4281560]

>>4280140

Continuing >>4281534

Islamic and Christian institutions were also - despite popular perception - crucial to the survival of ancient literature into the early modern world, where secular publication and the new technology of print gave them to new and wider audiences. Many of the works printed in the early age of the printing press were found, and later sought by humanists, some of them clergy or people in the employ of the church like Poggio Bracciolini, in monastic libraries, where they had been kept and copied over the intervening centuries. Some ancient works continued to be read, translated, and commented on in the Islamic world, when they and their authors were virtually unknown in Western Europe (and Aristotle in particular was current in the Muslim world in a period before his works became widely taught in Christian universities), and one or two ancient Greek works are to this day known only through surviving Arabic translations. And that is to consider only classical literature: the private libraries and historic institutions of Timbuktu are the best known, but not the only, place where ancient and early texts in Arabic and other languages have been preserved, reflecting the learning of people in the centres of the pre-modern Islamic world.

But of course Jewish scholars have also played a significant part in all of this over the last few centuries; and the traditions of textual study and debate in which they were educated are surely not insignificant to that. It's important to remember that Jews were a minority in all countries where they had significant presences, prior to the establishment of Israel,

[Anonymous No.4281584]

>>4280107
>I stand for putting power back in the hands of the plebs.

why

[Anonymous No.4281600]

>>4281584
Your right.
Mustn't give plebs power, they might start thinking they're people.

[Anonymous No.4281617]

>>4280140
>which I don't is something Judaism has been able to match because of its more regional focus

I'm not sure what you mean by a "regional focus". Prior to the rise of European fascism, World War 2, and the post-war foundation of Israel, all of which led to significant Jewish migration, and the second to decimation of some communities, there were significant, vibrant Jewish communities in many European countries, and in parts of the Middle East where there no longer are. This historical diffusion is one of the reasons that today there are distinct Jewish communities with different customs.

In arguing for the greater influence of Christianity, it's important not to forget that in many countries prior to and into the twentieth century, members of religious minorities could be under considerable social or legal disabilities, that could prevent their participation in the general life of a country. Jews, as a widespread minority, were often subject to these. In some places and periods, they also faced forced conversion or expulsion (e. g., the Spanish Inquisition was set up to invesitigate whether Spanish Jews had sincerely converted, as they were required to do at the time, after centuries of full participation and considerable influence in Spanish society).

[Anonymous No.4281630]

If you look at a religion and only see what it can offer you, you're probably not looking at religion in the right context. Yes, logically Judaism is obsolete when compared to Christianity and Islam, but it's not about picking the most bang for your ethereal buck, it's what you believe. Faith, not profit.
I'm way too classy to make a pun on 'profit' and 'prophet'

[Anonymous No.4281656]

>The Christian has spiritual interests, because he allows himself to be a spiritual man; the Jew does not even understand these interests in their purity, because he does not allow himself to assign no value to things. He does not arrive at pure spirituality, a spirituality such as is religiously expressed, e. g., in the faith, of Christians, which alone (i. e. without works) justifies. Their unspirituality sets Jews forever apart from Christians; for the spiritual man is incomprehensible to the unspiritual, as the unspiritual is contemptible to the spiritual. But the Jews have only "the spirit of this world."

[Anonymous No.4281680]

>>4281656
He died for nothing.

[Anonymous No.4281729]

>>4281600
What about his right?

[Anonymous No.4282348]

>>4277719
> golden bull
> idol
> wall street

judeans strike again

[Anonymous No.4282362]

>>4281680
don't we all?

[Anonymous No.4283496]

>>4281617
>I'm not sure what you mean by a "regional focus". Prior to the rise of European fascism, World War 2, and the post-war foundation of Israel, all of which led to significant Jewish migration, and the second to decimation of some communities, there were significant, vibrant Jewish communities in many European countries, and in parts of the Middle East where there no longer are. This historical diffusion is one of the reasons that today there are distinct Jewish communities with different customs.

