Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Israel, DNA, Jews and the Alpha Male

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Sons of Noah

    Originally posted by Irubak
    And just found the second reference:

    40. Heth #71 (27.Canaan12, 19.Ham11, 17.Noah10, 15.[Lamech]9, 14.Methuselah8, 13.[Enoch]7, 11.Jared6, 9.Mahalalel5, 7.Kenan4, 5.Enosh3, 3.Seth2, 1.Adam1) ref. Gen 10:15. Heth is the progenitor of the Hitties. [Gn 23:10--Ephron, a son of Heth, is also Ephron the Hittite.]

    Children:

    53. i Sons of Heth #96.

    54. ii Helon #97.

    So according this Ashkenaz is Japhetid and Helon Hamit, how are they related to Semit Israelits?!
    Irubak - In considering that our DNA [and the genetic testing that we pay for] is supposed prove one being the offspring of another, or related to another, then should it stand to reason, given that Japeth, Shem and Ham were the sons of Noah that the descending Y-DNA would be same/similar?

    If genetic testing is supposed to be a 99% flawless process, then why all the contradictions of reality?

    Comment


    • #17
      The Scythians and the Ashkenazi

      Originally posted by josh w.
      According to Kriwaczek, the equation of Scythians with Ashkenaz is actually the result of a translation or copying mistake: the two terms have very similar spellings in Hebrew. A broad definition of Ashkenaz extended the usage of the term to eastern European Jews. However, except in the case of Ukrainian and Russian Jews, I doubt if anyone has scientific evidence that the majority of Ashkenazi Jews stem from the ancient Scythians. To the extent that the exceptions are similar to Scythians, they are similar to Indo-Iranians more than to Semites in terms of haplogroups.
      josh w. Shouldn't genetic testing and the science of DNA be able to prove who was who and from where? This is probably why academic, anthroplogical and other institutions will not share the DNA of many of the anthro-human remains they find or have because in doing so might just prove, or disprove a few of life's mysteries; I guess these things would astound, infuriate and upset a lot of people?

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Son_Of_Israel
        Irubak - In considering that our DNA [and the genetic testing that we pay for] is supposed prove one being the offspring of another, or related to another, then should it stand to reason, given that Japeth, Shem and Ham were the sons of Noah that the descending Y-DNA would be same/similar?

        If genetic testing is supposed to be a 99% flawless process, then why all the contradictions of reality?
        Sorry, I am afraid, I don't get your point here. So, genetic testing is not flawless, I agree, but what do you want to say by this? And how does this fact supports your ideas?

        Comment


        • #19
          let's not forget the bigger picture

          The great message that Prof Sykes (Oxford ancestors) makes in his writings is how we are all closely related, and how these relationships go beyond current national and religious divides. It's a bit disconcerting that some people are clutching at straws to establish a special identity through their DNA. I think this is because they're trying to make DNA information fit into their religious beliefs and (inevitable) bias. The point is (and the bigger picture has definitely been lost in this thread!), that the idea of religion is relatively new. Some religions have caused the propagation of certain DNA lines because of their practices, but this is a recent occurence and not in the time-frame of, e.g., the ancestral mothers of the haplogroups.

          So yes, people sharing the same religion for many centuries will have a genetic link, but this genetic attribute is not unique to that group, because others in other religions, creeds or whatever you want to call it (!) will have genetic connections to members in that group from perhaps an earlier time. This means that the dominant haplotype of a group does not define it as, say, Jewish, unless you want to argue that an ancestral mother herself was a Jew, which is totally absurd of course...

          I guess people are doing what they've always done: looking for division and distinction to help give better identity and specialness to their "in-group" (as if we need more of that in this world!). To me, all the discussion on who's the son of who, and whether or not this story is more accurate than that, is bizarre, and is exactly why we have the "racial" and religious divisions and problems that we have now.

          My mt-DNA (K) is very common amongst Askenaze Jews. It just means that there is shared ancestry somewhere, and that current day Jews stem from this maternal line. Isn't it better and more satisfying to feel part of a larger family which crosses religions, rather than persisting on identity uniqueness? I'm still hopeful that the real message of DNA research wil get through eventually, but I guess as usual, the greatest resistance and challenges will come from those whose entire basis for identity and life is their religion.

