Boromir

We have a new iteration of this: https://t.co/0Rni4UQk9p I wonder who was more confused: the Romans in their descriptions of said people both in Judea and abroad, using the same name for both, and describing both their ethnic and religious characteristics or Frances in reading such passages. Now, the way this game can be strung along for additional iterations is by pointing to a couple counter examples. Such can also be done for any modern ethnic group with a national homeland of the same name. i.e Italians aren't an ethnic group because here is a quote that uses the word "Italian" for all citizens of Italy, which include recent immigrants etc. Likewise, the ancient corpus has a couple such counter examples. And the same way counter examples don't undo our understanding of an Italian ethnicity, they don't contradict the basic reality that the Jewish ethnicity was understood in ancient times (an understanding that never died). The same way that modern contexts provide us a way to know whether the term Italian is used administratively or ethnically, ancient texts do the same for Jewish/Judean. Mind you, the latter was rarely divorced from the ethnicity, but I'm making sure to address the entire corpus. Here is a quote from Philo's works, attributed to Agrippa I (of both Hasmonean and Herodian ancestry). And everything is there: the connection of the ethnic group to its homeland, the ancestral tie of said ethnicity to its homeland ,its residence abroad, the mention of said ethnicity in Europe, the care of said diaspora for its homeland, and the favorite "colony" word. Everything watermelons attribute to a modern Zionist invention and criticize, was already done by Herod Agrippa 2000 years ago. I'd love to learn how the people mentioned here are an anachronism for modern day Jews. If I hear anything, it'll be: cope that their descendants never ventured northward to become the ancestors of Ashkenazim, that the admixture levels of modern day Jews are both whatever the responder thinks they are and happen to cross some blood quantum threshold; I may also hear that the change form Roman Judea to Roman Palestine also magically changed the ethnicity of the Jewish diaspora - well, imagine the implications for the Palestinian diaspora.

AleJohnson242's tweet photo. We have a new iteration of this:
https://t.co/0Rni4UQk9p
I wonder who was more confused: the Romans in their descriptions of said people both in Judea and abroad, using the same name for both, and describing both their ethnic and religious characteristics or Frances in reading such passages.

Now, the way this game can be strung along for additional iterations is by pointing to a couple counter examples. Such can also be done for any modern ethnic group with a national homeland of the same name. i.e Italians aren't an ethnic group because here is a quote that uses the word "Italian" for all citizens of Italy, which include recent immigrants etc.

Likewise, the ancient corpus has a couple such counter examples. And the same way counter examples don't undo our understanding of an Italian ethnicity, they don't contradict the basic reality that the Jewish ethnicity was understood in ancient times (an understanding that never died). The same way that modern contexts provide us a way to know whether the term Italian is used administratively or ethnically, ancient texts do the same for Jewish/Judean. Mind you, the latter was rarely divorced from the ethnicity, but I'm making sure to address the entire corpus.

Here is a quote from Philo's works, attributed to Agrippa I (of both Hasmonean and Herodian ancestry). And everything is there: the connection of the ethnic group to its homeland, the ancestral tie of said ethnicity to its homeland ,its residence abroad, the mention of said ethnicity in Europe, the care of said diaspora for its homeland, and the favorite "colony" word. Everything watermelons attribute to a modern Zionist invention and criticize, was already done by Herod Agrippa 2000 years ago.

I'd love to learn how the people mentioned here are an anachronism for modern day Jews. If I hear anything, it'll be: cope that their descendants never ventured northward to become the ancestors of Ashkenazim, that the admixture levels of modern day Jews are both whatever the responder thinks they are and happen to cross some blood quantum threshold; I may also hear that the change form Roman Judea to Roman Palestine also magically changed the ethnicity of the Jewish diaspora - well, imagine the implications for the Palestinian diaspora.

364

Boromir @IssureiBeiah613

2 days ago

“But when he came to Eastern lands and the glory of God no longer shone over him, he threw away the costly garments of Judaism, and put on strange ones.“