Jews: .18% of world population (that’s POINT 18%)
Blacks: 8% of world population
Hindus: 15% of world population
Muslims: 29% of world population
Christians: 32% of world population
Asians: 60% of world population
Of all these groupings, none of them (that I can think of) has a word to classify anyone who is NOT that class. There is no word in the English language that means “anyone who is not black”; “anyone who is not Christian”; et cetera.
Yet, the smallest, most minuscule grouping, Jews, yields a word that is universally accepted to mean “anyone who is not a Jew.” Even though that grouping includes 99.82% of the world and includes the most racially, ethnically, and religiously diverse group there is. The one and only thing everyone in the group has in common, is that he or she is not a Jew.
Does this make any sense to you??
More.
Personally, I don’t use the word Gentile in my common parlance. I feel that perhaps it would be perceived as somehow exclusionist or elitist and instead employ the more neutral term, “non-Jew.” Most Jews that I know also prefer the softer term.
But.
Most non-Jews that I know, when telling me that they are not Jewish, seem to be more likely to use the term “Gentile” than Jews.
Hmm.
The term “Gentile” seems to have originally derived from the Hebrew “goy.” The Hebrew word “goy” means “nation,” and is used many times throughout Torah scripture, never derogatorily. Sometimes it refers to the Jewish nation and sometimes it refers to the other nations, usually in the context of exhorting the Jewish people to resist the pulls of assimilation and intermarriage and to remain true to its heritage.
Somehow, the term evolved into its common usage, ostensibly by those very non-Jews. So why did everyone buy into this term? Do non-Jews feel that “everyone who is not Jewish” somehow shares a common bond? More than “everyone who is not black”? More than “everyone who is not Christian”?
Still scratching my head.
Thoughts?
To Mormons, we (and all members of other religions) are gentiles. To Japanese all non-Japanese are gaijin. The name of at least one tribe of American Indians translates as The Real People. So I'm not quite sure what you are getting at.
Also, in the circles in which I run, Gentile is a polite locution. Goy is the term which makes me wince when I hear a fellow Jew use it. YMDV (Your mileage does vary, a joke on the more standard YMMV).
Hi Larry,
Re: Mormons, here's this bit from wikipedia –
"Members of the LDS church regard themselves as regathered Israelites, and so sometimes use the word Gentile to refer to all non-members… In such usage Jews may be colloquially referred to as "Gentiles" because they are not members of the LDS Church. However, the traditional meaning is also to be found in the introduction to the Book of Mormon, in the statement that it is written to both "Jew" (literal descendants of the House of Israel) and "Gentile" (those not descended from the House of Israel or those of the tribe of Ephraim scattered among the "Gentiles" throughout the earth). Needham writes that Mormons have "outgrown the term." …In order to avoid confrontation and pejorative connotations, Latter-day Saints in the 21st century avoid using the word Gentile in everyday matters, preferring "non-member". Gentile is usually reserved for discussions of scriptural passages."
This is interesting to me because it says that the only reasons Mormons used the term "Gentile" in the first place is because somehow they considered themselves to be Jews (this I did not know).
Re: the Japanese, the term seems awfully obscure and used only by the Japanese (correct me if I'm wrong). I'd never introduce myself to a Japanese person as a gaijin, which is my point – non-Jews identify themselves as gentiles with that widely accepted term, as opposed to it being an "inside term" to refer to outsiders.
Re: The Real People, that describes the insiders, not the outsiders.
Re: Goy and Gentiles… yeah. I think the nice part is that both of us are trying to avoid pejorative terms, and that's important.
As far as what I'm getting at – nothing you'd approve of! I'll leave it at that for now, and see how the discussion ensues. My goal was to raise the question, and see what kinds of conclusions people arrive at. I don't like telling people what to think, and sometimes I don't even like telling them what I think, but I do like raising questions and seeing what everyone else thinks.
Gaijin isn't at all obscure- you hear it daily if you're a foreigner in Japan, and almost anyone who has lived there or studied anything even peripherally related to Japan knows exactly what it means. It has similarly contentious connotations to goy, actually, for not dissimilar reasons. gaijin (外人), which literally translates to "outside person" is short for gaikokujin (外国人), with a literal meaning of "outside country person" but is translated as "foreigner." If you refer to yourself (or anyone else) as a foreigner, that's the word you use. Some people, both Japanese and foreign, find the word gaijin at best slightly xenophobic, at worst outright perjorative. I worked with Japanese people who consciously avoided using it, particularly in front of our students. Others don't mind it one way or the other. I've heard it used in ways not intended to be offensive at all, and it's not at all uncommon for foreigners to self-identify as gaijin (reference Gaijin Smash, a well-known blog by an American teaching in Japan- excellent, BTW) both while they're in Japan and after they leave when referencing their time there.