What I was getting at is at with regionalism was its more ethnic focus and its emphasis on preservation of the Jewish community within the world over advancement and perfection of the human condition in general in accordance with a divine plan for salvation and based on a heavenly model. For those reasons, Jews either kept to themselves in societies or assimilated to some extent. But there's no real hallmarks left of a Hebraic civilization besides some of the ruins of Jerusalem which have been rebuilt time and time again by Muslims or Christians.

[Anonymous No.4283502]

>>4277683
"wat I mean is, is there anything Judaism offers that one can't find in a tradition like Christianity or Islam, whose worldviews are more universal than Judaism's more ethnocentric approach"

the three are utter shit tho. in fact i think the islam is probably more shit than judaism is such a thing is even possible.

religions suck. zionism suck. and antisemitism does too

[Anonymous No.4284247]

its a spook

[Anonymous No.4284941]

>>4277834
My native american ancestors who were enslaved, raped, denied by brutal force any expression of their native culture and religion, and legally treated like subhumans in their own land, all in the name of christianity, would be thrilled to hear of the progress that christianity encourages.
I guess the members of the christian establishment that fought tooth and nail against any positive or progressive change brought on by the enlightment, changes that make modern life at least somewhat bearable, would also be thrilled at your laim. My own country was plunged into a civil war because the christian establishment revolted against a proposal of eliminating the monopoly on education the catholic church had (the same establishment who would fight against freedom of the press, universal suffrage, elimination of blasphemy laws, minimum wage, unionization,, social secuirty, etc., etc.).
The hindus and other non-muslims whose decapitated heads were built into inmense mounds by their muslim conquerors in praise of Allah would also be thrilled at the idea of islam encouraging progress.
I also find it interesting that many christian mystics seeking spiritual self-improvement from the early modern period up to today have taken an active interest in and dedicated themselves to the study of jewish mysticism, a product of that obsolete barely-religion.

[Anonymous No.4284967]

>>4277922
>>4279068
I think that the claims in both these posts have merit, but the claims are about inmensely complex social processes that were fundamental to the shaping of the modern world, so you better show your work backing up those claims.

[Anonymous No.4284996]

>>4277729
Judaism is like any other religion. Different sects practice differently. Judaism isn't some monolith you idiot. Reform Jews allow for conversion no problem. They require that you study and give money, that's all.

[Anonymous No.4284997]

>>4280079
It's funny then that only with the consolidation of strong, centralized, nation-states in the rennaissance and early modern period was anything resembling the free-market possible.
Then again, I suspect that you're just a troll nd I'm falling for the bait.

[Anonymous No.4285002]

>>4281584
Because I'm a pleb, it's in my rational self-interest to do so.

[Anonymous No.4285017]

>>4277841
Christians are idol worshipers and damned to the fires of Jahannam.

[Anonymous No.4285021]

>>4284941

Woah hello my classy gentleman friend. I tip my fedora to you and your inability to separate the word of Christ with the actions of "Christian" invaders.

[Anonymous No.4285063]

>>4280140
> a universal outlook that generally speaking didn't have strong concepts of racial or national identities
Yet racist and nationalist movements in the Christian and Islamic worlds throughout history have almost always had a very strong religious component.
>So you have a missionary attitude (how do we get these people to convert? I know, we'll study their traditions and translate our religion into language they can understand)
This was also complemented with inmense amounts of brutality and violent repression. The only times christians don't resort to violence are when they simply don't have the resources to do so (for example, tokugawa Japan, and early chirstianity in the roman empire)

Your problem is that you take religious claims at face value, take highly abstracted ideas of these claims and make broad, sweeping claims about history based on these ideas, which are obviously easily refuted by just looking at history.
If you want to argue about how christians and muslims constributed to human progress( and jews didn't), actually point at what they DID, not at what they said.

>>4281534
>>4281560
>>4281617
Thank you for bringing actual historical arguments into this mire of ideological solipsism and facile stereotypes.

