Talk:Jewish schisms

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Judaism High‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anthropology: Oral tradition

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by Oral tradition taskforce.

Missing

What about the Esenians, Solomon Molcho, David Reubeni?

Does Zionism deserve mention?

Chabad Anyone?

I really think that there should be some mention of the messianic movement surrounding the Lubavitcher Rebbe zt"l.

I have recently read Sue Fishkoff's book, The Rebbe's Army, which I recommend. It is clear from her reporting that messianic Lubavitchters are a small dissident group within Chabad, not an important schism. Although, it's a bit strange to see the Rebbe's picture on a bus in Jerusalem. --Metzenberg 03:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split of Christian movements - where's the evidence!

Here is what the text now says:

The most famous schism in Jewish history was the split between the followers of Jesus (who were known as Notzrim or Nazarenes) attributed to the Council of Jamnia, with the claim by his disciples that he was the long-awaited Jewish Messiah, and the majority Pharisees (Predecessors to Rabbinic Judaism) who rejected this claim.

There is a lot of 2nd century material in Mishneh concerning heretics, but it's not really clear that they were Christian, as opposed to Greek/Roman pagan, or members of other Jewish sects (and there were others). This so-called "schism" has been given an outsized importance that is not in accord with the actual historic record.

It is obvious that a lot of Jews did convert to Christianity, especially after Christianity became a Roman/Greek religion in the 4th-5th centuries. But there just isn't much documentary evidence for the existence of a large Jewish sect among the Pharisees that supported Jesus, that was part of the rabbinical/Pharisee movments, and that had a lot of interplay with Pharisees/rabbis.

The most famous schism in Jewish history? Show me the evidence. --Metzenberg 03:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About 2000 years of history count for anything?

I agree and made some changes to avoid this unsupported claim. When I was growing up, Christianity was another religion but I never heard the word "schism" in my home or in Hebrew School; I have read LOTS of books on Jewish history and none used the word "schism." My sense is that a schism leads to a major split within a religion, and not the creation of a new religion. Wasn't the big schism in Christianity between Rome and Eastern Orthodoxy? yet these are both Christian and recognize each other as Christian, right? I am not even sure that Christianity should be mentioned in this article ... does the word "schism" really apply here? Slrubenstein | Talk 17:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

npov

The section is written from a mostly neo-chabad hasidic POV. Hasidim were opposed by traditionalists and rationalists outside of Vilna. Including Schneur Zalman's own father Baruch. Usage of the word baal shem tov is objectional. 203.214.137.16 15:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It also assumes the historicity of the Bible. I've removed the claim it is based on archaeology--Doug Weller (talk) 15:54, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research

This reads like someone's original research. On the other hand, it is identical to the text at http://www.hareidi.org/en/index.php/Schisms_among_the_Jews -- "This website contains resources for the Anglo-Hareidi community, as well as resources for those wishing to learn about or become part of that community. Hareidi or Chareidi Judaism is the most theologically conservative form of Orthodox Judaism." I can't tell offhand which is the original.--Doug Weller (talk) 15:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. Somebody's copying someone else, that's for sure. My guess: the http://www.hareidi.org/en/index.php/Schisms_among_the_Jews site is a copy of Wikipedia, probably by a bot or spider, because it fails to incorporate the menorah graphic - a live person who prepared the page would have made sure that the graphic displayed, not just a link to view it. Molly-in-md (talk) 14:28, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Vilna Gaon portrait.gif

The image Image:Vilna Gaon portrait.gif is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:00, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Syncretic movements, Kabbalah Centre, etc.

I think all of those should be mentioned, especially since those are movements or religions, involving Jews or alleged Jews, that are closely related to Judaism that are not considered to be Jewish. (Note: I thought of including Samaritanism, but since Samaritans are generally not considered to be Jews, I left that out.) — Rickyrab | Talk 07:58, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was: Moved. The consensus seems to be that the proposed name is better than, or at least no worse than, the current name. A further move to Jewish denominations or merger with Jewish religious movements can be the subject of a new proposal. Station1 (talk) 08:13, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Schisms among the Jews → Jewish schisms — More for reasons of style, than anything else. "Schisms among the Jews" seems an overly dramatic and poetic way of titling this article, while "Jewish schisms" sounds much more natural and to the point. YeshuaDavid • Talk • 21:21, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish denominations would be more appropriate; describing Conservative Judaism as a schism is hyperbole. Can this be merged with Jewish religious movements? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:53, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I support the move, Yehoshua's reasoning makes sense. Shlomke (talk) 16:27, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Christianity

The first Christians were the original Jewish followers of Jesus, a Galilean healer, preacher, and milenial prophet. After his crucifixion for sedition by the Romans, his followers broke over two issues: first, whether they should continue to observe Jewish law; second, whether Jesus had been resurrected, and would return to restore the Kingdom. Those who argued that the law no longer applied to them, and that Jesus had been resurrected, broke with Judaism to form a new religion.

