The Lost Tribe of Israel

[VSh]

I heard about hypothesis that Japanese are one of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel, but did not get it serious (you see, people like sensational things) until I read this (http://www5.ocn.ne.jp/~magi9/isracame.htm). Now I think it might be so. The hypothesis has got very strong arguments like thousands similar words between Hebrew and Japanese, a lot of similarities in ancient traditions and culture, religious ceremonies, historical names. Is it really positions of the hypothesis become stronger?

[kiyomi]

good lord almighty!! are you trying to suggest that I could be...JEWISH???????????

************THUD********************

It was hard enough being a Shinto..then an Alientologist...but..being Jewish?? I have nothing against Jews..okay?? dont get me wrong folks!! (please, no flames and no hate mail for me..I truly love Jews)..but..if I'm a desendant of Israel....oh heck..but..but..I LOVE christmas!!!!!!!

[KuroiKenshi]

In my personal estimation, a lot of this is rationalization, and seeing what you want to see in things. I also see a lot of the myth of Japanese exceptionality being played out here.

Some of it is interesting though, but unfortunately its impossible to prove either way. My question is how much of this is common to more than just Japan or to Judaic traditions, and why is the view of these taken so ahistorically. The other thing that I noticed is that examples are taken from random places, but they may not apply to all of Japan (especially that Abraham-sacrificing of the son bit). Finally, even allowing that there is a similar mythology behind the sacrifice of the son thing, or any other similiarities, does that necessarily prove a link between showing that a tribe of Israel went to Japan? I don't question that religious traditions influence each other, but i do question the idea that this influence is always direct, and is necessarily proof of a genetic link.

Let's take for example the lions in front of Shinto shrines, which the author brings up. The author says "its been proved that the tradition of lions in front of shrines originated in the Middle East." But he doesn't use this as evidence of a genetic link between, say, Assyrians (who had man-lion like creatures in front of their temples) and Japanese. I don't doubt that the practice of putting lions in front of shrines came from outside of Japan, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it came from a "Lost Tribe of Israel" spreading their seed there.

Let me put it another way: the religious statuary of the Ancient Greeks resembles in a lot of ways those of many religions which flourished along the silk road, but no one says that this is because Alexander sowed his seed along the entire silk road (although this had something to do with it, it is not the only reason, nor does it hold true for all of the places in question).

PS - Kiyomi-baachan: does this make you a Jewish grandmother? Could you make me some macaroons then? Pretty please?

[Leader Desslock]

This is laughably bad scientific and cultural research. I literally laughed aloud at several points in the article. When it comes to lost tribes of Israel and credibility, the linked article ranks down there with the Book Of Mormon, which has been refuted by an overwhelming amount of linguistic and archaeological evidence.

[kiyomi]

Kuroichan..sure thing hun..I'll get right on it..would you like them original or extra crispy??

Be prepared to eat a hockey puck.....

[Matsu'o Tsurayaba]

good lord almighty!! are you trying to suggest that I could be...JEWISH???????????

************THUD********************

Technically yes,you are Jewish.Christanity is a offshoot religion from Jewish faith,Jesus..was Jewish.Many of the people in the Bible are also Jewish,why people refuse to belive this anymore..that is the real question.

[KuroiKenshi]

Technically yes,you are Jewish.Christanity is a offshoot religion from Jewish faith,Jesus..was Jewish.Many of the people in the Bible are also Jewish,why people refuse to belive this anymore..that is the real question.


i thought kiyomi-baachan said she was an alientologist...?

[kiyomi]

I cant be jewish...I'm a freaking Alien.......

[Bernard_Monsha]

This is laughably bad scientific and cultural research. I literally laughed aloud at several points in the article. When it comes to lost tribes of Israel and credibility, the linked article ranks down there with the Book Of Mormon, which has been refuted by an overwhelming amount of linguistic and archaeological evidence.


Really, you're going to love this (http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/shogun.html) one then. So they are black and jewish like Sammy Davis Junior.

Were you here when I slew the many headed "Egyptians were black and it is being hidden by a white conspiracy" hydra Desslock. Ah the good old days of poorly researched crackpots with self appointed professorships makeing absolutely incredible claims with no backing then crying racism when you pointed out the emporer had no clothes. Ah those were the good old wild and wooly days of SD & D

As to the sunject at hand it has as much credibility as the Identity Christians who claim the 12 tribes moved into northern Europe. You will never guess what the most famous group who subscribes to this blather is either. :rolleyes:

[Leader Desslock]

^ Wow. Just... wow. From the crap about Japan to the Identity Christians. Wow.

I'm ashamed to say that I'd never heard of the Christian Identity movement. Now that I've looked it up, um... wow. Thanks for calling attention to such a glaring hole in my knowledge. I enjoy a good theological debate with most proslytisers, but about all I can say that CI groups deserve is a solid boot in the arse for knocking on my door.

You know what's sad? Hearing the way some of the CI information's phrased, I'm pretty sure that a prominent group of church folks who used to "spread the word" in my area was a branch of that movement. And I Didn't Know. GRRRRR! It makes my blood point just thinking of some of the crap they were peddling, now that it's been put into perspective. I can see that I was entirely too civil in my discussions with them.

[Bernard_Monsha]

Believe it or not there is a Jewish Supremacist movement who believe the Jews are physically and mentally superior to others. I was approached by a gentlman at a synagogue who proceded to show me irrifutable scientific pproof in the form of news articles and a nice pamplet on how jews are superior to other groups. The fact I was a dark skinned Mexican Catholic who came to the service with my girlfreind at the time family (as I did once or twice a month) was lost on him. The irony of him doing this was not lost on me however.

[Leader Desslock]

^ That's better than my story. I was house-sitting a parsonage when the local Jehovah's Witness family came by to proselytise. It wasn't until their second visit or so that I realized they thought I was the parish minister. I chided them for their arrogance, but I also had to give them credit for the courage it took for laypeople to challenge someone they perceived to have formal training at a theological seminary.

Not that they had any better results than they would have had if I really had been the parish minister...

[CrossboneGundam]

I heard about hypothesis that Japanese are one of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel, but did not get it serious (you see, people like sensational things) until I read this (http://www5.ocn.ne.jp/~magi9/isracame.htm). Now I think it might be so. The hypothesis has got very strong arguments like thousands similar words between Hebrew and Japanese, a lot of similarities in ancient traditions and culture, religious ceremonies, historical names. Is it really positions of the hypothesis become stronger?

...:lol:

I feel sorry for you.

Desslock already did the footwork, so I'll just be content to laugh at your gullibility and the ludicrousity of that site.

If you compared any two cultures, you'd find similarities.

[Ken-Ohki]

The only tribes of Isreal we know about are Judah and Levi which are mixed in with the Jews. Simeon may have a remnant in the modern Jews but the tribe had pretty much vanished by the time of Moses anyway. I've heard rumors of them being Martians, living under the ice cap at the north pole, and being one group or another throughout history.

I think we all need to just wait till we die. Then we find answers to all the important questions, where did the lost tribes go, who's bigfoot, and why Bill Gates? Dear lord why Bill Gates!?!