[Anonymous No.4285077]

>>4283496
They kept to themselves because christians were constantly throwing laws and regulations into their faces of how to dress to be easily identifiable, where could they or couldn't they live, and all sort of other laws to make their lives and integration into the wider community impossible. Seriously, do you have any fucking knowledge of history, are you going to continue to entertain us with your hilariously shocking ignorance?

[Anonymous No.4285099]

>>4285021
I think it's totally awesome how you trivialize the extinction of thousands of cultures and religious traditions at the hands of christians in order to justify the moral abomination of your ugly little faith and take a stab at atheists along the way.
I'm sorry I don't judge people by what they say but by what they do.
Anyways, why do you assume I'm anti-religious just because I'm anti-christian?

[Anonymous No.4285192]

>>4277719
>tfw no qt3.14 tourists kissing your gigantic ballsack

[Anonymous No.4285209]

>>4284996
>and give money
of course they do...

[Anonymous No.4285214]

>>4280107
even f the people is mostly conscious enough, the mass makes horrible choices. DO NOT put the power back in the people

[Anonymous No.4285230]

>>4285192
>tfw not immortalized in bronze

[Anonymous No.4286275]

>>4285099

I'm not a Christian but if you think that colonizing, exterminating and enslaving weaker peoples is a Christian concept you're way off, it's an everybody mentality where the strong take advantage of the weak; the Christian west has just been strong for the past few hundred years.

[Anonymous No.4286872]

>>4281534

>It's simply not true that there's no racial / nationalist history in Christianity or Islam

I never said there wasn't, only that it wasn't an inherent aspect. Until you get to the modern period, traditional societies, at least as far as Christendom/Islamdom are concerned, seem to perceive religion as the most important identifying factor, whether or not there is any kind of regionalism in a people. And for a long time, the sharpest divisions in the Christian and Islamic worlds were matters of religious dogma, authority and belief and the borders and relationships between tribes and ethnicities were largely decided by these matters first and foremost. I never said once that these religions destroyed tribalism, only that their worldviews are not inherently tribalistic and so were able to have a much broader appeal and spreading of the two and this also allowed for the construction of empires that utilized the knowledge and skills and multiple tribes/nations. My other point was that before you get closer to the modern period, the general worldview of the traditional Christian or Islamic civilizations was "this is the country of our religion (God's kingdom)." while in the modern period, as nationalism and more secular ideas began to replace religion's place in society in many ways, the worldview appears to have shifted more towards "this is the religion of my country," and so as a result you see an increase in religion being carried and determined by race and ethnic relations while if we're talking 400CE to, say, 1400, it seems more like the racial and ethnic relations are determined by the religious climate.

In that timeline I just mentioned, the biggest concerns for people appear to be whether you're iconoclast or not, whether you were a Monophysite or not, whether Christ ever laughed, whether you believed the Qu'ran was created or eternal or who was supposed to lead the Ummah/Church in the absence of Christ/Muhammad (in both the religious and political sense)? Where you stood on these kinds of issues seemed to be what was most important and it was these which largely, though not absolutely, decided how different ethnic groups or tribes related to each other (although class also played a big role) and the borders between civilizations.

[Anonymous No.4286876]

>>4286872

CONT'D

>Your argument that missionary activity "allowed humankind to progress" seems based centrally on the notion that the spread of Christianity (and Islam) is in itself "progress".

I was basing it more on the fact that the two religions have an inherent missionary attitude and the most important affiliation of a person in their worldviews is the religion said person belongs to with everything else being of either arbitrary or secondary at best, at least traditionally, and what I was trying to say was this attitude helped encourage the creation of a greater network for exchange of ideas, and not just religious ideas, although almost every field of study back then was coated in religious language. And by "missionary attitude," I'm referring to the general idea of "we need to expand our religion and gain converts," whether this attitude be focused on military conquest or more humble means.

