Why Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah

[cnorman18]

A word before I begin:

This post is NOT an attack on Christianity.

Jews, as a rule, do not comment on the truth or falsehood of any other faith, and that includes the Christian faith; we have no right. We only claim to know how God chose to speak to US. If He chose to speak to another people in another manner, that is no business of ours, and we have no warrant to say yea or nay. Only in the matter of literally worshiping idols as divine beings do we pronounce judgment, and that is rather rare in the modern world.

In my own, personal belief, Jesus was indeed sent by God to bring the light of Torah to the rest of the world. The Jews will always be "a small people"--the Book says so--and surely the rest of the was not meant to be left in the darkness of paganism. If not for Jesus, and perhaps even more for Paul, my own Celtic ancestors might have continued to paint themselves blue and worship trees.

The battle has never been between Christians and Jews, anyway. We are on the same side. On the other side are today's pagans--those who worship things; money, power, fame, gratification, status. May we both always remember that.

This post is on the rather more limited topic of why the Jews did not, and do not, accept Jesus as our Messiah. That some few have, and do, does not matter. Peace to them, but there are reasons why very few Jews who are familiar with and committed to their faith and tradition ever have, or ever will, believe in Jesus. This post is an effort to explain some of the most important.

To begin, then; Jesus, to put it plainly, simply did not perform the very specific actions that the Messiah was expected to do. There can be no "wiggle room" here; the tradition has been constant for thousands of years, and has not changed.

It is not that there were certain "prophecies" that the Messiah had to "fulfill"; the Messiah was DEFINED by certain acts. To do them was to be the Messiah, and the meaning of the word "Messiah" was "the man who does these things."

Jesus did not do them. He was not the Messiah. There is no "therefore," because the phrases are synonymous.

Further, Jesus claimed (or it was claimed for him) that he had power and authority that no Jew could or would claim for any man, far beyond any that were ever attributed to the coming Messiah; and he took on a role that no Jew, at any time from Abraham forward, had ever contemplated that any man, Messiah or no, would ever be called upon to fulfill. There was no need for it.

Jesus fulfilled one and only one attribute of the Messiah; he was of the tribe of Judah. Much is made of this in two of the Gospels, Matthew and Luke, with elaborate genealogies given for Mary, and, oddly, for Joseph.

Other than that, St.
Paul and the Gospels to the contrary, Jesus did nothing expected of the Messiah. Three such expectations will suffice for our purposes: (1) The Messiah was to be a military, or at least a political, leader, an actual, rightful King. (2) He would restore the independence of Israel and free it from foreign (at the time, Roman) rule. (3) Most importantly, he would institute a reign of perfect peace, justice, liberty and piety that would shortly extend over all the earth.

It seems rather clear that none of these occurred; most glaringly the last, which was and has always been the most important sign and task of the Messiah (The short answer, for many Jews, to the question "Why don't you believe in Jesus?" is "Oy! Look around!").

The Messiah was the coming King who would restore the line of David, free Israel, and being peace to the world; he would institute the Messianic Age. He was named for it, and it would be named for him. The two would come together, or not at all. They were one.

At the end of Jesus's life, these things had not happened. The Messiah had not come.

As if all that wasn't enough, Jesus, or his followers, made claims for him that were alien to Judaism, and in fact often blasphemous from a Jewish point of view. For starters, that Jesus was God incarnate.

It would be hard to think of an idea more repugnant to Jews, then or now. The oldest and most fundamental and nonnegotiable tenet of Judaism is that God is One, which means a good deal more than "one God." Among other things, it means that God is unique and indivisible, and shares His Essence and Being with no one and nothing.

It would be easier for Jews to begin chowing down on ham-and-Swiss sandwiches than to accept the claim that a man could be, in any sense, God. The Messiah was never conceived to be anything other than an ordinary mortal man; anointed by God, to be sure, but no more a God himself than King David was. There is no hint of such a thing in any Jewish tradition; it is about as likely as the High Priest carving a stone idol and placing it in the Holy of Holies. It was, and remains, quite literally unthinkable.

Second, Jesus was said to be the literal son of God. This was way beyond bizarre. The idea that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of Moses and Sinai, could or would come down to earth and father a human child is as foreign to Judaism as temple prostitution. That is a Greek idea, not a Jewish one--consider Zeus had Hercules--and it may be no coincidence that Paul was speaking to Greeks, not Jews, when he formulated it. There has never been anything within a light-year of that idea anywhere in all the enormous tradition and long history of the Jewish people. It is, again, unthinkable:

Third, Jesus claimed the power and authority to forgive sins.

