| Revision as of 01:20, 9 May 2012 editDeknMike (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,253 edits →Roots of Messianic Judaism← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:18, 9 May 2012 edit undoZad68 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users20,355 edits →Roots of Messianic Judaism: r to DeknMike, same ol' same ol'Next edit → | ||
| Line 95: | Line 95: | ||
| :::(emphasis mine:) Reliable source Shoshanah Feher, Ph.D. in Sociology, in "Passing over Easter: Constructing the Boundaries of Messianic Judaism" (1998), p. 140. writes "This interest in developing a Jewish ethnic identity may not be surprising when we consider the 1960s, when Messianic Judaism '''arose'''." Reliable source James Lewis, Ph.D. in Religious Studies, in "Odd Gods: New Religions & the Cult Controversy" (2001) writes "The origins of Messianic Judaism date to the 1960s when it '''began''' among American Jews who converted to Christianity." The article currently states "arose in the 1960s and 70s" but it could just as easily say "began in the 1960s and 70s" because we have multiple reliable sources to support it. Regarding your question "If you are willing to say that Messianic Judaism has a history prior to 1960 (even if under other names) then we are in agreement." -- Answer is: It doesn't matter what I, personally, am "willing to say." All that matters is what reliable sources say. Reliable sources--multiple, independent Ph.D.s from around the world--say it arose/began/emerged in the 1960s and 1970s and so that is what the Misplaced Pages article will say. ] (]) 18:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC) | :::(emphasis mine:) Reliable source Shoshanah Feher, Ph.D. in Sociology, in "Passing over Easter: Constructing the Boundaries of Messianic Judaism" (1998), p. 140. writes "This interest in developing a Jewish ethnic identity may not be surprising when we consider the 1960s, when Messianic Judaism '''arose'''." Reliable source James Lewis, Ph.D. in Religious Studies, in "Odd Gods: New Religions & the Cult Controversy" (2001) writes "The origins of Messianic Judaism date to the 1960s when it '''began''' among American Jews who converted to Christianity." The article currently states "arose in the 1960s and 70s" but it could just as easily say "began in the 1960s and 70s" because we have multiple reliable sources to support it. Regarding your question "If you are willing to say that Messianic Judaism has a history prior to 1960 (even if under other names) then we are in agreement." -- Answer is: It doesn't matter what I, personally, am "willing to say." All that matters is what reliable sources say. Reliable sources--multiple, independent Ph.D.s from around the world--say it arose/began/emerged in the 1960s and 1970s and so that is what the Misplaced Pages article will say. ] (]) 18:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC) | ||
| ::::And again to the root of the problem. If Feher, who said its "origins can be traced in the United States to the Hebrew Christian missions to the Jews in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries" had meant 'began' she would have said 'began' and not arose. Of the 7 sources, four say a segment of the Hebrew Christian movement ''emerged'' and changed its name and one says it existed in the 1940s. Yet you continue to harp on that one undefined word with no thought as to finding consensus, though I have tried over and over to find a synonym that squares with the majority of these sources.--] (]) 01:20, 9 May 2012 (UTC) | ::::And again to the root of the problem. If Feher, who said its "origins can be traced in the United States to the Hebrew Christian missions to the Jews in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries" had meant 'began' she would have said 'began' and not arose. Of the 7 sources, four say a segment of the Hebrew Christian movement ''emerged'' and changed its name and one says it existed in the 1940s. Yet you continue to harp on that one undefined word with no thought as to finding consensus, though I have tried over and over to find a synonym that squares with the majority of these sources.--] (]) 01:20, 9 May 2012 (UTC) | ||
| :::::"Again to the root of the problem" indeed: Again you are conflating the origins of MJism with the modern movement itself. Again you are flatly, plainly misrepresenting the sources to push your POV. | |||
| :::::*Dr. Shoshanah Feher, who received her Ph.D. in sociology from UCSB in 1995, gives the 1960s (p. 140) as "when Messianic Judaism arose." She differentiates MJs from Hebrew Christians by saying Hebrew Christians and Messianic Jews are all "Jews who become Christian and continue to consider themselves Jews" but "Hebrew Christians ... differ from Messianic Jews not in their identification as Jews, but in the extent to which they integrate Judaism into their religious life." So she's saying there had been Hebrew Christians (those who had converted to Christianity but started to identify themselves as ethnic Jews, elsewhere in her book she talks about how the Hebrew Christian movement started in the late 1800s) and in the 1960 MJism '''arose''' out of them. Let's be clear: According to Feher, before 1960, "Messianic Judaism" '''''did not exist''''' because it did not arise until the 1960s. Full quote from Feher, p. 25: {{quote|The Jewish community is most disturbed by Messianics' insistence on maintaining their Jewish identity. Those who convert from Judaism to Christianity may be upsetting because they leave the fold, but Messianic Jews straddle the cultures and cause havoc by confusing the boundaries and mixing classifications. This is not only true of Messianic Jews, but of all Jews who become Christian and continue to consider themselves Jews. Included in the category are Hebrew Christians, which differ from Messianic Jews not in their identification as Jews, but in the extent to which they integrate Judaism into their religious life. Jews for Jesus, perhaps the most prominent of the Hebrew Christian groups, uses considerably less Jewish ritual than Messianic Judaism, and its members worship in established Christian churches rather than in their own congregations.}} | |||
| :::::*Our most heavyweight reliable source, ], Ph.D. in History and Literature of Religions, founding director of the Institute for the Study of American Religion, Distinguished Senior Fellow at Baylor University's Institute for Studies of Religion, research specialist in religion and New Religious Movements with the Department of Religious Studies at USCB, second most prolific contributor to the Encyclopædia Britannica, and author of his own Encyclopedia of Protestantism, writes in his encyclopedia chapter on Messianic Judaism (read it for yourself ), "Messianic Judaism is a Protestant movement that emerged in the last half of the 20th century among believers who were ethnically Jewish but had adopted an Evangelical Christian faith... By the 1960s, a new effort to create a culturally Jewish Protestant Christianity emerged among individuals who began to call themselves Messianic Jews." The article does not mention the Hebrew Christian movement at all, but it appears in saying "believers who were ethnically Jewish but had adopted an Evangelical Christian faith" he means Hebrew Christians. | |||
| :::::*Bülent Şenay, Ph.D. in religious studies from Lancaster University, UK and former professor in the religion department of Bursa Uludag University in Turkey, the "group emerged in the 1960s" from the "Christian Jews," and there I think he's talking about Hebrew Christians, which he defines as those "who identify themselves as religiously Christian but ethnically Jewish." Again, before 1960: No MJs, but there were Hebrew Christians. | |||
