The very word Jewish, is something of an enigma. God chose to use the people of the Isles, the Pale – the archaic powerful English speaking clans who triumphed to monarchal heights. The English story is vast with myriad righteous Kings and Queens seeking favor of the almighty YHWH and in providing for His people a home in destitute times.
Assimilation aside, grievances aside, did not England embrace it’s loving arms around a people who were cast out roughshod after a century of chaos and struggle?
The British are so much a friend to the descendants of Israel that he primogenitured a name unto us after his own liking – Jewish.
How honorable to share such a similar title, Brit-ish and Jew-ish. Those who curtique my writing would accuse me of saying this in jest, but I riposte, this is an honor indeed. One in which I have no doubt the royal house and those involved shall be rewarded in kind by Elohim.
We do not give our primary thanks to the King and Queen and the stout, shrewd people of Britian who offered a downtrodden people sustenance and hope, but to Eloheinu we trust and give thanks eternally for His salvation and deliverance.
By this title the people of the world have come to know us – Jews. Some would say this to be speculative at best as Biblical works predate the 18th century English term by twenty centuries.
I digress there is too much evidence to support my claim. Every known English literature title communicating Judaic creed, historocity, or culture thereof will utilize the words Jewish or Jew when describing the entire Judaic community of the world.
Now I understand Israelites wholly reject this and such a divide owes to national pride when considering equating one with a multiple nationality across the pond who speak various dialect.
It’s a difficult understanding when considering the Russian born Chabad Lubavitch claim from Brooklyn New York and the Chief Rabbi of London claim that all of us are Jews united together under HaShem.
I cannot expect an understanding of this from the common man, only petulance that learning our centuries old terminology is incorrect. How do we re-educate society without chastizing students?
It seems now all of academia and Judaic historic narrative are entwined in some medieval fable concocted out of desparation to keep a people united under extreme duress. I think now is the time the populations of the world, the cultures of the world, understand that the people who serve YHWH are not to be referred to simply as British academic words.
There are no less than ten thousand volumes written on the subject of “Jews” all using the etymology of the phrase “Jewish People” or the elision of the archaic English iewe from the 15th century.
And again as much as we a people are thankful to the Crown, English parliament, and those who supported our survival and committment to goodwill, we as a nation would like to be referred to other than a British academic word of the 18th century.
The word was chosen in good faith and was the recognition of the establishment of the State of Israel and compel our fond memories of half a millenia of relationship to be sure.
Those who live in the United Kingdom, or the Pale should continue to realize the definition of the term set out for them legally by 1917 under the Balfour recognition. That your categorical name “Jewish” would differentiate oneself from the population in religious correspondence, cultural claim, or ethnic status as pertaining to law governing your country England.
The same cannot be true outside of English jurisprudence unless your nation is subject or viceroy to the Crown.
Thus, the legal terminology is not the same. The etymology of the words so chosen in other nations do not reflect the historic etymology of British words. Moreover, the word usage in dialect amongst the nations do not render the same meaning as an English word.
In all languages a rock is a rock and a tree is a tree. As a similar analogy the word Jewish is not a tree in all languages, nor is it the correct etymology when defining a culture from the Levant.
Judaism is a religion not an ethnicity according to Israeli law. Saying your mother is Jewish means she believes in Judaism, but is not necessarily a direct descendant from one of the twelve tribes (nor could we know this). If you’re not Jewish then you probably don’t know what I am talking about. If you think being a Jew is an ethnic, cultural choice, or special DNA to qualify then you are mistaken or fell prey to confusionism.
“The failure to achieve full emancipation rapidly led many German Jews to abandon Judaism and convert so as to be able to put the whole miserable struggle behind them by means of a mere sprinkle of water. In the 1820’s half the Jews of Berlin converted. Some of the great figures of German Jewry, such as Heinrich heine and Karl Marx, were in fact baptized. It was no accident that reform Judaism was born in Germany, as was a compromise brand that within an Orthodox format of worship permitted a more enlightened interpretation of the faith.” Stephen Brook, The Club: The Jews of Modern Britain, 1989.
There is much to be said on the above statement, but one thing we can all agree on is that Germany produced a phenomenon through mass murder. This effected the psyche and reverberates through time as an echo or wave in a still lake.