I lived in Japan for two years, and gaijin was the first word I thought of when reading your post. The second was the Chinese equivalent, usually laowai (老外), short for lao waiguoren, or "old foreigner." The Cantonese equivalent of laowai is gwailo. These words are used in ways virtually identical to gaijin's use in Japanese; they can be used affectionately, neutrally or in highly perjorative fashion. Waiguoren has the same characters as gaikokujin (外国人), just uses the Mandarin pronunciation and carries both the same literal translation ("outside country person") and meaning- if you refer to yourself as a "foreigner," that is the word you would use. Again, it's not at all uncommon to hear foreigners referring to themselves as laowai. I don't think I've ever heard anyone specifically describe another Asian person (say, Japanese or Korean) as laowai, but I've never really listened for it. I'll have to ask some of my Chinese coworkers about it tomorrow.
Anyway, lengthy comment, but as someone who has lived in Asia for a total of three and a half years now, I think Larry's comparison of gaijin (and its Chinese corollary) is very apt. A lot of Asian countries have comparable words, incidentally; in Thailand, it's farang. Somewhat interestingly, I've read numerous articles about both Chinese and Korean fascination with Jews, often referencing a shared emphasis on education and study and strong family and community relationships. And there's your East Asian studies/linguistics lesson for the day!
Wow. That is really illuminating.
When this first came up I wrote to a non-Japanese friend of mine who had spent 2 years working in Japan. His comment was "Always thought of myself as Gaijin, because it was an important, all pervading fact of life & social interaction. It usually went without saying, but once in a while got acknowledged explicitly."
That would be analogous to a non-Jew in Israel using the term Gentile. But I'm talking about non-Jews using it in the US. It would be like me calling myself a Gaijin in the US. Odd, no? Considering I've never been to Japan?
I wonder if Christians in Israel consider themselves Gentiles.
Neither "Gentile" nor "Goy" is inherently derogatory. At some point after the Biblical Era, the meaning of the word morphed, from meaning (only) Nation, to meaning "a person who is a member of a non-Jewish nation."
I think the problem people have with the word "Goy" is interestingly related to its sound: A single-syllable "punch" that offends by its very aural effect. It is very similar to the way people have found the word "Jew", or "Zhid" offensive because of its single-syllable POW! effect. But I can respect the idea that something that is not inherently offensive has become perceived as such, albeit for no "good" reason. So I try to avoid the word when I can, and use the mouthier terms in both English and Hebrew when speaking with people.
Hm. Never thought of it that way. I think any group that tends to get treated pejoratively, their name will change based on what's considered pejorative or non-pejorative at the time. Over time the non-pejorative term will take on a negative slant (since it's based on how they're viewed, not on what they're called) and need to be changed again.
Wow I agree with this! I have actually never really heard a nom-Jewish person refer to himself as a Gentile (that I can recall). I also don't ever use the term. However, I have heard goy coming from fellow Jews, and I can't stand it. I remember feeling like I'd been punched in the stomach when I was young and a group of us were talking about names – a guy told me my middle name (Evelyn) was "such a goy name." The way he said it sounded like a swear word.
Ruchi: Absolutely. It's happening with all the PC terms adopted to replace non-PC terms.
RD: I'm not sure the single syllable is what makes it pejorative. I've never heard "Swede" or "Finn" used pejoratively, for instance, probably because I've never heard of anyone who hated all Swedes or Finns. Also, I can think of several nasty racial/ethnic terms with two syllables (which I'd rather not write). So while I agree that widespread pejorative terms tend to be short, I don't think the shortness is what makes them pejorative.
I'm with Becca on all counts. I've never heard a non-Jew call her-/him-self a Gentile. And when I used to try and copy my mother and use that term in discussions (rare event), the non-Jews would invariably ask me, "What's a Gentile?"
And I don't like the use of the word 'goy', because whatever its derivation, it has only ever sounded derogatory in the contexts I've heard it.
I think the Roma also have a term used for outsiders, although I don't know what it is. And don't Spanish speakers have some sort of (pejorative) term for non-Spanish speakers, or at least non-hispanics? I'm going to hop on the bandwagon with the folks arguing that we're not the only ones to have a one-word "not-us" label.
Maybe, but I don't know it. Neither do you. And neither of us would introduce ourselves that way. But the term Gentile is NOT a word that the Jews invented. It's an English word.
Hi. I thought this post was interesting and since I'm not Jewish I thought I might take a stab at answering. My first guess was non-Jews would use the word Gentile as a way of trying to say that they know something about Judaism and they are "down with it". Maybe they are even trying to show off a little? I know this is something that happens to people from non-Western cultures so I thought maybe it is possible in regards to Judaism. I think this might be projection, though, since I have in the past tried to show off knowledge of other cultures.
Another possibility is from Christian scripture. I wasn't really raised Christian and I'm not terribly familiar with Christian scripture. I do know, however, that the term Gentile is used in discussing Jews and Gentiles, discussing what would be the place of Gentiles. Perhaps the word Gentile is actually coming from a non-Jewish origin? So, the word Gentile is Christians distinguishing themselves from Jews, rather than Jews distinguishing themselves from non-Jews. This seems quite plausible to me, but I don't have the academic background to support or deny this. For what it's worth, dictionary.com (yeah, I know, not the most reliable resource) says a gentile is "1. a person who is not a Jew, 2. a Christian, as contrasted with a Jew."(The fourth definition is "a pagan, a heathen" though.)