[VSh]

This is laughably bad scientific and cultural research. I literally laughed aloud at several points in the article. When it comes to lost tribes of Israel and credibility, the linked article ranks down there with the Book Of Mormon, which has been refuted by an overwhelming amount of linguistic and archaeological evidence.
Any popular paraphrase of science theory is laughable. For example, try to describe basic principles of relativistic theory by gestures to people who know next to nothing in the subject. I did it once. It was hilarious (for both sides). I think they still left in opinion that theory is very wrong.

I feel sorry for you.
Don't feel sorry, I don't need it.

If you compared any two cultures, you'd find similarities.

You are not right here. It wasn't without reason, contact between Japanese and European called "cultural shock".

Me too experienced some kind of strike when I see something like this:
http://www.evacommentary.org/tsuzuku.jpg
(From evacommentary.org. Sorry, Reichu, for the direct link. But the image is very small.)

Or this:
http://www.gainax.co.jp/anime/flcl/img/flcl_ost2.gif
(From gainax.co.jp)

Or, when watching some funsub: "What!? What did they just say?"

[Alice20th]

It's said by most anthropologists that Japan is a society that uses shame to serve as the people's moral compass. From my experience, it's at least mostly true. Which, of course, blows away the "Lost tribe of Israel theory."

A Jewish mother not using guilt? Impossible!! ^_^

[Bernard_Monsha]

Any popular paraphrase of science theory is laughable. For example, try to describe basic principles of relativistic theory by gestures to people who know next to nothing in the subject. I did it once. It was hilarious (for both sides). I think they still left in opinion that theory is very wrong.

Yes but the theory of relativity is backed up by facts and matmatical formulas. This article is tripe. You could make a more compelling case that Remus did not die by his brothers hand but sailed to Mexico and started the kernal of a society that became the Toltec and Aztec civilization because of several similarities between them and Rome. You could also do the same between the Bedouins and the Commanches, however both theories are full of bull because neither culture ever met eachother. So you can argue just as well that Japan was really founded by aliens or Ron Popeil if you are dealing in innuendo and supposition of completely unrelated similarities.

[Leader Desslock]

Any popular paraphrase of science theory is laughable. For example, try to describe basic principles of relativistic theory by gestures to people who know next to nothing in the subject. I did it once. It was hilarious (for both sides).
For an interesting take on this idea, try reading about relativity in words of four letters or less:

http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/txt/al.html

I know what you're saying, but just look at shallow level of understanding of some of the "evidence" used to support the "lost tribe" contention. Look at the conclusions reached. They're sad. This is really a "happy snowflake guy" level of scientific inquiry. As I believe someone else said, the people who believe these conclusions are doing so because they've found connections in the data that support what they want to believe, not because those conclusions were reached logically from an objective evaluation of the data. In order to believe in the Japanese Lost Tribe theory, a person would have to believe a very narrow sampling of the data, while completely ignoring large areas of research that outright refute that conclusion.

Let's take it at a Linguistic level at first. The author states that "old Japanese words have a Hebrew origin". O RLY? A lot of connections have to be made to support that contention, and modern linguists haven't ever made that connection. Yes, there are words in both languages that appear to have similar roots, but a Hebrew->Japanese descent of those words is a less-likely GUESS at an explanation than several alternatives. A person could just as easily guess that Hebrew was descended from Japanese, couldn't they? Why not?

The far more likely guess (and the one supported by modern linguistic research) is that both the Hebrew and Japanese languages are themselves descended from languages that share a common ancestral root. In layman's terms, there's a "distant cousin" relationship, rather than a "grandparent->grandchild" relationship between the two languages.

Hebrew is a language in the Afro-Asiatic language family. It shares linguistic similarities (common roots, grammatic structure, writing styles) with other languages in the Afro-Asiatic language family. Japanese is .... a bit of an anomaly in terms of classification. The Japonic language branch is lying beside the world language tree, but the section that used to connect it to the tree is now lost to history. The bark and leaves don't match the Afro-Asiatic branch nearly as well as other known branches, however.

Concentrating on a few common roots between Hebrew and Japanese to justify their conclusion ignores some obvious very obvious points, like
- the larger number of word roots in Japanese that are NOT present in Hebrew, which would suggest that the language is more likely to have a distinct ancestry
- Japanese does not appear to have inherited its grammar or writing system from Hebrew
- these language roots predate both the Hebrew and Japanese languages, and other (unrelated) language families ALSO share some of these roots

As for other types of "supporting evidence" - you don't have to be a scholar to see that they're just silly. I mean: "...people who regard mountains as their holy places for religious training. The Israelites also regarded mountains as their holy places." REALLY? ZOmG! The native American tribes in Maine also regarded Mt. Katahdin as the home of a powerful spirit - so maybe the Penobscots are the missing 40th Tribe of Israel!

Come on - that's just dumb. Some of the mythological and cultural connections listed are common for people across the globe, not exclusive to the Hebrews and Japanese. There are only about a dozen stories in human experience - the fact that any two cultures on earth share a few is hardly significant.

Isn't it you that's fond of telling people to "think better"? Did you write to the author to tell him to think better? Maybe you should. ^_^

[kiyomi]

*Raises hand*

So, Desslocksan...does this mean that I can breathe easier cuz...I'm not Jewish and that I can continue celebrating Christmas by running over Santas at the Mall?????

[Leader Desslock]

Kiyomichan, not only can you continue to weed out the false Santas, but you don't have to set out a plate of knish for Herschell the Hanukkah Hobgoblin, either.

[kiyomi]

wooooooooooo-hoooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

watch out Mall Santas, here I come!!! :devil:

[GreatNekoKoneko]

...^so it WAS you! (hides mall santa costume from last year.)

[kiyomi]

yeah, that was me Nekochan..so..you better run and hide that tail of yours..*EG*

[KuroiKenshi]

Wait, so what happened to my macaroons?

[Ken-Ohki]

This is laughably bad scientific and cultural research. I literally laughed aloud at several points in the article. When it comes to lost tribes of Israel and credibility, the linked article ranks down there with the Book Of Mormon, which has been refuted by an overwhelming amount of linguistic and archaeological evidence.

Lol, lol lol. You know nothing my friend. Good luck . . .

http://farms.byu.edu/

[kiyomi]

Wait, so what happened to my macaroons?


*Chunks the macaroons to kuroikenshisan* there ya go hon..hope you like the taste of burnt rubber....

[Animematt55]

Lol, lol lol. You know nothing my friend. Good luck . . .

http://farms.byu.edu/
Is he the guy that owns that mormon-esque cult that has all the compounds? the ones where they abuse and rap echildren, and put women into complete servtidue?

[Leader Desslock]

Lol, lol lol. You know nothing my friend. Good luck . . .

http://farms.byu.edu/
Oh, come on. I'm not trying to broaden the scope of this thread by indicting the entire Mormon faith. Nor does it matter to me how the Book Of Mormon stacks up against the Bible, nor how the Bible itself stacks up against the historical record. I don't think any holy book needs to have a 100% correspondence to the historical or physical sciences in all things in order to be a valid foundation for a world faith.

Does the Bible contain inaccuracies? You bet. They're fairly well-documented. Does this mean Christianity is invalid? Nope, it just means that not all truth in the Bible is necessarily literal. One can garner wisdom from Aesop's Fables without believing in talking beasts.

