|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This page was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was keep.|
|Threads older than 2 months may be archived by.|
- 1 Conceptualization etc. (globalize)
- 2 Depicting Legends as Sources
- 3 Rewrite needed for lead
- 4 archived tangential Messianic Judaism section
- 5 POVFORK of this article being created
- 6 Messy intro
- 7 Jewish AND Christian?
- 8 Christian Jews
- 9 opinion
- 10 Circumcision controversy
- 11 Requested move 20 December 2015
- 12 Requested move 29 December 2015
- 13 Requested move 18 August 2016
Conceptualization etc. (globalize)
- Why is this talk page not archived? The oldest comment on this page is from just three months ago. (Created archive from history).
- Issues with terminology and hyperbole: For example the language "totally faithful" in the lede.
- The term "Jewish Christians" is nominally general and as such has contemporary relevance, yet this is not mentioned in the lede. The lede improperly asserts an exclusively historical and contextually Christian definition, and not a Jewish-cultural/Christian belief definition, which is given only a section below, and otherwise might be confined to particular conceptualizations like "Netzarim," "Conversos," "Marranos," "Judaizers" or "converts/apostates."
- This article clearly has problems, including a couple noticed here years ago. So I will continue here, focusing on the lead.
- I think there are problems with the editing around some of the sources. For example, I wouldn't argue with Dr McGrath's quote given in the citation, but the article text lets the one statement stand out of context, as though there were uniformity among "Jewish Christians" (just how do you identify them, exactly?), and as though there were no conflicts or issues that the first Christians were sorting out at the time. The very adherence of former Jews to all Jewish traditions, especially circumcision, produced conflicts as far away as Corinth. And see what the Apostle Paul has to say about it in 1 Cor 7! He was most outspoken against the continuation of the very practices that are being pointed out in the article as being a norm that continued. But they didn't.
- Then let's take the Australian Catholic Univ source, by the unmentioned author David C Sim, who wishes to claim that the total number of Jews in the "Christian movement" (whatever that is) probably never exceeded 1000. I presume he has read Acts 2:41, where 3,000 joined the church on the day of Pentecost. More to the point, we can be sure that the Catholic Church knows the verse well, and doesn't do squishy math with the numbers or history. So, how acceptable is Sim as a WP:RS? Was he accepted because he was Catholic, or a prof at a nominally Catholic university? If his views are at odds with Catholicism (aren't they evidently so?) on what are we to base his reliability? So, what is the last paragraph of the lead, under-supported by only this one questionable source, doing there? Is it POV? Is it OR? Or something else? I'll wager it's not reliable, and unless I hear otherwise something soon, I'll remove that bit. But this is just small potatoes compared to an article that begins completely out of focus, where its principal subject area is not even clearly delineated. Would anyone else like to comment, or start fixing? Evensteven (talk) 19:36, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
Depicting Legends as Sources
Much of this material, particularly that applying to adventures of saints, is not historically sound. It has been passed on as religious legend and may be taken as factual by churches, but that is not acceptable for true scholarship. The ambiguity about these historical times and the gaps in our knowledge need to be acknowledged, and the only documents that are relevant are those not obviously written by medeival Christian propogandists. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 06:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
- There is little about religious historiology, Christian or otherwise, which is unambiguously factual. If you could list some specific criticisms, they could be dealt with one at a time. -Stevertigo (w | t | e) 00:27, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- Lets start with the assumption that Christians believe their own theology, and that Jesus rose from the tomb, and that the 11 disciples took over the movement after Jesus went to heaven. James became the congregational leader (according to tradition) after the congregation was scattered, not immediately upon Jesus' death. --DeknMike (talk) 13:13, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- I tagged the appropriate parts of history with the religious primary template... I agree, that section really needs an academic historical reference. Zad68 (talk) 21:49, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Rewrite needed for lead
This article is focused on first century Jewish believers, and ignores Jewish believers throughout history, especially the effect of Jewish Christians, Hebrew Christians and Messianic Jews in the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries. For example, the first sentence references the Judaizers in the original congregation in Jerusalem. However, that congregation likely was not call Christian, being a Hellenistic term originating in Antioch. --DeknMike (talk) 04:41, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- I have been reading your comment and you have a good point. Should this article title be "Early Jewish Christians"? - Ret.Prof (talk) 00:25, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- Or, the missing material could just be added. There's nothing stopping anyone from doing it, subject of course to WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:NPOV. Jayjg (talk) 00:39, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
archived tangential Messianic Judaism section
During the first years of the 20th Century, some Jews who had converted to Christianity began distancing themselves from Christian forms of worship, and began to use the term "Messianic". In the 1940s and 50s, missionaries in Israel adopted the term meshichyim ("Messianics") to counter negative connotations of the word nozrim ("Christians"). The rise of Messianic Judaism was, in many ways, a logical outcome of the ideology and rhetoric of the movement to evangelize the Jews as well as its early sponsorship of various forms of Hebrew Christian expressions. The missions have promoted the idea that conversion to Christianity was acceptable for Jews.