As all events in history the words used time stamp the orthology, or urban dictionary of the people at that time.
German ideology spread far and wide with the printing press in every literary format to enumerate the minds with ficticious myths and lore concerning eschatology for both Christian and Judaic cogito.
Today monotheist faith (Jewish, Christian, and Muslim) refer to their newer revised texts which birthed primarily from 15th century printing press. Only dutiful philologic adherents understand the difference between accepted fictional manuscripts, clones, and “A drappie o’ the real McKay.”
Before continuing the history of the word Jewish, I would like to take a moment to share my family background and what gives me the right to discuss anything Jewish at all.
As many families who lived within the Partions of Poland, we have a unique insight to what went on there over the centuries as opposed to newer fictions that seem to develop daily.
My name Zawada, the root word (original nee) which is Polish for “stumbling block,” and my life is proof that Hitler could not wipe us out. Shoah records both the death and survivors of Dachau, Flossenburg, and Auschwitz which display this truth and in which many oppose.
Zawada lived for centuries under the Partions of Poland through the Golden Age, antisemitism, Bolshevism and Hitler. The Zawada were part of the most pivotal times in the history of the world, including concentration camps, fighting Nazi’s with the Bielski partisans, and surviving with aliyah to Israel.
We have somewhat of an opinion based on our lineage and history which coincide with other groups who claim heritage or descendancy from Israel. At any rate, both words Zawada and Jew developed over 500 years.
Zawada remains in Poland unmolested as an original name, through which multiple family names birthed over centuries and dozens of townships bearing our name to this day. In essence we survived Hitler and the Soviet pogroms. Most Jews and Zawada fled, assimilated, or were removed by 1965 through aliyah, or scattered abroad.
Now the survivors of the families who lived there work daily at restoring the history that the Polish government currently censors to forget what happened. We do so in conjunction with organizations like Jewish Records Indexing, JewishGen, and American National archives.
Modern words for Judaism in London, Brooklyn NY, and Canada were imported from German/Polish orthology invention concerning the word “ioudaios” and the mass assimilation of culture by German, Polish, and Russian authority.
A perfect example of inaccuracy from these imports is found in wikipedia:
Wikipedia states, “Ioudaios is an Ancient Greek ethnonym used in classical and biblical literature which commonly translates to ‘Jew’ or ‘Judean.'”
As usual wikipedia editors are giving you their opinion of reality.
Don’t get me wrong wiki has the merits of a pop up tool, but when you must cross reference everything from their site it can be more time consuming weeding out propaganda from corporate editors.
The actual translation of the sentence below displays the cunning,
“Ioudaios is an Ancient Greek ‘ethnonym’ (19th century portmanteau) used in classical and biblical literature which commonly translates to ‘Jew’ or ‘Judean.'”
Portmanteau – “word blending the sound of two different words” (1882) was coined by “Lewis Carroll” (Charles L. Dodgson, 1832-1898) for the sort of words he invented for “Jabberwocky,” on the notion of “two meanings packed up into one word.” As a noun in this sense from 1872. https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=portmanteau
When was the word ethnonym invented in etymology? The 19th century.
Moreover, the wikipedia editor failed to realize the invention of the word, “ethnonym” is based off merging two (2) Greek words together for the purpose of describing fictional stories… like the Jabberwocky. Oops!
The poor wikipedia editor failed to realize he was using an invented word portmanteau to describe his fiction.
The use of the word ethnonym by wikipedia proves the theory is fiction.
The statement from wikipedia reads like this,
“Ioudaios is an Ancient Greek invented word used to describe a modern invented English word from classical and biblical literature which commonly translates to ‘Jew’ or ‘Judean.'”
Any amateur can run wikipedia or any statements through analysis software and see what the actual translations come out to be – whether they are making up a story (motive) or trying to tell the truth (earnest).
In this documentation you’ll learn the tools that defeat all liars and plagiarist, namely etymology and forensics which we have been using to solve crimes and put criminals in prison for centuries.
