Where did modern Jews and Indians come from?
#11
(02-12-2016, 03:52 PM)Zedta Wrote:
(02-11-2016, 02:55 PM)J Michael Wrote:
(02-11-2016, 02:23 PM)Zedta Wrote:
(02-10-2016, 12:25 AM)DeWayne Wrote:
(02-09-2016, 05:44 PM)Dominicus Wrote: When I first read the title I thought it was going to be about Mormonism.  :LOL:

If this is true then I wonder how many of these "Jews" are actually Jewish according to Halachic law. Barely any most likely as it comes from only the mother's side.

On a side note, its possible that I actually am "Jewish" from my mothers side.

Could this have anything to do with Revelation Chapter 3 Verse 9??

Interesting point.

I thought they may be some remnant of the Old Testament Jews who, during the Babylonian captivity, adopted the Babylonian religions and still do today.

Which "Babylonian religions" would those be?

Well, for instance; my son-in-law is of Indian decent and his family are devout Hindu. I have read some of their Hindu literature and I find it so resembles a form of multi-deity worship akin to worship of fallen Angels who are described in Gen 6. They being 'the heroes of old', 'the giants', etc.

The Hindu seem to have a deity for everything and I have read the Babylonians did too, as well as an hierarchy of deities, as do the Hindu. Each god having its own 'religion' or following, even to distinct Temples, also common for Hindu and Babylonian deities.

Then there is the racial appearances of the Indian...much liken to a Caucasian with brown skin or like an Arab or Semite? Yet on th border with distinctly Oriental groups.

Then, of course, there are those of the Jewish Religion who aren't genetically Semite, the 'converts' to Judaism, the Ashkenazi Jews, those 'Jews' who speak Yiddish. They have become numerous and were among a majority, perhaps, (due to their homes in Europe) that were subject to the Holocaust. They who may be more responsible, perhaps, for the ideas that they Jew is person liken to Shakespeare's Shylock? Many of the Jews in media seem to have a Yiddish background, at least those I came in contact with growing up among them in the Hollywood area.

I speculate, of course on all of this, but it is fascinating subject, none the less.

So, rather than speculate, which I grant you can be "fun", but really gets no one anywhere useful for the most part, you might find this to be an interesting, but not always easy read. 

So-called "racial appearance" can be very deceiving.  I lived in Israel for 5 years where I saw and knew Arabs with red hair, light skin, and blue eyes; Sephardic Jews with light skin and light hair; Ashkenazi Jews with blond hair and blue eyes, and Ashkenazi Jews with dark skin.  Go figure...
Reply
#12
(02-12-2016, 04:16 PM)J Michael Wrote:
(02-12-2016, 03:52 PM)Zedta Wrote:
(02-11-2016, 02:55 PM)J Michael Wrote:
(02-11-2016, 02:23 PM)Zedta Wrote:
(02-10-2016, 12:25 AM)DeWayne Wrote:
(02-09-2016, 05:44 PM)Dominicus Wrote: When I first read the title I thought it was going to be about Mormonism.  :LOL:

If this is true then I wonder how many of these "Jews" are actually Jewish according to Halachic law. Barely any most likely as it comes from only the mother's side.

On a side note, its possible that I actually am "Jewish" from my mothers side.

Could this have anything to do with Revelation Chapter 3 Verse 9??

Interesting point.

I thought they may be some remnant of the Old Testament Jews who, during the Babylonian captivity, adopted the Babylonian religions and still do today.

Which "Babylonian religions" would those be?

Well, for instance; my son-in-law is of Indian decent and his family are devout Hindu. I have read some of their Hindu literature and I find it so resembles a form of multi-deity worship akin to worship of fallen Angels who are described in Gen 6. They being 'the heroes of old', 'the giants', etc.

The Hindu seem to have a deity for everything and I have read the Babylonians did too, as well as an hierarchy of deities, as do the Hindu. Each god having its own 'religion' or following, even to distinct Temples, also common for Hindu and Babylonian deities.

Then there is the racial appearances of the Indian...much liken to a Caucasian with brown skin or like an Arab or Semite? Yet on th border with distinctly Oriental groups.