In the 1960s, in part because of the Jesus movement, Jewish groups and mainline Christians were surprised to see this rise of a vigorous movement of Jewish Christians or Christian Jews. Martin Chernoff became the President of the HCAA in 1971 (until 1975), and under his leadership the movement's position shifted radically. In June 1973, a motion was made to change the name of the HCAA to the Messianic Jewish Alliance of America (MJAA), and the name was officially changed in June 1975. According to David A. Rausch, "The name change, however, signified far more than a semantical expression — it represented an evolution in the thought processes and religious and philosophical outlook toward a more fervent expression of Jewish identity," and began to eliminate the elements of Christian worship that cannot be directly linked to their Jewish roots.  --DeknMike (talk) 01:18, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- What is your point with this material? Jayjg (talk) 02:30, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- The section at the end of the article about Jews who had converted to Christianity also struck me as being totally off-topic. I also tend to question the whole article as being somewhat original research and a fringe view, although with some good information. I'm not sure a distinct article for "Jewish Christians" is needed, rather good NPOV coverage of the history of the relationship of Judaism and early Christianity.Borock (talk) 13:51, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- What is your point with this material? Jayjg (talk) 02:30, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- Ariel, Yaakov S. (2000). "Chapter 20: The Rise of Messianic Judaism" (Google Books). Evangelizing the chosen people: missions to the Jews in America, 1880–2000. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. p. 223. ISBN 9780807848807. OCLC 43708450. http://books.google.com/books?id=r3hCgIZB790C&printsec=frontcover&vq=advocated+offspring+rhetoric+Shalom#v=onepage&q=advocated%20offspring%20rhetoric%20Shalom&f=false. The term was used to designate all Jews who had converted to Protestant evangelical Christianity.
- Ariel, Yaakov (2006). "Judaism and Christianity Unite! The Unique Culture of Messianic Judaism". In Gallagher, Eugene V.; Ashcraft, W. Michael. Jewish and Christian Traditions. Introduction to New and Alternative Religions in America. 2. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 191. ISBN 978-0275987145. LCCN 2006022954. OCLC 315689134.
In the late 1960s and 1970s, both Jews and Christians in the United States were surprised to see the rise of a vigorous movement of Jewish Christians or Christian Jews.
- Feher, Shoshanah. Passing over Easter: Constructing the Boundaries of Messianic Judaism, Rowman Altamira, 1998, ISBN 9780761989530, p. 20 The Messianic movement has eliminated the elements of Christian worship that cannot be directly linked to their Jewish roots. Communion is therefore associated with Passover, since the Eucharist originated during Ushua’s Last Supper, held at Passover. In this way, Passover is given a new, Yshua-centered meaning.