Sidenote: The term gaijin in Japanese means "foreigner" but is generally used to refer specifically to white Westerners. It does not necessarily serve as a term synonymous with "non-Japanese."
Abby, thanks for your valuable perspective. Do you think it's accurate to say that most American non-Jews recognize the term Gentile as referring to someone who isn't Jewish?
Like I said above, I've NEVER encountered an American non-Jew who even knew what it meant. Your reference below to Christian discussion groups is telling–I probably don't encounter many Christians who are deeply involved in their Christianity and in Christianity's relationship to Judaism and Israel (e.g. Evangelicals). But for Christians who care deeply about the origins of Christianity and its relation to Judaism, they might care enough to use the 'right word' or a word that is perceived as what Jews use in order to refer to themselves.
Any devout Christians on this thread who could say whether that's accurate?
The state of being "not Jewish" IS more important than the state of being "not black" or "not Christian", because it's a matter of soul identity – a person's deepest self.
There are two huge, general modes of relating to and serving G-d in this world: that of the Jewish soul, with its 613 mitzvas, charged with fusing the G-dly and the mundane; and that of the non-Jewish/gentile/Noahide soul, with its 7 mitzvas (that actually break down into many more mitzvas!), charged with "yishuv olam", making the world a settled and beautiful place for the Jewish people to draw G-dliness down into. Both are crucial to G-d's Ultimate Purpose for Creation.
Obviously within these two broad categories of service, there are as many individual paths as there are individual people. But the transcendent, overarching identity is whether their soul is part of the "Jewish" mission or the "non-Jewish" mission for the world. So I think that's why the category of "gentile" is so broad, and people of all cultures so readily identify that way – unconsciously, they sense its importance to their life's mission.
Most non-Jews that I know, when telling me that they are not Jewish, seem to be more likely to use the term "Gentile" than Jews.
This sentence here is your answer. When they speak to YOU, they differentiate themselves from YOU so as to clarify their status TO YOU from your perspective. They obviously don't use the term among themselves. Christians and Muslims don't say to themselves, "Hey that guy is a gentile just like us! Let's invite him to our gentile church for services."
This is identical to me explaining that I am an American to a group of Europeans or a mom to a group of non-moms or whatever. We all differentiate ourselves when the topic comes up for clarity's sake.
As for why Jews developed the word "gentile" to refer to everyone, without distinction as to religion and nationality, that's a function of history and halacha. Historically, Jews were persecuted by many nations and they differentiated all of them with one pejorative term. Halachically, many rules forbid various points of contact with gentiles (eating bread, drinking wine, giving gifts, etc.), so as to avoid intermarriage, without regard for the type of gentile.
Your point here seems to be that *even* the goyim understand that there is something innately special about Jews. But since I don't think there is anything special about Jews and find that approach to be a reflection of nationalism or in-group preference, I don't agree with your premise. – MP
M, "American" and "mom" describe what you are, not what you aren't.
You say that Jews developed the term Gentile, but they didn't. Christians did. (Although the gentiles inviting each other to service gave me a good giggle.)
I agree with anonymous above that there is some selection bias occurring. I am visibly Jewish, since I wear a kippah, but it is still rare for a non-Jew to identify themselves to me as a gentile. When they do it is usually in the context of discussion about religion. I suggest that as a professional kiruv worker you get into religious discussions with non-Jews more frequently than most, so you hear the term more often.
It is still an interesting question why they call themselves a 'Gentile' rather than Christian, , Buddhist, etc.I wonder if the answer is that the majority of Americans today are only loosely affiliated with a religion. Being Catholic, Lutheran, Hindu, etc. is not a big part of their self definition. When you talk to clergy of other religions, do they call themselves Gentiles, or do they refer to their specific religion?
MP: "Your point here seems to be that *even* the goyim understand that there is something innately special about Jews."
This is illuminating, because actually I had trouble following what Ruchi was getting at. So is MP right, is that the point of the post? Or one of them?
The question of whether there is something special about the Jews is one we have talked about a lot (is it by soul or by Torah adherence, for instance). This angle strikes me as not the strongest way to return to that discussion-worthy question. First because I also have trouble believing that no other group in the ENTIRE world has a word for 'anyone not in this group' (every kids' 'secret club' I ever belonged to INVENTED a word for non-members); and second because, I think, the word 'gentile' must come from Latin 'gens', 'people', which is a language that came way after Judaism originated; and third even if everyone else (in the Christian west?) did use the term that wouldn't mean to me anything metaphysical.
But maybe I'm misunderstanding the point here.
The point of the post was to raise what is to me a perplexing question, one to which I could not identify a parallel.
My suspicion is along the lines of what MP said, but I don't know for certain (I also might've phrased it a tad more tactfully). I thought the discussion here could help clarify.
But, Sbw, my point is just that: this is an *outsider's* word for the outsiders. Insider words for outsiders are around, though I still want to know what it is for non-Christians, non-blacks, etc. You are exactly right that it's Latin in origin; in my opinion that's what's so weird about it.