[Anonymous No.4286879]

>>4286872
>>4286876

CONT'D/end

>If you wanted to argue for the role of Christianity and Islam in "progress", a better basis would be their establishment of international languages allowing widespread spoken and written communication (Latin, Arabic), international networks and contacts, and institutions like the universities. Of course, especially in the case of the Christian world, these often began as places to train clergy, but they became centres and repositories of study and learning, and over time developed both traditions of rigorous and wide-ranging enquiry, and international contacts that assisted the dissemination of ideas.

That was pretty much what I was driving at, though I was unable to put it into proper words as well as you. However, on top of this I was asking to what extent the worldviews of these two encouraged these things considering the fact I mentioned that religion was such an integral part of daily & political life and social relationships. Meanwhile, I was also trying to point out that Judaism never created such civilization as arose under Christendom or Islam or even other religions further east for that matter. It's biggest contribution would appear to be the Old Testament. I'm not saying that Jews didn't make any worthwhile contributions, but after the destruction of the Second Temple and up until the formation of the state of Israel, their role is pretty much mitigated. While I understand the historical circumstances which contributed to this (smaller and scattered population, marginalization based on religious affiliation, etc.) I also am curious if another reason that there is no memorable Hebraic civilization beyond the Second Temple period is also because of certain worldviews which have come to characterize that which we call Judaism that prevented it from creating any kind of rival civilization. For instance, does the fact that Judaism is more ethnocentric and isn't the kind of religion that has generally sought "converts" like Islam and Christianity were wont to do play its role and to what extent? And do such qualities and others make it a religion capable of surviving any longer or a religion capable of contributing significantly to the growth of civilization in general? And on the more spiritual level, is there anything offered by Judaism that one does not readily find in the other Abrahamic traditions that if it can survive (which I believe it can) it is able to do through more than just people being born Jews and thus feeling obligated to be Jewish and preserve and observe Judaism.

[Anonymous No.4286893]

>>4277683
no religion is obsolete as its purpose is to bring one closer to god or truth or righteousness or whatever. but yes, religions are obsolete because of mass media.

[Anonymous No.4287141]

>>4286879
>there is no memorable Hebraic civilization beyond the Second Temple period

What about the history of ideas, and the arts? Maimonides in the 12th century is just one figure that stands out, and Jewish figures were prominent in the cultural hub of 19th century Vienna, for example. Jews have a disproportionate place in the history of medicine and of secular scholarship, and the performing arts and literature, especially since the Enlightenment, and despite historical restrictions on their access to academic institutions; while, as merchants and as being exempt from the strictures of church law against usury, they were crucial to the economic and commercial development and life of mediaeval and early modern European societies. True, there may have been no Jewish empire or state prior to modern Isarael; however "progress" and civilization are not to be measured only by political or military power. One reason that there's not the kind of "civilization" you're privileging is that, especially after their gradual legal emancipation in the 19th century, Jews were part of and influenced the general culture of Europe and other parts where they were present in numbers. Things like the Nuremberg Laws with their obsessively precise attempts to define who was an wasn't Jewish show the integration.

And you're not acknowledging the full import of the point about the marginalization and destruction of Jewish communities under various regimes, including occasional mediaeval persecutions or expulsions, and 20th century totalitarianisms: many of these communities were many centuries old, with established institutions and traditions, texts and artefacts and buildings, much of which was wiped out in a few short years during the Nazi occupation of Eastern Europe alone - the Nazi pogrom of "Kristallnacht" alone destroyed literally hundreds of synagogues in Germany and Austria, and their contents, to consider just one type of building that contained Jewish culture.

The minority, marginalization, and unstable position (one moment relatively secure; the next persecuted or expelled, as in mid-20th century Germany, or England in the late 12th century when Jews were massacred and a century later under Edward I when hundreds were first imprisoned, many killed, and all Jews finally officially expelled from England) of Jewish populations are enough on their own to explain the relatively lesser prominence of Jewish culture in mediaeval and modern history as compared with Christian or Islamic, without resort to speculation about worldview.

[Anonymous No.4287217]

>>4287141
>What about the history of ideas, and the arts?

If I knew enough of Jews contributions to the wealth of ideas and art, do you think I'd have made this thread?