POVFORK of this article being created
As this article notes, "Hebrew Christian" is another term for "Jewish Christian". Since 2006 the page Hebrew Christian has been a redirect to this article. In December, DeknMike (talk · contribs) decided to turn the Hebrew Christian article into a WP:POVFORK of Messianic Judaism - in fact, copying significant amounts of text verbatim from the Messianic Judaism article. A discussion was held regarding what should be done about this at Talk:Messianic Judaism/Archive 20#Newly updated Wikipedia article "Hebrew_Christian", and the consensus was to restore the redirect. However, since then DeknMike has reverted 3 different editors, re-creating the WP:POVFORK. He has not actually explained why the material is not already or could not be covered in the Messianic Judaism or Jewish Christian articles. Is there a consensus that the "Hebrew Christian" article should be turned into a standalone article?
- Oppose, for the reasons given above. Jayjg (talk) 18:18, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose for reasons as above but I do think an NEW article should be created with a title like "Hebrew Christians (19th Century movement)" or something like that. There was such a movement in that period and it deserves a page, but that movement was not directly related to or a continuation of the movement discussed at Jewish Christians.Zad68 (talk) 21:31, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Can someone lease explain, first, why you're holding this discussion here instead of on that article's talk page? It seems to me to be implicitly prejudicial to hold the discussion here. Well, I see that you've notified that other article, so I guess this is fine, but I still find it odd. I'm going to take a look at the several articles in question later today when I have time; when I read just Hebrew Christian as a reader with no knowledge of the subject, I don't actually see how it's a POV fork, but perhaps if I read it more closely (or if someone explains), I'll understand better. If there is, in fact, as Zad68 says, a distinct, separate movement from the 19th century that is not the same movement as Messianic Judaism, then there should be a separate article. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:44, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- We're doing the vote on this page because Jayjg did a redirect on the HC talk page, and it is no longer publicly accessible.--DeknMike (talk) 01:21, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- For - The Messianic Judaism editorial community made convincing arguments that the history of the Hebrew Christian movement did not belong on that site. However, since the Jewish Christian article deals mostly with early Christianity, I used the large body of evidence to document the rise of so-called Hebrew Christians in the 18th thru 20th century as a separate movement. However, if the community would prefer, we can rename the aforementioned article Hebrew Christian 'Movement'. --DeknMike (talk) 01:21, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- So the issue is resolved then DeknMike if you agree to create a new page and put the material on the 19th century movement there. DeknMike could you please put back the redirect on Hebrew Christian to Jewish Christians and put the material on the 19th century on a new page, problem solved. Right? Zad68 (talk) 02:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
RESOLVED: Per consensus and agreement of DeknMike at the discussion here, and because DeknMike mentioned that he would be away from editing for a few days, I completed the move of the article contents and restored the original redirect. Zad68 (talk) 15:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
The lede was incorrect in placing without sourcing four/five terms as coequivalent, which sources indicate they are not, even if Christian Jews, Hebrew Christians reasonably redirects back here. I have broken out and added [incomplete but mainstream I hope] sources. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:40, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
The current intro constitutes a multitude of "definitions", that should instead be placed on a disambiguation page. The article body, in contrast, is dealing mainly with the original Aramaic speaking "Christians" (Nazarenes, the original adherents of Yeshua bar-Maryam) living in Roman Judea of antiquity. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 10:41, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Jewish AND Christian?
since Jesus never claimed to be anything other that a Jew, is there a form of Judaism that acknowledges Him as the Messiah, but rejects Christianity itself?--126.96.36.199 (talk) 05:08, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
when one says that a person is Jewish-Christian, what does the name so over? Have seen the term has been used in several articles, concerning a person's religious beliefs.--188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:48, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
The article says, "A common interpretation of the circumcision controversy of the New Testament was that it was over the issue of whether Gentiles could enter the Church directly or ought to first convert to Judaism. However, the Halakha of Rabbinic Judaism was still under development at this time, as the Jewish Encyclopedia article on Jesus notes ... ." Whether or not the Halakha, (i.e., Jewish law) was under development or not, circumcision was not at issue.
The article also says, "In 1st century Pharisaic Judaism there was controversy over the significance of circumcision, for example between Hillel the Elder and Shammai." Hillel and Shammai agreed that male converts had to be circumcised; they disagreed on the treatment of converts who were already circumcised.