Then, of course, there are those of the Jewish Religion who aren't genetically Semite, the 'converts' to Judaism, the Ashkenazi Jews, those 'Jews' who speak Yiddish. They have become numerous and were among a majority, perhaps, (due to their homes in Europe) that were subject to the Holocaust. They who may be more responsible, perhaps, for the ideas that they Jew is person liken to Shakespeare's Shylock? Many of the Jews in media seem to have a Yiddish background, at least those I came in contact with growing up among them in the Hollywood area.

I speculate, of course on all of this, but it is fascinating subject, none the less.

So, rather than speculate, which I grant you can be "fun", but really gets no one anywhere useful for the most part, you might find this to be an interesting, but not always easy read. 

So-called "racial appearance" can be very deceiving.  I lived in Israel for 5 years where I saw and knew Arabs with red hair, light skin, and blue eyes; Sephardic Jews with light skin and light hair; Ashkenazi Jews with blond hair and blue eyes, and Ashkenazi Jews with dark skin.  Go figure...

No doubt. After so many years, its no wonder that there have been huge additions to the general gene pool of all races. Which one is still 'pure', as it were?
Reply
#13
the fact is that the indo-Iranians that conquered Persian and northern India maintained cultural connections and continuity.  The Persians like most conquering cultures before and after, appropriated the jewels and elements of the culture they conquered, particularly ancient and venerable ones like the Babylonians.  It ain't that hard. 

Not too mention, if we speak as an original 'civilization' it would probably be Neolithic farmers in eastern Anatolia/northern Syria, that moved westward and presumably eastward.  the ones that went westward formed the founding farming populations of the Mediterraen world (key word is farming as there were presumably a hunter/gatherer population already their that has passed on only a sliver of their genetic material.  For instance, Britain claims to be Celt/Anglo/Saxon, yet genetically the majority are more closely related to northern Iberians than to the continental celt/saxon/anglo groups.  which tells you that invaders typically leave little genetics but impart huge culture changes (think how many Turks in Turkey are really Turks when Greek was spoken longer than any other language and they have had a longer history than most peoples).  However, they stopped around the alps, and their technology diffused northward which is one of the reasons for the light/dark hair divide in Europe.  the eastward question is a little bit more complicated as there are several civilizations that neither had a semitic or Indo-European culture, which makes one wonder what came first like the Sumerians or the Elamites.

The observation of light-skinned Arabs is a testament to the slave trade and Ottoman/Moslem policies for conscription, where they took sons away from Christian families, converted them, and sent them on their conquest.  Even then, the Arab/Turks preferred European girls for their harems.

The jew is complicated because they made the change from patrilineal to matrilineal descent (after all you do know who the mother is).  I like to think and I do believe there is enough evidence of various founder populations for jews across eastern and western Europe that attests to be middle eastern in origin, even amongst the most blue hair, blonde eyed Jew.  Not too mention, during the Roman period, some estimated the jewish population to be close to 10% of the population prior to the second jewish revolt. That is a lot of DNA that probably was spread after the revolt and forced to live in isolated communities across the empire, presumably most jews were not the pious Pharisees that we make them out to be and probably intermarried with local Christians or pagans.  There are many different ways to explain jewish populations because they were moved so much.  though I think the only population probably closest to the origin Israelites are the Yemenite Jews, they lived n relative isolation, maintain some of the oldest traditions, and close proximity to the homeland.     
Reply
#14
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, AM, but don't most scholars think that the proto-Indo-Europeans came from somewhere close to modern-day Ukraine, or are the Neolithic farmers you mention a different group of people?
Reply
#15
(02-13-2016, 01:28 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, AM, but don't most scholars think that the proto-Indo-Europeans came from somewhere close to modern-day Ukraine, or are the Neolithic farmers you mention a different group of people?

The mainstream theory is the Ukraine is the original 'homeland' for the proto-Indo-Europeans.  However some alternative theories include the Balkans or Anatolia.  There is enough  evidence to show that there is a genetic and cultural continuity of sorts from eastern anatolia to danube and southern europe that would suggests that there were successive waves of settlers that brought farming into the region (that either displaced, assimilated, or replaced previous groups).  For instance Ancient Anatolian (i.e. Hittites and Luwian) both lack terms that other IE groups have, which suggests they were the oldest or separated from the main body at an earlier date.  As I mentioned generally conquerors impart language and culture but leave little in complete demographic domination.  Not to mention, the Indo-Europeans that are part of the Kurgan hypothesis were ascribed as pastoralist. 
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)