Likewise with the Book of Mormon - Mormonism is a faith like any other. Its holy books make claims which have never been verified (and have been largely refuted) by modern archaeological and linguistic sciences. The history, agriculture, linguistic traditions and geneology of the people of the Americas might not be known with 100% accuracy, but no study of these sciences will ever lead an objective researcher to believe that the Olmecs were the missing Tribe of Israel or whatever. There may well be widsom to be garnered from the pages of the Book of Mormon, but this truth is not scientific.

THE PROBLEM IS (he says, bringing his post back to the thread topic) that people want to believe some things so badly that they lose their ability to objectively analyze the historical record. They can't separate faith and reason. So they read about missing tribes, and that sparks a global search for centuries to try and FIND those tribes. After all, they're referenced in the scriptures, right? So they must exist, and all we need to do is look around to find the evidence of their passage...

...and that's where they're already working backwards. You don't start with a belief and seek to find just the evidence that supports it; that's not science. You look at all the evidence and try to come up with a picture of what happpened that fits the facts. Then, after everyone agrees on that picture, THAT's when you see how well that picture meshes with the ancient literature.

You don't say, "even though we can't find supporting evidence, domesticated horses must've existed in the new world prior to European contact because they're mentioned in the Book of Mormon." You say, "here's the archaeological evidence that shows that pre-Colombian new world civilizations domesticated horses, and oh - isn't it kind of interesting that the Book of Mormon mentioned those a hundred years before science figured it out?" Same with the Lost Tribe of Japan.

[Ken-Ohki]

FARMS is an organization for the research of the Book of Mormon as a historical and scientific record. It stands simply for Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies and was begun by a number of BYU professors most notably Hugh Nibley.

Horses eh?

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=transcripts&id=129
http://farms.byu.edu/display-print.php?table=jbms&id=246
http://farms.byu.edu/other_questions_evidences.php?id=6&table=questions

Since you mention linguistic evidence but not in specifics I guess I'll post about those too. Check out Chiamus which is the most enlightening.

http://farms.byu.edu/display-print.php?table=review&id=303
http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=465

Your claim that there's no scientific evidence supporting the Book of Mormon is unfortunate. Im afraid you've been misinformed.

[Leader Desslock]

FARMS is an organization for the research of the Book of Mormon as a historical and scientific record. It stands simply for Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies and was begun by a number of BYU professors most notably Hugh Nibley.
Yeah, I've been through the FARMS site. It's exactly the type of site I meant when I said, "people interpreting the data according to what they want to see, as opposed to objectively interpreting the data and then seeing if it coincidentally matches."

Horses eh?
I didn't bring that up as a specific refutation, I brought that up as an example of "if it did happen, THIS is how it should be approached scientifically". The folks you cite are engaging in exactly the sort of backwards thinking I mentioned, however. They went looking for horses because they'd been TOLD they were horses and their critics pointed out that many of the plants and animals mentioned in the BoM didn't seem to exist in the pre-Colombian new world.

One interesting note in their argument - they say that small herds of the "missing" animals were likely brought over by other groups, and that such groups often leave no physical evidence in the archaeological record. Then they point out one or two discreet sites in which bones may have been found. What that makes me wonder is simply: Okay, so where are the OTHER signs of domesticated livestock you'd expect to find? If horses don't leave convenient bones, that's fine, but the people who WORK with them do have tools and tack. Where'd that all go? People who live in civilizations that contain horses and other large domesticated livestock have words and art for these things. Where'd that all go?

Since you mention linguistic evidence but not in specifics I guess I'll post about those too. Check out Chiamus which is the most enlightening.
Check out the science of linguistics, which is entirely more enlightening than a pattern found in Smith's texts. There simply is no linguistic basis to suggest any sort of migration of a lost tribe to the new world. Not one of the language families in the new world is a semitic descendant. Not One. None of the surviving languages show any influence from extended contact with a culture that DID speak a semitic language. Not One.

Any linguist would have to conclude that if there HAD been a significant semitic-speaking civilization of any kind in the Americas in 300-400AD, aliens must've landed, packed up every trace of them, mind-wiped all other inhabitants who ever came in contact with them, and THEN changed the indiginous populations' languages to eradicate any trace of the Lost Tribe's presence. Call me strange, but it seems a wee bit more likely to say that based on the current evidence, the Lost Tribe was never there.

And before you point it out, yes I'm familiar with Mr. Stubbs' work. Don't bother. If he ever uncovers meaningful linguistic evidence to support his contentions, then I and the rest of the MLA owe him an apology. Until that day, I'm fully comfortable dismissing his work as crackpot 'science', along with Happy Snowflake Guy.


Mormonism might be The Truth, The Light and The Way for all I know, but if it is, then a person is not going to come to that conclusion by studying linguistics, that much I can tell you. Nor do I think that matters, as I said earlier. If it's a matter of faith, why does it have to correspond to the historic record? Why can't faith just be faith?

[Soluzar]

you don't have to set out a plate of knish for Herschell the Hanukkah Hobgoblin, either.

Is this something you just made up, or...?

PS: WTF is knish? I'm betting it's some form of fried dough. You Americans seem to make far too many things out of fried dough.

Oh, come on. I'm not trying to broaden the scope of this thread by indicting the entire Mormon faith.
Why exactly not? It's always fun to indict the entire Mormon faith.

Likewise with the Book of Mormon - Mormonism is a faith like any other. Its holy books make claims which have never been verified (and have been largely refuted) by modern archaeological and linguistic sciences. The history, agriculture, linguistic traditions and geneology of the people of the Americas might not be known with 100% accuracy, but no study of these sciences will ever lead an objective researcher to believe that the Olmecs were the missing Tribe of Israel or whatever.
It is most unlike you to mince words, Desslock. This is not what I expect from my esteemed blue associate at all. Why soft-pedal the truth? The Book of Mormon is about as believable as Scientology.

Far be it from me to criticise those who follow the faith, since the doctrines can be sound even if the scriptures are not, but I could never follow the teachings of a holy book that I know to be false in all of the most significant regards.

At least in the case of Christianity, the most important parts aren't a grotesque distortion of the known facts.

[Leader Desslock]

Is this something you just made up, or...?
I believe that Herschell the Hanukkah Hobgoblin is mentioned in the Animaniacs Christmas Special, but I could br wrong. I'd guess it's in a Pinky and the Brain cartoon.

WTF is knish?
Like a stuffed potato crepe, you might say? Not exactly an empanada, but not all THAT dissimilar in a way.

Why exactly not? It's always fun to indict the entire Mormon faith...It is most unlike you to mince words, Desslock....The Book of Mormon is about as believable as Scientology.
Well, I didn't want to turn this into a Mormon-bashing thread. They happen too often and too easily on AN, and I really don't have any problem with adherents of the Mormon faith. I might take exception to the Church's strategy when it comes to proselytising, but the Mormons I've met have been normal, decent everyday folks like everyone else. I know there's a lunatic fringe, but I've never come in contact with 'em.