| :::::*Dr. Yaakov S. Ariel, Ph.D., Professor of Religious Studies at UNC Chapel Hill also discusses Hebrew Christians through the mid-1900 but clearly states "The Rise of Messianic Judaism" was in "the early and mid-1970s" (p. 194). The 1940's you keep throwing out is about the ''term'' and not the ''movement'' itself, which Ariel makes clear arose in the early and mid-1970s. In fact, Ariel makes it clear that in Israel in the 1940s, the term "Messianic Judaism" described ''Jews who accepted Christianity in its Protestant evangelical form''. Here's the full "term resurfaced" quote you keep misusing, full quote (): {{quote|When the term ("Messianic Judaism") resurfaced in Israel in the 1940s and 1950s, it designated all Jews who accepted Christianity in its Protestant evangelical form. Missionaries such as the Southern Baptist Robert Lindsey noted that for Israeli Jews, the term nozrim, "Christians" in Hebrew, meant, almost automatically, an alien, hostile religion. Because such a term made it nearly impossible to convince Jews that Christianity was their religion, missionaries sought a more neutral term, one that did not arouse negative feelings. They chose Meshichyim, Messianic, to overcome the suspicion and antagonism of the term nozrim. Meshichyim as a term also had the advantage of emphasizing messianism as a major component of the Christian evangelical belief that the missions and communities of Jewish converts to Christianity propagated. It conveyed the sense of a new, innovative religion rather that(sic) an old, unfavorable one. The term was used in reference to those Jews who accepted Jesus as their personal savior, and did not apply to Jews accepting Roman Catholicism who in Israel have called themselves Hebrew Christians. The term Messianic Judaism was adopted in the United States in the early 1970s by those converts to evangelical Christianity who advocated a more assertive attitude on the part of converts towards their Jewish roots and heritage.}} | |||
| :::::*Dr. ], who received his Ph.D. in Religious Studies from the University of Wales, says "he origins of Messianic Judaism date to the 1960s". | |||
| :::::*Cohn-Sherbok, perhaps the weakest source (a rabbi of Reform Judaism and no advanced academic degrees in religion), says that MJ "emerged a growing segment of the Hebrew Christian community" '''in the 1970s'''. Full quote: {{quote|In the 1970s a number of American Jewish converts to Christianity, known as Hebrew Christians, were committed to a church-based conception of Hebrew Christianity. Yet, at the same time, there emerged a growing segment of the Hebrew Christian community that sought a more Jewish lifestyle. Eventually, a division emerged between those who wished to identify as Jews and those who sought to pursue Hebrew Christian goals... In time, the name of the movement was changed to Messianic Judaism.}} | |||
| :::::So, to review: According to reliable sources, Messianic Judaism arose as early as the 1960s. In the 1950s, the Messianic Judaism movement did not exist. I don't know what else can possibly be done to convince you to accept what the multiple, independent reliable sources have to say on this matter. I'm certainly exhausted trying to convince you to accept what the reliable sources say, it simply may not be possible to do so. (You also grossly mischaracterize the underlying core issue here ("you continue to harp on that one undefined word with no thought as to finding consensus, though I have tried over and over to find a synonym...") as the archives here prove, and as we are currently discussing on the open ] thread that you are already aware of, but as that is an editor behavior issue and not a content issue, there's no reason to go into that further here.) ] (]) 18:18, 9 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Jerusalem Council as source == | == Jerusalem Council as source == | ||
Revision as of 18:18, 9 May 2012
| Skip to table of contents |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Messianic Judaism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24Auto-archiving period: 10 days  |
 | Messianic Judaism was one of the Philosophy and religion good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
| Current status: Delisted good article | ||||||||||||||||
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
 | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Messianic Judaism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24Auto-archiving period: 10 days |
Roberto de Nobili
first used a similar adaptation method in India. Could be added to the history section. Jan 89.176.207.223 (talk) 07:44, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- Only if reliable secondary sources make that connection. Jayjg 02:28, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Roots of Messianic Judaism
On page 13 of Mark S. Kinzer's Postmissionary Messianic Judaism: Redefining Christian Engagement with the Jewish People ], he says "In (chapter8) I will recount the history of the Messianic Jewish movement and its origins in late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Hebrew Christianity." (I don't have access yet to the details in chapter 8) The lede says the HCAA adopted the name Messianic in the 70s, but the movement's roots are much older.
Kinzer also comments on the diversity within the movement, and quotes theologian Michael Wyschogrod's complaint about "congregations that simply adopt Jewish symbos and practices but are not committed in principle to Torah observance. (Authentic Messianic) congregations are ‘committed in principle to Torah observance' and ‘demand it ..indefinitely.' The motivation is covenant fidelity, not missionary expediency." --DeknMike (talk) 15:13, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- Hi DeknMike. What changes to the article are you proposing? Regarding the history, it appears that Kinzer is in line with what the article already says--there were things that happened in the 19th Century Hebrew Christian movement that were relevant to the eventual rise of Messianic Judaism. Regarding MJ practice, first we should also be aware while we're discussing him that Kinzer is a Messianic himself and is an "insider," partisan to a particular group's implementation of it. Take care with the Wyschogrod quote, he does not talk about "Authentic Messianic" anything. But again, you posted something here on the Talk page and it sounds like you want to use this source to support changes to the article, what are those changes? Zad68 (talk) 15:45, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- (On no other board does an insider expert get ruled out of bounds.) I was noting an additional source that confirmed that Messianic Judaism did not begin in the late 1960s, but instead had a history, and over time - particularly with international attention on the Six Day War and the influx of converts during the Jesus Movement - the emphasis shifted from the Hebrew Christian practices to let the 100-year-old Messianic Judaism strain emerge.--DeknMike (talk) 21:10, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think Zad was ruling Kinzer out, as you put it. There's just a fine line as to what might be acceptably sourced by someone with as deep an interest in the movement as Kinzer. He is a well-known leader in (if I remember correctly) the UMJC, so sourcing to him would be most appropriate for views prominent in (or specific to) the UMJC -- his idea of unrecognized mediation, for instance (which really should be mentioned, by the way). Unless he cites a third-party (preferably impartial) source in relation to his thoughts on Messianic history, or it is otherwise independently verifiable, I would be a little uncomfortable with that. However, if there is independent verification, as you say there is, there should be no problem adding it to the article. But how exactly does the current state of the article say that Messianic Judaism arose "Ex nihilo"? I don't get that from it at all. Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 21:22, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- Exactly, thank you Evanh Zad68 (talk) 21:32, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- First, I'm not saying that he's "ruled out of bounds," but only that his particular take on what MJism should or should not be needs to be understood as that of a partisan insider. Kinzer is not an anthropologist. He is not an independent, impartial, scientific observer and recorder of what MJism currently is. In fact, Kinzer's book that you are quoting from is his argument about what MJism should be--something new that he is proposing that he calls "Postmissionary Messianic Judaism"--and as such we must understand that MJism as it currently exists is not what he is arguing it should be, otherwise he would not have to write such a book. His book might be useful for this article in some ways, but not as an impartial overview of the state of MJism as it currently exists. Do you understand?