Larry, it's a good question you ask. But even that the word exists is telling.
Ok I get it.. You were suggesting that "Gentile" is "their" word for non-Jew. Pretty much my mother and grandmother were the only people I ever heard use the word. So I thought it was a Jewish word for non-Jews.
Would you accept a secular-academic argument that disagreed with your idea that Christians invented the word to refer to non-Jews? I haven't done any research myself but wonder how you would view evidence against your idea about the word's history.
Sure. This whole discussion is mostly a question, with a fuzzy hypothesis thrown in for good measure – the hypothesis being a support for something I already believe: that there is just something different about a Jew.
While it would be fun to be right, I care more about the truth.
Ruchi, I think the reason for the existence of the term "Gentile" among non-Jews is that Western society is strongly influenced by the Bible, which focuses on the Jews (or Hebrews or Israelites).
Yes. Which invites even more questions.
Such as?
Such as why Christianity would bother basing itself on Judaism. Such as how the Jews have the influence they do, in light of our historically tiny numbers.
Christianity bothered basing itself on Judaism because it started out as a Jewish sect, just like the Sadducees, Boetheisans, and Essenes. About a century or so after its founding the then-leaders made the decision to drop much of halacha in order to improve its outreach to Gentiles.
According to Wikipedia (for what that is worth) in Roman times the word meant 'not a roman citizen'. It was used in Latin translations of the Tanach as a translation of the word 'goy' in the particular context of meaning someone non-Jewish. Lastly, Wikipedia notes that in modern times from the 17th century onward Gentile was most commonly used to refer to non-Jews. This was in the context of European Christian societies with a Jewish minority. For this reason Gentile commonly meant persons brought up in the Christian faith, as opposed to the adherents of Judaism, and was not typically used to refer to non-Jews in non-Western cultures.
Now here's exactly my question: why would Christians bother with a word that meant "we're not Jews"?? If indeed it didn't even refer to other "non-Jews" at that point in time, wouldn't it have served them better to create a word for a non-Christian? After all, they already had a word for Christians: Christians. Why was "as opposed to Jews" necessary? Was it an anti-semitic thing? It doesn't seem so.
Was the word originally meant as a compliment?
Does anyone have a copy of the Oxford English Dictionary? According to Merriam-Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gentile), the first known use of the word in English was in the 14th century, but unfortunately, it doesn't give the quote or context. The OED probably does. The King James translation, which uses the word, was done between 1604 and 1611, i.e., long after the 14th century, but it's possible that the 14th-century use was an earlier Bible translation. If so, the answer to why Christians would bother with a word that meant "we're not Jews" is that they were translating the Jewish Bible (and the Christian Bible, which also has to do with Jews and non-Jews).
I've got OED online. I cut and paste below, and add some inexpert attempts to comment in brackets. I think the point is still that the term 'Gentile' was taken over from the apostle Paul's use of it to mean 'non-Jew' in documents and in a context where Jews WERE the point of reference [development of Christianity among a group of Jews in 1st-century], and non-Jews were a mixed bunch, and it came to mean "Christian".
c1475 (1400) Apol. Lollard Doctr. (1842) 6 Constreyning þe gentil to be com Jewes in obseruaunce.
[I believe this would translate into mod. English as "constraining the gentile to be like Jews in observance". See the whole document, which is an English Reformation text against the church and church authority: http://lollardsociety.org/pdfs/Todd_ApologyforLollardDoctrines.pdf. I think this is actually a quote from or reference to Paul talking about whether you need to observe Jewish law to be a good Christian, so it does refer directly to Paul's distinction between Gentiles and Jews. But Paul, I believe, identified as a Jew–this is probably a controversial issue–so Gentile means "everyone else"]
1686 J. Scott Christian Life (1747) III. 51 A current Doctrine among the ancient Writers, both Gentile and Jewish.
[So following the distinction Gentile/Jewish that was already made by early Christians, but translated as Kelly says from ethnos in Greek translated as gentiles in Latin.]
1774 J. Bryant New Syst. II. 118 There had been a true notion of the Deity transmitted by Zoroaster..when the rest of the gentile world was in darkness.
[Here I think Gentile means 'pagan', not sure]
1782 J. Priestley Hist. Corrupt. Christianity I. i. 6 The richer and more learned gentile christians.
[See http://archive.org/stream/historyofcorrupt02prieiala#page/n5/mode/2up for whole document. Need a historian here–he distinguishes between 'Jewish Christians' and 'Gentile Christians', I guess that's about who accepted Jesus as Messiah, some of them were Jews and some were non-Jews]
That's a lot of philology, but now I want to figure out how it answers Ruchi's questions and the idea lurking in the original post that the very WORD 'Gentile' is a way that Christians acknowledge the specialness of Jews. I think Larry and Kelly already said all this basically.
"Now here's exactly my question: why would Christians bother with a word that meant "we're not Jews"?? If indeed it didn't even refer to other "non-Jews" at that point in time, wouldn't it have served them better to create a word for a non-Christian? After all, they already had a word for Christians: Christians. Why was "as opposed to Jews" necessary? Was it an anti-semitic thing? It doesn't seem so."