As for the Scientology comparison? Nah, I wouldn't say that. Scientology never turned into anything good; it's just a life-sucking cult. But however Mormonism started out, however Smith came up with the texts, whether it ever happened or not - something good still came of it. The Church and its members have done a lot of good work, and whether it started out with genuine revelation or a loonie Branch Davidian-esque cult in the desert doesn't really matter. Not to me, anyway.

[CrossboneGundam]

FARMS is an organization for the research of the Book of Mormon as a historical and scientific record. It stands simply for Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies and was begun by a number of BYU professors most notably Hugh Nibley.

Horses eh?

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=transcripts&id=129
http://farms.byu.edu/display-print.php?table=jbms&id=246
http://farms.byu.edu/other_questions_evidences.php?id=6&table=questions

Since you mention linguistic evidence but not in specifics I guess I'll post about those too. Check out Chiamus which is the most enlightening.

http://farms.byu.edu/display-print.php?table=review&id=303
http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=465

Your claim that there's no scientific evidence supporting the Book of Mormon is unfortunate. Im afraid you've been misinformed.

Because, obviously, Brigham Young University is a totally objective scientific organization with no ulterior religious motive to propagate.

So we can all rest assured that we're getting the full picture, here! :)

[/sarcasm]

[VSh]

Mormons???

//Check forum and thread

What have you done here? I was out only one weekend.

Yes but the theory of relativity is backed up by facts and matmatical formulas.
Relativistic theory was based on only one fact and one contradiction. Formulas mean nothing here. Math can provide you only with warranty that your conclusions are true if your basic suppositions are true. Simply scientists of exact knowledge are less conservative and have more common sense. So, we can say that this theory can have stronger basis.

Let's take it at a Linguistic level at first. The author states that "old Japanese words have a Hebrew origin". O RLY? A lot of connections have to be made to support that contention, and modern linguists haven't ever made that connection. Yes, there are words in both languages that appear to have similar roots, but a Hebrew->Japanese descent of those words is a less-likely GUESS at an explanation than several alternatives. A person could just as easily guess that Hebrew was descended from Japanese, couldn't they? Why not?

The far more likely guess (and the one supported by modern linguistic research) is that both the Hebrew and Japanese languages are themselves descended from languages that share a common ancestral root. In layman's terms, there's a "distant cousin" relationship, rather than a "grandparent->grandchild" relationship between the two languages.
Linguistic science disagrees with you. Linguists said "There are thousands of words and names of places with no real etymological meaning in Japanese. And they all correspond with Hebrew words." The Hebrew -> Japanese mix is the most probable way to get here.

Some of the mythological and cultural connections listed are common for people across the globe...
Probably some cultural connections are common along people, but in this case it is very some, less than 5% of listed facts. We will get other more convincible connections with their explanations, as soon as scientists work more on the subject. This hypothesis isn't worse than any others. I think some mysteries will be revealed in the next 10-15 years. Stay tuned and think better.

[Philemon]

Does the Bible contain inaccuracies? You bet. They're fairly well-documented. Does this mean Christianity is invalid? Nope, it just means that not all truth in the Bible is necessarily literal.

What examples of inaccuracies?

[Leader Desslock]

Mormons???
Well, when you mention "lost tribes of Israel", you had to expect they'd be brought up sooner or later, right? Japan's hardly the first "lost tribe" claim.

Linguistic science disagrees with you.
No, it doesn't. The writer of that particular article might disagree with me, but the body of mainstream Linguistic science does not support the idea of the Japanese people being descendants of a lost tribe of Israel. Linguistic science's current stance on the matter is that the Japanese language is most likely a descendant from languages in Korea/SE China, none of which are classified as Semitic.

Linguists said "There are thousands of words and names of places with no real etymological meaning in Japanese. And they all correspond with Hebrew words."
That would most likely be an overstatement. If Japanese is like every other language on the planet, then there are probably a lot more than a thousand words that don't have a clear etymological origin. I'm willing to bet that not ALL of them are Hebraic in origin, nor even most of them. But that statement sure makes it sound more convincing than if he'd worded it, "I notice about a thousand words in Japanese that sound similar to Hebrew words. Weird, huh?"

The Hebrew -> Japanese mix is the most probable way to get here.
Not even close. A peoples' stories can travel more easily than the people themselves, right? Translated copies of hold books, etc. Lots of things travel easier than people. Or - some common ancestral language root whose point of connection has been lost to history, as has been the case for countless people all over the globe.


We will get other more convincible connections with their explanations, as soon as scientists work more on the subject. This hypothesis isn't worse than any others. I think some mysteries will be revealed in the next 10-15 years. Stay tuned and think better.
Ah, yes... the "wait and see" theory. Always gotta love that. You tell me to think better, then you think exactly backwards.

Let me end with a nice testimonial to the fallacy of thinking backwards, this one from another "lost tribe" advocate, Thomas Ferguson. Copied from the wiki article (underlining mine):

In 1951 Thomas Ferguson, a devoted LDS member, petitioned Mormon President David O. McKay to financially back the founding of the New World Archeological Foundation (hereafter NWAF). Ferguson requested at first a 5 year funding grant to dig throughout Mesoamerica for evidence of the veracity of the Book of Mormon claims. His persistence paid off and the first five years were funded from 1955 to 1959. At the end of this period, additional funding was granted and continues to this day.
In a 1961 newsletter Ferguson predicted that although nothing had been found, the Book of Mormon cities would be found in 10 years. Eleven years later in 1972 LDS member Hal Hougey wrote Ferguson questioning the progress given the stated timetable in which the cities would be found. Replying to Hougey as well as secular and non-secular requests, Ferguson wrote in a letter dated 5 June 1972: "Ten years have passed... I had sincerely hoped that Book-of-Mormon(sic) cities would be positively identified within 10 years — and time has proved me wrong in my anticipation."


What examples of inaccuracies?
Oh, bloody hell. Why me?

If you don't want to do a google search, then I'll just bring out one of my favorites. Read the last words of Jesus, as described in the books of the New Testament. Are they verbatim? Let's see...

Matthew & Mark: "Lord, why have you forsaken me?"
Luke: "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit."
John: "It is finished."

Now - why would I point out this particular discrepancy? Because it's perhaps the most significant event in Christendom, it's simple, it's blatant, the differences are wide enough that it's not just a typo or a difference in translation, and above all - it's really meaningless in the grand sceme of things.

One the one hand, this discrepancy doesn't invalidate any of the teachings of Jesus, nor does it invalidate his theology or worldview, so it's meaningless. On the other hand, I find it interesting that four of the disciples managed to forget the last words of their friend, mentor and coincidently the being they believed to be the saviour of humanity. Okay, it was written down long after the fact, maybe they were getting long in the tooth when the chroniclers jotted it down. Still - the fact remains that if one of those phrases were the actual dying words (translated) of Jesus, then the other two phrases are simply wrong. Hence, a discrepancy/inaccuracy exists.

There's nothing wrong with that, as I said. But it does mean that the Bible has to be interpreted in context, and not as literal fact. That doesn't invalidate the faith in any way, I don't think. It merely places Christianity alongside every other faith in the world.