- So, we are discussing the start date of MJism again. The article currently has seven reliable sources that explicitly give the 1960s and 70s as when the movement arose/emerged/began. What exactly does Kinzer say? Can we please see the full text of exactly what he says, in context, quoted directly from the source? Once we have that we can discuss what changes to the article it might support. Zad68 (talk) 21:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- Exactly right on both your points, that a) the article already clearly indicates that while Messianism itself arose in the 60s and 70s, it had Hebrew Christian precursors in the 19th century, and b) we need to know exactly what the source says, in context, and exactly what changes are proposed based on that source. Jayjg 01:20, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- I agree that the full text of exactly what the source says, in context, would be very useful here. Ambiguous phrases saying things like "it has roots" elsewhere are somewhat problematic, because the definition of "roots" in context is an ambiguous one. I tend to think he may be a reliable source on what, if Evanh2008 is right, the UMJC or its members declares to be its history, but unfortunately the internal statements of adherents and the academic opinions of outsiders often differ greatly, particularly regarding groups which see themselves as being a direct continuation or possibly "restoration" of earlier groups, but which are not necessarily seen as such by outsiders. John Carter (talk) 01:28, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- The opinions of UJMC, as being the largest body of MJ,should have more weight than editorials of outside antagonists.--DeknMike (talk) 04:28, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- To which "editorials of outside antagonists" are you referring? Please be explicit, listing the exact source, why you think it is an "editorial", why you think it is an "outside antagonist", and how it is used in the article in lieu of the views of the UJMC. Jayjg 11:08, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- Evanh2008, the ex nihilo comment refers to the many discussions (particularly from Zad68)that MJ did not exist until the late 1960s, which has been documented to be false.--DeknMike (talk) 04:32, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- We have seven reliable sources indicating that Messianism arose in the 1960s and 1970s. Please stop trying to promote historical revisionism, please review WP:NOTAFORUM, and please make more accurate Talk: page statements. Jayjg 11:08, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- For the record, I am not of the conviction that MJism arose "ex nihilo" and I have not made edits along those lines. DeknMike, please stop misrepresenting my editing history. Who exactly are the "outside antagonists" you are referring to? Zad68 (talk) 12:45, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- Seven reliable sources you say? Cohn-Sherbok says a growing segment of the Hebrew Christian movement ‘emerged’ and..."In time the name of the movement was changed to messianic Judaism." Şenay and Melton's Encyclopedia also say 'emerged' (not ‘started’). Ariel says the term ‘resurfaced’ in the 1940s in Israel and was ‘adopted’ in the US in the early 70s. Lewis says origins were with American Jews in the 1960s, ignoring Ariel's reporting of the movement in other countries – how can we then call his work ‘authoritative’? Feher’s research regarding the ‘’date’’ is unsubstantiated. That gives one source that dates the movement at least to the 1940s, three that say a segment of the Hebrew Christian movement emerged and changed its name, and one undocumented assertion based on common assumptions. Four sources indicate a beginning prior to 1960 (the strongest indicates a movement prior to 1940); only the weakest two sources says it started in the 1960s.--DeknMike (talk) 04:32, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- This is yet another attempt to continue the many, many arguments cataloged here. As you've added nothing new to the previous arguments, and none of them ever resulted in consensus to change the article, I don't see any need to re-engage here at this time. I would support anybody who would consider this to be a continuation of a history of disruptive editing. Zad68 (talk) 13:46, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Agreed. Jayjg 00:43, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- And yet he changed it anyway, to ""emerged from the Hebrew Christian movement", despite the fact that several sources use the term "arose" or "rise" or "began", and that the sources give many different (and somewhat conflicting) origins for Messianism. By my count this is the 23rd time he's changed it to something which does not accurately represent the sources. Jayjg 23:43, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- I think that probably qualifies as tendentious editing as per WP:TE and POV pushing as per WP:POV. Perhaps it might be time to consider a topic ban at WP:AN/I? That seems to be the reasonable next step. John Carter (talk) 00:11, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- I support this proposal. This idea has come up before, but it didn't go anywhere. Maybe it will this time? Zad68 (talk) 01:33, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- I think that probably qualifies as tendentious editing as per WP:TE and POV pushing as per WP:POV. Perhaps it might be time to consider a topic ban at WP:AN/I? That seems to be the reasonable next step. John Carter (talk) 00:11, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- This is yet another attempt to continue the many, many arguments cataloged here. As you've added nothing new to the previous arguments, and none of them ever resulted in consensus to change the article, I don't see any need to re-engage here at this time. I would support anybody who would consider this to be a continuation of a history of disruptive editing. Zad68 (talk) 13:46, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Seven reliable sources you say? Cohn-Sherbok says a growing segment of the Hebrew Christian movement ‘emerged’ and..."In time the name of the movement was changed to messianic Judaism." Şenay and Melton's Encyclopedia also say 'emerged' (not ‘started’). Ariel says the term ‘resurfaced’ in the 1940s in Israel and was ‘adopted’ in the US in the early 70s. Lewis says origins were with American Jews in the 1960s, ignoring Ariel's reporting of the movement in other countries – how can we then call his work ‘authoritative’? Feher’s research regarding the ‘’date’’ is unsubstantiated. That gives one source that dates the movement at least to the 1940s, three that say a segment of the Hebrew Christian movement emerged and changed its name, and one undocumented assertion based on common assumptions. Four sources indicate a beginning prior to 1960 (the strongest indicates a movement prior to 1940); only the weakest two sources says it started in the 1960s.--DeknMike (talk) 04:32, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- The opinions of UJMC, as being the largest body of MJ,should have more weight than editorials of outside antagonists.