In a simple description, all somebody did was take the Greek word for nation “ethnos” ɛθnoʊ, and mix this word with the Greek ōnumon which means “names” in the 19th century to define all theory concerning ethnic names of cultures in history like Russian Cossacks, Jews, or Mongol Oyrat. Of course Oyrat is a folk-etymology or folklore and the word “Jew” is an elision of the word iewe from 15th century Bibles.
Ioudaios DOES NOT translate to “jew” nor is the word “common” as there is nothing common about slang words etymologically.
I want everyone on the planet who claims themself Jewish or Jews, myself included, to explain to me right now, why are you using an 18th century English British academic word to describe your belief in YHWH Torah?
Slang words are generally new inventions in a language describing what is and time stamps the era for us to examine.
Looking close at wikipedia they again make egregious errors on their List of Jewish ethnonyms page. I will not address all the errors per culture/language as the task requires an entire chapter to do so.
Under the heading we see wiki has left out the important English word iewe that had been in place for centuries. The word iewe is extremely important for archiving the transliteration or elision process of Greek ioudaios to German yuden to English iewe to modern English Jew as legally defined in 1917.
|English,||Jews, see Jew (word)1 (oops! where is the original iewe?)|
|Israelites or Children of Israel3|
Lets break it down when we see the changes in history:
- Jew 18th century
- Israel-ite 17th century (KJV)
- iewe and Israel 15th century
Below is inaccurate use of “Jew” from Latin Iudaeos,
Iudaeos = Jew, (incorrect) Juden, Judíos (English, German, Spanish)
Iudaico = Jewish, (incorrect) jüdisch, judío (English, German, Spanish)
Iudaeae = Judea, correct, but Israel is made up of 12 tribes, not just Judah or a place in the Levant.
It is said that Publius Cornelius Tacitus l (56 -118 CE) used the word “Jude,” but of course this is simply fiction from academia trying to link the German/English word Jude to the 1st century.
 Sed quoniam famosae urbis supremum diem tradituri sumus, congruens videtur primordia eius aperire. Iudaeos Creta insula profugos novissima Libyae insedisse memorant, qua tempestate Saturnus vi Iovis pulsus cesserit regnis.
Iudaeos does not equal or translate to “jude” as used by Tacitus and Google does not define this word, which proves another fiction by historians trying to manipulate reality.
Keep in mind the Latin is from 4th century AD, while the Greek is much older from the 2nd century BC and states this word,
Ἰούδας – ioudas
Ἰσραήλ – Israel
Notice above how the i remains an i from Greek to English. Notice how the other words such as Jewish convert the i to a j.
The only reason this occurred is due to the fact medieval English speaking people did not know how to say the word ioudas, which became the word iewe through the elision process in 15th century AD.
Coverdale Bible 1535 AD
The Coverdale Bible, compiled by Myles Coverdale and published in 1535, was the first complete Modern English translation of the Bible (not just the Old Testament or New Testament), and the first complete printed translation into English. The later editions (folio and quarto) published in 1539 were the first complete Bibles printed in England. The place of publication of the 1535 edition was long disputed. The printer was assumed to be either Froschover in Zurich or Cervicornus and Soter (in Cologne or Marburg). In 1997 the printer was identified as Merten de Keyser in Antwerp. https://publicdomainreview.org/collection/the-coverdale-bible-1535
Here is a snippet from the Coverdale Bible 1535 AD.
In John 5:1-2 above can you see the word Jewes?
So we know the word has been around for at least 500 years. This is where the modern word Jew comes from as well as the word Israel-ite – archaic English words.
In the verse below you will see the same symbol that looks like a capital J be written for Jericho and for Israel. This is where the common man in England in the 15th century (not knowing the difference) began to say the word “Jewe” and “Israel” as separate words, one denoting a J sound, the other denoting the correct i sound.
KJV 1769 version, “And the priests that bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord stood firm on dry ground in the midst of Jordan, and all the Israelites passed over on dry ground, until all the people were passed clean over Jordan.”
The English word “Jew” as one can see, is simply a shortened improper translation or slang elision (deleting, changing letters) from iewe found in the Coverdale Bible.
Based on the archaic words translated from the 15th century the clergy signed off on this new, easier pronounced idiom, to officially enter the descriptions into the halls and records of English parliament. King Henry VIII who terrorized a generation of people while claiming himself head of the Church, would succumb to death at the ripe old age of 56 in 1547.
