It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Debunking the 'Fake Jew' AKA The 'Khazarian Jew' Myth.

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 11:01 AM
This is a fascinating topic and thank you for your research.
The one important thing to remember however, when dealing with any religion, race issue is that there is NO PURE blooded race or religion and therefore no absolute right to anything on this planet.

The Israelis definietly deserve a home but so do the people who were living there prior to them.

We cannot permit genocide of either competing race and condemnation against any such war should be absolute and not biased in anyway.

Here we have a problem where the world can see injustice and bullying and yet chooses to stand with the stronger both militarily and financial and I think that this is what upsets so many 'ordinary' people who do not believe that anyone should be permitted license to war on a country in which 50% of its residents are the most vulnerable of all.....children.

From the Jewish book, 'The Bible' we see that they often claimed that God commanded them to commit mass genocide and not show pity to 'old men, women, children or virgins' and sadly they do, in all honesty, believe that they are a special people, simply because a book that they wrote tells them so.

They should be entitiled to believe that they are special but not permitted to therefore continue pracitices that the world no longer sees as condoned by God.

Pity should be shown to both sides and by both sides or else this tragedy will never end.

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 11:35 AM
reply to post by Anonymous ATS

Thanks for your well researched post.
As I mention in my OP, you are most certainly correct: There is evidence and historical sources that point to a greater number of converts than just the nobility and royalty. Figures vary greatly but what looks the most accurate is a higher number of conversions over a lower number of conversions. It definitely looks like more people converted than just the nobility.

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 11:39 AM
Jews are on both sides of that fence. Ther problem is with Zionism.
If you want to get Biblical, why not start with "Though shalt not steal" and "Though shalt not kill"

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 11:52 AM
reply to post by AshleyD

from the original thread starter:

Debunking the 'Fake Jew' AKA The 'Khazarian Jew' Myth.


Current events dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have created a significant increase in ATS threads discussing various aspects of the long-running issue. Due to this, possibly a dozen times in the last two days alone I've noticed accusations that today's Jews (American, European, and Israeli) are not 'real Jews' but are instead descendants of Khazarian Jewish converts. . This claim is typically offered as a reason why Jews currently inhabiting the state of Israel have no legitimate ancestral claim to the land. My intent with this thread is to debunk such an accusation

A Very Brief History

After suffering persecution in Persia, Byzantium, and various Islamic nations, many Jews fled to Khazaria (1, 2) for safety. The Khazars and Jews enjoyed a diplomatic relationship and eventually Khazarian nobility converted to Judaism around the 8th-9th century A.D. Some historians believe their subjects later converted to Judaism as well, although the extent of conversion is debated and evidence exists to verify a range of figures. Kharzars held a diverse range of religions including Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrianism, and various pagan beliefs. Although evidence certainly points to some Khazars holding Jewish beliefs, they were not all converts to Judaism.

you are wrapping two thread concepts into one debate...

the Khazars who have adopted the Jewish religion can, if they wish, wear the 'Jewish' mantle...

the former Ashkenazi are different, and unique from the Ancestral 'Jews' Jews who have a heritage as one of the 12 tribes of historic 'Israel'...
(see my post citing www.jewish genetics, which spells out the genetic differences and gulf between the ancient Hebrews/Israelites and the east-european converts)

the former peoples of the Ashkenazi empire cannot be included in the
12 Tribes of Israel lineage.... they can however be called Jewish 'brothers or brethern' in any political, social, religious sense...

in response to your sentence;
"This claim is typically offered as a reason why 'Jews' currently inhabiting
the state of Israel have no legitimate ancestrial claim to the land."

i'd call the situation, counterfeit.

i believe your trying to bring in the 'spiritualism' meaning, which counts gentiles converted to Christianity as the spiritual 'Church'...
with the promise to regather the 12 Tribes of Israel for the Millinium Kingdom ruling from a new Jerusalem.
Two different sets of criteria...

the euphamistimic word 'Root' is code-word for 'DNA', in bible speak... i.e. the Ashkenazi are not from the Root of Jessee or David or anyone else in the 12 Tribes of Israel, including the Tribe of Judah...

all in all, i see a manipulative hand in this deliberately clouded issue.
with some arguing the wrong points

[edit on 3-1-2009 by St Udio]

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 11:55 AM
i find it extremely intriguing how genetic heritage is considered so important regarding the right (or absence thereof) of living on a certain patch of land.

i truely wonder if the same people who cling to such views would condone employing the same logic in any other case.