> and Jewish figures were prominent in the cultural hub of 19th century Vienna, for example. Jews have a disproportionate place in the history of medicine and of secular scholarship, and the performing arts and literature, especially since the Enlightenment, and despite historical restrictions on their access to academic institutions; while, as merchants and as being exempt from the strictures of church law against usury, they were crucial to the economic and commercial development and life of mediaeval and early modern European societies. True, there may have been no Jewish empire or state prior to modern Isarael; however "progress" and civilization are not to be measured only by political or military power.

I'm well aware of all this, but this is not what I'm asking. I'm not really asking whether Jews contributed to the cultural and intellectual landscape of the cultures they resided in as individuals, but how much their worldviews as followers of Judaism influenced them to make these contributions. Did they just simply contribute because they were well learned in this or that field and so happened to be Jewish? Or did Judaism play a role in inspiring their contributions? And if it did, what kind of role? Or was their being Jewish was altogether irrelevant when it came to them making this contribution of theirs? I'm not simply asking "did Jews contribute to the progress of human society." I have no doubt that they did, though I have limited knowledge as to what those contributions are exactly so I'd wish to know more.

And while yes I am also aware that progress is not measured by only military/political power, these are often vehicles for progress nonetheless and among the fundamental components of any civilization.

>The minority, marginalization, and unstable position (one moment relatively secure; the next persecuted or expelled, as in mid-20th century Germany, or England in the late 12th century when Jews were massacred and a century later under Edward I when hundreds were first imprisoned, many killed, and all Jews finally officially expelled from England) of Jewish populations are enough on their own to explain the relatively lesser prominence of Jewish culture in mediaeval and modern history as compared with Christian or Islamic, without resort to speculation about worldview.

Yet other persecuted or unstable religious and ethnic minorities have often rose up to positions of strength and influence in spite of marginalization and often went on to create strong empires and states themselves (which, ironically enough, often went on to persecute and/or marginalize others). This doesn't appear to be the case with Jews, not until after World War 2 at least. Perhaps worldview only has a small role in the Jews' case, but I doubt it had no role.

[Anonymous No.4287218]

>>4286872
>>4286876

I'm not sure it's really the case that Christianity, in particular, was ever divorced from political and national divisions, at least from the time when it became a powerful and then the state religion of the Roman and successor states (like the "Byzantine" empire). Clerics and orders wielded secular power, and were involved in their own and others' rivalries and conflicts (with both secular powers and church figures using each other, and each other's powers of appointment and approval, to further their own, their families', or their favoured parties' causes). This is one of the factors that lead to the removal of the papal seat to Avignon; and the "Great Schism" that followed its return to Rome in 1378, and the election of the Italian Pope Urban VI (in response to Roman demands for an Italian pope): he sought to reassert the power of the papacy as against that of the college of cardinals, who by then had been selected by the (French) Avignon popes, were mostly French, and had gained greatly in power during the Avignon period, and this conflict between the cardinals and the pope led to the election of a rival pope based in Avignon, and a split of the church along national lines, which both reflected and exacerbated contemporary political tensions. So too, in warfare and political conflicts, broad and narrow, civil and international, each side would have clergy who might be advisers and counsellors, but also support the cause and the claims of their side. After the Reformation, which side of the Protestant-Catholic divide one stood could in itself be an element in conflict (as with British rule in Ireland, and Irish resistance), but even before then, for example during the Crusades, there were both religious and national political tensions between, for example, Latin (Western) and Greek (Eastern) Christians, as many of the former passed through lands of the latter: in 1204, after a period of tension between Latin ("Catholic", by modern labels) and Greek ("Orthodox") Christians in Constantinople itself, the city was besieged by Western European and Venetian forces, taken and sacked (including the destruction and looting of religious buildings and ertefacts, and various atrocities against inhabitants, including religious), and then ruled by a Western, Latin Christian crusader emperor, Baldwin I.