All sins.

Now this is difficult, because this is not widely known: Jews do not believe that God Himself has that power. God can forgive sins against Himself--ritual offenses, broken vows, and so on--but no more; a sin against another human must be forgiven by that person, or not at all. (This is why there can be no forgiveness for murder. The only one with the power to forgive is dead. This is also why the Jews of today cannot "forgive" the Holocaust. You must ask the six million for that forgiveness; we have no right to give it.)

By claiming this power, Jesus was not claiming to be coequal with God, but in fact greater than God. No wonder some tore their robes when they heard him speak.

And again, as if all this were not enough--it is claimed that Jesus was the sacrifice that saves all men from their sins, and that this salvation is accessed by believing in it.

This seems simple; but for Jews, there are no less than six separate problems here.

First, the idea that people need to be saved from their sins. Jews have never believed in "Original Sin," or that all people are born sinful. We believe that everyone has an impulse to do good, and an impulse to do evil, and that these remain with us all our lives; our job is to follow the first and resist the second to the best of our ability.

Second, St. Paul to the contrary, Jews have never taught, nor do we believe, that we are obligated to fulfill "the whole of the Law" or face eternal damnation. We believe that, since God made us, He knows our imperfection and our weakness, and does not demand that we be perfect and without fault or flaw. That would be the act of an unjust God, and we do not believe that God is unjust.

Third, Jews do not believe that any human can bear the sins of another. That principle is underlined in the Torah over and over again. Each man bears his own sins, and that cannot be changed.

Fourth, we do not believe that a "sacrifice" is necessary to obtain forgiveness for sins, whether animal or human (and the idea of a human sacrifice is so far from any Jewish belief or practice that it is barely comprehensible that anyone would even propose it as a possibility). It is true that animal sacrifices were performed in the Tabernacle and later in the Temple, but it is clear throughout the Torah and the Prophets that the sacrifice itself was meaningless without the repentance and devotion of the individual human heart.

Fifth, in Judaism, "belief" accomplishes precisely nothing by itself. There is no Creed in Judaism, no specified set of acceptable beliefs. What one "believes" is all but insignificant next to what one does, and no amount of "belief" cancels or ameliorates the results of one's actions. Believing the proper "doctrines" in Judaism is utterly irrelevant to anything at all.

Put simply: if I am in need, what do I care what you "believe"? Will you help me, or not? Nothing else matters.

Sixth, Jews are not even certain that there is a Heaven at all. Judaism has rather little concern with the afterlife; it isn't mentioned in the Torah, and belief in it seems to have been entirely absent from its teachings in the early years of our religion. Even those Jews who do believe in Heaven spend little time or energy thinking and talking about it. The point of the Jewish religion is THIS life. The next, we leave to God.

As you can see, though Judaism and Christianity share an ethic, basic values, and many religious practices, our views of the nature and structure of the relationship between God and man, the nature and importance of sin and the means of its forgiveness, the significance of the afterlife, and many other matters, are so different that they really do constitute entirely separate religions. That one was derived from the other, and that we share a large body of Scripture, no longer matters. We stand beside each other as brothers; but we have long since taken separate paths. We ought to respect one another and work together where our ideals and ethics converge--which is almost everywhere. Where our beliefs differ, we should agree to disagree and leave each other alone.

One more note: It is wholly illegitimate and improper for a follower of any faith to attempt to dictate to a follower of another what his beliefs OUGHT to be, then castigate him because they do not follow his prescription. No one has any warrant to point out passages of "prophecy" in our own Scriptures that we do not, and have never, read as such, and overrule the traditions and beliefs that we have held for more than three thousand years--and tell us what we ought to think and believe. No one has that right.

We have no warrant to deny that Jesus is your Savior, or to deny that, for you, any belief you may hold about him is true. That is between you and God, and is none of our business.

But in the same way, it is not your right to insist that we abandon our own beliefs and convictions in favor of an understanding of our own Scriptures that we have never held.

Thank you for reading. May we all work together for the good of the Kingdom of God and forgive each other our disagreements.

