There have been some people who assumed that Zelensky is Jewish and therefore he cannot possibly be a Neo-Nazi. Many in Israel are deeply disturbed by his claims to be Jewish when he married a non-Jew and his children are baptized in the Russian Orthodox Church he wants now banned. Zelensky before the war would not comment about being Jewish for he was certainly not a practicing Jew. He would not comment on being a Jew before his election.
Many are comparing Zelensky to George Soros who is also a non-practicing Jew who even helped the Nazis seize Jews, send them to the death camps, and confiscated their property. He also admitted he did not believe in God. Soros has been behind funding Zelensky who played a TV role of a comedian becoming president and they put money behind him to turn that role into reality. Those who think Zelensky cannot possibly be a Neo-Nazi fail to look at the facts and assume the Nazis were only exterminating Jews.
Since the war, Zelensky has been playing the Jewish card to get money from Israel and to try to pretend he is not a Neo-Nazi which means a “new” version of Nazism that believes still in ethnic cleansing, but their targets are Russians, not Jews. When it comes to the total number of deaths one person is responsible for, Hitler actually comes third after Stalin and Mao, but if we include revolutions, then Karl Marx is responsible for over 200 million. This seems to be the goal of the World Economic Forum to rise to the top of the list to also reduce the population so Bill Gates can sleep at night.
The Jewish community of Mariupol in Ukraine dates to the mid-19th century. The roughly 10,000 Jews were living in the city in 1941 and were nearly exterminated by the Ukrainian Nazis. Many of the Ukrainian Jews who did not move to Israel, moved to the Donbas where Russians were never part of the Holocaust. Zelensky’s civil war against the Donbas has led to at least 1.4 million Donbas residents being displaced, and at least 75,000 fled to Russia (2019-05-UNHCR-UKRAINE-Operational-Update-FINAL). Zelensky will say anything for money. He addressed the Israeli government and pretended that Ukraine is fighting for its life comparing it to the Holocaust. Many have found this to be a real disgrace.
First of all, making such a statement that Zelensky cannot be a Neo-Nazi demonstrates that they really have listened only to the propaganda about Hitler and the Jews. Hitler was engaged in eugenics and that was NOT confined to the Jews. While the overwhelming account of the Nazis was their extermination of the Jews, they were not the only people targeted. The German Nazis also engaged in the genocide of European Roma (Gypsies). He also dragged invalid World War I soldiers from their beds and exterminated them for they were a burden on the state to support.
The Ukrainian Nazis were on board with the German Nazis and were also engaged in this ethnic cleansing but they targeted Jews, Polish, and Russians. I strongly urge you to watch Oliver Stone’s documentary Ukraine on Fire which covers the Ukrainian Nazi movement. The US never prosecuted the Ukrainian Nazis for the slaughter of countless Jews, Polish, and Russians because they were also killing Russians. Hence, in the old story, their enemy is my friend. Only the Germans were prosecuted for their acts against the Jews at Nuremberg – no Ukrainians.
The Bottomline is that I believe Zelensky is a FRAUD and rejected being a Jew but uses that for-profit now. Zelensky is playing the Jewish card for the money and to pretend he is somehow not a Neo-Nazi yet today the Ukrainian Neo-Nazis are not about killing Jews – only Russians and if they happen to be Jewish that is no exception. In 1959 Ukraine had 840,000 Jews, a decrease of almost 70% from 1941 totals (within Ukraine’s current borders). Post-1991 and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the majority of the Jews who remained in Ukraine in 1989 left the country migrating to Israel but Zelensky abandoned Judaism and remained. Antisemitic graffiti and violence against Jews had remained a problem in Ukraine. It is no wonder why he abandoned being a Jew, married a non-Jew, and baptized his children. Now he is a Jew to the pretend he is not a Neo-Nazi out to hate Russians?
I visited Israel in the oughts, and I get no money for what I do.
Got any more cheap insults?
So you never answered my question. Is Judaism your religion? Or Islam or Christian or Hindu or? Atheist? I'm Christian and my race is white Caucasian.