--DeknMike (talk) 04:28, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- I agree that the full text of exactly what the source says, in context, would be very useful here. Ambiguous phrases saying things like "it has roots" elsewhere are somewhat problematic, because the definition of "roots" in context is an ambiguous one. I tend to think he may be a reliable source on what, if Evanh2008 is right, the UMJC or its members declares to be its history, but unfortunately the internal statements of adherents and the academic opinions of outsiders often differ greatly, particularly regarding groups which see themselves as being a direct continuation or possibly "restoration" of earlier groups, but which are not necessarily seen as such by outsiders. John Carter (talk) 01:28, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- Exactly right on both your points, that a) the article already clearly indicates that while Messianism itself arose in the 60s and 70s, it had Hebrew Christian precursors in the 19th century, and b) we need to know exactly what the source says, in context, and exactly what changes are proposed based on that source. Jayjg 01:20, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think Zad was ruling Kinzer out, as you put it. There's just a fine line as to what might be acceptably sourced by someone with as deep an interest in the movement as Kinzer. He is a well-known leader in (if I remember correctly) the UMJC, so sourcing to him would be most appropriate for views prominent in (or specific to) the UMJC -- his idea of unrecognized mediation, for instance (which really should be mentioned, by the way). Unless he cites a third-party (preferably impartial) source in relation to his thoughts on Messianic history, or it is otherwise independently verifiable, I would be a little uncomfortable with that. However, if there is independent verification, as you say there is, there should be no problem adding it to the article. But how exactly does the current state of the article say that Messianic Judaism arose "Ex nihilo"? I don't get that from it at all. Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 21:22, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- (On no other board does an insider expert get ruled out of bounds.) I was noting an additional source that confirmed that Messianic Judaism did not begin in the late 1960s, but instead had a history, and over time - particularly with international attention on the Six Day War and the influx of converts during the Jesus Movement - the emphasis shifted from the Hebrew Christian practices to let the 100-year-old Messianic Judaism strain emerge.--DeknMike (talk) 21:10, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm not sure what to think here. I only drop in here occasionally but have increasing sympathy with Jayjg's view and in particular am somewhat concerned with DeknMike making 23 changes on a single line (I'm presuming that the 23 changes the other way will have been made by a variety of editors, 3 editors x 7 reverts each or something, but haven't checked). I would advise DeknMike that at this point edits to that particular line need to go through the keyboard of another editor - for example John Carter who is evidently neutral here. Has that option been offered DeknMike already? If it has been offered and has been refused, then it might be getting near to topic ban. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:38, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- IIO, take a look at DeknMike's Talk page--John Carter has tried several times to advise DeknMike but it does not seem to have worked. And actually it was John Carter himself who brought up the AN/I suggestion. Zad68 (talk) 03:43, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- (am having a connectivity problem, may take time) It may take time to look at the diffs. Is Melton's wording in article now? Melton would be a standard source. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:11, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- IIO, Melton says "Messianic Judaism is a Protestant movement that emerged in the last half of the 20th century among believers who were ethnically Jewish but had adopted an Evangelical Christian faith... By the 1960s, a new effort to create a culturally Jewish Protestant Christianity emerged among individuals who began to call themselves Messianic Jews." The article says "arose in the 1960s and 70s." So, the article agrees with Melton on the timing. If you're talking about "emerged" vs. "arose" again... to rehash our old discussion, Feher and Yaakov Ariel use "arose/rise" and Melton, Cohn-Sherbok and Şenay use "emerged." Honestly I don't think it matters either way, it doesn't make a darn bit of semantic difference, and here's a little bit of proof: Feher and Melton were both at UCSB at the same time, researching in the same subject area, and in her book, Feher thanks Melton: "Gordon Melton generously shared his ideas and his library and introduced me to the world of Messianic Judaism." So between these two Ph.D. colleagues, who worked at the same university, in the same subject area, who talked to each other and shared research resources and ideas about this subject, one uses "arose" and the other uses "emerged." Also, in this thread DeknMike is equally unhappy with "emerged" as he is with "rise," and in that same thread Jayjg notes "Oddly enough, back in July 2010 the word used was 'emerged', before DeknMike started edit-warring over it." The issue here is not "arose" vs. "emerged" but rather the continuous attempts to misrepresent the sources and change the article to have it say something the sources do not say. Zad68 (talk) 13:09, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Mmm. As I said I was having a connectivity issue and couldn't open history up. It does seem as if DeknMike is pushing it. As far as I know the problem is limited to one page - here. (I haven't been following anyone's contribs history). If it is only here then it may be manageable without a topic ban. Hmm. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:34, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- As far as I know I'm working alone. I did ask for 3d party input on the reliable sources board but Zad68 clownfooted the discussion with more of the same old rhetoric. I did not start the edit war, but rather offered sourced statements that did not agree with those wishing to prove MJ has no right to exist or to use the name it has chosen, and when they were deleted out of hand I restored the vandalism. All I have tried to do is show there are more sources than the ones "allowed" that offer other research, and my accusers respond with tired diatribes and half-truth accusations. When I compromise they reject the offer and slam my good name yet again with bygone discussions. Is Messianic Judaism the new name for Jews not happy in the Hebrew Christian congregations or Protestant churches, or was it a spontaneous creation by a large number of disaffected Jews who all organized the same way?--DeknMike (talk) 21:03, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- (am having a connectivity problem, may take time) It may take time to look at the diffs. Is Melton's wording in article now? Melton would be a standard source. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:11, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Sources from inside a movement can be used to support copy edits, but such sources would need to be prefaced with "some Messianic Jews consider...". If the sources were couched in that format then I don't see inclusion is a problem, provided that what is stated in source and edit copy match up. It is possible to use sources from inside - many of not most Chabad articles on WP depend exclusively on Chabad sources, JW articles (not an area I'm too familiar but John Carter and myself were both recently exposed to some JW vs JW-basher edit conflict) do feature JW internal sources. So the issue normally is in presenting those sources (a) accurately, and with due Weight, and (b) making sure the copy edit matches up.