The eventual redefinition of Moses' Law by Jesus' disciples and their belief in his deity, along with the publication of the New Testament, ensured that Christianity and Judaism would become different and often conflicting religions. The New Testament depicts the Saducees and Pharisees as Jesus' opponents, whereas the Jewish perspective has the Pharisees as the justified followers of the rabbis who upheld the Torah, or what Christians refer to as the Old Testament as a mark of their having supplanted the Jews' position. This is known as Supersessionism, a teaching strongly rejected by Judaism.

I removed the aove to the talk section. Peronally, I see some good reasons for describing the development of Christianity as a schism among Jews. I also see some good reasons for NOT calling it this. The thing is, I know of no Jewish historian - or non Jewish historian o the jews - who refer to this as the "Nazarene Schism" (the name of the redirect that sends people here). Does anyone have any citation for a major historian in a reliable source writing about the "Nazarene Schism?" Slrubenstein | Talk 22:18, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There has to be something in the article about Christianity, even if you want to claim that it may not be a Jewish schism.

Wikipedia is not censored. ^{şṗøʀĸɕäɾłäů∂ɛ:τᴀʟĸ} 19:46, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like Jesus and Paul of Tarsus should get mentioned. Neusner's A Rabbi Talks with Jesus would be a good source for Jesus, or Judaism's view of Jesus, for Paul the articles Paul of Tarsus and Judaism and New Perspective on Paul already exist and give plenty of information. (Maybe there should be an article titled Jesus and Judaism.) The Jewish Christians could be mentioned as well as the other names used for them, such as Ebionites and Nazarene (sect). 75.0.2.151 (talk) 06:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Needing something, and not seeing anything about how to improve on the above, I am restoring it. ^{şṗøʀĸɕäɾłäů∂ɛ:τᴀʟĸ} 21:58, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why is second term in Upper Case?

Why is the initial letter of the second term in upper case (Schisms)? Bus stop (talk) 20:17, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've been wondering the same thing. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean in the title, Jewish Schisms, why is Schisms captitalized? Isn't that accepted protocol to capitalize both words in a title? What are Wikipedia's standards on this? DonaldRichardSands (talk) 20:26, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The lines of scripture relevant to this question are found at WP:LOWERCASE. Since this is clearly not a proper name, the article has been renamed following a request by Koavf. Favonian (talk) 18:59, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Jewish schisms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:41, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jewish schisms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120601001320/http://www.jtsa.edu/PreBuilt/ParashahArchives/jpstext/korah.shtml to http://www.jtsa.edu/PreBuilt/ParashahArchives/jpstext/korah.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:49, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Third Original

The "18:43, 8 November 2018" edit that changed the HatNotes/tags atop "Jewish schisms" from Multiple (POV-check, original research) - both dated April 2008 to a single WP:OR dated November 2018 was an solated/unexplained edit amidst a series of edits by Edit2020.

The Multiple POV-check/WP:OR were added 18-April-2008 @ 14:55 & 14:57 with a "see talk page" note.

Somewhat interesting is that the above "isolated/unexplained" edit(or) co-incided with adding "WP Israel|class=start|importance=low" after a pair of "importance=high" ratings for WikiProject Jewish history and WikiProject Judaism. (same editor).

Please see above "==Original Research==" (April 2008) and followup (Sept. 2010). If, a decade later, that latter is not a good enough resolution, it's time for this one: blame that 2010 theory's BOT. Pi314m (talk) 09:36, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced Ladino-speaking

The sentence "Thus a cultural schism was also created between the more westernised English, French, and Ladino-speaking Western European Jews" is unsourced, and grouping Ladino-speakers (meaning Sefardim, who aren't burdened with reform-ism) with "English, French" - without a source - is mixing West with (Middle)East. Pi314m (talk) 09:49, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sefardim aren't a monolith; some dispersed to the Middle East after the expulsion while others dispersed to France, the Netherlands, or even the Americas. And in France's reform communities, Ashkenazim and Sephardim freely intermingle, as they also do in Seattle's reform communities. פֿינצטערניש (Fintsternish), she/her (talk) 20:35, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Later on, in 1880s America, Conservative Judaism split from the Reform movement"

Wasn't Conservative Judaism formulated by the leadership of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, which began as an Orthodox institution? And wasn't this JTS largely led by disciples of Zecharias Frankel of the Breslau seminary, and part of a larger movement that also included Neolog Judaism? פֿינצטערניש (Fintsternish), she/her (talk) 20:31, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Misnagdim/Mitnagdim

why is Misnagdim changed to Mitnagdim?--142.163.195.18 (talk) 02:10, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]