Ok. Actually, binahyeseira’s post was the most straight to the core, and dealt with the actual reason more than proof thereof.
thanks!
But, it came with a big disclaimer, saying that it won’t suffice as proof to one who doesn’t accept its premise.
can anything suffice as proof if you don’t accept its premise?
problem with the atypical troll thread was that his premise was completely inaccurate; so everyone was arguing with pba’s made-up theory of what is a Jew.
if one defines a Jew as only someone who lives in Israel or as someone who got a non-halachic conversion, there’s no discussion, for that is NOT how Hashem defines what is a Jew. that’s why arguing without agreeing on the premise is pointless – you’ll be arguing about apples and other person about oranges.