The word jew to come out of Henry the VIII’s savage reign is not a root word (nee), from the Greek ioudaios (multiple ways to spell this), or from Latin iudaeus, but slang from the English improper idiom iewes. keep in mind the population was illiterate at this time. There was no need by scholars to be precise for the common tongue.
The King James Bible (produced 75 years later) would still have the archaic word iewes or Jewes.
Simple process – iewe to Jew. The Greek and Latin i is now changed to a J – just like Yesus to Jesus, and of course is easier to pronounce with the J for English, although an incorrect translation and utterance.
Why the word was selected to represent modern Judaism one would have to ask Baron Edmond James de Rothschild who helped established the state of Israel. This “Jewish” word makes perfect sense to me since Rothchild was born in France 1845 AD, after the word iewe was updated to the word “Jew” in King James Bible revisions AFTER 1769. The original copy of the KJV has iewe, not Jew as it reads now.
The update occurred in the 18th century and these changes were strongly address by scholars in England at this time,
“For many years which followed the publication of the edition of 1769, even after its glaring imperfections had become in some measure known, the King’s Printer and the two English universities continued to reproduce what was in substance Dr. Blayney’s work, when the public attention was claimed in 1831 by Mr. Curtis of Islington, who complained that all modern reprints of Holy Scripture departed widely from the original edition of 1611, to the great deterioration of our Vernacular Translation.” The Existing Monopoly an inadequate protection of the Authorized Version of the Scripture, &c. By Thomas Curtis, London, 1833, 8vo.
Edmond Rothschild grew up with the newer, by 50 years, modern word “Jew” floating around British academia.
Let me make this clear that the word Jew is not a slander word in 1917, just an improper shortened version of iewe from 15th century Bibles.
The Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British government in 1917 and had clear language defining the word Jewish in use via London academia.
Moreover, the British chosen word Jewish was for the purpose of legal action in a court of law. Equity in English law did not require testimony in open court, but rather relied on documentation before the Chancellor such as Farrer Herschell (1837–1899).
Chancellor Herschell was legally describing Brit-ish / Jew-ish citizens that would be taxed in the newly mandated Palestinian colony.
The word Jewish legally described an individual in equity or common law under the crown as accorded through the Balfour/Palestine Mandate.
Mr. Rothschild was unable to use the word Israelite (copyright English Bible) legally to describe British taxed citizens and regardless he was French with no legal claim to a Biblical title.
In the Balfour document the lingo used is “Jewish Zionist” and “Jewish people,” which we can see how the process of letter selection was made as similar to the word Brit-ish. Once the term was written officially as a charter for a nation state this became the time stamp of recognizing nationality under such lingo and simultaneusly enforced by English law.
Albeit the word Jewish is not the end result of an evolution of translation from Greek to Latin to French to German to archaic English and finally modern English as wiki suggest. This is ideology by the wiki editor and anyone who believes it accepts mere fantasy.
Furthermore, for any editor to link an 18th century invented British word to represent a culture of people from AD 30 is simply fiction. We already have a name for our people at that time –
The name above does not mean Jew, or Yehudi, which translates to English Judah. We are also told by wiki the Hebrew word for Jew is Yid or short for Yiddish – another fantasy. Yiddish is 70% German with a smattering of Polish/Slavic and less than 15% Hebrew.
Yid is just slang for someone who speaks Yiddish, not a description of the British elision word Jew that would come into existance two centuries later. Yid relates from the Polish Zyd (from Zydom, Zawada, Zalman, Zavadiv – notice the Z’s), both shortened versions which do not mean the same. One is from Polish non-neutral (Poles describing Yid) while the other is a shortened version of Yiddish (Yid describing Yid). The difference is whether you are being addressed by a friend, neutral, or by insult.
Propaganda tells us that Yiddish is not a “corruption” of German but that in fact Yiddish was a language that developed in step with the German lanaguage!