[Bernard_Monsha]

It is easy to find contradictions in the Bible

God creates animals and then man - Gen 1:25-26
God creates man and then the animals - Gen 2:18-19

Noah takes 7 pairs of each type of animal onto the ark - Gen 7:2-3
Noah takes one pair of animal onto the ark - Gen 6:19

So far as archeological evidence supporting the claims of Joseph Smith. Outside of the state of Utah serious hostoprians either laugh or sigh when one of those people show up at a conference or a dig. They fall into the same catagory as The Shame of Texas (http://www.creationevidence.org/) located ironically enough near one of the most important paleontological finds in 100 years.

[CrossboneGundam]

What examples of inaccuracies?

There was that whole sun revolving around the Earth thing... But whatever.

[VSh]

Japan's hardly the first "lost tribe" claim.
Claim? Nobody claims. Simply this hypothesis might be true.

...the body of mainstream Linguistic science does not support the idea of the Japanese people being descendants of a lost tribe of Israel.
I didn't say that.

Linguistic science's current stance on the matter is that the Japanese language is most likely a descendant from languages in Korea/SE China, none of which are classified as Semitic.
Origin of Japanese is unknown. Again, nobody said that Japanese is Semitic language. Linguists themselves say that hypothetic Korean/Chinese origin is most likely because they do not have anything better. There are only 2 arguments: geographic proximity and grammar, partially borrowed from Korean. The vocabulary was very different. Weird?

Now, you have two languages with large set of common words and in the first language those words do not have etymological meaning and have it in the second. Obviously those words were borrowed from the second language. I skip clear implications sometimes.

Ah, yes... the "wait and see" theory. Always gotta love that. You tell me to think better, then you think exactly backwards.
I think exactly forward. We do not need to dig. We need to research only. Such things are very dependant on human resources, attractiveness of the hypothesis, and geopolitics. Now it is good time. So, my expectations are well grounded here. Any results will be good for science.

[umeboshi_neko]

What I think is weird is that some of the characters in the Ivrit script aleph-bet are remotely similar to the Japanese hiragana Ah-N.


Originally Posted by Leader Desslock
Does the Bible contain inaccuracies? You bet. They're fairly well-documented. Does this mean Christianity is invalid? Nope, it just means that not all truth in the Bible is necessarily literal.

I HAVE PROOF TO BACK YOU UP.
Anyone heard of the Oral law? The Mishna?
The whole bible was passed from teacher to pupil for a good few hundred years before the whole torah (or the christian old testament) was written down as the scrolls as you know them. Anything could've changed in that period.
For all we know, Moses could've rescued the whole of the Jews out of Egypt via an incredibly large Tsunami, or a big red boat.

[Leader Desslock]

Claim? Nobody claims. Simply this hypothesis might be true.
The authors of the article you link certainly claim it to be true (if you look at their wording) and in your first post you state, "Now I think it might be so." I don't know how to read that, except as an endorsement of the theory.

I didn't say that.
The authors of the article you link say that. From the article:

"...it might be possible to think that the Japanese mythology was originally a kind of genealogy which showed that the Japanese are descendants from Jacob, Joseph, and Ephraim."

That clearly means that the theory the author is endorsing is that of the Japanese people actually BEING a lost tribe of Israel, not merely MEETING a lost tribe of Israel. Several other points in the article reinforce their position.

This is no different than the Mormon account of a lost tribe of Israel popping up in the new world. Mormon researchers have spent a great deal of money on DNA sampling to demonstrate a biological link between the ancient Hebrews and the native inhabitants of the new world. They would only do this if they were trying to confirm biologic descendancy, rather than cross-cultural contamination.

Origin of Japanese is unknown. Again, nobody said that Japanese is Semitic language. Linguists themselves say that hypothetic Korean/Chinese origin is most likely because they do not have anything better.
Those are nicely misleading statements, particularly that last one. I could just as easily say that linguists say that French is a Latin descendant 'because they don't have anything better'. While that would be an absolutely true statement, it would neglect to mention the well-documented connections between Latin and modern French. ^_^

Is the precise origin of modern Japanese known? Nope. But strong connections to other languages have been made, and quite a few theories have been ruled out and are no longer accepted as 'credible' by mainstream linguistics. Guess which side of that line your article falls on?

There are only 2 arguments: geographic proximity and grammar, partially borrowed from Korean. The vocabulary was very different. Weird?
Yep. Then again, nowhere near as weird as the anomaly of the Basque language, but that doesn't mean that the Basque people are a lost tribe. That just means that record of the ancestral languages in which the connections are made have been lost. But - this is important - just because you've got an orphan doesn't mean that just ANYONE can come along and claim to be a parent. Just because the middle of the branch is missing, that doesn't mean you can't compare the twigs to the base.

Now, you have two languages with large set of common words...
Another misleading statement. A large set? No. Perhaps a thousand or two words. I don't have an easy statistic for how many words exist in the Japanese and Hebrew languages, but if we were talking about the English language, that'd be about a 0.2% correlation, tops. Two tenths of a percent. To give you an idea how sigificant that is, the percentage of words in English that have a Greek origin is around 5% - 25 times greater. What does that mean? That means that if we ignore all other sources of information, it's 25 times more likely that Britain was settled by a lost tribe of ancient Greeks.

You're hanging your hat on a statistical anomaly, not a strong correlation. Running total on Chinese-derived words in the Japanese language is over 30%, I believe. Just to put things in perspective.

Obviously those words were borrowed from the second language. I skip clear implications sometimes.
You should, because those 'clear implications' are 'bad science'. You yourself point out that the origins of the Japanese language are unknown. Fair enough. Why then should it be less likely that the Japonic and Semitic languages have a common ancestory from which these roots were handed down to their respective languages? A common ancestor that predates both cultures, but which has left its linguistic and cultural fingerprint in both cultures, despite their lack of contact since their ancestral break, lost in the depths of prehistory.

Isn't that more likely than, say, a lost tribe of Jews making their way to Japan? I mean, the rest of the story of the Hebrew people is known from the old testament; clearly this was a people predisposed to documenting their own history. Wouldn't you expect any lost tribe to similarly chronicle their journey across Asia? Wouldn't you expect the Chinese to have some documentation to a band of wanderers crossing their country? They documented OTHER events (many after the fact) during the period the migration would have happened, so how'd they miss a band of wandering Israelites?


You know, I thought some of this sounded familiar, so I did some digging. Remember Minoru? Even he didn't think the Lost Tribe theory sounded credible:

http://www.animenation.net/forums/showthread.php?t=173584

You know, when a person whose goal is to be genetically resequenced into an immortal asian superbeing says that your theory is hard to swallow, that says something, you know? :lol:

[VSh]

I begin to see some elements of logical fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy) in you posts. Probably we need some timeout.

Intermediate conclusion: there are some linguistic and cultural similarities, and there is no refutation of direct correlation. The hypothesis is worth of following examination.


http://www.animenation.net/forums/showthread.php?t=173584

Wow! I haven't seen it before. That whole thread is very recommended.

[Leader Desslock]

Intermediate conclusion: there are some linguistic and cultural similarities, and there is no refutation of direct correlation. The hypothesis is worth of following examination.
The "Lost Tribe in Japan" theory's been circulating since the mid-1800's, and was revived back in the early 20th century as well. You say in 10-15 years we'll know more? Perhaps. You think maybe they said that a hundred years ago? 50 years? 25 years ago?