          As far as I know, every European haplogroup (and some African) are exhibited amongst the Jewish population. Are you guys now saying that some Jews are more Jewish than others? If so, oh dear... And yes, if you go to a narrower and narrower sub-clade then eventually you may find a group that is all Jewish, but hey, if you go down far enough it may be just you and your father (!), and it still doesn't change the fact that there are many Jews that are a complete different haplotype.

          Comment


          • #20
            Well said Stela Paya!

            It is of interest that the followers of the Abraham-founded monotheism now includes some 2500 subsects, of which "Jewish" numbers a recognised five , "Islamic" over four, and "Christian" over 2000 . What this is doing to religion-denominated DNA identification can be imagined.
            Religion, welcome to the Human Race!

            Comment


            • #21
              Useful Link on Jewish DNA

              This link provides a valuable insight into Jewish DNA, going beyond the Mormon studies into the workings of the Cohen database:-

              http://www.fairlds.org/Book_of_Mormo..._Mormon_2.html

              Comment


              • #22
                Establishing One's Identity

                Originally posted by Stela Paya
                It's a bit disconcerting that some people are clutching at straws to establish a special identity through their DNA. I think this is because they're trying to make DNA information fit into their religious beliefs and (inevitable) bias.
                I am assuming that being a Registered User - and the fact that you have quoted Prof. Sykes - that you have had your DNA tested. If you think "some people are clutching at staws to establish a special identity" then why did you bother? Like most people, I undertook DNA testing to find my "special identity - my family", where I belong.

                Originally posted by Stela Paya
                I guess people are doing what they've always done: looking for division and distinction to help give better identity and specialness to their "in-group"
                "Divisions" you say: What do you think families are? What do you think religions are? I was brought-up a Roman Catholic, but 4 generations ago I was Greek Catholic, and earlier still, Jewish. It's called "belonging and tolerance", not "in-groups" as you put it.

                Please do not introduce divisive comments into this Thread and turn it into a religious argument.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Son_Of_Israel
                  Please do not introduce divisive comments into this Thread and turn it into a religious argument.
                  Her point is that the whole premise of this thread is divisive. I think she makes a good point.

                  Mike Maddi

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Read Nehemiah 10:1-27, and then ask yourself about ancient dating habits. I think people were speaking different languages and mixed with other people while other lines continued 98% or higher tribal purity. Whatever, some genealogical stories are detailed and amazing. Where are the dwelling places of light and of the people?

                    Originally posted by Son_Of_Israel
                    . . . Are not all Jews descendant from the same "alpha male"? Shouldn't all "Jews" have the same Y-DNA, or share the same Haplogroup? . . . We are "true" descendants of JACOB; one of the lost Tribes of ISRAEL.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      titled?

                      Originally posted by Son_Of_Israel
                      Why does FamilyTreeDNA discriminate against the Ashkenazi by not having a specific test, or if one is E3b1, why is the Haplogroup not titled? .

                      Hello Son of Israel, did you mean an icon for E3b1 similar to the one for J1s with CMH? If so, I think it has something to do with the fact that J haplogroup in general and J1 with CMH in particular is observed in such high frequency among Cohenim of both Ash and Sephardic origin, suggesting they share a recent common ancestor. As you may know, J1 is also common among lay Jewish populations, second only to J2. I would think that once it is shown that J2 and E3b Seph/ Ash/ Cohen/ lay/ Jews and Samaritans/ Israelites have a common modal haplotype suggesting they also share a recent common ancestor we may see additional icons, demonstrating the existence of multiple lineages among ancients Israelites.

                      regards,

                      bob

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Bob, an E3b modal Jewish haplotype may be less certain than the CMH. As Coffman noted, there are different E3b subclades in the Jewish population, none of which are unique to Jews. (And the CMH may not be that certain--see current discussion on Y dna forum). I can understand the need for reference group distinctiveness but so far only R1b subclades demonstate promise of that degree of specificity, possible because so many FTDNA subjects are R1b. As others have noted, the search for distinctiveness can sometimes be divisive. For me, the wonder of haplogroups is that they reveal communality among reference groups.
                        Josh