“However, according to modern linguistics, scholars like Zunz were naïve in their approach. Now, scholars believe that it’s more accurate to see in both modern Yiddish and modern German direct descendants of an older German, without deciding which language is the “direct” heir and which is the corrupted one. Indeed, in historical linguistics, the notion of a “corrupted” language makes no sense. To understand the relationship between Yiddish and modern German, one would do better to view them as two different idioms having the same ancestor.” https://forward.com/opinion/412210/no-yiddish-is-not-a-corruption-of-german/
Such fantasies people live in their brainwashing. Yiddish was not a corruption, but a defence to assimilation. Yiddish was simply mixing the German language with slavic and a smattering of modern Hebrew to avoid complete assimilation. The newer Hebrew developed in the 9th century makes up less than 10%!
We are told the same thing concerning Greek as well. That Greek is “really formed from semitic languages, thus, a bastardization of a language developed in the 9th century” (Masoretic Hebrew) – just simply absurd.
Of course we can see that all words borrowed from the misinterpretations have engulfed a myriad of other languages, Portugese, Dutch, French, Danish, Spanish…
The nation of Israel, in my opinion, will eventually remove this terminology as history becomes more of a spectacle.
Why should English translation words define the nation of Israel?
It’s not that wiki is completely bad, they just leave out what they wish and why you must proof read, NOT fact check, all data. Fact checking is a buzz word for gathering more propaganda or fictional alter opinion. Fact checking is a scam and does not mean “checking facts.”
This etymology invention is used primarily for the purpose of propaganda against ideology that does not reflect group think of the owner. Or simply an easy response to say “I fact checked their data…and it’s wrong.” It’s the lazy man’s social media tool for academic chicanery.
Key points to know:
- In the 14th century no one used the word “Jewish” as the word didn’t exist yet. The notion that the word Jewish is from early Christian days or that Jews existed during the time of Jesus is simply fiction.
- the words Jew-ish and Brit-ish are from the same language Engl-ish, which is historically one of the worlds most powerful monarchy.
- the word Jewish originated from iewes in the 15th century under King Henry VIII, which became Jewes. This means the etymology is about 500 years old or medieval literature.
- the phrase Jewish Zionist was invented by British academic clergy by 1899 (122 years ago) to define a people who would live in Israel under a new nation by the British Zionist Federation.
- Edmond Rothschild was born in France and never referred to himself by a British academic word. The phrase “Jewish” would define a nation state in the future under Zionism and become reality by 1948.
- The British never intended their invented word, jewish, to refer to anyone other than their citizens or those who would live in Israel as a national identity, legally under the Crown, or Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
- When you refer to yourself as Jewish, you are in fact saying you’re a 1917 British description of a people that may live in Israel under the Mandate for Palestine of 1922.
- The terminology Jew-ish did not describe an American or Asian, but a joint English/French European faction that would be taxed under the crown according to the mandate.
According to the Israeli government website,
The Mandate for Palestine
July 24, 1922
The mandates for Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine were assigned by the Supreme Court of the League of Nations at its San Remo meeting in April 1920. Negotiations between Great Britain and the United States with regard to the Palestine mandate were successfully concluded in May 1922, and approved by the Council of the League of Nations in July 1922. The mandates for Palestine and Syria came into force simultaneously on September 29, 1922. In this document, the League of Nations recognized the “historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine” and the “grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”
The British Mandate
In 1920, the Council of the League of Nations appointed Britain as the Mandatory entrusted with the administration of the Land of Israel. The borders of the land, as a separate country, were defined for the first time in many centuries. Until then, under the Ottoman Empire, the land’s boundaries had not been defined because it was part of other large Ottoman districts like the district of Damascus and was not a distinct political unit. The term name “Palestine” that was chosen for this Mandate was based on the term name “Palestina” that was given to the country by the Roman Empire in the second century CE.
The territory of the British Mandate included land on both sides of the Jordan River, encompassing the present-day countries of Israel and Jordan. About 77% of this Mandate was east of the river Jordan River, and in 1921, Great Britain created there a separate administrative entity called Transjordan. The changed mandate took effect in 1923.
Living in America can in no way make you jewish under the British mandate, which describes only those who would live in Israel under the Zionist regime for legal documents pertaining to the Crown, NOT Brooklyn New York, or anywhere else goyim for that matter.
Try telling this to anyone in Brooklyn… good luck.
