this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2024
51 points (89.2% liked)

History

4255 readers
204 users here now

Welcome to History!

This community is dedicated to sharing and discussing fascinating historical facts from all periods and regions.

Rules:

FOLLOW THE CODE OF CONDUCT

NOTE WELL: Personal attacks and insults will not be tolerated. Stick to talking about the historical topic at hand in your comments. Insults and personal attacks will get you an immediate ban for a period of time determined by the moderator who bans you.

  1. Post about history. Ask a question about the past, share a link to an article about something historical, or talk about something related to history that interests you. Please encourage discussion whenever possible.

  2. No memes. No ads. No promos. No spam.

  3. No porn.

  4. We like facts and reliable sources here. Don't spread misinformation or try to change the historical record.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 25 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

As a Jewish person myself its for a few reasons:

  1. We don't forcibly convert, we also actively convince people not to convert (I mean using every argument possible to convince people). Jewish Philosophy states that if someone is holy enough to go out of their way to join they're holy enough to be Jewish (the conversion process is long and if it's not sincere they aren't accepted).
  2. Jewish power structures have always been contained, in Israel for example Jewish religious leaders have little power.
  3. Judaism has a long history of expulsions and being massacred, also forced conversations away from Judaism
  4. Due to Jewish fundementalism its common to see people stop identifying as Jewish. For many people the Jewish community can be extremely hostile and unwelcoming, a few examples include: women, Neurodivergant people, Queer people, people without a Jewish education, people who dont fall into traditional gender roles/expressions, etc
[–] Roldyclark@literature.cafe 10 points 15 hours ago

I think you mean expulsions lol

[–] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 36 points 22 hours ago

They believe that God wants us to use our free will, which means that proselytizing isn't kosher (har har.) Where Christianity and Islam have spread pretty aggressively (often literally), missionary work or let alone forcing people to convert is anathema to Judaism

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 27 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

Judaism tries to disincentive people to convert while Islam and Christianity both try/have tried very hard to convert people, often at the tip of the sword.

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Is the disincentive effort a filter? To weed out those who are not fully committed?

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Until you realise that they do the same shitty conversion tactics as Christians, just to those who are ethnically but not religiously Jewish.

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 1 points 11 hours ago

I was considering it only from the... I suppose... Intellectual viewpoint perhaps?

Here are all the reasons you shouldn't want to join our club.

And also, from a very naïve viewpoint too. The subtleties of an ethnic religion are an entirely foreign idea to me.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io -3 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Okay just to make something clear: While Muslim rule spread by force, getting told "comvert or die" was generally a very rare occurrence. Better living conditions for non-Muslims were a thing depending on the time and place, but even then the Islamization of the modern Muslim world outside Arabia was a very gradual process that took, for example, four hundred years in Egypt of one-sided cultural osmosis. Admittedly there was some foul play involved at some points, but almost nobody was converted at the tip of a sword.

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Convert, pay up an extortionate tax and/or become a slave, or die, is forced conversion.

[–] anas@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

pay up an extortionate tax

Jizya is less than the Zakat, the equivalent tax for Muslims.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 11 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

I am not a historian but my bet would be that it's ultimately a political question.

Christianity was the religion of the late and medieval Roman Empire, and later of the western European colonial empires.

Islam was a religion that became a caliphate and a series of empires afterwards.

There has never been a Jewish empire, and the Jewish kingdoms (Hellenistic Israel, the Khazar khanate, Beta Israel) have been small, non impetial and relatively short lived.

[–] SattaRIP@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 21 hours ago

Part of why is that Islam and Christianity spread to other cultures, often with force. Judaism doesn't give heaven points like they do for converting someone.

[–] Praxinoscope@lemm.ee 7 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

The Holocaust may have played a role

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 11 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Not a huge one. The far bigger factor is that it doesn't try to convert people, while Islam and Christianity both do/have, often at the tip of the sword

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 0 points 21 hours ago

Not sure why the down vote this is just a fact lol

Christians and Muslims are brain dead zealots... Seeing clowns pester people in public places. Haven't seen muslim tbh but Christian twats are worse than NYC guy trying to give you a "gift"

[–] Amoxtli@thelemmy.club 0 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

There were many streams of Judaism in ancient times, and they were not as closed off as they are today. Jews converted other people. The major distinction between Judaism and that of Christianity and Islam is the sense of universalism. The concerns of Jews are mostly toward Jews. Not outwardly toward non-Jews. It is a covenant with God. Christianity and Islam proselytize for universal reasons. For Christians, to save the souls of people against the eternal damnation of the original sin and to seek eternal existence with God. For Islam, it is to expand the community of Muslims, and in a similar Abrahamic eschatology, to prepare mankind for the end times, which strangely involve Jesus. In belligerent times, more Muslim recruits for war.