- Can I make a suggestion? Rather than argue further (whoever is right) on the arose / emerge / roots issue for a time. Could the search for reliable sources go into another direction and explain why/how/when Messianic Jewish practices developed. why/how/when did MJ's split from traditional Protestant "Hebrew Christian" groups? Why/how/when did use of bits of Hebrew in English become current? Why/how/when did celebrating Jewish festivals get (re)introduced? etc. If you can provide sourced content for this it would improve the article and would inform the roots/split with earlier Protestant Jewish groups. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:32, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Such material would certainly be useful, if independent reliable sources can be found which address such matters. If only internal sources can be found, it might however best be included in the body of the article, but perhaps not to any great degree in the lead. John Carter (talk) 23:51, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that comment makes any sense. The lede summarizes the article (or at least, is supposed to), so anything fit for inclusion in the article, if notable enough, can be summarized in the lede as well. While we're on the subject, the lede on this article is ridiculously large and includes numerous non-summary statements; if I have enough free time next month I'm going to go through and try to clean it up a bit. That's all the input I have right now. Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 00:56, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- Agreed regarding the lead. My earlier comment was more or less in accord, I thought, with WP:NPOV. We really are not supposed to give any side more prominence than the other. So, including only the internal opinions of the group, without any indication of whether the material has independent support, would to my eyes seem to give the group's own opinion undue weight and possibly violate NPOV. "Opinions regarding the origins of MJ" would be significant enough for the lead if internal and external opinions were known. FWIW, though, having myself gone over the reliable independent sources available to me on this topic in the past, I can't remember any independent sources really saying anything about MJ origins or "prehistory" one way or another. John Carter (talk) 01:14, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- What John says makes sense, anything controverted or based on internal sources would be better in body. Ledes are invariably too long and oversourced/overworked in these kind of articles anyway. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:50, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'll bring up your concerns at the annual conference this summer, though most (not all) of the scholarship done on the subject is done by so-called 'insiders' and has in the past rejected by some on this board as biased, even if well-referenced; other sources are not concerned with origins as much as current activities. Nuances - such as the difference between churches adopting Messianic music and Jewish trappings versus Jewish-led congregations that rely heavily on liturgy in Hebrew with Messianic sermons - are often ignored. Even the sources allowed say Messianic congregations existed in Eastern Europe and Israel in the 40s, and a few in the US, but the 60s saw many new congregations and in the 70s many Hebrew Christians changed their name to the term Messianic.--DeknMike (talk) 02:14, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- DeknMike, which sources "say Messianic congregations existed in Eastern Europe and Israel in the 40s, and a few in the US"? Please cite and quote them. Jayjg 21:59, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- 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. pp. 194–195. ISBN 978-0-275-98714-5. LCCN 2006022954. OCLC 315689134--DeknMike (talk) 05:20, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Greenwood Publishing is generally a reliable source. Can you provide an exact quotation from the article in question which would link it directly to modern Messianic Judaism. I more or less have to ask that they be directly linked to MJs in the source, because there have been numerous messianic movements in Judaism, and not all of them are necessarily directly connected to the modern Messianic Jews. John Carter (talk) 18:25, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- I've read the source, and it in no way supports the claim Mike is making for it - no doubt this is the reason the quotation I requested was not provided. In fact, the source talks about Christian Missions to Jews, not "Messianic congregations". This is just more of that invented revisionist history. Mike, provide the quote that states "Messianic congregations existed in Eastern Europe and Israel in the 40s, and a few in the US", Jayjg 23:34, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Greenwood Publishing is generally a reliable source. Can you provide an exact quotation from the article in question which would link it directly to modern Messianic Judaism. I more or less have to ask that they be directly linked to MJs in the source, because there have been numerous messianic movements in Judaism, and not all of them are necessarily directly connected to the modern Messianic Jews. John Carter (talk) 18:25, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- 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. pp. 194–195. ISBN 978-0-275-98714-5. LCCN 2006022954. OCLC 315689134--DeknMike (talk) 05:20, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- DeknMike, which sources "say Messianic congregations existed in Eastern Europe and Israel in the 40s, and a few in the US"? Please cite and quote them. Jayjg 21:59, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- Agreed regarding the lead. My earlier comment was more or less in accord, I thought, with WP:NPOV. We really are not supposed to give any side more prominence than the other. So, including only the internal opinions of the group, without any indication of whether the material has independent support, would to my eyes seem to give the group's own opinion undue weight and possibly violate NPOV. "Opinions regarding the origins of MJ" would be significant enough for the lead if internal and external opinions were known. FWIW, though, having myself gone over the reliable independent sources available to me on this topic in the past, I can't remember any independent sources really saying anything about MJ origins or "prehistory" one way or another. John Carter (talk) 01:14, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that comment makes any sense. The lede summarizes the article (or at least, is supposed to), so anything fit for inclusion in the article, if notable enough, can be summarized in the lede as well. While we're on the subject, the lede on this article is ridiculously large and includes numerous non-summary statements; if I have enough free time next month I'm going to go through and try to clean it up a bit. That's all the input I have right now. Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 00:56, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- Such material would certainly be useful, if independent reliable sources can be found which address such matters. If only internal sources can be found, it might however best be included in the body of the article, but perhaps not to any great degree in the lead. John Carter (talk) 23:51, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Page 1 of Feher says Messianic Judaism's origins "can be traced in the United States to the Hebrew Christian missions to the Jews in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries," plus the 60s Jesus People movements and renewed Zionism. On the history page of the MJAA ("the largest association of Messianic Jews and non-Jewish believers in Yeshua (Jesus) in the world"), they say they were founded in 1915. On their explanation of Messianic Judaism, it says '"Hebrew Christianity" has since become known as "Messianic Judaism."' If the largest group within Messianic Judaism says their roots go back to 1915 and that they are now known as Messianic Jewish, and Feher confirms, who am I to argue? The quote from Kinzer confirms that the name change of HCAA to MJAA was a semantic difference, not a new start of a new movement. --DeknMike (talk) 22:38, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Mike, provide the quote that states "Messianic congregations existed in Eastern Europe and Israel in the 40s, and a few in the US". Jayjg 23:09, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Mike, in that same book by Feher, she says (p. 140) "This interest in developing a Jewish ethnic identity may not be surprising when we consider the 1960s, when Messianic Judaism arose." Why do you say "Who am I to argue" against what Feher says on page 1, but you argue so vehemently against what she says on page 140? Zad68 (talk) 03:31, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- I don't argue against what she said on page 140, only your interpretation of what arose means. I say it means came into view by the general population and you say it means began. If you are willing to say that Messianic Judaism has a history prior to 1960 (even if under other names) then we are in agreement. --DeknMike (talk) 16:47, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- (emphasis mine:) Reliable source Shoshanah Feher, Ph.D. in Sociology, in "Passing over Easter: Constructing the Boundaries of Messianic Judaism" (1998), p. 140. writes "This interest in developing a Jewish ethnic identity may not be surprising when we consider the 1960s, when Messianic Judaism arose." Reliable source James Lewis, Ph.D. in Religious Studies, in "Odd Gods: New Religions & the Cult Controversy" (2001) writes "The origins of Messianic Judaism date to the 1960s when it began among American Jews who converted to Christianity." The article currently states "arose in the 1960s and 70s" but it could just as easily say "began in the 1960s and 70s" because we have multiple reliable sources to support it. Regarding your question "If you are willing to say that Messianic Judaism has a history prior to 1960 (even if under other names) then we are in agreement." -- Answer is: It doesn't matter what I, personally, am "willing to say." All that matters is what reliable sources say. Reliable sources--multiple, independent Ph.D.s from around the world--say it arose/began/emerged in the 1960s and 1970s and so that is what the Misplaced Pages article will say. Zad68 (talk) 18:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- And again to the root of the problem. If Feher, who said its "origins can be traced in the United States to the Hebrew Christian missions to the Jews in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries" had meant 'began' she would have said 'began' and not arose. Of the 7 sources, four say a segment of the Hebrew Christian movement emerged and changed its name and one says it existed in the 1940s. Yet you continue to harp on that one undefined word with no thought as to finding consensus, though I have tried over and over to find a synonym that squares with the majority of these sources.--DeknMike (talk) 01:20, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
- "Again to the root of the problem" indeed: Again you are conflating the origins of MJism with the modern movement itself. Again you are flatly, plainly misrepresenting the sources to push your POV.
