No, im disappointed that the savior of mankind, in the book most oriented towards “the future”, tells us about “them of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but do lie”, and you can’t see the forest in front of you because you’ve smashed your face into the tree named “ulla”
You love to preach the multiple meanings folded into Jesus’ words…well, except when it comes to anything related to the genocidal state of israel
Yes, when someone claims to be a Jew, Jesus warns that it's an important claim to verify. I've provided evidence that the verification is sufficient for ordinary standards (you make extraordinary claims). I've alluded to the Ashkenazi I knew who pointed out his tribe had less claim on Judaism than many African tribal Sabbatarians, solely because of the Khazar ingrafting. If you want to get specific about any evidence I should consider about what I'm not seeing about continuity of Judah/Jewry, I'm still waiting. But words like "genocidal" I counsel journalistic patience about.
Yes, when someone claims to be a Jew, Jesus warns that it's an important claim to verify.
Feel free to elaborate on the word “verify” and how it differs from “take people at their word, full stop”
I've alluded to the Ashkenazi I knew who pointed out his tribe had less claim on Judaism than many African tribal Sabbatarians [who aren’t regarded as jews]
Sounds like he has his head on straighter than you!
If you want to get specific about any evidence I should consider about what I'm not seeing about continuity of Judah/Jewry
You mean, beyond the fact that ashkenazim aren’t Judahites, as you just acknowledged?
I didn't acknowledge that the Ashkenazi aren't Judahites. Evidence indicates they arise from the merger of Judahites and Khazarians, which eventually continued the name Judahites and not the name Khazarians. It doesn't make them non-Jews just because they have more intermix but have always been taken as Jews by Jews and most everyone else. There is no case in history I know of where mixing two together removes the right to use either name in the future; and usually a marriage takes the man's name.
Not exactly, but you did acknowledge that your ashkenazi acquaintance rightly observed that his tribe has less claim to the name than peoples who are excluded from the name by the group known as “world jewry”, which is a roundabout way of acknowledging that Ashkenazim aren’t jews.
No, im disappointed that the savior of mankind, in the book most oriented towards “the future”, tells us about “them of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but do lie”, and you can’t see the forest in front of you because you’ve smashed your face into the tree named “ulla”
You love to preach the multiple meanings folded into Jesus’ words…well, except when it comes to anything related to the genocidal state of israel
Yes, when someone claims to be a Jew, Jesus warns that it's an important claim to verify. I've provided evidence that the verification is sufficient for ordinary standards (you make extraordinary claims). I've alluded to the Ashkenazi I knew who pointed out his tribe had less claim on Judaism than many African tribal Sabbatarians, solely because of the Khazar ingrafting. If you want to get specific about any evidence I should consider about what I'm not seeing about continuity of Judah/Jewry, I'm still waiting. But words like "genocidal" I counsel journalistic patience about.
Feel free to elaborate on the word “verify” and how it differs from “take people at their word, full stop”
Sounds like he has his head on straighter than you!
You mean, beyond the fact that ashkenazim aren’t Judahites, as you just acknowledged?
I didn't acknowledge that the Ashkenazi aren't Judahites. Evidence indicates they arise from the merger of Judahites and Khazarians, which eventually continued the name Judahites and not the name Khazarians. It doesn't make them non-Jews just because they have more intermix but have always been taken as Jews by Jews and most everyone else. There is no case in history I know of where mixing two together removes the right to use either name in the future; and usually a marriage takes the man's name.
Not exactly, but you did acknowledge that your ashkenazi acquaintance rightly observed that his tribe has less claim to the name than peoples who are excluded from the name by the group known as “world jewry”, which is a roundabout way of acknowledging that Ashkenazim aren’t jews.