For some it’s difficult to realize that the word Jewes was around hundreds of years before the American constitution was written. America was just another colony under the British Crown at that time.
I understand the British imported the phrase Jewes to the new America and anyone who emigrated there, including Russian Lubavitch, would become familiar with the words.
These two words, Israel and Jew, would continue their trek in history since the 15th century. One correctly, the other “jewe” a morphed etymologic elision by the common illiterate man who couldn’t tell the difference between i’s and j’s.
In the era we live now, it seems everyone claims themself the British word jewish, regardless of believing in YHWH, or Torah, and regardless of where they live. When the narrative is cohesive unity for the formation of a new nation, buzz words will catch on – part of life.
In almost all modern literature with English as the dialect the Brit-ish word Jew-ish is used to represent a diverse culture of people, cogitare (thought), and way of life with multi-national language as developed over two thousand years.
This is how language evolves and also determines the meaning of the “invented words” through their etymological time stamps.
Historians can clearly view an ideological fork in the road with these two words. Jewish is a fictional word from improper translation, while Israel is the proper English elision. As should be.
Israel is the correct transliteration from ancient Greek, whereas, the word Jewish is not.
Israel is an ancient people who lived in the Levant and was destined to that end. The word Jew, selected by British parliament, is slang from misinterpreting the word iewe from the 15th century. And like it’s misinterpretation, the ideology of those who claim themselves a misinterpreted word, also show the same tenets of misinterpretation of the original Torah.
We have too much evidence to support this truth. One example, same sex marriage, is a misinterpretation of Torah.
According to The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, fourth edition (2000),
It is widely recognized that the attributive use of the noun Jew, in phrases such as Jew lawyer or Jew ethics, is both vulgar and highly offensive. In such contexts Jewish is the only acceptable possibility. Some people, however, have become so wary of this construction that they have extended the stigma to any use of Jew as a noun, a practice that carries risks of its own. In a sentence such as There are now several Jews on the council, which is unobjectionable, the substitution of a circumlocution like Jewish people or persons of Jewish background may in itself cause offense for seeming to imply that Jew has a negative connotation when used as a noun.
If wikipedia or anyone from France to Brooklyn for that matter, wishes to identify themself as Jewish, that’s fine it’s your choice. The majority of the population identify with secular belief and way of life, or opposite of Torah as portrayed in numerous films, series, and historic archive.
In the 1900’s, Edmond Rothschild was not going to use the word iewe from the time of Henry VIII – a medieval word, and why would one do so?
What other word could have been used?
Why couldn’t Mr. Rothschild just use the word Israeli?
Mr. Rothschild was unable to use the word Israelite from the King James Bible, as he was born in France and the word itself was an invention based on the Aramaic of Israel shown above. Naturally, the word Israeli did not define any nationality committing aliyah from the multitude of nations. At any rate, no one could use the word Israeli on a legal document as there is no legal claim to the Biblical title before 1948.
The English language and the common tongue is made up of improper structure and slang, just like I used above “why couldn’t” or why could not Mr. Rothschild, which is improper structure. The common man in the 15th century and even now cares less about proper indirect objects between verb and direct objects – to make my point. The common or vulgar tongue expressing language evolved throughout the centuries as it’s own dilapidated wonder.
The stark problem facing any nation is what unique legal word could one select to define a multi-national mix of culture with completely different dialects. Once that word was selected, which would determine the written language of the Royal Charter, that word (jewish) would then define legally it’s relation to the Crown and obligations under the 1833 Judicial Committee Act.
Notice the use of the word “Jude” by the British from 1833. This came from the Prussian use Yude.
How could the influx of Italian, Spanish, Russian, Polish and German language compete with Arabic that had already been there for a thousand years? And at the same time how do you get the newer language of Hebrew to become the lingua franca of the Levant in the year 1910?
Difficult to say the least.
The languages flooding into the Levant from the 1850’s is a photograph of what America looked like when pilgrims sailed to America. Judeo-persian, Tajik, Russian, Polish, German, Spanish, Lithuanian, and the Lebanese-arabic dialect posed a major problem for modern hegemony concerning language “ownership” after 1900 and cohesive unity in the Levant.
For adherents to Torah who claim descendency from Israel or the Levant these were undoubtably difficult issues to address as is with any nation in it’s formation.