My advice: Don't sell the bike shop, Orville! ^_^

[Bernard_Monsha]

Intermediate conclusion: there are some linguistic and cultural similarities, and there is no refutation of direct correlation. The hypothesis is worth of following examination.


No it does not work that way. You have to prove the point in question, you can just as well say that the Japanese had ties to ancient Prussia because they have cultural and religious similarities. You of course would be wrong becuase the vast majority of the evidence contradicts and disproves that statement. You have to come up with an plausible theory that dispproves the orthodox and proven view.

Your arguemnt is an example of Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc, and Argumentum ad Hominem. You first state A is true and B is true so thusly X must be true, then you attack Desslock saying he needs a time out and accuse him of exactly the tyupe af argument you have been makeing. Sorry that is not going to fly. I am waiting for you to make a straw man and attack it next.

[VSh]

The "Lost Tribe in Japan" theory's been circulating since the mid-1800's, and was revived back in the early 20th century as well. You say in 10-15 years we'll know more? Perhaps. You think maybe they said that a hundred years ago? 50 years? 25 years ago?
I've already answered to this a couple posts before, in last lines. Try to figure by yourself, what was wrong 25, 50, 100 years ago.

I am waiting for you to make a straw man and attack it next.
Pass it before: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/musicquiz.html

[Leader Desslock]

I've already answered to this a couple posts before, in last lines. Try to figure by yourself, what was wrong 25, 50, 100 years ago.
The same thing that will be wrong 10-15, 25, 50 and 100 years from now - it's a theory from the lunatic fringe that doesn't hold water.

Will a lack of evidence kill the Lost Tribe In Japan theory? Nope, no more than it killed the Lost Tribe In The New World theory for the Mormon church. Some people will give up on it, but others will pick up their torches and retrace their paths; still more people will never give up on it no matter how much contrary evidence is assembled. All that will happen is that they will change their theory to fit around each new piece of evidence that refutes their contention - just as they have for the last century and a half.

Should this be researched? Eh, it might make for a fun Master's Thesis and an IgNobel prize, but I don't see any merit beyond that.

I'm not saying it shouldn't ever be researched. As far as I'm concerned, this is as legitimate as the search for Norumbega. Still, you have to wonder how high a priority this search deserves to be assigned knowing that no matter what's found, the theory will still live on.

[Bernard_Monsha]

.

I'm not saying it shouldn't ever be researched. As far as I'm concerned, this is as legitimate as the search for Norumbega. Still, you have to wonder how high a priority this search deserves to be assigned knowing that no matter what's found, the theory will still live on.


Somehow I am betting he does not believe we landed on the moon.

[Neo0tak0n]

How can the japanese be descendents of a lost tribe of israel if there was japanese on japan in the pleistocene?

[CrossboneGundam]

You know, I thought some of this sounded familiar, so I did some digging. Remember Minoru? Even he didn't think the Lost Tribe theory sounded credible:

http://www.animenation.net/forums/showthread.php?t=173584

You know, when a person whose goal is to be genetically resequenced into an immortal asian superbeing says that your theory is hard to swallow, that says something, you know? :lol:

I think he was offended by the idea because it implies that the Japanese aren't the pure master race and rightful rulers of the world that he thinks they are.

[kiyomi]

I think he was offended by the idea because it implies that the Japanese aren't the pure master race and rightful rulers of the world that he thinks they are.


We're not??????????????????????????????? :huh:

Bummer..............

Guess I'll go knit now.......

[umeboshi_neko]

(Guess I'll go knit now.......

sorry to go off topic now but.....YAY KNITTING!)

[Bernard_Monsha]

I think he was offended by the idea because it implies that the Japanese aren't the pure master race and rightful rulers of the world that he thinks they are.


Do you remember his lament on how he was born European, I often wonder if he ever grew up or got the help he needed.

[CrossboneGundam]

Do you remember his lament on how he was born European, I often wonder if he ever grew up or got the help he needed.

He's probably still dreaming of the day that he'll bring peace to the world by making everyone Japanese. :lol:

[Suiko Eiji]

Do you remember his lament on how he was born European, I often wonder if he ever grew up or got the help he needed.

I've only got one thing to add to this: I kinda miss the crackpot.

That said, I think the main intellectual brunt of this conversation has been handled by Bernard and Desslock quite well.

[kiyomi]

*Raises hand*

Does this mean I can finally breathe easy that I'm NOT Jewish, and can still enjoy knocking the crap out of Christmas Elves...and that I'm not any other race except the one I was born into..Japanese???

If so..I'm going to do my Happy Dance of naked silk chiffon and go eat some sushi..

domo arigato gozaimasu Bernardsan and Desslocksan.. :bow:

[KuroiKenshi]

ok so ive been in belize for a week, but i wanted to ask

can someone please make me some macaroons?

my most OT post ever. forgive me

[kiyomi]

Kuroisan...I already made you some macaroons eon posts ago ya numbnuts!!!!!!!!!!!

And you were in Belize and YOU want fricken macaroons????!!!!!!!!!!!!

**Chunks the macaroons at Kuroisans skull**

[windwalker]

日本人=失われたユダヤの氏族説は、ユダヤのラビが日本人騙して１０％税取りたいから 言った冗談だろ？

もし日本に来てたとしても、ごく少数でしかなく、しかも異民族征伐期に滅ぼされた側に いたはずだ。
日本は、天皇の権威を前提にする主流派と、それ以外の雑多な異民族で構成 されていた。

当然その中には何らかの形で、セム的一神教（ゾロアスター教から派生したイスラム教・ ユダヤ教・キリスト教）の一派がいても不思議ではない。だがしかし、それ以前に、移動 経路に当たるユーラシア大陸に痕跡が残るはずだがそれがないのはおかしい。実際は、日 本に来るかなり手前で滅亡してると思う。
そもそも日本の神話は、一神教を信奉する少数民族を取り込みながら成立した多神教だ。 だから日本では一神教は単なる「既に敗北した信仰」であり、根本的に受け入れられるこ とはない。
確率はゼロに近いと思うが仮に日本にユダヤの失われた氏族がいたとしても 、
「日本には、とっくの昔に滅ぼされたけど失われた氏族が渡来していた」
という意味であり、日本人は敵の子孫ということになるな。もちろん日本人はフン族とは 違い慎みがあるので、いたとしても間違いなく敵だったのに子孫だとか正当後継者とか言 うつもりはない。

言いづらいことだが、日本の神話のあらすじは
「強さを嵩に着て『俺以外の神なんて不要』と主張した傲慢な神が、他の神々に集団で袋 叩きにされました」
というものだ。まあ、日本人とイスラエル人の一部が言ってる、一種のオカ ルト話だな。
ちなみに、ユダヤの失われた氏族説そのものは、中国でも韓国でも確認されている。つま り、ユダヤ人はこれをあちこちで言ってる。むしろアジアで言われてないのはフィリピン ぐらいのもので、ダヴィンチコード並みのでたらめさだ。

[KuroiKenshi]