I'll close with a saying from the Talmud. When the sages of old disagreed and could find no way to reconcile their differences, they would often allow both rulings to stand as equally acceptable options in Jewish law. When asked how this was possible, it was said that "When Elijah comes, he will explain which of us was right--or why we both were."

Peace to all.

Charles

[cnorman18]

Smersh, you have no right to be calling Jews Satan worshippers. That's very rude and bigotted. Do you think this is how Jesus wanted you to go about helping others, by telling them that they are the devil worshippers. Jesus had the knowledge to see the true hearts of people, but you certainly do not. All you can do is speak out of bigotry, animosity, and ignorance when you label someone a devil worshipper. I think you are showing the signs of the devil's influence moreso than the Jews you accuse.

I thank you for that, jgh7. From the bottom of my heart, I thank you.

We disagree about much; that is clear enough. I don't know if this is a Jewish point of view, but it seems to me that even as much as we disagree, our differences are insignificant compared to what we have in common--and you have displayed that right here, right now.

Theology is, in some ways, an interesting and sometimes intense intellectual chess game.

Hatred is a bloody, vicious fist fight.

We have just seen both, and it may be presumptious, but I think it's clear which is more important.

Again, I thank you.

Charles

[bernee51]

. Paul said of the Jews: "Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the mutilation. For we are the circumcision".

Paul was an hysterical misogynistic misanthrope who totally screwed up the gentle message of Jesus. His words were poison.

Do you see how those who at first were children became dogs? Do you wish to find out how we, who at first were dogs, became children? "But to as many as received him, he gave the power of becoming sons of God"[/b].
(Saint John Chrysostom :Eight Homilies Against the Jews)

And how many pogroms grew out of such sentiments?

[bernee51]

Jn 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Rev 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

More word from the nut case in the cave.

Such words that launched a thousand pogroms.

We can look at it from other prospective. Jews throughout the world's history are conspirators, rebels and revolutionaries. Revolution as rebellion against lawful authority is satanic deed.

The men who made the USofA were conspirators, rebels and revolutionaries. I'm not up on US history...were they Jewish?

May be I should quote from Saints? Willingly.

But do not be surprised that I called the Jews pitiable. They really are pitiable and miserable. When so many blessings from heaven came into their hands, they thrust them aside and were at great pains to reject them.

Nothing is more miserable than those people who never failed to attack their own salvation. When there was need to observe the Law, they trampled it under foot. Now that the Law has ceased to bind, they obstinately strive to observe it.

Although such beasts are unfit for work, they are fit for killing. And this is what happened to the Jews: while they were making themselves unfit for work, they grew fit for slaughter. This is why Christ said: "But as for these my enemies, who did not want me to be king over them, bring them here and slay them".

If, then, the Jews fail to know the Father, if they crucified the Son, if they thrust off the help of the Spirit, who should not make bold to declare plainly that the synagogue is a dwelling of demons? God is not worshiped there. Heaven forbid! From now on it remains a place of idolatry.

Enough?

With such diatribe they do not deserve the epithet 'Saints'.

You have answered the question I asked in this thread.

"The author of Revelations had internet access...in his mind."

I never said such nonsense.

But plenty of other.

"All you non-Christians are gonna burn forever...to death."

I am not exactly sure what form the punishment takes, nor am I sure who will be subjected to it. Yet, groups such as jews and satanists are most likely to be subjected to this punishment.

What absolute garbage.

Why take refuge in a book of myth written (in part) by madmen.

The words you have chosen to use here would put you well in their company.

With such attitudes to defend against it is no wonder I am a 'militant atheist'

[cnorman18]

Thanks, Bernee51.

Let me point out something: in some ways, you and I are on the same side here. Whenever religious people, whether Christian or Muslim, decide to get crazy and do something stupid, vicious and brutal--

They always do it to us Jews first.

That's been the case for centuries. Except for Israel, we've got it better here in the US than we've ever had it anywhere at any time in all our long history--but we don't forget.

There's a saying whenever two Jews from different movements argue about some difference in their faith or practice, and it usually ends the argument and sees the two part amicably:

"When the pogroms start, it won't matter."

Because they always come back. Always.

Peace.

Charles

[arayhay]

We are not on one side. In fact there is no religion in existence which is more opposed to what we (Christians) believe in.

I love this guy!