The Zionist needed a new term that defined nations of people unifying under the Star of Dovid. The Academic English parliament provided the answer and already defined what Biblical Israeli’s were called, orthographically, “jewish” based on the English language.
Certainly the Queens court must know how to present the Queen before her dignitaries. The crown must know how to properly address her subjects, by what English name, and by what phrases as deemed suitable by their academics and clergy running the cogs.
The English orthography for the word “jewish” may be correct from the English point of view, but again this is opinion. The English can name whatever they like as is their right, however, I do not believe nor accept that YHWH agrees with a modern invented English word to define His tribes of Israel.
I do not understand why a Canadian, American, French, or Israeli would claim themselves to be a British academic word defining a group of people from 1917. I can tell you the British never intended Chabad Lubavitch from New York to claim themselves a British word planning to live in Israel.
The British will tell you the name wasn’t meant for American’s, or Europeans, but was simply an English word defining where a group of people would live. The British were not defining what you would call yourselves in America, the Czek republic, or India…
Certainly the Polish, Russian, and Germans NEVER referred to themselves as Jews simply due to the fact, they didn’t speak English.
Moreover, legally in 1917 the purpose was for describing a nation that would exist 30 years into the future. It was never meant for use by Americans, but there you have it.
This is why Ben Shapiro states correctly, “Being Jewish is not an ethnic thing, but a religious belief,” or something to that effect. He is right, but he is also wrong in referring to himself as Jewish, as the Brit-ish word was invented for defining people that live in Israel as their own nation, not New York, Geneva, or Barbados.
It’s the stamps of these authors that define new invented words, slang, slander, and use of words like “ethnonym” in historic time.
Once these words are recorded in history we can examine them forensically as every good scholar should do.
When a person (company) fact checks they are in essence saying to you, “our opinion is what matters, not your data,” and their fact checking data is generally bias and edification of agendas that push promoted ethnic groups for votes and financial gain.
Today British secular or those who claim a Jewish status for political and propaganda purposes should stick to British issues and leave Jewish issues to those that actually live in Israel or identify as the covenant of Torah.
If we are promoting Jewish values and way of life, you are certainly not doing this by trying to eliminate your comeptitors for having an opinion!
Of course this modern tool of using social media and the internet to take down democracies is not sustainable, nor complies with Torah law. Those who promote these ideologies from university and computer hyper models promote a passing trend in which will collapse.
Even the amateurs have super computers now and can fact check the fact checkers!
I built a corporate super computer back in 2015, now outdated, when the chips were invented and became commercially available in Switzerland. The cost was about $16k USD at the time. I do appreciate seeing a good yarn about the merits of fallible AI and listening to fact checkers as I input their data to be fact checked.
This is why Microsoft and Google have such a stake in these endeavors. Facebook has a unique position through their “groups” or user hobbies and interests. Fishing group, seashell group, shooting group, etc,. in which they harvest user data.
These groups define the new lingo everyone speaks which time stamps the generation through slang words, insults, and mixed words which define both the propaganda and what the culture absorbs.
We can determine if our propaganda is effective or not based on the lingo the culture uses and what “free think” stands out from the mob.
Dictionaries, lexicons, and even Strongs concordance are being rewritten to omit words and change words to fit a modern narrative of what they wish you – the reader – to believe.
We can pin point the historical dates of inventions in language century by century.
Wikipedia, like most modern publishing house find themselves reinventing history from editors who either do not know any better, have little philologic/etymology training, or do so from corporate or personal agenda similar to Googles Machine Learning Fairness Algorithm.
They make it easy for forensics examination which define their tactics, whether they are foreigners engaged in espionage, or political parties trying to capture hearts and minds.
Back on topic, 19th century Americans and the English world were fully versed with the word Jew through Germany’s yuden and the mischling of 1933.
After shoa Jews were told not to remove their Nazi camp tattoo numbers for proof of the atrocity although a tattoo is illegal for one who observes Torah. Likewise, the word “Jew” defined the suffering of the people and my family under Hitler.
The remaining linguistics of this assimilation is vanishing; yiddish (70% German) verified our resistance to the pogroms and of course we resisted through both death and life in the camps of which many say “never existed.”