日本人=失われたユダヤの氏族説は、ユダヤのラビが日本人騙して１０％税取りたいから 言った冗談だろ？

もし日本に来てたとしても、ごく少数でしかなく、しかも異民族征伐期に滅ぼされた側に いたはずだ。
日本は、天皇の権威を前提にする主流派と、それ以外の雑多な異民族で構成 されていた。

当然その中には何らかの形で、セム的一神教（ゾロアスター教から派生したイスラム教・ ユダヤ教・キリスト教）の一派がいても不思議ではない。だがしかし、それ以前に、移動 経路に当たるユーラシア大陸に痕跡が残るはずだがそれがないのはおかしい。実際は、日 本に来るかなり手前で滅亡してると思う。
そもそも日本の神話は、一神教を信奉する少数民族を取り込みながら成立した多神教だ。 だから日本では一神教は単なる「既に敗北した信仰」であり、根本的に受け入れられるこ とはない。
確率はゼロに近いと思うが仮に日本にユダヤの失われた氏族がいたとしても 、
「日本には、とっくの昔に滅ぼされたけど失われた氏族が渡来していた」
という意味であり、日本人は敵の子孫ということになるな。もちろん日本人はフン族とは 違い慎みがあるので、いたとしても間違いなく敵だったのに子孫だとか正当後継者とか言 うつもりはない。

言いづらいことだが、日本の神話のあらすじは
「強さを嵩に着て『俺以外の神なんて不要』と主張した傲慢な神が、他の神々に集団で袋 叩きにされました」
というものだ。まあ、日本人とイスラエル人の一部が言ってる、一種のオカ ルト話だな。
ちなみに、ユダヤの失われた氏族説そのものは、中国でも韓国でも確認されている。つま り、ユダヤ人はこれをあちこちで言ってる。むしろアジアで言われてないのはフィリピン ぐらいのもので、ダヴィンチコード並みのでたらめさだ。


Translato-tron (to make up for my OT post):

Isn't the idea that the Japanese are a lost tribe of Israel a joke told by Rabi because he wanted to trick the Japanese and take a 10% tax?

Even if they did come to Japan, I expect that they would have been on the side destroyed during the period in which non-Yamato peoples(note: I assume) were subjugated.
At the time, Japan was constructed out of a main branch which took as a precondition the power of the emperor (note: aforementioned "Yamato" Japanese) and of various other peoples.

During that time, it wouldnt be so surprising if in some form a group following Semitic style monotheism (religions which took cues from Zoroastrianism such as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) was in Japan. However, one would expect that there would be evidence of their passage over the Eurasian continent, but there is not. I think that in reality they'd probably have died out long before reaching Japan.
In the first place, Japanese myths show a form of polytheism constructed from the monothestic gods of minority populations. So in Japan monotheism simply meant the religion of defeated peoples, and those monotheisms were not completely accepted [by the mainstream].
I think that the probability is close to zero, but if, perchance, indeed there was a lost tribe in Japan, it would be in the form of "they died out a long, long, long time ago, but there was once a group of people who came to Japan," and they would probably be known as the enemies of the Yamato Japanese. Of course the Yamato would have hated their enemies, so even if we allow that they came to Japan, its unlikely that the Japanese are their descendents and I have no intention of saying that.

It's hard to say, but to summarize Japanese myths, they can be considered to be "Gods claiming 'any other gods than me are unnecessary' and defeating those gods in groups." I guess it's like a kind of occult story being told by certain Japanese and Jews.

By the way, the story of the lost tribes of israel is known in both china and korea also. In other words, there are Jews repeating this story all over the place. In fact about the only place in Asia where it hasn't been repeated is the phillipines, and its BS on the same level as the da vinci code.

[Haro!]

*Catholicism off* I'm surprised the site didn't make reference to Jesus spending the last of his days in Japan. C'mon its a KNOWN fact that Jesus went to Japan and married a woman named Yomiko and had children. I mean if you're the son of God, of course you'll knock up a Japanese woman. *Catholicism back on*

[kiyomi]

I just fricken spewed my coffee all over the place...

Thank you so much Haro...

[Gejutsuka]

"Anata no inochi o itadakimasu"... if it's kosher.

(chuckling)

[KuroiKenshi]

id like some macaroons. maybe not made by kiyomi baa-chan.

and lox. gotta have lox.

even more OT than before, but is lox known as jewish food outside of new york?

[Haro!]

id like some macaroons. maybe not made by kiyomi baa-chan.

and lox. gotta have lox.

even more OT than before, but is lox known as jewish food outside of new york?
I think it is. What I'm very curious about is whether Jews outside of NY adhere to the rule that eating non-kosher food is fine as long as its in a Chinese restaurant. (NPR joke)

[Bernard_Monsha]

even more OT than before, but is lox known as jewish food outside of new york?

Yes with bagles. Outside of that it is known as Swedish/Danish Lax which the Yiddish word Lox is derived from. The Best in the world is from Scotland which also makes a wonderful creamy oatmeal stouts which goes well with Lox on bagles with cream cheese and capers.

[PILMAN]

Wasn't there some kind of thread about this about a year ago? Anyways i've read the few articles regarding the similarities with the Japanese and the Jews though that doesn't really prove anything. I am Jewish my self though the issue with the tribes of Israel is that there are a "LOT" of groups claiming to be from the lost tribes of Israel. I myself am a Levite but when you have a 50 year old white christain guy part of the christain identity claiming he is a true Israelite to me that's like the people in the US that claim to be cherokee indian to get the benefits yet they don't have an ounce of indian blood in them. While there doesn't appear to be any noticeable Jewish community in Japan there are a few synagogues I believe but there is a difference with Judiasm and Jewish. The topic of the discussion however sounds like it's relating to the lost tribes rather than the Jewish people as it's possible to be a semite or a hebrew and not be Jewish. It's possible to trace this through genetics and Israel is actually doing this with a few people in India to verify if they are indeed one of the lost tribes. I know how I checked my background is a marker DNA test which they found the Kohain gene (tied to the tribe of Levi). This is only passed down from the male Y chromosome. I'm not sure how it will benefit a person finding if their part of the lost tribes though kudos to you if so. Unfortunately with the topic of Israel it immediately boils down to religion and we all know how science and religion get along, not so well funny enough as Israel is largely non religious (60 percent) besides of course the old city and West Jerusalem.

As for our Japanese members that are worried, being tied to the lost tribes of Israel doesn't mean your tied to the Jewish people ;) . It just means your tied with the Hebrews racially though with the thousands of years of interacially mixing you wouldn't notice most semetic features anyways (as for the reason some Jews with a Jewish last name or the genetics would appear completely white). The Jews descended from the Hebrews though this day in age most Jews don't refer to them self as a race but rather the majority being hebrew background and the Jews being a nation and their religion Judiasm.

As for claims it was already mentioned there are several people trying to lay claim that they are the lost tribes. There are of course Christain Identity who they claim the Jews are a "bastard" race and stole the land from the white man. There are the Africans who refer to themselves as the "Hebrew Israelites" and seem to claim that the Jews are nothing more than Russians with a tan who stole the land and sold the Africans into slavery stealing their identity. My favorite is the Arab claim that they are related to the Canaanites who were the original people in the land until the Jews took over and wiped them out. There are a lot of crazy nuts out there and Israel seems to be one of the hottest topics in debates and politics today (not officially).