Christianity was a religion for the lower strata of society. In a world, where poverty was considered normal, and frowned upon. Poverty, disease, and oppression were considered a deserved affliction. It was a world without compassion. Entire economies were run by slavery and a Roman, saw it as his duty, without any doubt, to discipline his rebelling slave, because of what is at stake. Since there were more poor people and downtrodden people, Christianity spread like wildfire. It was not a religion just for the elites and the rich, whose gods were only concerned with superior things, even pettiness. This type of morality is the basis for Marxism, feminism, communism, etc., because the New Testament is about Jesus being against oppression, regressive taxes against the poor, and treating people equally, and against corruption. The poor in Christianity have a special purchase on the rich. For the Romans, who were looking for a religion to unify the empire, saw Christianity as the most marketed religion, and made it a state religion for that purpose.

I think Islam started as a war booty army that expanded control of ceded territory by the bankrupt Eastern Romans, who sacrificed much to lay a technical defeat on the Sasanian Empire. The Saracens, who were anti-Roman as pagans, and even as Christianized tribes afterward, they were known as thieves who robbed the caravans of the Eastern Romans. That culture was palpable to the Turks. It is important to note that the evolution of Islam involved different factions of people. For the example, the Turks, the Saracens, the Persians, etc. The Qur'an is a collection of heretical literature and theologies that are not mainstream Christianity today, but were in significant communities under the thumb of the Eastern Roman rule, who had a policy of orthodoxy. What was to become Islam, was originally anti-Trinitarian Christianity. The Qur'an contains mostly a Christological polemic against other Christians. If you were anti-Roman, how fitting it is to be against Trinitarian Romans by being non-Trinitarian. I digress.

For the Jews not having any type of universal mission for mankind in general, this was a disposition of being dominated by those religions that were universal.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 45 points 20 hours ago

Judaism is what's called an ethnic religion, rather than a universalizing religion. Ethnic religions generally don't seek converts. There are accounts of forced conversion by Jewish fundamentalists in the Second Temple Period, but even then it tends to be of peoples they regard as ethnically related and 'fallen astray' rather than people they see as out-and-out foreigners. Ethnic religions are regarded as a pact between the Divine and a specific set of people - and outsiders are either viewed neutrally or negatively coming (or trying to come) into the faith. As such, ethnic religions generally only propagate by birth or, less often, intermarriage. They don't want outsiders flooding into their private ethnic pact with the Divine, and, indeed, sometimes regard it as religiously offensive.

Universalizing religions, on the other hand, are quite explicitly peddling a view of the world that does not, theoretically, have ethnic or cultural borders. Christianity and Islam, both universalizing religions, desire Asian Christians as much as African or European Christians. Theoretically. There is a... great deal of difference between what is taught and what is executed, but in general you can assume that universalizing religions like those more or less always want a person as a convert, regardless of their background. The pact with the divine is regarded as personal, rather than ethnic, and the divine regarded as largely impartial to all the minute divisions of mankind.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 17 points 21 hours ago

One thing no one mentioned yet.

Christianity really spread once it became Rome's state religion, and Islam was always about expanding.

Once the Jews got kicked out of their homeland they were stateless people. Pretty hard to go against local religion when you're a guest with no army.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 10 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

So in addition to what pretty much everyone else says, you should note the conditions of emergence. Judaism not only doesn't seek converts; the people it considers its followers were a subjugated people. Not in a position to spread anything. And then after the Romans drove them out of their land a couple centuries BCE, they were basically the world's biggest refugee population. Again, not a situation that helps proselytization even if they wanted to do it.

Meanwhile Christianity managed to become the state religion of Rome and basically all of Europe after the collapse of Rome. Added up that's more than 600 years as the state religion of a global superpower (or superpowers) that actually cared to spread their religion. When you also remember how European colonization was a thing, you basically have three continents' worth of Christians and significant populations elsewhere.

Meanwhile Islam came and united the Arabs under one banner. These people, who were only concerned about writing poetry, trade and killing each other for a while, suddenly had both the means and (material and spiritual) incentive to expand. With the two extant superpowers greatly weakened, nobody could do anything about their light cavalry and sheer zeal (remember the Syria crossing?) for a while. You know how the Mongols were united by Genghis Khan and conquered basically everyone? Yeah that's basically how it went. Muslim merchants, with their country now the wealthiest in the world (sans China I don't know much about them in that time period) went everywhere and had a tendency to convert trade partners, which got Islam a foothold in places Muslim rule never reached. BTW here I'd like to correct a common mistake: Islam usually didn't force people to convert. However, Islam was still the state religion and at the top of the socioeconomic ladder, and depending on time and place non-Muslims had significantly harder lives than Muslims. These factors fueled conversions and in a few centuries Islam was the majority religion in these countries.