I'm Jewish. I was born into a Reform family. Upon my closer study of Torah from listening to Orthodox Rabbis I am more impressed with their observance and understanding of the religion. My children get their Jewish education lessons from Chabad -- the orthodox sect of Judaism recognizable by the black coats. My observation can stand some improvement, but I try to use Torah as the source of my values.
My race -- non-whites say I'm white. Whites say I'm Jewish. I usually say I'm Jewish of Ashkenazi descent.
I've heard the Torah ends up becoming the Talmud. But then I don't know why the Torah stops at the 5th book of the OT. Some day you should forge ahead and read more of the Old Testament. It's pretty planned out and the fulfillment of prophecy is remarkable. You would like Saul of Tarsus aka Apostle Paul.
His journey is quite amazing. Roman citizen. Former Pharisee to chosen 12th Apostle. Every person owes it to themselves to prove all things.
Have a good night.
The Torah is the first five books of what Christians call the "Old Testament" and what Jews call "The Tenach." The Tenach includes books such as Joshua, Samuel, Kings, Esther, Isiahiah, Malachi, etc. I did read through all of it and would no doubt benefit from doing so again. But the Torah -- the first five Books of Moses -- have a special significance.
We believe the Torah was the written law of Moses. But Moses also had an oral tradition, which was passed from teacher to student. For a long time, you could say that you learned from your teacher X, who learned from Y, who learned from Z, and trace it all the way back to Moses. Unfortunately, the line of transmission got interrupted during history, and they decided they had to write it down. This written version of the oral tradition is called the Mishnah.
The Talmud is a discussion by Rabbis on the proper application of the law. It spans many years and many Rabbis on many questions. As an example that might make it relatable, imagine people studied all the Supreme Court decisions since the founding of the United States to its end. They could name each judge, that judge's biography and biases, and discuss the decisions, dissent, and concurring opinions. Similarly, the Talmud is a discussion of the law and often goes to explore the absolute limits. Some of its questions sound like the "how many angels dance on the head of a pin" variety.
Part of the reason the Talmud sounds odd to the ears of people who don't study it (there's a number of hate sites that take certain parts of the Talmud without context or understanding, and in some cases even fraudulently made up verses) is that they are exploring the limits of law.
An example of what this might be like.
To seal a marriage contract, you have to sign a legal document. That document is called a Ketubah. The one I signed with my wife is in a frame hanging on our wall.
Now suppose someone asked: "Rabbi, if I sign a Ketubah with invisible ink, is it still valid?" Or: "What if instead of writing the Ketubah on a piece of paper, we used chalk on the sidewalk? Would it be valid? What if the rains came and washed the chalk away? Would it be valid then, or would it cease to be valid? What if it was on a text message on a cell phone? What if the cell phone is lost and no backup was made?"
And they'll come up with answers for these extreme situations.
Of course, if you said: "SHOULD I write my Ketubah on the sidewalk in chalk?" They would say: "Of course not. Use paper and ink. We were just discussing if that was valid."
I was in an argument with an anti-Semite who was citing a part of the Talmud about marriage and girls at a young age. He claimed it was a demonstration that Jews believe in child marriage, or even child rape. In actuality, it was more about can you betroth (promise) a child in marriage at a young age. (We don't do this anymore, but it happened in the ancient world). And also, if a girl is (G-d forbid) molested, does she still count as a virgin? This is significant, because a girl who is not a virgin has many obstacles to getting married that are already on the books. If it doesn't "count" that means she can still get on with her life and count, legally, as a virgin when she grows up and its time to get married. Which is part of the question being asked.
There's a user I chatted with around here who is very well versed in this. When I asked him about this problematic passage he found it funny, because he said: "If this anti-Semite reads three pages later, he'll find that it advocates having the woman marry when she comes of age, and to weigh her wishes when she says "I want to marry so-and-so." The anti-Semite didn't know -- or care -- about this passage three pages after the one he argued with me about. Instead, it was a hyper focus on the one that justified his hatred of Jews.