Not this again...I wonder what if molokans russian convert to judaism like subbotniks.
Not this again...
Damn, Dimitri! Back at it again with the random conversions to judaism?
He's back!
I know that ad hominem comments are bad.If you don't have an intelligent contribution, just don't post, don't take a big metaphorical dump on the thread.
I know that ad hominem comments are bad.
However, i'm gonna be the devil's advocate here and say that dimitrius' repeated threads about "X people convert to judaism" are getting repetitive. I've got no grudge nor malicious intent on him now that you've said it and apologise, but i just feel like... he could have raised another, more interesting question.
Okay, then.He has posted three threads, over as many months on the board, about a topic he finds interesting. Because you don't find it interesting, and because he isn't a native English speaker, you decide to not only crap on his thread, but then argue when someone tells you not to do that.
This attitude is incredibly destructive of discussion. This board is for discussion of alternate history. People shouldn't be afraid to post because they may cross over the imaginary rules that GauchoBadger has decided apply. The only rules that apply to this board are the rules to be civil, which you are not following. This is a warning to be civil.
But did they have enough connections with people who could educate them in fully Talmudic Judaism to plausibly convert to it?The Molokans converting to Judaism is much more plausible than it sounds at first. The primitive variety of Christianity (I don't mean primitive as a bad thing) practicized by the Molokans is basically Judaism with a little Jesus thrown in.
For one example they already follow Old Testament (read Jewish) dietary laws.
I feel that a clarification is needed. While the OP has not done so in this thread, in at least one of those he posted previously, he did not respond to our more constructive comments, and did not adress our doubts regarding the reliability of his cited source. While I do not believe that this was really his fault, I think Grouchobadger and I were justified in expecting little of substance from his threads on this subject. Apologies for the lateness of my reply.He has posted three threads, over as many months on the board, about a topic he finds interesting. Because you don't find it interesting, and because he isn't a native English speaker, you decide to not only crap on his thread, but then argue when someone tells you not to do that.
This attitude is incredibly destructive of discussion. This board is for discussion of alternate history. People shouldn't be afraid to post because they may cross over the imaginary rules that GauchoBadger has decided apply. The only rules that apply to this board are the rules to be civil, which you are not following. This is a warning to be civil.
But did they have enough connections with people who could educate them in fully Talmudic Judaism to plausibly convert to it?
Thanks.Connections? No idea. But if they wanted to do so, it wouldn't be hard to do.
If it happened in the 16th or 17th century, my guess is that the Molokan converts would face persecution in Russia for apostasy, and many would choose to emigrate to Poland and Lithuania, at which point their customs would meld with those of the Jews there.
An interesting notion is that the Molokans do proselytize, and might pass this on to Judaism. The descendants of the Molokan converts would be there for the birth of the Hasidic movement, so perhaps the Hasidim would seek to convert non-Jews. Evangelical Hasids... that would be interesting.
An interesting notion is that the Molokans do proselytize, and might pass this on to Judaism. The descendants of the Molokan converts would be there for the birth of the Hasidic movement, so perhaps the Hasidim would seek to convert non-Jews. Evangelical Hasids... that would be interesting.
People like to backproject modern Judaism's closedness with regards to proselytization.
Historically, Jews absolutely did proselytize. In fact, the word "proselyte" originally refers to someone who accepts the Jewish god, turning their back on the Hellenic/Roman pantheon. The Jews of Alexandria were particularly noted for this, though it must be admitted that they developed a fairly divergent religion from the Jews of Judea during the Classical period.
And, of course, the Bible itself is full or explicit or implied proselytization as the Israelites conquer and assimilate others in Canaan.
Modern Judaism's aversion to proselytism developed...well, it's hard to be certain, but probably about the time that Christianity became a major force in the Empire. This aversion probably arose due to a fear that converting Christians to Judaism would raise the ire of the Roman authorities (who had previously been fairly lax due to the pluralistic pantheism of the Empire). That remained the case under subsequent Christian and Muslim rule. I.e., Judaism's refusal to proselytize has little to do with doctrine and more to do with keeping their head down.
This would apply also to the Molokans; indeed, OTL, the Molokans were persecuted in part on the fear that they were in fact trying to convert Christians to Judaism (yes, they weren't, but explain that to the Tsar). So...
People like to backproject modern Judaism's closedness with regards to proselytization.
Historically, Jews absolutely did proselytize. In fact, the word "proselyte" originally refers to someone who accepts the Jewish god, turning their back on the Hellenic/Roman pantheon. The Jews of Alexandria were particularly noted for this, though it must be admitted that they developed a fairly divergent religion from the Jews of Judea during the Classical period.
And, of course, the Bible itself is full or explicit or implied proselytization as the Israelites conquer and assimilate others in Canaan.
Modern Judaism's aversion to proselytism developed...well, it's hard to be certain, but probably about the time that Christianity became a major force in the Empire. This aversion probably arose due to a fear that converting Christians to Judaism would raise the ire of the Roman authorities (who had previously been fairly lax due to the pluralistic pantheism of the Empire). That remained the case under subsequent Christian and Muslim rule. I.e., Judaism's refusal to proselytize has little to do with doctrine and more to do with keeping their head down.
This would apply also to the Molokans; indeed, OTL, the Molokans were persecuted in part on the fear that they were in fact trying to convert Christians to Judaism (yes, they weren't, but explain that to the Tsar). So...
The causality was probably neither fully exogenous nor fully endogenous. As far as I understand it, Increasing Christian pressure relative to earlier centuries accelerated a doctrinal shift within Judaism to downgrade prostyletizing. This over time generated its own momentum, until it simply stopped.Doubtful that it arose from the effects of Christianity... 300 years and 600 years prior to the adoption of Christianity in Rome, the Jews were still converting individuals. Further, it cannot be denied that there is scriptural evidence and precedence for an inward Judaism, at least to a degree.