Proof that the Polish authority at the time could not beat us into submission, nor the Russians and their pogroms, like we see happening in America now.
Proof that YHWH preserved us and has brought us back to Israel, aliyah, after thousands of years of diaspora.
We do not require anyone to tell us what happened, or rewrite history with delusional fantasies for the nations and secular to play with.
My name “nee zawada” means this is a root word or original word in which all other words such as zawoda, zawadcki, zavadski (actual family names) will come out of.
The root word zawada is older than the word “Jew” and historically refers to Judaic communities or shtetl’s and dorf within Poland. To this day in Poland, many municipalities or towns are still named Zawada. There exist vast historical data about Zydom in the Polish kingdom which historians, JRI being one, gather daily.
The Unesco heritage site, Auschwitz Birkenau German Nazi Concentration and Extermination Camp (1940-1945) is a distance of 35 miles away from Zawada. link
Zawada has a similar meaning in Polish language as “skandal” and in German “stolperstein” under Martin Luther from 1 Corinthinas 1:23.
“But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a (zawada) stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;”
Although these words, Zawada and Jew, developed differently, both words include family names serving Torah covenant under Elohim and those who became assimilated for wealth or secular atheist. Both words paint a picture of Torah and political life for centuries in Europe as the Partitions of Poland ebbed and flowed.
Please keep in mind the phrase “Jewish Zionist” did not exist in 16th century Poland!
The 19th century group, Jewish Zionists, do not own the historic narrative in either the Levant or Poland and some seem to be busy rewriting history to prove otherwise. Modern “Jews” are not the tribe of Judah from 30 AD, or 300 AD, nor do they encompass all tribes together as a culture. Surely to claim such fantasies in the current technological state of the world is lunacy.
They, Zionists, and other dominant groups, Catholic included, try to persuade all other descendants from Israel that we are the English “Jewish” and belong to their same group and that we must believe in their newer form of quasi-medieval Judaism. The Catholics do the same for Christianity.
The people of the Levant who reside there (sabra) centuries before Jerusalem was captured in 1967 reject these copyright claims of ownership under Zionist gentile and political atheist control as do any sane logical minds who will refuse to embrace assimilation from Germans!
We do not give up so easily on historic Torah as those who did in Germany to assimilate!
Again, if you wish to know who believes in Torah vs those who assimilated one only need to look where the family origin came from and what you believe personally.
If you spoke Yiddish (70% German), you resisted Prussian assimilation by speaking European/Slavic and a bit of modern Hebrew (10%) developed after the 11th century and resided primarily in Poland so you would not be assimilated into Germany. One could more easily cross into the Russian border if need be when Polish uprising or partition boundaries occurred between the nations of Lithuania, Austria, Poland, Germany, and Russia.
Just as God used King Artaxerxes in 444 BC to rebuild the nation of Israel and 2nd Beis HaMikdash so did God use the French European banking clan of Rothstein / Rothchild to establish the nation of Israel under gentile control since 1948.
Lets be crystal clear, there is a vast difference in the way we think, dissimilar as Mandarin sinograms compared to the English alphabet. We as Orthodox Jews, Zawada, or Israeli of Torah – we do not believe in Zionist ideology like politicians and the banking clans, nor do we believe in the secular gentile control of Jerusalem.
What type of thinking might you ask?
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, the first openly gay man elected governor in the United States, has married his longtime partner in the first same-sex marriage for a sitting governor.
Polis and Marlon Reis, who have been together for 18 years and were engaged in December, wed in a small traditional Jewish ceremony Wednesday, the governor’s office said.”
YHWH rejects the above apostacy, which is against Elohim mitzvot and if you are of the covenant of Israel then you must also reject the ideology of same sex marriage.
To seek answers for these problems you need to learn about what is forbidden and hidden to Jews and I don’t mean necromancy and ritual blood magic as the current trend in secular academia.
Those who serve YHWH will only adhere to Torah and HaMashiach as Beit HaMikdash was taken away due to the same apostacy! Regardless of the title you claim for yourself, whether American, English, or Jewish, YHWH Torah is clear of what you must do and what you are forbidden to do, to be part of Eloheinu covenant.