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 12:03 PM
reply to post by St Udio

Hey there. One quick note before I respond in detail.

Upon reading your last two posts (that contain great information, by the way), it looks like you are confusing Khazarian and Ashkenazi in the historical and modern sense.

The correct classifications are:

Khazarian: Historical.
Ashkenazi: Modern.

It looks like you're saying Ashkenazi is the historical and Khazarian is the modern.

Am I reading that right?

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 12:11 PM

Originally posted by Long Lance
i find it extremely intriguing how genetic heritage is considered so important regarding the right (or absence thereof) of living on a certain patch of land.

i truely wonder if the same people who cling to such views would condone employing the same logic in any other case.

in this mankind governed world order, the creation of Israel is not based on Genetic heritage...I understand Jews in Israel will accept most any, reasonable persons into the country as immigrants and to apply for citizenship.

the real point of this acquisition of land is founded in the Judeo-Christian prophetic promise by a Tribal God, that the descendants of the tribes of Israel will possess the land around/including Jerusalem.
and much of the world is allowing this to transpire above all other norms in societal & national rules of order

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 12:13 PM
reply to post by AshleyD

no, im just using the shorthand...

ifa formal type of peer review Essay format is required... then i can't comply....

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 12:28 PM
Well done on your thread.

Israel has a right to have a homeland, but not at the cost of someone else's. In the Bible I don't remember it saying "thou shall not kill" unless it's on the Gaza Strip.

I understand your position, being a christian, but at what cost do the people of other religions have to pay to see your prophecy come true?

As there are many names for water in the world, there are many names for GOD. But just like water, there is only ONE true definition. The rest is filtered through regional culture.


posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 12:42 PM
reply to post by St Udio

No formal writing formats required. It's just a friendly discussion.

However, I'm not sure how your article about Ashkenazi diseases refute what I'm saying, especially when I have provided a scientific connection to possibly trace many Ashkenazi to Levant:

You'll see how the above map even coincides with much of modern day Israel. Then the two sources (not Wiki) in the OP. Pay special attention to the red font text in the first external citation. It shows how they were traced back to a common Middle Eastern population.

Once the Ashkenazi became more isolated, it does not surprise me to see their gene pool then share common diseases later in history. I don't see the contradiction you are trying to point out.

Please feel free to correct me if I am misunderstanding what you're trying to say.

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 12:43 PM
Excelent, great job. I hope to stay on tpoic & hope others will as well, regarding the post & question from revelation about those claiming to be decendents of abraham but are not - there is a growing group of independent churches that claim jewish decendents are false & that they are the true decendents-these churches are in America, Africa,Europe, the Mid-East. The number of churches among anglo-saxon in America claiming decent from the "lost tribes" is diminishing while it is increasing in Europe, churches in africa & african-american churches in america are increasing in this belief thru claims of decendancy from the Queen of Sheba & some off spring of hers and King Solomans or from when Jesus went into Egypt(i do not understand the explanations of how they tie that in). While yet more mosque in the mid-east are starting to assert this claim thru Ishmael. I'm glad you pointed out that Abraham's true decendents can be traced genetically.

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 12:50 PM
reply to post by St Udio
I dont think she is trying to cloud the issue, she is simply saying that the majority of the Jews in Israel are truely & genetically Jewish ( or Hebrew if not from the tribe of Judah). Thanks

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 12:56 PM
Ancestral claim is bunk, just because you owned something thousand of years ago doesnt mean you own it now. I dont see anyone giving land back to the Native Americans or the aboriginal people of Australia.
On this type of propaganda.

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 12:56 PM
reply to post by St Udio

The best way to look at it is from a tribal perspective or as Ashley stated ethno-religious.

When outsiders are "converted" they are adopted into the House of Israel. The Torah (Exodus 12:48) lays the foundation for this adoption with rules for the Passover meal. Strangers can be brought in "made native" by undergoing circumcision and partaking of the Passover meal.

The tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim, who are of Hamitic ancestry through Joseph's Egyptian wife Asenath, are part of the House of Israel.

Ruth, the great grandmother of King David, was a Moabite who was adopted into the House of Israel. "Where you shall go (to your homeland Israel), there shall I go; your nation shall by my nation, your G-d (religion) shall be my G-d" (Ruth 1:16)

Think about that for a second, the House of David and Lineage of the Messiah, goes back to a Moabite adopted into the House of Israel.

