Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleJudaism was one of the Philosophy and religion good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
March 13, 2006Good article nomineeListed
April 22, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 11, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
August 15, 2021Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Judaism on Sin and L-D Punishment[edit]

Sent following query at Ask A Rabbi Chadbad date 07/04/2022 ID 5659671 Q Query on sin and the L-Ds Punishments does the L-D always punish those who refuse to repent on the parts of their bodies they have sinned with? For examples Eli the Priest saw that his sons were sinning yet he only made a futile rebuke..thus his descendants at the L-Ds Alter were sentenced to view the alter with eyes of consumming greed and Eli himself went blind or Samson who married non Jewish Philistine women and was blinded by the Palestines? Please correct me if this theroy is mistaken

on 07.05.2022 received a reply to query B”H HI I am smart. All the best, Rabbi Eliezer Zalmanov For — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:45, 5 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

All of this is disinformation and has nothing to do with actual Judaism. If you don’t understand Judaism, please do not touch an encyclopedia page. “L-D Punishments?” What does that mean? There’s no such thing. We are not a religion based on “Sin” nor “punishment” whatsoever. Jewish “laws” aren’t actual “laws,” that’s just the closest word to translate to in the English language, that can’t be understood in the context of a literal “law.” There are “rules” that simply outline which prayer is said on what occasion and how, holidays, hygienic and dietary “laws” and “rituals,” etc. If you don’t comply with very serious “laws,” then the “punishment,” if that’s how one chooses to see it, is simply not being Jewish anymore. For example: If you believe in more than one God, you’re not Jewish. There’s absolutely no means for punishing anyone, and 99% of the global Jewish population is not Hasidic (ultra-orthodox —- which is what Chabad is), but assimilated, and thus cannot “shun” anyone if they decide to no longer be Jewish. Your own beliefs are being projected onto another religion. Judaism is fundamentally different from Christianity in every way imaginable. You have to remove all of your core beliefs to understand a very simple religion: Judaism.
And again, I will reiterate — Chabad is not a source, and Hasidism (Chabad is American Hasidic-Judaism) accounts for only 1% of the world’s Jewish population. 99% of Jews do not practice Judaism that reflects Hasidism’s radically different belief-system and way of life. They’re still a sect, but you’re over representing them, and thus not allowing Judaism to be represented. They are the most zealot extremist form of Judaism on Earth. There’s also no way to verify a Rabbi on the internet. There is no such thing as “Eli the Priest.” No idea who Samson is. Philistines are an ethnic group from an entirely different region. Palestine is the name given to modern-day Israel and Jordan after being colonized by the Ottoman Empire, and it does not come from the Greek word “Philistine.” We don’t have any alters, and we don’t believe in violence or retribution of any kind. The Old Testament is not the Torah. Those who believe solely in the Christian Old Testament are called Fundamentalist Christians. The Torah is only the 5 Book of Moses, as originally written — not the re-written King James Version (authored by King James of England during a campaign against the Jews).
This is why actual Jews, who have real Rabbis, need to have access to contribute to this article about Judaism. It’s extremely biased and inaccurate — and locked. If this is a section in the Wiki Article, please kindly delete it. Thank you. AmericanHistory.exe (talk) 03:15, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your comments about what Judaism is or is not are baffling. Please explain
how many "versions" of Judaism you believe there are. Patrick Riot 2003 (talk) 18:01, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Hebrew Bible"[edit]

Why is this phrase used? Use the proper name. We do not have the Catholic Quran or the Taoist Vedas. I'd edit it myself but I don't know how. 2601:14E:4100:79B0:D50B:C10F:AFE8:F4AA (talk) 16:00, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's a very common phrase and not at all analogous to those examples. 18:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC) Furius (talk) 18:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Furius it's a poorly used phrase that should not be used.
The name for all Holy books are not <religion name> Bible. They have their own names, with their own history and culture. Christians have a Bible, other religions have holy books of their own names. Use the proper name and don't try and fit everything into a Christian mindset. 2601:14E:4100:79B0:369D:2221:E2FF:1CBB (talk) 01:41, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you feel strongly about this, take it to the talk page of Hebrew Bible, but you will see that there is a section there explaining that "Hebrew Bible" is considered a neutral term, not a Christianising one. The term "bible" is not specifically Christian; it just means "books" and in fact it was used by Greek-speaking Jews to describe the Hebrew Bible centuries before Christians showed up. Furius (talk) 01:50, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Furthermore, what name would you prefer? This isn't exactly a simple topic. Many incorrectly use the term "Old Testament," for example, which not only is a Supersessionist name, but not even accurate as what Christians call the "Old Testament" includes some additional books that are not part of the Hebrew canon. Tanakh, while a more correct title, is not at all common in English language usage, as opposed to something like Quran or Rig Veda. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 15:40, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Since the 'Bible' has several sectarian versions, one should use Tanakh as the default term for the Jewish Masoretic recension, as with the Qur'an and Rg Veda. Since there are different canonical selections, rather than use a generic term, Bible/Hebrew Bible/Tanakh, one should cite the specific book from which some datum is being cited which sidesteps this confusion. It is improper, for example, to use the 'Hebrew Bible' to write up some material on early biblical history, for the ethnic epithet implies that this item is not contained in any other bible format, Catholic, Protestant or whatever. Nishidani (talk) 15:56, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Hebrew Bible" is the most common English term into which Tanach is translated. So using "Hebrew Bible" in English is using Tanakh. -- Avi (talk) 16:57, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nishidani, can you provide any WP:RS that "Hebrew Bible" implies such a thing. It sounds like something that you have made up. Furius (talk) 17:05, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2023[edit]

Judaism did not evolve from Yahwism. John Dobermen of Ireland (talk) 16:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Reliable sources cited in the article maintain that it did. If you wish to call those sources into question, please post your arguments and supporting citations of reliable sources here on the Talk page and seek consensus for any change. General Ization Talk 17:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 23 February 2023[edit]

After the end of the "Origins" section (before the "Antiquity" section), add:

In his seminal Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels, Julius Wellhausen argued that Judaism as a religion based on widespread observance Torah law first emerged in the year 444 BCE when, according to the biblical account provided in the Book of Nehemiah (chapter 8), a priestly scribe named Ezra read a copy of the Mosaic Torah before the populace of Judea assembled in a central Jerusalem square.[1] Wellhausen believed that this narrative should be accepted as historical because it sounds plausible, noting: “The credibility of the narrative appears on the face of it.”[2] Following Wellhausen, most scholars throughout the 20th and early 21st centuries have accepted that widespread Torah observance began sometime around the middle of the 5th century BCE.

More recently, Yonatan Adler has argued that in fact there is no surviving evidence to support the notion that the Torah was widely known, regarded as authoritative, and put into practice, any time prior to the middle of the 2nd century BCE.[3] Adler explored the likelihhood that Judaism, as the widespread practice of Torah law by Jewish society at large, first emerged in Judea during the reign of the Hasmonean dynasty, centuries after the putative time of Ezra.[4]

In the Bibliography section, add two sources (each in their proper alphabetical place):

  • Adler, Yonatan (2022). The Origins of Judaism: An Archaeological-Historical Reappraisal. Yale University Press. ISBN 9780300254907.
 Question: Do you have sourcing for the sentence starting "Following Wellhausen, most scholars..."? That's quite a claim to make and likely to be challenged. Actualcpscm (talk) 12:27, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  1. ^ Wellhausen 1885, p. 405–410.
  2. ^ Wellhausen 1885, p. 408 n. 1.
  3. ^ Adler 2022.
  4. ^ Adler 2022, p. 223–234.