[Anonymous No.4287226]

>>4287217

I should make a correction here, when I say "positions of strength and influence," I'm not of course referring to positions in the established bureaucracy or courts of the lands they resided in, mostly I'm referring to people actually rising up and taking over mostly.

[Anonymous No.4287232]

>>4287217
>I'm not really asking whether Jews contributed to the cultural and intellectual landscape of the cultures they resided in as individuals, but how much their worldviews as followers of Judaism influenced them to make these contributions.

I've already commented on that, both implicitly and explicitly: the traditions of textual study, religious scholarship, and debate that are integral to Jewish religious tradition are widely held to have influenced jewish contributions to the sciences, scholarship, the legal profession, medicine, etc. Jewish culture and religious ideas allowed Jews in the mediaeval and early modern period to engage in business that Christians couldn't without church sanctions, so their Jewish worldview, in contrast with the church's, directly enabled this contribution. These contributions happened in some cases even while Jews suffered under legal and other disabilities; once they began to be emancipated - essentially, treated something like equal, free citizens, their role in those societies expanded. So, yes, Jewish traditions influenced Jewish roles in society; and the limitations of that role were crucially tied to the marginalization of Jewish communities.

>Yet other persecuted or unstable religious and ethnic minorities have often rose up to positions of strength and influence in spite of marginalization

And I've noted that this did happen with Jewish populations: they quite often (In mediaeval England and Spain prior to the respective persecutions and expulsions, for example) became prosperous, influential, and important to their societies. So too in the pre-Nazi German world. This very profile, security, prosperity, and influence is often a factor in the persecutions that have followed, as elements of the majority population became envious and / or fearful of a perceived "other".

But, having said that, it's really important not to buy into the idea that Jewish populations were clearly distinct from non-Jewish: conversion and intermarriage (as between Protestant and Catholic) happened, and especially in places like 19th and 20th century Germany, some people were simply not that bound to their religious origins, so many extended families had both Jewish and non-Jewish sides. This was something the Nazis ideologues were well aware of, and took into account when it came to their anti-Semitic programme - that while many Germans might be susceptible to anti-Semitism as an idea, many also had Jewish relatives or Jewish acquaintances whom they might not be so ready to demonize. Indeed, even some senior Nazi figures themselves had Jewish family connections, precisely because the Nazi idea of the Jews as an alien, immigrant "race" distinct from "true" Germans was a fiction. Obviously, as with any minority community, there was a degree of distinction, but it wasn't nearly so clearcut as anti-Semites pretended.

[Anonymous No.4287238]

>>4287226
>mostly I'm referring to people actually rising up and taking over mostly

But then it looks like you're making definitions to suit your argument. You began by talking about influence on "civilization" and "human progress". That can happen by wielding military / political power, but it very often doesn't. Indeed, much of the progress of recent times in many areas has depended crucially not on such antagonistic situations, but rather on peaceful coexistence permitting exchanges between people in countries that were mortal enemies within living memory (e. g., the UK, US, Germany, and Japan).

[Anonymous No.4287242]

>>4287238

And conversely, one need only look at the post-War history of Africa to see how attempts to overthrow powers and establish one's own can fatally undermine societies, and lead to extreme poverty and underdevelopment in resource-rich regions.

[Anonymous No.4287299]

>>4277683

Come on... Any religion is either absolute truth or atavistic superstition and thus obsolete. Your silly consumerist relativism gets you nowhere.

What you are asking is whether Jewish culture is obsolete, and this is self-evidently not the case. To Jews, who are the only people it has any validity to.

For all cultures to embrace universalism, all religions must be superceded, since every single one claims to be absolute.

[Anonymous No.4287477]

>>4287141

Spinoza is another major figure of the European intellectual tradition whose roots and upbringing were Jewish; although he was as a young man expelled from his Jewish community for reasons that are not entirely clear. The components of his education, and influences on his thought, are several and various, but his Jewish background was certainly among them.

[Anonymous No.4288489]

>>4277683
Those silly pricks!

[Anonymous No.4288515]

>>4277683
Judaism is a religion founded on iron age barbarism and racism, it needs to die.