The very earliest Christians WERE in their own eyes Jews. They did not consider themselves 'Christians', because that identity had not yet developed. So 'Gentiles' as used among early Christians refers to non-Jews from a perspective that considered itself Jewish. So in that context it means 'those other people who are not us', which is not such an unusual kind of designation. And it probably meant 'Greeks, pagans, all those others who live here but are not Jewish like us'.
So that means that those early Christians who used the word 'Gentile' did NOT already have the word 'Christian' to describe themselves. They described themselves as Jews. And so 'Gentile' is not anti-Semitic, it's just "those others".
But then over time–and this is to me much more obscure–the designation 'Gentile' was taken over by self-identified Christians to refer to themselves. So as Larry points out, 17th-century Europe takes over the designation but really means 'Christians'–because 17th-century Europe didn't have much in the way of Muslims, Hindus, and so forth. And as Kelly says, this is probably out of a deep knowledge of Paul's distinction between Jews and others. So that would not reflect so much a sense of Jews' centrality as an adherence to Paul's early Christian usage of the term.
Interesting. "An Apology for Lollard Doctrines" is believed to have been written by John Wycliffe, a Bible translator who died in 1384. Do you know if this is a reprint? What are the 1400 and 1475?
The OED entry is quoted at http://dict.leo.org/forum/viewGeneraldiscussion.php?idThread=1152928 and has an earlier citation farther down: "c1380 Wyclif Sel. Wks. III. 345 He [Petre] wolde not dele wiþ Gentiles for tendirnnesse of þe Jewis." ("Sel. Wks." is "Selected Works.")
So the earliest known English uses of the word seem to be Wycliffe referring to Gentiles as distinct from Jews in a New Testament context.
Interestingly, the OED also has citations from 1555-1727 in which "gentile" means a Hindu, as distinguished from a Muslim.
SBW: Excellent summary
DG, I don't know what the dates are. Maybe they are publication dates–because the printing press wasn't created until some decades after Wycliffe died in 1384…?
Also for clarification, Paul and early Christians (who identified themselves as Jews) obviously did not say "Gentiles" because he/they didn't speak Latin (or English). But he used the Greek term that got translated as "Gentiles", which Kelly already explained.
I've been asking around a little today. My closest non-Jewish (and non-U.S.) interlocutor said, when I asked him what 'Gentile' means: "That's what American Jews call non-Jews." And I asked why they called them that, and after I went through the Goyim-Ethnos-Gentiles etymology he agreed with my guess that it must be because PAUL called non-Jews 'Gentiles' (in Greek, which got translated via Latin through the English Reformers into our modern term) and so the Jews must be trying to be polite and use the CHRISTIAN word for non-Jews [although in fact Paul was using it as a 'Jewish' word for non-Jews, since he identified as a Jew].
I think my mother would corroborate that, and say that Jews call non-Jews Gentiles to be polite and use a positive term that comes from Christianity, instead of 'non-Jew', which sounds too much like an exclusionary term from a solely Jewish perspective [and ironically Paul would have meant it from a Jewish perspective].
Now, what strikes me as funny about this, if it's true, is that Jews would seem to use the term to be polite when referring to Christians, because they think it is a *Christian* term for non-Jews (which it is, insofar as Paul's teachings are a foundation of Christianity). But Christians might use the term to be polite when describing themselves to Jews because they think it is the *Jewish* term for Christians (which it is, insofar as when Paul used it he was doing so as a Jew to name non-Jews).
Do I have that right?? If yes, I have to say I think it's a beautiful story.
Wow… so much great info here! Thanks, everyone. Please see my answer to Kelly below as it touches on many of the things you mentioned. Specifically, "But then over time–and this is to me much more obscure–the designation 'Gentile' was taken over by self-identified Christians to refer to themselves." – this change is where it gets interesting in my opinion. I would think the word would fall into disuse after that point. Why would the Christians need to retain it?
And as a day-school educated Jew, I never was under the impression that the word Gentile was a Jewish original. I figured it was a King James translation of "goy" – and as many of the King James words were not translated exactly in accordance with the Hebrew intent, this was probably one of those examples.
I agree that the shifts in usage in early-modern Europe are the interesting, and apparently less documented, issue.
But I don't think it is as consistent as you suggest. Even within the history of self-identified Christianity, as Kelly alludes to, the usage of 'Gentile' has several, seemingly contradictory, usages. Thomas Aquinas (major 13th-century Catholic theologian) wrote an import tract "contra Gentiles", i.e. "against the Gentiles", which meant at that time against the Jews and Muslims, apparently it was for missionaries trying to convert Jews and Muslims and Christian heretics. So there "Gentiles" are identified by a Christian theologian as non-Christians, including Jews.
So I think "Gentiles" were also those understood by the Christians as "non-believers". And yet it came also to mean (how?? will work on this) 'Christians'!