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by bob_chasm
                          Hello Son of Israel, did you mean an icon for E3b1 similar to the one for J1s with CMH? If so, I think it has something to do with the fact that J haplogroup in general and J1 with CMH in particular is observed in such high frequency among Cohenim of both Ash and Sephardic origin, suggesting they share a recent common ancestor. As you may know, J1 is also common among lay Jewish populations, second only to J2. I would think that once it is shown that J2 and E3b Seph/ Ash/ Cohen/ lay/ Jews and Samaritans/ Israelites have a common modal haplotype suggesting they also share a recent common ancestor we may see additional icons, demonstrating the existence of multiple lineages among ancients Israelites.

                          regards,

                          bob

                          Maybe J2 has always been more common among the Israelite caste. With the original Cohens being mostly J1s and the more common Israelites J2.



                          Y-DNA: J2a*

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Did Zebulon Jews from Holland?

                            I didn't know Holland was a tribe from Zubulon,Israel. Now I heard of everything.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Jewish / Hebrew genetics

                              Although there are several hints of admixture throughout the history of the Jewish people, I would counter the arguement that Jewishness is simply a religion, much like Protestantism, etc.

                              Judaism is essentially tied to a culture, one that was started by a group within the same geographic region, then perpetuated throughout thousands of years. Given the existance of the Cohane Modal Haplotype, which proves a genetic link between many Jews despite vast geographic distances (Asia, Eastern Europe, Middle East, Western Europe - Spain), its safe to say that this goes beyond just a religion. Likewise, the historical definition of a culture is a people with a common heritage, history, language, art and often times religion. All those pertain to the Jewish people. Furthermore, medicine does note that there are definitive "Jewish" diseases, those that Jews, who are an isolated genetic population, are more susceptible to.

                              As a clarification, the term "Jew" did not come about until after the formation of the Kingdom of Judah, and did not reference all like people until the fall of its sister state the Kingdom of Israel. This occured prior to the Roman occupation of the holy land. Rather, they were called Hebrews, meaning 'those who passed over'... when Abraham crossed over the river to journey into the desert, ie. leave what was considered civilization. ('Jews, God and History' by Max Dimont).

                              Since then, the Jews have come to live within, though have mostly stayed apart from nearly ever major civilization in history. Evidence of this is their rise as an economic power. After the fall of Rome, the Jews were not subject to the same laws as native populations, the intention of which was to keep them away from Christians so as to not taint them. As such, Mosiac and Talmudic law came to govern the Jewish peoples scattered throughout the Old World, managing their rules in trade, transactions, intermarriage, etc.

                              Additionally, in regards to the 'tribal' issue, all save the Levite (and within, Cohane) lines were all but dissolved when King Solomon sought to diffuse tribal allegiances in exchange for a Hebrew consciousness. This is similar to when the Constitutional congress in the US sought to dissolve state allegiance in exchange for a national consciousness. This is the reason that most Jews today have no idea about their tribal origins. Given that the Tribe of Levi, and their subset the Cohanim, had religious functions, the maintained their ties.

                              Hope this sheds some historic light on this issue.

                              Sean
                              Last edited by SeanMSilver; 5 February 2007, 09:29 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                The J2 case

                                Originally posted by J Man
                                Maybe J2 has always been more common among the Israelite caste. With the original Cohens being mostly J1s and the more common Israelites J2.



                                Y-DNA: J2a*
                                According to Coffman, I think J1 was only slightly more common among Cohenim than J2. In contrast, J2 is almost twice as common among lay followers of Judaism. In addition, J2 is found among Samaritans and the isolated Bene Israel population of India, while J1 presents a mixed picture in these populations. For example, Deneke suggests that J1 is absent among Bene Israel. The above referenced article suggests J1 Samaritans lack CMH.

                                regards,

                                bob

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X