- Dr. Shoshanah Feher, who received her Ph.D. in sociology from UCSB in 1995, gives the 1960s (p. 140) as "when Messianic Judaism arose." She differentiates MJs from Hebrew Christians by saying Hebrew Christians and Messianic Jews are all "Jews who become Christian and continue to consider themselves Jews" but "Hebrew Christians ... differ from Messianic Jews not in their identification as Jews, but in the extent to which they integrate Judaism into their religious life." So she's saying there had been Hebrew Christians (those who had converted to Christianity but started to identify themselves as ethnic Jews, elsewhere in her book she talks about how the Hebrew Christian movement started in the late 1800s) and in the 1960 MJism arose out of them. Let's be clear: According to Feher, before 1960, "Messianic Judaism" did not exist because it did not arise until the 1960s. Full quote from Feher, p. 25:
The Jewish community is most disturbed by Messianics' insistence on maintaining their Jewish identity. Those who convert from Judaism to Christianity may be upsetting because they leave the fold, but Messianic Jews straddle the cultures and cause havoc by confusing the boundaries and mixing classifications. This is not only true of Messianic Jews, but of all Jews who become Christian and continue to consider themselves Jews. Included in the category are Hebrew Christians, which differ from Messianic Jews not in their identification as Jews, but in the extent to which they integrate Judaism into their religious life. Jews for Jesus, perhaps the most prominent of the Hebrew Christian groups, uses considerably less Jewish ritual than Messianic Judaism, and its members worship in established Christian churches rather than in their own congregations.
- Our most heavyweight reliable source, J. Gordon Melton, Ph.D. in History and Literature of Religions, founding director of the Institute for the Study of American Religion, Distinguished Senior Fellow at Baylor University's Institute for Studies of Religion, research specialist in religion and New Religious Movements with the Department of Religious Studies at USCB, second most prolific contributor to the Encyclopædia Britannica, and author of his own Encyclopedia of Protestantism, writes in his encyclopedia chapter on Messianic Judaism (read it for yourself here), "Messianic Judaism is a Protestant movement that emerged in the last half of the 20th century among believers who were ethnically Jewish but had adopted an Evangelical Christian faith... By the 1960s, a new effort to create a culturally Jewish Protestant Christianity emerged among individuals who began to call themselves Messianic Jews." The article does not mention the Hebrew Christian movement at all, but it appears in saying "believers who were ethnically Jewish but had adopted an Evangelical Christian faith" he means Hebrew Christians.
- Bülent Şenay, Ph.D. in religious studies from Lancaster University, UK and former professor in the religion department of Bursa Uludag University in Turkey, wrote the "group emerged in the 1960s" from the "Christian Jews," and there I think he's talking about Hebrew Christians, which he defines as those "who identify themselves as religiously Christian but ethnically Jewish." Again, before 1960: No MJs, but there were Hebrew Christians.
- Dr. Yaakov S. Ariel, Ph.D., Professor of Religious Studies at UNC Chapel Hill also discusses Hebrew Christians through the mid-1900 but clearly states "The Rise of Messianic Judaism" was in "the early and mid-1970s" (p. 194). The 1940's you keep throwing out is about the term and not the movement itself, which Ariel makes clear arose in the early and mid-1970s. In fact, Ariel makes it clear that in Israel in the 1940s, the term "Messianic Judaism" described Jews who accepted Christianity in its Protestant evangelical form. Here's the full "term resurfaced" quote you keep misusing, full quote (Judaism and Christianity Unite! The Unique Culture of Messianic Judaism p. 194):
When the term ("Messianic Judaism") resurfaced in Israel in the 1940s and 1950s, it designated all Jews who accepted Christianity in its Protestant evangelical form. Missionaries such as the Southern Baptist Robert Lindsey noted that for Israeli Jews, the term nozrim, "Christians" in Hebrew, meant, almost automatically, an alien, hostile religion. Because such a term made it nearly impossible to convince Jews that Christianity was their religion, missionaries sought a more neutral term, one that did not arouse negative feelings. They chose Meshichyim, Messianic, to overcome the suspicion and antagonism of the term nozrim. Meshichyim as a term also had the advantage of emphasizing messianism as a major component of the Christian evangelical belief that the missions and communities of Jewish converts to Christianity propagated. It conveyed the sense of a new, innovative religion rather that(sic) an old, unfavorable one. The term was used in reference to those Jews who accepted Jesus as their personal savior, and did not apply to Jews accepting Roman Catholicism who in Israel have called themselves Hebrew Christians. The term Messianic Judaism was adopted in the United States in the early 1970s by those converts to evangelical Christianity who advocated a more assertive attitude on the part of converts towards their Jewish roots and heritage.
- Dr. James R. Lewis, who received his Ph.D. in Religious Studies from the University of Wales, says "he origins of Messianic Judaism date to the 1960s".
- Cohn-Sherbok, perhaps the weakest source (a rabbi of Reform Judaism and no advanced academic degrees in religion), says that MJ "emerged a growing segment of the Hebrew Christian community" in the 1970s. Full quote:
In the 1970s a number of American Jewish converts to Christianity, known as Hebrew Christians, were committed to a church-based conception of Hebrew Christianity. Yet, at the same time, there emerged a growing segment of the Hebrew Christian community that sought a more Jewish lifestyle. Eventually, a division emerged between those who wished to identify as Jews and those who sought to pursue Hebrew Christian goals... In time, the name of the movement was changed to Messianic Judaism.