[–] sun_is_ra@sh.itjust.works 9 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

I'd like to correct a common mistake: Islam usually didn't force people to convert.

Christians and Jews were free to convert but pagans were absolutly forced to convert. Another thing is that like other invaders, locals were forced to pay annual duty and it varied from ruler to rules. Those who couldnt pay for whatever reason could only choose between death and conversion. Muslims were also forced to remain Muslim or die.

so while not everyone was forced, a lot were

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Christians and Jews were free to convert but pagans were absolutly forced to convert.

That also happened, but I'm pretty sure most of the time dhimmi rulings were adopted. That's why, say, Zoroastrians got to stay Zoroastrian.

[–] sun_is_ra@sh.itjust.works 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Zoroastrian

Are we discussing Sunni empires or Shia empires?

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Mostly Sunni, why do you ask? Iran was Sunni until the 16th century no?

[–] sun_is_ra@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 hours ago

My knowladge of Iran history is not very good. I was under false impression they were always Shia. TIL

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 6 points 17 hours ago

I want to note that there isn't actually a lot of historical evidence for Jewish people being driven out of Judea in any large numbers by the Romans.

The area did get conquered as part of the Arab conquests though, and while Islam didn't actually do conversion by the sword, as you mention, they did do conversion by tax relief. It wasn't just a social heirarchy, they would literally tax you more money if you didn't convert.

What almost certainly happened to the Jewish majority in Judea was simple conversion. I was easier to follow Allah than Yahweh, and if they're theoretically the same god anyways...

[–] The_v@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Also remember that Islam and Christianity have been shown to be a very mallable tool for political power. The upper echelons were those who controlled the religion, state, and military.

In all islamic and Christian countries, the state religion was essentially a branch of the government.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io -2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I know this was the case for Christianity, but was it for Islam? AFAIK in Muslim lands religion was more of a grassroots thing since there wasn't a capital C Church like in Europe. Maybe there's something I'm missing, but if I've got my history right Islam served as a justification for a caliph's claim to power but wasn't really bent by individual rulers, as the most influential scholars (and the, again, mostly grassroots scholarly community at large) were their own people and not beholden to the state more than an average citizen.

[–] The_v@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Islam started with the rulers being the head of the church. Not as a completely separate entity adopted by the rulers like Christianity. Most of Islamic traditions in the Hadith is traced back (with very little supporting evidence) to the original founders. The Hadith was the "oral tradition" of what Mohamed said written down a century or two after his death by "scholars" who totally were not fully funded and directed in any way by the rulers.

The Hadith has everything from religious practices to economic laws. These laws amazingly create social classes of elites and everyone else. The elites control the state, military, and religion completely. The non-elites are essentially banned from any legal economic engagement other than worker for an elite. This has created extreme social inequality in most Islamic states today.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 0 points 14 hours ago

Islam started with the rulers being the head of the church.

Again, there's no church in Islam. The ruler has no authority to actually make religious decision. Islam doesn't have a Pope.

Most of Islamic traditions in the Hadith is traced back (with very little supporting evidence) to the original founders.

Okay I'm not sure what you mean by "with very little supporting evidence". There's a whole branch of Islamic scholarship solely concerned with narrators and their reliability, and a lot of Hadith was written down before Muhammed's death and during the time of his companions. Hadith was compiled 1-2 centuries after Muhammed's death, but that compiling wasn't writing down oral tradition, as most (or at least a lot of, my knowledge of the specifics is fuzzy) Hadith was written by that point. What happened in that time period was scholars journeying all over the Caliphate and gathering Hadith that was already preserved and written down.

who totally were not fully funded and directed in any way by the rulers.

I mean yes exactly. This isn't myth; these were real things that were done and written down by real people. If they were directed by the rulers someone would've written that down.

These laws amazingly create social classes of elites and everyone else.

Okay you'll need to provide examples because I'm not aware of a single law that does what you're talking about.

[–] MrJameGumb@lemmy.world 5 points 22 hours ago

It's because new religions always cherry pick the parts they like of old religions and then eventually replace them entirely. Judaism itself was just made up from parts of Zoroastrianism and Hellenism and Babylonian beliefs.

It's all bullshit anyway so it hardly matters. Religions change as needed to meet the changing wants and needs of the people who follow them. A Christian from the time of the crusades would probably be horrified by what is considered to be Christianity today.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 3 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (2 children)

Looking at religion purely as a means of comfort for people who are afraid of dying, I wouldn't think Judaism is very popular compared to Islam or Christianity because afaik, Judaism doesn't have a clear way to heaven.

[–] MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 20 hours ago

I mean, it doesn't really have a hell, either.

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 4 points 21 hours ago

I don't know about how much is actually from the book, but most jews I know believe that they will go to heaven by following the 613 laws