[VSh]

I think this thread needs some reviving.

One of resources I found interesting is the short article Christianity and its history through Japanese animation: anime (http://ri.essortment.com/animejapanchri_rfdw.htm) by Sabrina Surovec. Just two quotes:
When Westerners watch anime for the first time, they are often struck by what seem to be random uses of Judeo-Christian religious elements.Only one tribe remains to be discovered, and researchers wisely turned their attentions to [...] Japan.

Another resource is the book The Ancient Refugees From Religious Persecution In Japan (http://www.keikyo.com/books/hada/index.html) by Ikuro Teshima. Very interesting book, but you should read it critically. The author was the founder of Japanese new religion Makuya. I like that kind of books - they are usually exciting. Otherwise that new religion was not been born, was it?

[aoishonen7]

Well geneticaly are all cousins, but that article is a bit far-fetched.
There are alot of simliarities between other cultures. Like the Myans and the Egyptians with their culture and knowlege of astronomy. That's just one example I can't think up anymore. My point is that just because they have simlarities dosent mean they are connected. It could be just coencidence that they have some similarities. Since humans love patterns we tend to try to connect ourselves in order to relate to each other and coexist. It's more of a psycological issuse than a search for absolute truth. I think the author was just grabbing in the dark. Of course, I could be wrong.

[Deb]

Current thinking on Native Americans being lost Tribe, according to Mormons.

http://www.irr.org/MIT/Lamanites-DNA-Book-of-Mormon.html

Deb


FARMS is an organization for the research of the Book of Mormon as a historical and scientific record. It stands simply for Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies and was begun by a number of BYU professors most notably Hugh Nibley.

Horses eh?

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=transcripts&id=129
http://farms.byu.edu/display-print.php?table=jbms&id=246
http://farms.byu.edu/other_questions_evidences.php?id=6&table=questions

Since you mention linguistic evidence but not in specifics I guess I'll post about those too. Check out Chiamus which is the most enlightening.

http://farms.byu.edu/display-print.php?table=review&id=303
http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=465

Your claim that there's no scientific evidence supporting the Book of Mormon is unfortunate. Im afraid you've been misinformed.

[kiyomi]

Oh dear lord...not this thread again.

[loplop]

Why don't you all just have a drink and settle down . . . .

http://loplop.us/banned.jpg

[CrossboneGundam]

VSh, this thread did not need to be revived. Your "evidence" is still comedic speculation at best, no different from anything put out by mormons or scientologists or zugzwang.

And something tells me Ken-ohki still doesn't realize that a bunch of Mormons going to a Mormon religious school doing a Mormon funded "research" project to treat Mormon propaganda as though it were unbiased reporting of the truth (as opposed to the unconfirmable claims of a lone cult leader from the 19th century,) is not legitimate scientific evidence. It's laughable to use that idea in the same paragraph as "legitimate scientific evidence."

[Leader Desslock]

I think this thread needs some reviving.
Gods, why?

I found one of your quotes interesting:

Only one tribe remains to be discovered, and researchers wisely turned their attentions to [...] Japan.
What I find interesting about that quote is that it makes a few implicit suggestions. It implies that people looking for 'Lost Tribes' are in some form of agreement about which tribes were lost, how many there were, where they might be located, etc.

Of course, this statement is contradicted by documented history, isn't it? In fact, groups of researchers have chosen different cultures from all over the world and made similar claims: "This is the true Lost Tribe of Israel! Yes, all the other researchers got it wrong, and finally, here is the proof that everyone missed that shows conclusively that People X are without a doubt the descendents of the Lost Tribe."

...sound familiar? It should. It's been going on for hundreds of years, and no amount of evidence against these arguments is going to stop them. Even thought Xenu's volcanoes didn't exist 75 million years ago, there will always be Scientologists. Even though Richard Hoagland is a documented grade-A charlatan and Nancy Lieder's predictions have been refuted by independent observations (and Physics), people will still tune in to Coast To Coast AM and say, "What if?" There's a Creation Evidence (http://www.creationevidence.org/cemframes.html) museum in Texas. And sure enough, someone's always gonna have a Lost Tribe or two kicking around.

There's a difference between real scientific conclusions and 'making up a story that happens to fit the evidence you like'. The latter is how speculative fiction like The DaVinci Code is written. The former... well, let's just say I wish it was taught better in this country.

[VSh]

Remember Commandment #3 (or #2 sometimes).
... why?
There are many reasons: 1) it is interesting; 2) it is on topic here; and 3) I have some personal reasons that aren't interesting to others.

I melted reading your "contradictious" examples. Let's continue your logic a bit. 330 years of futile working did not make "Fermat's Last Theorem" false. The proof was found in 1994. You made me go down to your level of argumentation.

Interesting, you mentioned "The DaVinci Code". Have you read books I recommended you? I see you haven't. You should. I promise highest extreme, it's not for weak people. Then you can understand that level of that evidences are not lower and often higher than historians' convenances.

Are you reading and can understand only things you agree with? It is 1) boring; 2) simply not right. Or you are so sure in your knowledge? Then it is also 3) stupid.

... I wish it was taught better in this country.
Holy true.


EDIT: It looks like that books thread has gone. So here are my recommendations again:

History: Fiction or Science? (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/2913621058/sr=8-1/qid=1155303777/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-8687128-5551951?ie=UTF8) by A.Fomenko

Crimes Against Logic (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0071446435/ref=pd_sim_b_3/104-8687128-5551951?ie=UTF8) by J.Whyte

[Ninja337]

I've actually been studying this for a while. It is entirely possible one of the 10 lost tribes traveled to Japan at some point. It's also very likely that people of some other semetic descent traveled to Japan. It is all just conjecture. There are many conections, such as the Kagome lattice and some liguistic similarities. These theories have mostly been propogated by Japanese Christian movements and stuff. There are true peoples who descend from the 10 lost tribes, such as an African tribe in Western Sahara and some Indians in India. Their culture doesn't show a single hint of Hebrewism, and you wouldn't tell if it weren't for DNA testing, so I don't see why Japanese decendants would eaither.

There is a theory that maybe one of the 10 tribes traveled along the silk road and migrated towards Japan temporarily and formed the Hata Tribe. The Yamato period is shrouded in so much uncertainty and legend, the only records we have of it are some Chinese dudes who didn't even know where Japan was for certain or what year it was. There is also an alternative that they are Turkestani and they were hauled over to work as slaves in China, and excaped to Japan.
good lord almighty!! are you trying to suggest that I could be...JEWISH???????????

************THUD********************

It was hard enough being a Shinto..then an Alientologist...but..being Jewish?? I have nothing against Jews..okay?? dont get me wrong folks!! (please, no flames and no hate mail for me..I truly love Jews)..but..if I'm a desendant of Israel....oh heck..but..but..I LOVE christmas!!!!!!!

No... Lost Tribes, as in they never went on to form the Jewish people after they were deported. Have you ever heard of Menaseh or Zebulun? That's what they mean by lost. Jews of today are tribes Benjamin, Judah, and Levi.