Should Be Working:
Great summary, there. To shed a little more light on this comment in particular:
"So that means that those early Christians who used the word 'Gentile' did NOT already have the word 'Christian' to describe themselves. They described themselves as Jews. And so 'Gentile' is not anti-Semitic, it's just "those others"."
The earliest Christians were just called "followers of the Way" (see Acts 9:1-2 NRS Meanwhile Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any who belonged to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.)
and were first called Christians at Antioch:
Acts 11:25-26 25 Then Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, 26 and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. So it was that for an entire year they met with the church and taught a great many people, and it was in Antioch that the disciples were first called "Christians."
If I'm remembering correctly, the term "Christian" was first a derogatory term.
If I'm remembering correctly, the term "Christian" was first a derogatory term.
As was 'Orthodox'.
Larry, really? If so, that is an interesting example of a derogatory word becoming more simply descriptive. I don't know too many of those.
There are some great examples of derogatory words getting repurposed by the groups so named, who then take up that derogatory term in a rebellious-playful way and remake it into a positive identity. I'm thinking of terms in the gay rights movement mainly–like the group 'Queer Nation'.
But if "Orthodox" started out derogatory and then became simply descriptive (because I don't see Orthodox people doing a playful-rebellious repurposing of the term, just a sincere, serious embrace of it, even with some reservations, as Ruchi has indicated she has), that would be the ONLY example I can think of where a derogatory label gets 'neutralized' without parody.
The actual term "Orthodox" is derived from Christian theology and was, at first, a term of reproach hurled against the traditionalists by the early Reformers at the beginning of the nineteenth century, to imply that those who failed to respond to the modernist challenge were hidebound. Eventually, however, the term was used by the traditionalists themselves as a convenient shorthand for the attitude of complete loyalty to the Jewish past, although some traditionalists prefer the term "Torah-true" to describe their religious position. In any event, Orthodoxy came to mean for Jews faithfulness to the practices of Judaism, to the halakhah (Jewish law) in its traditional formulation.
source
So now I better understand the hostility Ruchi has referred to from Reform types toward Orthodox types, or Reform movement toward O Judaism. Historically apparently there was such hostility from Reform toward Orthodoxy. In my Reform-ish world I perceive no hostility, maybe curiosity, alienation, and some eye-rolling though. All this is a far cry from the Israeli context in an case.
Kelly, that is fascinating. I did not know that. It still sounds like the term Christian started out early, and why would it be a derogatory term? In your reference it doesn't seem to be the slightest bit derogatory. Which group of people used it that way?
Larry, good catch. I kinda thought the Orthos just sort of gave in and reconciled themselves to the name, especially when in need of a way to distinguish their philosophies.
SBW, the hostility went all three ways (cross-denominationally). Now, there's much more ignorance on the part of your average Reform lay person as to what the movement stands for. I think if you polled your average Reform person (meaning someone who is a member of a Reform congregation), and asked him/her "what does the Reform movement believe?" you would get a hugely wide variety of answers. Certainly the idealism of those early days has calmed down significantly.
But I digress.
This is timely. In this article (http://www.newgeography.com/content/003039-utah-up-chicago-down-why-mitt-romney-should-embrace-his-mormonism) it calls a non-Mormon a "gentile", referring to the time period of the 1840s (it does use the quotation marks, too, so I am assuming it is how the person was referred to at that time).
As for the term Christian, yes, it was obviously an early term, as the book of Acts was probably written sometime in the 60s to 80s (the date is disputed). From the notes in my Oxford Annotated Bible: "Christians, a Latin word meaning 'partisans of Christ,' perhaps at first a term of reproach." From an Acts commentary by William Willimon: the new congregation at Antioch was composed of gentiles who shortly before were considered questionable subjects for the gospel(p. 108). From a commentary on Acts by C.K. Barrett: "It is a not unreasonable suggestion that it reflects a situation in which Christians were becoming numerous and were clearly distinguished from Jews."
I am disappointed that the 2 commentaries I have don't explain anything about it being derogatory; it is only that short note in my Bible's annotations that allude to it. BUT, this is what I am getting from it:
At first, Jesus' follwers were Jews. Later after his death and resurrection, Paul became a missionary to the Gentiles (non-Jews) to invite them into the fold. This particular group at Antioch was probably people who were, shall we say, "lowlifes" and maybe people thought they weren't worth anyone's (even God's) time of day. Someone maybe called them "Christians" in a disdainful tone because of that and it stuck. Eventually, anyone who was a part of this new, fast-growing sect became known as a Christian, but after a time, the non-Jewish/Gentile segment became larger than the Jewish segment.
Very informative. Thanks! Sbw, I guess then Christian is another example of derogatory term gone neutral.
Maybe Gentile too?
I would guess that the only non-Jews referring to themselves as gentile are Christians or those people raised in Western Christian society.
The term goy may have an innocuous meaning in the Torah, but I have only heard it used negatively from other Jews of both Orthodox and not. I don't think most Christians if they heard it used by a Jew would like the context. I have rarely and never regularly heard a Christian refer to themselves as a gentile.
I think the discussion may be a bit academic, because these are terms we generally use just around other Jews.
