Was Jesus a Jew? Well, that all depends on how you define the term Jew.

Modern Jews have no resemblance or connections to Yeshua, period. Jesus did not practice or preach from the Halakha, Zohar, Lurianic Cabala, Kings Torah or Talmud, which states that Jesus is rotting in excrement and is the bastard child of a whore. Jesus was first the son of God, born among Judahite Hebrews and Galileans but whose spirit was above these worldly identities.

I'd say yes, the first century itinerate apocalyptic prophet from Galilee was - and perhaps up there somewhere in the ether still is - a Jew.

Nope. Jews didn't exist in biblical times. I'm glad some people can time travel definitions and modern practices to fit square blocks into circle slots but it doesn't make it true. The word Jew is an appellation. Rabbinism is simply a mass conversion and intermarriage among different peoples practicing the anti-Christ naturalist ways of the rabbis who rejected Him. The religion of 'Judaism' ie., rabbinism, is simply the practice of a modern form of Pharisaism of converted persons with various added anti-Christ books written be supremacist rabbis throughout the middle ages.

Jesus kept a kosher diet, his homies were Jewish, he identified with the Essenes, but didn't withdrawal from the world, he sparred with the Pharisees, but also like them revered the Torah and the Prophets, he honored the Sabbath, prayed the Psalms, people called him rabbi,...

No he did not. He did not eat Kosher. Whoever invited him into their home, he would eat what they would give him, sitting lowly and humbly. The Apostles and his disciples did the same. The Kosher diet is a scam meant to isolate Jews from 'lesser' non-Jews, and Kosher slaughter is obscene and a ridiculous practice of tradition that Yeshua did not care to practice for he was the son of God, who did the will of the father. Jesus was perfect and despised the traditions of the Pharisees, which he sought via the will of God to end by making Himself a living sacrifice for our sins. The old covenant is made obsolete and withers away!

...his parables were thoroughly Jewish, hell, Jesus even dressed like an uppity Jew donning those fringes, and last but not least, it was Yahweh alone baby and none of that pagan henotheism crap, it was full throttle monotheism!

Jesus was not a Jew, did not practice the Talmud or the stupid traditional laws that Jews practice today, nor was he donning fringes like an uppity Jew. He was a poor carpenter that came in lowly to set Judahite Hebrews and Israelites and later the rest of the world on course with God thru his sacrifice. In this way a growing movement of Judahite Hebrews, who later denied their worldly identities, Romans, Greeks, etc., came to know and follow His way. The one true God for the Pharisees was a murderer from the very beginning. Zealots who had killed innocent people for land and booty. Who killed the prophets. Jesus tried to set the record straight. Hence, why he chose a Zealot and Roman tax collector as his apostles, among others, who denied their own worldly will, their flesh, their desires, for faith in God. Through the will of God Jesus became an everliving sacrifice for our sins, to follow and preach His gospel to the lowly and downtrodden as well as expose the principalities of darkness.

So, no, Jesus had no ethnic relationship, not a racial relationship with counterfeit Israel or modern Jews. God tells us to debounce meaningless genealogies!

But seriously, I do get what that one saidit dude is implying. The Pharisaic sect practiced in Jesus' time was a religion that the ethnoreligious group that would come to be known as "the Jews" hitched their wagon to many many centuries later.

Yes, but the Pharisees were Judahite Hebrews that are long gone. Some of their practices were certainly similar to Rabbinism today ... the Sadducees, practiced what could parallel dialectical materialism on the other hand. Nevertheless, the Jew appellation today as a British Israelist catch phrase for empire building and colony/commercialization projects, as the Zionist Jewish ethnostate is certainly such a state today, has nothing to do with Biblical Hebrewism. Jews have no relationship with Israel today. Most are not semitic and this does not matter to me either way because Yeshua denied the Zealotry and lies of those who rule this world who are taking orders, not from God, but from Satan. All one can prove, in the eyes of God, is that all those who practice Talmudism/rabbinism are simply converts to a new form of anti-Christ Pharisaism. Israel is spiritual. It is faith in God through Jesus Christ. A circumcised heart!