No "arguments," no "proofs," no "reasoned opinions," just clear, unambiguous statements, like:

"Judaism is the tool of Satan."

"The author of Revelations had internet access...in his mind."

"All you non-Christians are gonna burn forever...to death."

Ladies and Gentlemen, I think we got us a keeper.

I posted this in another debate to smersh. I hope you see how his lies have entangle him.


arayhay
So you've stated that traditions are equal to Scripture, and then you tear down Scripture without fouling up your traditions. How can this be. When I challenge this oddity that's when, you attack me personally. But when the Messiah contradicts you, you point the accusatory figure at me as if I am on my own. LOL. You should be sued for lack of support. LOL. How do you reconcile this ??? I haven't a clue. Oh yeah, you don't, but you try to blame your wiping boy heretic. in fact its your kind that have accused the so called Heretic, and manifested this false challenged to what Jesus has said, [begining with a half truth is begining with a lie] to create the meaning that you want from His words. Then these pretend meanings can invent support from what is your departure from Scripture, trying to convey a the resulting and faulty conclusion. The heretic is there, but not in the form you put him in. This then is where the misplacement of the truth drops them [the orthodox of this ilk] through a crack so that they lose what they claimed to be seeking all the long, the fulfilment of The Gospel God made with the Nation of Israel. But ignorance does not make you free from catching the resulting disease and death. This is quite a uninformative way of thinking. There is no safety net to catch you. No foundation to be built upon. Your self serving, and falsely created traditions, and the fervor it generated, only results in displacement of the truth of God's word. The fact is, You/and your kind have actually 'mangled' what His words plainly mean to suite a vile hatred for the Jewish people. Resulting in an unwitting separation from the Nation of Israel, and the necessary truths He states about them. You condemn your-SELFS with heresy's you can't support when challenged and seem to think that they don't need support or defence. This line of thinking confines you in the abis created by your abuse of the Scriptures. But your accusation is pointless from its beginning, because these verses can not be changed beyond recognition in a reasonable mind at all. They survive intact without you or your traditions. So you must attempt to contradict the Messiah with the phantom heretic and phantom conflict of your own making otherwise your lies don't appear legitimate. Thus your NEED for a heretic, in this case of Jewish description serves a dual purpose for you. One it allows for hatred of the Jews. and Two it creates a conflict between the Messiah and the Jews that was not there. Yes there is a conflict between the Messiah ans SOME Jews. But it is exaggerated by this kind of christian reasoning so as to exile the Jews from the covenants. But your obtuse circular reasoning never finds its mark because its aim is SELF contained and self-destructive. A bind of contradictions that results in making the errors YOUR OWN. That is, orthodoxy shoots its-self in the foot by attacking the Jews. Not recognizing their need for inclusion in Israel. Orthodoxy loses sight of this truth, and a proper perspective of its-self by taking this wrong approach to foundational landmarks. One that they don't realize is OUTSIDE looking in, not inside looking out. To reiterate; this point is fatally lost on them, for they think they are aiming at something OUTSIDE of the truth, but their beliefs are what is outside of the truth. And they don't see their own bombs going off all around them. But their bighting off their nose to spite their face is very apparent when one considers that they have in fact abandoned truth and reason from a Biblical framework. Not presenting any facts that could be corroborated as evidence, [outside their own framework]. You've sold out to these traditions of mans making.

That's dishonest. You've accepted and are promoting a LIE.

your flagrantly void of any compunction. Which I find deplorable.




To this i would add;
Luk 3:4 As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
Luk 3:5 Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be made low, and the crooked shall become straight, and the rough places shall become level ways,
Luk 3:6 and all flesh shall see the salvation of God.'"

[Dionysus]

Smersh -

Because Jews simply do not subscribe to the recent (~ 1850) Fundamentalist-literalist notion of Biblical interpretation. There's no reason to expect them to hold to a Protestant sola scriptura ideal because it has never been a part of their religion, or that of the oldest branches of Christianity for that matter (Catholicism and Orthodoxy). You will find that virtually all movements closely related to Judaism, such as the older Christian sects, explicitly reject sola scriptura and that it a historically recent aberration - not to mention a 'Scripturally' unsupported one, but we'll leave it at that.

Fact: Judaism acknowledges tradition to have a place equal in authority to Scripture, as does Catholicism to a lesser extent. This conservatism is the result of a centuries-long reliance on an oral tradition.