True. I could have made the point sharper by focusing on groups in America and on how insiders and outsiders are termed.
For example, why isn't there an English word to describe non-Christians? 75% of Americans identify as Christian. Don't you think a term would have developed?
Also, on religious Christian discussion boards, the term Gentile is alive and well.
Do you think a Muslim would refer to themselves as a Gentile? A Hindu? A Buddhist? Doesn't 'Gentile' in modern American context really mean "Christian?"
That's an interesting question. I think it would be used predominantly by Christians, but I think Christian would intend for it to refer equally to Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists. We really need some Christians on this thread to help us out because I'm just giving it my best guess.
Interestingly, according to the New Advent Catholic encyclopedia, "Since the spread of Christianity, the word Gentiles designates, in theological parlance, those who are neither Jews nor Christians." I've never seen it used that way, though.
Me neither. What is New Advent Catholic?
Now I see it's actually entitled the "Catholic Encyclopedia". It's an encyclopedia of Catholicism on the New Advent website.
I hate the term "goy". It matters little where it came from, but how it is used predominately. And I rarely hear it used in any way other than to make light of/lesser-than people who are not Jewish. I cringe when I hear the term and I find myself VERY angry when I hear someone says "goyishe"–as in, "you're acting so goyishe". Ugh.
To me it's juvenile and it makes Jews look ignorant and self-righteous–two things a Jew should never want to appear to be! Why not just refer to people as people? If you need to distinguish their religious/cultural affiliation, then do so without condescending remarks or name calling. It's easy, watch: "Judi is my friend, but she is not Jewish so she doesn't observe Shabbat like I do."
Anonymous, I agree with you that bigotry is entirely uncalled for. Truly spiritual people do not disparage others. We are all created in God's image.
Hi there! This is my first time visiting this blog; Larry Lennhoff directed me towards this post.
I have to say, that, as a Christian, I rarely hear anyone use the term Gentile; in my experience, many Christians do not know what it means. In Christian scripture, depending on the translation, the word translated as Gentile will also be translated as "pagan" or "Greek" or "nations". (please note I don't actually read Hebrew OR Greek (yet–someday I hope to!); I have a computer program called BibleWorks that I use for these kinds of word searches/studies).
Here are some examples. The Greek word in all of these examples appears to be "ethnos" (or a form of it).
Matthew 12:18 (which quotes Isaiah 42:1, where the word appears to be goyim; correct me if I am wrong, please).
NRS "Here is my servant, whom I have chosen, my beloved, with whom my soul is well pleased. I will put my Spirit upon him, and he will proclaim justice to the Gentiles.
NIV "Here is my servant whom I have chosen, the one I love, in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will proclaim justice to the nations.
NRS Acts 16:1 Paul went on also to Derbe and to Lystra, where there was a disciple named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer; but his father was a Greek.
NIV Acts 16:1 He came to Derbe and then to Lystra, where a disciple named Timothy lived, whose mother was a Jewess and a believer, but whose father was a Greek.
NRS 1 Corinthians 12:2 You know that when you were pagans, you were enticed and led astray to idols that could not speak.
NIV 1 Corinthians 12:2 You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols.
I *think* that originally it probably always meant non-Jew (since the first Christians were a Jewish sect), however, when modern Christians read the text and they don't understand the Jewish context, they will probably assume that Gentile/pagan/Greek will refer to a non-Christian. Any Christian who actually knows what it means is a step ahead, and if said Christian refers to him/herself as a Gentile, as is the example in this original post, I would assume that he/she is doing it in order to try to be respectful/understanding that there is a distinction in Judaism.
Does that all make sense? I hope so!
Thanks, Kelly, for visiting and adding your information. As a Jewish educator, it's hard for me to distance myself and see the term from a more bird's-eye view. I still do feel that there a missing link: when Christians morphed from a Jewish sect to a distinctly non-Jewish religion, and the term changed, although it did always mean "non-Jew" – what changed was whether that was an "insider" term or an "outsider" term. Yes?
Thanks for the welcome! I think I understand what you are asking/saying: that the term "Gentile" changed in meaning from an outsider term to an insider term, but since I have never come across other Christians who use the term, to me, it still seems to be an "outsider" term (probably b/c I am going by original meaning).
There's definitely something "off" about the whole thing, though, I'll give you that!
Yes… what do you mean by something "off"?
By something "off" I mean there is something odd about the whole idea of a Christian deliberately referring to oneself as a Gentile as well as all the confusion that seems to come along with trying to figure out the origin, history, and contemporary use of the word.
Don't forget about the shicksha pardon the spelling. We have a few in my Jewish family who married in. Somtimes they would call themselves that in jest and that was fine till I heard the definition. It's not at all a funny term.
Yes, that is inherently offensive and despicable, whereas "goy" is only offensive if used pejoratively.
"Shiksa" is an awful word (as is the corresponding "sheygetz"), and I don't like people using it in my presence, in jest or otherwise. The relative offensiveness and connotation of the word "goy" can be debated, but "shiksa" is unquestionably derogatory. I've told friends who used it self-referentially, joking around, what it means and why they probably shouldn't throw that word around.