- Dr. Shoshanah Feher, who received her Ph.D. in sociology from UCSB in 1995, gives the 1960s (p. 140) as "when Messianic Judaism arose." She differentiates MJs from Hebrew Christians by saying Hebrew Christians and Messianic Jews are all "Jews who become Christian and continue to consider themselves Jews" but "Hebrew Christians ... differ from Messianic Jews not in their identification as Jews, but in the extent to which they integrate Judaism into their religious life." So she's saying there had been Hebrew Christians (those who had converted to Christianity but started to identify themselves as ethnic Jews, elsewhere in her book she talks about how the Hebrew Christian movement started in the late 1800s) and in the 1960 MJism arose out of them. Let's be clear: According to Feher, before 1960, "Messianic Judaism" did not exist because it did not arise until the 1960s. Full quote from Feher, p. 25:
- So, to review: According to reliable sources, Messianic Judaism arose as early as the 1960s. In the 1950s, the Messianic Judaism movement did not exist. I don't know what else can possibly be done to convince you to accept what the multiple, independent reliable sources have to say on this matter. I'm certainly exhausted trying to convince you to accept what the reliable sources say, it simply may not be possible to do so. (You also grossly mischaracterize the underlying core issue here ("you continue to harp on that one undefined word with no thought as to finding consensus, though I have tried over and over to find a synonym...") as the archives here prove, and as we are currently discussing on the open WP:AN thread that you are already aware of, but as that is an editor behavior issue and not a content issue, there's no reason to go into that further here.) Zad68 (talk) 18:18, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
- "Again to the root of the problem" indeed: Again you are conflating the origins of MJism with the modern movement itself. Again you are flatly, plainly misrepresenting the sources to push your POV.
- And again to the root of the problem. If Feher, who said its "origins can be traced in the United States to the Hebrew Christian missions to the Jews in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries" had meant 'began' she would have said 'began' and not arose. Of the 7 sources, four say a segment of the Hebrew Christian movement emerged and changed its name and one says it existed in the 1940s. Yet you continue to harp on that one undefined word with no thought as to finding consensus, though I have tried over and over to find a synonym that squares with the majority of these sources.--DeknMike (talk) 01:20, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
- (emphasis mine:) Reliable source Shoshanah Feher, Ph.D. in Sociology, in "Passing over Easter: Constructing the Boundaries of Messianic Judaism" (1998), p. 140. writes "This interest in developing a Jewish ethnic identity may not be surprising when we consider the 1960s, when Messianic Judaism arose." Reliable source James Lewis, Ph.D. in Religious Studies, in "Odd Gods: New Religions & the Cult Controversy" (2001) writes "The origins of Messianic Judaism date to the 1960s when it began among American Jews who converted to Christianity." The article currently states "arose in the 1960s and 70s" but it could just as easily say "began in the 1960s and 70s" because we have multiple reliable sources to support it. Regarding your question "If you are willing to say that Messianic Judaism has a history prior to 1960 (even if under other names) then we are in agreement." -- Answer is: It doesn't matter what I, personally, am "willing to say." All that matters is what reliable sources say. Reliable sources--multiple, independent Ph.D.s from around the world--say it arose/began/emerged in the 1960s and 1970s and so that is what the Misplaced Pages article will say. Zad68 (talk) 18:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- I don't argue against what she said on page 140, only your interpretation of what arose means. I say it means came into view by the general population and you say it means began. If you are willing to say that Messianic Judaism has a history prior to 1960 (even if under other names) then we are in agreement. --DeknMike (talk) 16:47, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Jerusalem Council as source
Though not a mainstream Messianic Judaism body, the particular citations used in the text are not inconsistent with Messianic Judaism in general. The "unreliable source' tags should be removed.--DeknMike (talk) 04:21, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- What indicates that it meets the requirements of WP:RS? Jayjg 11:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- Quote: Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:
- the material is not unduly self-serving;
- the material does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities);
- the material does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
- there is no reasonable doubt as to the authenticity and source of the material;
- the article is not based primarily on such sources.
- The source in question is an "about us" section of a public website. --DeknMike (talk) 02:20, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- This article is Messianic Judaism, not Jerusalem Council. The material is about Messianic Judaism, not Jerusalem Council. Jayjg 21:58, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- Quote: Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:
- ...and Jerusalem Council is a Messianic organization. --DeknMike (talk) 05:08, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- First, I notice that Jerusalem Council is a disambiguation page, not an article, so I am not myself necessarily sure exactly what is being referred to here. Secondly, and perhaps more important, it is apparently, I guess, a separate, self-governing group within broader Messianic Judaism. That being the case, it would probably be a violation of WP:SYNTH and/or ] to assume that a statement which is apparently true of this Jerusalem Council would also necessarily be true about Messianic Judaism in general. It might well be relevant for a separate article about the Jerusalem Council, but I am not myself sure that such an article exists at this point. John Carter (talk) 18:31, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- True. More directly, the WP:SPS exemption applies only if the material does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities). This in not an article about the Jerusalem Council, it is an article about another entity. Jayjg 23:31, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- John Carter, I'm not sure who added the Jerusalem Council wikilink, but the references in the document all point to the website of the Messianic Jewish organization that provided information about Messianic beliefs. It is neither OR or SYNTH to reference the words of a Messianic organization as a reference about Messianic beliefs, which meets the RS test.--DeknMike (talk) 22:14, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Actually, I believe you are wrong. A single Messianic group is very likely to have its own beliefs. To present those beliefs as being those of Messianic Judaism as a whole would be in the first instance not supported by the evidence, and thus a violation of WP:OR, but also making an assumption which is not substantiated by the text, specifically, that the beliefs attributed to a single group within the MJ community are also true of MJ as a whole, is a fairly clear violation of WP:SYNTH, as the source itself does not apparently specifically say that the beliefs are held by the broader MJ community, but rather only by a single group within the broader MJ community. That is, unless the source specifically and clearly states that those beliefs are commonly held by the MJ community as a whole. So, while that source is a reasonable source for the Jerusalem Council, and while it might be possible to say that "Some groups within the MJ movement, such as the Jerusalem Council, believe....", that would likely be the only way to have such information included in this article, and including the beliefs of a specific group within the broader movement also raises serious issues of WP:WEIGHT, by giving material about a specific group within the movement attention in the main article on the movement itself. Of course, if you wish to pursue the matter, I suppose you could raise the question at the appropriate noticeboard, WP:NORN. John Carter (talk) 22:33, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Exactly my point. The reference we've been talking about is to the phrases "some of them argue that Messianic Judaism is a sect of Judaism", "Other Messianic believers call rabbinic commentaries such as the Mishnah and the Talmud 'dangerous'," and "Other congregations are selective in their applications of Talmudic law Not universal constructs." Not broad pronouncements. "Some" and "other" indicate these are various independent pronouncements. It's not OR or Synth to add this source saying what they believe within the Messianic universe. They're not mainstream, but why leave them out if properly caveated? --DeknMike (talk) 02:48, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- Actually, I believe you are wrong. A single Messianic group is very likely to have its own beliefs. To present those beliefs as being those of Messianic Judaism as a whole would be in the first instance not supported by the evidence, and thus a violation of WP:OR, but also making an assumption which is not substantiated by the text, specifically, that the beliefs attributed to a single group within the MJ community are also true of MJ as a whole, is a fairly clear violation of WP:SYNTH, as the source itself does not apparently specifically say that the beliefs are held by the broader MJ community, but rather only by a single group within the broader MJ community. That is, unless the source specifically and clearly states that those beliefs are commonly held by the MJ community as a whole. So, while that source is a reasonable source for the Jerusalem Council, and while it might be possible to say that "Some groups within the MJ movement, such as the Jerusalem Council, believe....", that would likely be the only way to have such information included in this article, and including the beliefs of a specific group within the broader movement also raises serious issues of WP:WEIGHT, by giving material about a specific group within the movement attention in the main article on the movement itself. Of course, if you wish to pursue the matter, I suppose you could raise the question at the appropriate noticeboard, WP:NORN. John Carter (talk) 22:33, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- John Carter, I'm not sure who added the Jerusalem Council wikilink, but the references in the document all point to the website of the Messianic Jewish organization that provided information about Messianic beliefs. It is neither OR or SYNTH to reference the words of a Messianic organization as a reference about Messianic beliefs, which meets the RS test.--DeknMike (talk) 22:14, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- True. More directly, the WP:SPS exemption applies only if the material does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities). This in not an article about the Jerusalem Council, it is an article about another entity. Jayjg 23:31, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- First, I notice that Jerusalem Council is a disambiguation page, not an article, so I am not myself necessarily sure exactly what is being referred to here. Secondly, and perhaps more important, it is apparently, I guess, a separate, self-governing group within broader Messianic Judaism. That being the case, it would probably be a violation of WP:SYNTH and/or ] to assume that a statement which is apparently true of this Jerusalem Council would also necessarily be true about Messianic Judaism in general. It might well be relevant for a separate article about the Jerusalem Council, but I am not myself sure that such an article exists at this point. John Carter (talk) 18:31, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- ...and Jerusalem Council is a Messianic organization. --DeknMike (talk) 05:08, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Another source misrepresentation / inaccurate edit summary?