Fact: Martin Luther was an idiot who was never able to support his convictions with any evidence beyond his own prejudices.

[Smersh]

cnorman18

To Smersh:

I don't generally engage in debate with either bigots or nuts, and you appear to be both: but just out of curiosity--the same kind that makes one slow down to stare at a car wreck--let me ask you a few simple

As an Orthodox Christian I am obligated to "live with no fear of the jews" Jn 7:13, Jn 9:22, Jn 20:19

This applies to both physical injury/death or ridicule. So calling me nut, bigot, anti-semite is just wasting your time.

yes-or-no questions. Feel free to expand on your answers as you like.

Thank you kindly for permitting me to expand on my answers.

(1) Do you believe in an "International Jewish Conspiracy"?

I believe in conspiracy by satan acting through his servants of all faiths and nationality. Among satan's servants, jews are most prominent. This conspiracy is called mystery of iniquity. This conspiracy as its ultimate goal has the enthronement of the Anti-Christ whom you know as jewish messiah yet to come. Most participants in the conspiracy are used as "dark agents", that is they do not even know they participate in conspiracy.

2 Thessalonians 2:7
For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now restraineth will restrain, until he be taken out of the way.

(2) Do you believe that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a genuine document, proving the existence of the conspiracy mentioned in #1?

The man who published them has my full respect and admiration. Sergius Nilus who first published protocols in his book The Great Thing in the Small is a great spiritual writer most famous for his book entitled The Wheat and the Tares in which he talks about the meaning of Christian life. So his personal character is beyond any doubt.

What is undeniable is, first, that Nilus was genuinely convinced of their authenticity, and secondly, that, as the London Times pointed out, whether they were authentic records of a Masonic meeting or not, the Protocols were remarkably prescient in their description of the workings of "the mystery of iniquity" in the twentieth century.

(3) Do you believe that Jews have ever consumed the blood of Gentiles as a religious ritual?

In 1844 Vladimir Dal published an essay "Investigation of the Murder of Christian Babies by Jews and the Use of Their Blood." which earnestly asserted that Jews were in fact guilty of ritual murder. This essay was result of formal investigation by Ministry of Interior of which Dal was an employee. Now Dal being an honest and thorough investigator stated that: "certainly not all and not even all religious jews perform these crimes, however the fact that sect of Hasidism regularly engages in it, is evident".

Little bit about Vladimir Dal:
Vladimir Dal was one of the greatest Russian lexicographers. His magnum opus, Explanatory Dictionary of the Live Great Russian language, was published in 4 huge volumes in 1863-66. The Sayings and Bywords of Russian people, featuring more than 30000 entries, followed several years later. Both books have been reprinted innumerable number of times. For his great dictionary Dahl was honoured by the Lomonosov Medal and the honorary fellowship in the Russian Academy of Sciences. To mark the 200th anniversary of Vladimir Dal's birthday, UNESCO declared the year 2000 The International Year of Vladimir Dahl.

(4) Do you believe that the Holocaust, as described in mainstream history texts, actually occurred?

I believe jews have indeed suffered from Nazi regime just like many other nations. And I can certainly think of nations that suffered more than jews.

(5) If your answer to #4 is "Yes," do you believe that the Jews deserved it?

Do you think other nations deserved it? Or may be they deserved it more than jews?

(6) Do you believe that Jews control the media?

I believe the mystery of iniquity does. So naturally one will find jews are overrepresented among people controlling media.

(7) Do you believe that Jews control the international banking system?

See above.

(8) Do you believe that Jews are more inclined toward criminal behavior than Gentiles?

No reliable evidence exists for that. However according to Cesare Lombroso, the author of "Genius and insanity", jews are 6-8 times more likely to develop a mental disorder. There is direct correlation between mental disorders and criminal behavior.

Little bit about Cesare Lombroso.
Cesare Lombroso, born Ezechia Marco Lombroso (November 6, 1836 October 19, 1909) was an Italian criminologist and founder of the Italian School of Positivist Criminology. Lombroso was born in Verona to a wealthy Jewish family. He studied literature, linguistics, and archeology, but changed his plans and became an army surgeon in 1859. In 1862 he was appointed professor of diseases of the mind at Pavia, and later took charge of the insane asylum at Pesaro, eventually becoming professor of medical law and psychiatry at Turin.

(9) Do you believe that Jews are a separate race?