I could not agree more.
When my oldest was a baby, she had a little button nose and was very blonde. I took her to the bank once in the US (we were living in Israel at the time) and the teller said, "Oh what a beautiful child! She looks just like a shiksa!"
I was so startled I didn't even know which emotion to focus on first. Horror? Embarrassment? Offense?
Unbelievable story!! Was this some kind of Orthodox bank where the teller THINKS everyone is ok with that kind of language (or even knows what it means)??
Does it happen that you have to tell other O people that you are not OK with things they say, because they assume "we all talk this way"?
[My babies were blond/blue and I'm definitely not. When I took them to the park, people often asked me how I liked being a nanny. Or worse, how much I earned for it.]
Hmph. I won't take offense at that, only cuz I like you.
Not only wasn't it an Orthodox bank (is there even such a thing?), it wasn't even Jewish! And I imagine the teller was Jewish, but I wouldn't have known by looking.
Unfortunately, derogatory language is too common in *all* circles. I waffle between the desire to tell people to stop, and the unwillingness to act like a know-it-all.
A propos the latest thread, I am not sure what was the offensive part, but I want to try to identify it and apologize for it more precisely. I'm a bit mortified that I offended you. Let me explain and then you can tell me if I am identifying the offensive part correctly.
I think you think I'm saying that O Jews all talk this way. I actually have no idea because I don't know any to talk to in any case. There is a lot of this language on the OJ-web, but that doesn't mean much for how people really talk in their normal lives.
But I figured that maybe among SOME O people, that language is ok and standard, for instance when speaking to other O people. I have heard Reform people use the term "goy" derogatorily, and worse, thinking that "we can say that among ourselves". I have acquaintances that use language I would not want to use when referring to people with different political views because "among us it's ok to say that". So it seems normal to me that "one's own" would sometimes use words that you or I would object to. Not because they are O, but because all kinds of people use derogatory words and they use them most freely when they are around people they think are most like them in their views.
So what I did assume was this: I assumed the story referred to a bank in your (presumably) Orthodox neighborhood, and staffed by Orthos who as fellow locals knew you, or at least saw you around enough to even KNOW you are Jewish? [I guess I imagine there is a sort of Orthodox economy out there, you have your stores, your restaurants, your hairdressers–why not bank branches?) And you have written about dressing to look (while modest) moderately stylish and wearing a wig that looks pretty natural, so how would anyone even KNOW you are Jewish, unless they knew you in your context?? Otherwise why the "in-group" (and totally not-ok with much of that in-group) derogatory language? So I guess I figured it was an event within your O world, I don't think of you much out there in the non-O world, except in the outreach capacity–not in the 'customer' capacity!
Am I right that you think I was assuming that O Jews use this language all the time? I want to let you know that I wasn't thinking that.
But if that wasn't the offense, can you please help me understand what was the offense?
I understand. Youre right, how could you have known the intricacies of the encounter if I didn't share them?? In my actual real life friends, we do NOT use the word shiksa. While admittedly some do, I prefer to hang with a more refined subset of people. But the real truth is that I did NOT take offense, as I said, because I know your assumption just stemmed from inexperience, and that you're not under the impression that all Orthodox Jews are a bunch of foul-mouthed bigots.
Of course, brash language on the web is much louder than refined language.
I'm relieved but still offer my regrets to you and others who may have understood me to be suggesting that O Jews all use derogatory language.
OK. This is exactly what I'm talking about.
A friend of mine posted an article on Facebook about how the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a statement today in favor of circumcision. A friend of hers commented thus:
"I'm never sure if the Jewish community is aware that Gentiles [at least of my age 45] were circumcised – as a youth I remember this caused much confusion and disbelief at camp among young Jewish boys – who presumably thought they owned circumcision."
Interesting!
My guess is still that if Jews use the term to politely refer to non-Jews, and non-Jews think it is a polite way to refer (in the company of Jews) to non-Jews (i.e. themselves), then it is all-around acknowledged and agreed to be a polite term that offends no one, even if the reasons it is thought to be polite differ in each case, as described above. [Although since Muslims circumcise, I can see some Muslim irritation with this line of thinking and the idea that "young Jewish boys….thought they owned circumcision".]
I'm just not hearing/seeing the term used by Jews…
Sounds like O Jews don't say it? So you are wondering if Jews (not your O peers but non-O Jews) took it over from Christians? Hmm.
Don't know. What I do know is that if a *Jewish* person would have made a similar comment on Facebook, I would have been totally startled.
Hm, I'm similarly surprised that a NON Jewish person made that comment. Or that the AAP would use the term "Gentile".
No, no. The AAP didn't. It was a layperson's comment on the subject of circumcision about himself being a Gentile.
The Roma term for Non-Roma (White, Black, Asian, Mexican, etc. Religion doesn't matter) is Gadji (spelling varies), and a group would be Gagjensa (similar to Goy and Goyim) (My dad's dad was half Jewish (Mother) half Roma (Father))