Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but you seem to be implying that Judah was a jew, as many people have been taught.
That is false.
He was an Israelite (not jew), just like his brothers, as they were all sons of Jacob/Israel.
It's kinda weird when people pick one particular brother out of the 12 and claim he was a different ethnicity, when there is nothing at all in scripture to suggest such a thing.
Are you suggesting that the term jew comes from something else and not the name Judah?
Yes. Sort of ...
From Benjamin Freeman, who was a high level jew, in the sense of knowing and having international meetings with the jewish world leadership. Later, he basically renounced Judaism.
His words are from his perspective, and I do not believe he had it entirely right, but here he explains in detail where the word "jew" comes from, and why it is incorrectly used in our English versions of the Bible.
He said (taking snippets here -- the entire discussion is on the website):
Jesus is referred as a so-called "Jew" for the first time in the New Testament in the 18th century. Jesus is first referred to as a so-called "Jew" in the revised 18th century editions in the English language of the 14th century first translations of the New Testament into English. The history of the origin of the word "Jew" in the English language leaves no doubt that the 18th century "Jew" is the 18th century contracted and corrupted English word for the 4th century Latin "Iudaeus" found in St. Jerome's Vulgate Edition. Of that there is no longer doubt.
The point is that one who is called a "Jew" in the Bible is not necessarily a chosen man of God, a follower of Moses and the prophets, a member of the tribe of Judah, an Israelite, or even a Semite, but one who is a resident of Judea. A Judean. But a well-organized and well-financed international "pressure group" created a so-called "secondary meaning" for the new word "Jew" which is not the understanding intended by the Scripture of truth. Those who call themselves Jews today falsely imply they are somehow descendants of the tribes of Israel and chosen of God. Yet few of them are Jews as they are not "Judeans," or residents of Judea.
The spelling of our present-day English word Jew is a transliteration of an abbreviation or slang word coined by their Babylonian conquerors for Judeans without reference to the race or religion of the captives.
Today most people think of Jews as the people of Israel, but that is not correct. An Israelite was one who had descended from Jacob.
... and a "jew" was one who lived in the Roman province of Judea, during the time of Jesus, whether they were an Israelite, a Judahite, an Edomite or a Canaanite or a Hittite, or a Chinaman.
The only thing I disagree with is the characterization of Babylon being conquerors. I think that if Judah then was anything like Judah of today then the Assyrians were welcomed as liberators and emancipators.
Pick one of the 13 tribes israel not named Judah or Levi
Graft yourself into that tribe through the blood of Jesus. Or rather let the blood of Jesus graft you in.
Congratulations you are now a descendent of Shem.
You by default cannot be anti shemetic or anti.Semitic
Insult away at the tribe of Judah
I'm Scottish descendent I picked Ephraim
They hated me for this ..... hated me lol
Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but you seem to be implying that Judah was a jew, as many people have been taught.
That is false.
He was an Israelite (not jew), just like his brothers, as they were all sons of Jacob/Israel.
It's kinda weird when people pick one particular brother out of the 12 and claim he was a different ethnicity, when there is nothing at all in scripture to suggest such a thing.
Just one of the many jew lies.
It's incredibly weird. With the insult I landed he immediately shifted from anti semetic to anti Jewish. It was such an important tell to witness.
I agree that Judah was an Israelite. Are you suggesting that the term jew comes from something else and not the name Judah?
Yes. Sort of ...
From Benjamin Freeman, who was a high level jew, in the sense of knowing and having international meetings with the jewish world leadership. Later, he basically renounced Judaism.
His words are from his perspective, and I do not believe he had it entirely right, but here he explains in detail where the word "jew" comes from, and why it is incorrectly used in our English versions of the Bible.
He said (taking snippets here -- the entire discussion is on the website):
... and a "jew" was one who lived in the Roman province of Judea, during the time of Jesus, whether they were an Israelite, a Judahite, an Edomite or a Canaanite or a Hittite, or a Chinaman.
http://www.wicwiki.org.uk/mediawiki/index.php/The_Etymology_of_the_Word_%22Jew%22
Interesting thank you for the clarity.
The only thing I disagree with is the characterization of Babylon being conquerors. I think that if Judah then was anything like Judah of today then the Assyrians were welcomed as liberators and emancipators.