In an edit that everyone here apparently missed, DeknMike changed
Missions to the Jews saw a period of growth between the 1920s and the 1960s. In the 1940s and 50s, missionaries in Israel such as the Southern Baptists adopted the term meshichyim (משיחיים "Messianics") to counter negative connotations of the word notsrim (נוצרים "Christians", from "Nazarenes"); the term was used to designate all Jews who had converted to Protestant evangelical Christianity.
to (changes highlighted)
The term resurfaced in Israel in the 1940s and 50s when missionaries in Israel such as the Southern Baptists adopted the term meshichyim (משיחיים "Messianics") to counter negative connotations of the word notsrim (נוצרים "Christians", from "Nazarenes"); the term was used to designate all Jews who had converted to Protestant evangelical Christianity.
Missions to the Jews saw a period of growth between the 1920s and the 1960s. Its leaders used the decades to build a strong, respectable reputation, and hired Jewish converts as missionaries. Among the missionaries were Martin (Moishe) Rosen, who later founded Jews for Jesus.
The edit summary used was "separated Israel from the US experience".
As is fairly obvious, the edit did much more than simply "separate Israel from the US experience", but because the new material was in a new paragraph, it wasn't automatically highlighted in a diff, and was hard to notice. Mike, where is the source for the additional material? Where does Ariel say that "Its leaders used the decades to build a strong, respectable reputation, and hired Jewish converts as missionaries. Among the missionaries were Martin (Moishe) Rosen, who later founded Jews for Jesus"? I can't find it in the cited sources. Jayjg 02:23, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- The source was there all along, already quoted in the Ariel (ch19) footnote. ""Missions to the Jews during the period were conservative evangelical institutions. It should be noted, therefore, that the years from the 1920s to the 1960s were not ones of decline but rather a period of growth for these enterprises in size, experience, organization and sophistication." Is it because you believe that one who adopts a faith in Jesus is no longer Jewish? That's an opinion not shared by scientists. I did put in a link to the Moishe Rosen information - I'll pretty it up later.--DeknMike (talk) 05:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Mike, where does Ariel say Its leaders used the decades to build a strong, respectable reputation. And where did it say anything at all about Moishe Rosen? The quote you've provided says nothing like that. Jayjg 23:36, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- As for the separation, I was making it clear to you that the term may have come into vogue in the USA in the 60s, but the movement is multi-national and existed at least in Israel in the 40s.--DeknMike (talk) 05:07, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- The source for Moshe Rosen is different from the use of Messianic in Israel, since he was pretty much Hebrew Christian Missions for most of his life, and only adopted the nomenclature 'Messianic' later.--DeknMike (talk) 19:12, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- Which "movement"? Christian Missions to the Jews? Because that's the only thing the source is talking about there. Jayjg 23:36, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Why the Messianic Judaism movement, of course. It is clear from the variety of sources there is no one single Messianic denomination or uninimity of doctrine, though the article captures the central core fairly well. It's not a separate religion, not an accepted form of Rabbinic Judaism, and generally different in style than most of Christianity. It's common within the church growth literature to call a set of ideas moving forward together a 'movement.' However, if you don't like that word, what would you call Messianic Judaism (other than heresy).--DeknMike (talk) 19:12, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, to make the assumption you make in your very first sentence above, DeknMike, is a clear violation of WP:SYNTH, which I very much suggest you read and perhaps become better acquainted with. Messianic Judaism is not even directly mentioned in the source, and there is no way according to policies and guidelines that we could include such content based solely on the opinions of one editor who has a very clear POV issue regarding this subject. John Carter (talk) 19:45, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- Why the Messianic Judaism movement, of course. It is clear from the variety of sources there is no one single Messianic denomination or uninimity of doctrine, though the article captures the central core fairly well. It's not a separate religion, not an accepted form of Rabbinic Judaism, and generally different in style than most of Christianity. It's common within the church growth literature to call a set of ideas moving forward together a 'movement.' However, if you don't like that word, what would you call Messianic Judaism (other than heresy).--DeknMike (talk) 19:12, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Related discussion
There is a discussion relating to content on this article at the Administrators' Noticeboard here. John Carter (talk) 17:44, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
Ariel2006p191bwas invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
Ariel2000p191was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
Ariel2006p194bwas invoked but never defined (see the help page).
- Delisted good articles
- Former good article nominees
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class Christianity articles
- High-importance Christianity articles
- B-Class Jewish Christianity articles
- Top-importance Jewish Christianity articles
- WikiProject Jewish Christianity articles
- WikiProject Christianity articles
- B-Class Religion articles
- Mid-importance Religion articles
- B-Class New religious movements articles
- High-importance New religious movements articles
- New religious movements articles
- WikiProject Religion articles
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics