BL: Judeo-Christian
Posted: 24 May 2019 07:19 AM   [ Ignore ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6900
Joined  2007-01-03

An interesting and politically relevant history

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 May 2019 02:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1609
Joined  2007-02-14

I recently had occasion to use the term Abrahamic to define a conception of God in a Facebook discussion.  Of course the exclusion of Buddhism and Hinduism was intended.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 May 2019 03:02 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1383
Joined  2007-03-01

Thanks for this Dave - I confess I was unaware of the original sense, which might have confused me if I had encountered it unawares.

The term Abrahamic has been proposed as one that would include Islam in the same cultural tradition, but, like Judeo-Christian, it fails to include Buddhism, Hinduism, or other religions.

But what term, other than ‘major world religion’ or some such, could? Judaism, Christianity and Islam - as the Quran recognises with the term ‘People of the Book’ - share a common origin and basic scripture, and have a fundamental concept of divinity which simply doesn’t map on to Buddhism or Hinduism at all.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 May 2019 06:22 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6900
Joined  2007-01-03

Certainly, Abrahamic is appropriate when the specific roots and commonalities of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are relevant to the discussion (e.g., “you can find the practice of X in the Abrahamic religions, but it is absent from Buddhism).

But using it in things like “the Abrahamic moral values that make the US a great country” would be exclusionary of atheists, agnostics, Unitarians, Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans and other New Agers, Native American religious adherents, and those with belief systems that have fewer adherents.

[ Edited: 25 May 2019 06:24 AM by Dave Wilton ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 May 2019 11:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1383
Joined  2007-03-01

But using it in things like “the Abrahamic moral values that make the US a great country” would be exclusionary of atheists, agnostics, Unitarians, Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans and other New Agers, Native American religious adherents, and those with belief systems that have fewer adherents.

But this would be intentionally exclusionary. When people say anything like that, or speak vaguely (as people occasionally do in many Western countries) of ‘our nation’s Christian culture and values’, they either haven’t registered the existence of citizens of other faiths and belief systems or are deliberately disregarding them.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 May 2019 02:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6900
Joined  2007-01-03

Intent doesn’t matter. The words exclude. It’s like saying one can use “he” as a generic pronoun referring to all sexes.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 May 2019 10:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  982
Joined  2013-10-14

The etymology is simple. It’s a straightforward compounding of the standard combining form Judeo-, referring to Judaism, and the adjective Christian.

Are they not both adjectives when compounded?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 May 2019 07:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6900
Joined  2007-01-03
Logophile - 25 May 2019 10:28 PM

Are they not both adjectives when compounded?

No. First, the word can function as either a noun or an adjective. A Judeo-Christian can be 1) a member of the early church in Jerusalem, or 2) someone who holds to the values of that supposed tradition. In these cases Christian functions as a noun.

Second, Judeo- doesn’t stand alone as a word, therefore it’s not strictly an adjective. Hence it’s called a combining form by lexicographers. It has a modifying function like an adjective though.

More to the point, parts of speech are squirrely things, and words don’t stay penned up in the neat categories we draw for them. It’s better to think of its parts of speech as semantic functions that words perform, not inherent properties of them.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 May 2019 01:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1383
Joined  2007-03-01

Intent doesn’t matter. The words exclude.

But don’t all adjectives, and all qualifying phrases, exclude? That’s what they’re for. Whenever we use one, from
all pedigree poodles to every patriotic citizen, we are deliberately excluding every poodle and every citizen that does not fit the adjective we have used. I don’t see how this is an issue, from a purely linguistic point of view.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 May 2019 01:46 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  557
Joined  2007-02-24

One can include every religion in the world if they want. That still excludes all non-believers, whom are almost always excluded.

[ Edited: 26 May 2019 01:49 PM by Eyehawk ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 May 2019 03:05 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6900
Joined  2007-01-03
Syntinen Laulu - 26 May 2019 01:11 PM

But don’t all adjectives, and all qualifying phrases, exclude? That’s what they’re for. Whenever we use one, from
all pedigree poodles to every patriotic citizen, we are deliberately excluding every poodle and every citizen that does not fit the adjective we have used. I don’t see how this is an issue, from a purely linguistic point of view.

No, they don’t necessarily. If I say, pedigree poodles are more expensive, I’m not excluding other poodles. I’m specifying the more expensive type. If I were to say, only pedigree poodles can register for the dog show, then that is exclusionary. Likewise, if I say that Judeo-Christian theology believes in a messiah coming to Jerusalem, that’s not exclusionary. It specifies a particular tenet of faith that is common and unique to Judaism and Christianity.

But that’s not how Judeo-Christian is typically used. It’s typically used to categorize a vague set of values and traditions that are not particularly unique to those religions, but are shared by most people, regardless of religious faith or lack thereof. It’s used, wittingly or not, to exclude those of other faiths and non-believers from the body politic.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 May 2019 06:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4205
Joined  2007-02-27
Faldage - 25 May 2019 02:59 AM

I recently had occasion to use the term Abrahamic to define a conception of God in a Facebook discussion.  Of course the exclusion of Buddhism and Hinduism was intended.

Hinduism,  Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism are referred to as the Dharmic religions.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 June 2019 03:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1473
Joined  2007-04-28

My understanding is that the myth of Abraham being willing to sacrifice his son Isaac so impressed YHWH (who had commanded it) that he chose the Jews as his Chosen People AKA sons of Abraham in some circles, and ordered circumcision so he could easily identify them later (the men, anyway, with Muslim men also adopting the practice which he failed to foresee).

Judaism begat Christianity and Islam so they alone are Abrahamic religions and updates of the original (religious syncretism) myth. There’s a list here showing English, Hebrew and Arabic names for Jews from the Bible who appear in the Koran. I don’t know how many Muslims realise these characters’ roots. The process of anglicisation and arabicisation of the Hebrew and Aramaic and Greek names is interesting. Maryam, Yusuf and the prophet Isa!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 June 2019 09:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6900
Joined  2007-01-03

I don’t know how many Muslims realise these characters’ roots.

I think most observant Muslims are well aware of their religion’s supposed roots and such things as the status of Jesus as prophet in Islam.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 June 2019 03:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4205
Joined  2007-02-27
venomousbede - 14 June 2019 03:20 AM

I don’t know how many Muslims realise these characters’ roots.

All of them. It’s basic knowledge for Muslims.

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
‹‹ hanged vs. hung      BL: Mecca ››