No.

(10) Do you believe that Jews are essentially in control of the government of the United States?

The mystery of iniquity is. See above.

jgh7

Smersh, you have no right to be calling Jews Satan worshippers.

I am sorry, The Dogma of The Church is not negotiable.

Do you think this is how Jesus wanted you to go about helping others, by telling them that they are the devil worshippers. Jesus had the knowledge to see the true hearts of people, but you certainly do not. All you can do is speak out of bigotry, animosity, and ignorance when you label someone a devil worshipper. I think you are showing the signs of the devil's influence moreso than the Jews you accuse.

I believe I provided Biblical evidence that Christ Himself called them exactly that, Jn8:44. As a Christian I must imitate The Saviour.

bernee51
And how many pogroms grew out of such sentiments?

How is it relevant to the truth of the statement?

The men who made the USofA were conspirators, rebels and revolutionaries. I'm not up on US history...were they Jewish?

Were they not masons? Also look at the product of their making.

With such diatribe they do not deserve the epithet 'Saints'.

You have answered the question I asked in this thread.

People don't decide who the Saint is, God does. And thank you I have indeed covered some of it.

What absolute garbage.

Why take refuge in a book of myth written (in part) by madmen.

The words you have chosen to use here would put you well in their company.

With such attitudes to defend against it is no wonder I am a 'militant atheist'

Sounds more like you are a militant judaizer or as your friend cnorman18 will refer to you shabes goim.

arayhay
That is, orthodoxy shoots its-self in the foot by attacking the Jews. Not recognizing their need for inclusion in Israel. Orthodoxy loses sight of this truth, and a proper perspective of its-self by taking this wrong approach to foundational landmarks.

You either have never read The Bible or didn't understand it. I support all my theological constructs with Biblical evidence. It would be very stupid of you to attempt to argue against it for you will be arguing against Saints, people enormously better and more intelligent than us.

Luk 3:4 As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
Luk 3:5 Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be made low, and the crooked shall become straight, and the rough places shall become level ways,
Luk 3:6 and all flesh shall see the salvation of God.'"

Is it not referring to God that jews murdered?

[Dionysus]

In 1844 Vladimir Dal published an essay "Investigation of the Murder of Christian Babies by Jews and the Use of Their Blood." which earnestly asserted that Jews were in fact guilty of ritual murder. This essay was result of formal investigation by Ministry of Interior of which Dal was an employee. Now Dal being an honest and thorough investigator stated that: "certainly not all and not even all religious jews perform these crimes, however the fact that sect of Hasidism regularly engages in it, is evident".

X FUCKING D

You can't be serious.

You just can't be.

Do you not see the utter fucking stupidity of citing a hundred and sixty-three-year-old 'study' to back up your utterly laughable claims?

Back to the Dark Ages, from whence ye came!

[Smersh]

Dionysus

X xxxxxxx D

You can't be serious.

You just can't be.

Do you not see the utter xxxxxxx stupidity of citing a hundred and sixty-three-year-old 'study' to back up your utterly laughable claims?

Back to the Dark Ages, from whence ye came!

How is date of publishing bears any relevance to credibility of a criminal investigation? Especially investigation conducted by a brilliant scientists whose works are so well known and respected? Are you saying that all people found guilty 163 years ago are in fact innocent? How about 162 years ago? 2 years ago?

[Dionysus]

Dionysus

X xxxxxxx D

You can't be serious.

You just can't be.

Do you not see the utter xxxxxxx stupidity of citing a hundred and sixty-three-year-old 'study' to back up your utterly laughable claims?

Back to the Dark Ages, from whence ye came!

How is date of publishing bears any relevance to credibility of a criminal investigation? Especially investigation conducted by a brilliant scientists whose works are so well known and respected? Are you saying that all people found guilty 163 years ago are in fact innocent? How about 162 years ago? 2 years ago?

I'm saying that this is quite clearly a case of a governmental employee validating the biases and prejudices of the culture of which he was a part, namely the Russian culture which, as we all know, has a long history of engaging in pogroms and seems to be more susceptible to anti-Semitism than most.

And Dal was not a 'brilliant scientist'. He was an etyologist, a social 'scientist'. This means he was about as 'scientific' as Marxist 'social scientists'.

Furthermore: Was his work peer-reviewed? If not, it means absolutely nothing.