Of the Ashkenazim themselves, 40% can be genetically traced back to Semitic origins, but that root doesn't really matter. The House of Israel has many roots, Egyptian, Moabite, and it all began with a Chaldean from Ur.

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 01:06 PM
reply to post by dalan.

It's confusing I know, but consider jews and arabs as the same race fighting for religious supremacy. That's the only picture we should draw. No matter where they started fighting at. Israel is where they were sent to rest after being sent on the zionist trail. Wrong has them turned over to egypt as slaves and their troubles have followed them ever since. The crusade of zionist made splits in the family and you could always be accepted as a jew.

[edit on 3-1-2009 by rightwingnut]

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 01:18 PM
Ha ha what a load of baloney

'African' Jews coming home!

'Jews' a nationality!
OK how come they're black? How the hell can they be jewish if it's a nationality? Black europeans are NOT european they are immigrants just like most Israeli's.

Admit it Jews are a bunch of immigrants that have been allowed to squat on and steal land in the middle east for over 50 years, using their religion as an excuse.

My grandmother was born in Ireland does that give me the right to say I'm Irish and demand a home there and land to build it on??

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 01:51 PM
I think there are those here pushing a particular agenda and also missunderstanding what race, nationality and religion are. Nationality is defined as where a person is born withing a particular political/geographical area, race relates to a genetic tie to a given people, religion relates to the faith in which a child is raised.

Judaism is not and never will be a nationality, anyone who claims such is a fool. Those who state they are Jewish so therefore Israel/promised land belongs to them are wrong. To blindly believe that a certain group of people have a God given right to occupy a certain piece of land is totally ludicrous. Being that the so called stories are just that, stories and nothing more.

If the same situation was apllied to other races we would have native Indians fighting the present day squatters of the USA stating that the land was theirs by right and no one else had a right to it. The Initial op is flawed in that it only provided one perspective of the argument and fails to take into account all info available. Again a questionable motive given the current situation in the ME.

In its most extreme point even if one agreed to such a claim it does not give those of the Jewish the right to commit genocide no more than it made it right for the Nazis to think they were superior to all others. Somehing I may add that Jews do think and that is part of the problem. Irrespective of their heritage they think they have a right to do what they like and see themselves as superiorto all others. This is just not a problem for the Palestinian people but to all those not of the Jewish faith.

Perhaps a time will come when the Jews kill people that we do care about.

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 02:19 PM
First, I must reply to one of the mods chastising us for drifting off-topic. I see nothing wrong with this activity. In our "parade" of discussions, we should be less like the marching band proceeding down the middle of the street, and more like the Shriners in their little cars, looping and turning and carrying on.

I believe someone's reference to "Dry Bones" sums up the topic well. Reading about and worrying about what the "Lord" said thousands of years ago is ridiculous and a time-waster. It's pitiful behavior. If you want to go back in time, let's go WAY back and consider the origins of Man. How are those fossilized critters truly related to us? What did they think about? Where did they come from? How did they act? What did they look like? Millions of years ago is where we should focus, not thousands of years ago. It seems to me that modern-day religious discussions are meant to distract us and keep us from discovering our TRUE origins and purpose.

BTW, what's wrong with so-called "Anti-Semitism"? If the Jews think they are better than everyone else, and their Lordeth says so, what's wrong with non-Jews responding to the contrary? Mr Jew says he's special. I say, "Really? How is that?" He says, "Well, my Lordeth and the Bible says so." I say, "Well, I don't think you are THAT special, just aggressive and pushy." In short Anti-Semitism is the non-Jew's defense mechanism against Jewish pride, aggressiveness, elitism, etc. It's a healthy reaction.

posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 03:26 PM
reply to post by AshleyD


Well laid out post and info. I have a question for you as the author however, are you someone who believes in the "end times prophecy" or the "rapture"?


posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 04:45 PM
I urge everyone to read Arthur Koestler's The Thirteenth Tribe and decide for yourself whether this is a myth or not.

Mr. Koestler was an Ashkenazi Jew and took pride in his Khazar ancestry. He was also a very talented and successful writer who published over 25 novels and essays. His most successful book, Darkness at Noon, was translated in thirty-three languages.

As expected, The Thirteenth Tribe caused a stir when published in 1976, since it demolishes ancient racial and ethnic dogmas...At the height of the controversy in 1983, the lifeless bodies of Arthur Koestler and his wife were found in their London home. Despite significant inconsistencies, the police ruled their death a suicide...

[edit on 3-1-2009 by GoldenFleece]

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in