Also, since Jesus rejected the Pharisees, he was involved in a different religious project.

Nope, he rejected worldly traditions and was the Son of God. Perfect and involved only in Gods commands to be crucified and be born again as a sacrifice for our sins. We all must come to terms with Christ and follow His way.

The old feud among the sects hypothesis.

Worldly thinking.

It's an idea that can be further complicated - and perhaps made problematic - with a plunge into the etymology of the term Jew and what it means in Hebrew and biblical Greek.

Things I don't care about. It doesn't matter to me. The passing of time proves that genealogies, as God made clear, are a waste of time and only meant to distract. 'Jews' (15th century appellation) so-called ancient homeland is merely a Zionist scam to commercialize a land where natives have been living their for thousands of years. No different to what the German Templars did to Jaffa but failed, no different to what Anglicans did to Palestine but failed, no different to what the USSR or US inc., did or is doing to natives in Israel llc today. It is a colonization, settler commercialization project.

I also enjoyed the spirited squabble about modern Jews not being a pure ethnoreligious group, but rather coalesced from a conglomeration of disparate folks: Edomites, Canaanites,Hebrews, Israelites, Khazars, etc. - and so, the point being- have no historical or textual claim to territory in the Levant (the Promised Land).

They don't. Nobody does. If the Romans at one time owned almost the entirety of what is now called the United Kingdom, does the Vatican have the right to reconquer? No. But they could. This is where I find a minority of secular ethnonationalist non-religious Jews (Sephardi/Ashkenazi culture bros) to be especially cunning. Arguing with them about genetics, racial or ethnic land rights, it always ends with them claiming that "might is right," and all empires/people who are strong will impose their might over the weak and win. "This is history." This is where I know I won the moral side of the debate but it does not matter to them. They are merely espousing the naturalist tolerance of being intolerant because of some ancient land promise, that was never promised by God for them to take by the sword and bomb nor was it ever theirs in the first place. And again, if they can't win their opposition with that stupid argument they resort to "might is right." I just watched a Palestinian, or native living on her property hold to the grave her child because thugs wanted to tear down her house and grave for a garden for settlers.

The idea being that you can't load a hodgepodge of various groups and ethnicities into a pastry bag and miraculously pinch out a singularity of collective identity.

Yet they do just that. It's like a beefed up Roman collective identity to keep their ethno-company colony afloat, which is basically a giant welfare state that is the largest exporter of weapons, more so than the US, based on % of GDP.

(I think one of the best analyses on this issue - which rejects the claim in the above opinion- is the chapter on Ancient Israel in Robert Bellah's book 'Religion in Human Evolution'.)

Have not read this book.

But of course you can create the appearance of that singularity with origin myths. For example, beginning in the 6th and 7th centuries AD early Islamic scholars began fabricating origin stories about pre-Islamic Arabs to supplant pre-Arabic memories.

While Islam venerates Christ, Mohammad was a pedophile and preached violence, whereas Jesus did the very opposite. The Pharisees and Rabbinism preach an eye for an eye. This is precisely why verses in the Talmud, Kings Torah and spoken language by rabbis often denigrate and dehumanize non-Jews.

The intent of this particular historical revisionism was to establish a bonafide Arab identity stretching into the deep past - ergo, the obsession with gargantuan family trees extending back to the biblical patriarchs, etc - in fact, an established Arab identity in the Levant and the Arabian Peninsula was spawned by the growth of Islam. The movers and shakers were thinking, "yikes, this Islam thing is growing exponentially fellas, we need an Arab origin myth pronto!"

We could say the same thing about Thulists or any other religion or philosophy if we wanted to. But my faith won't break from Christ. I've read most of the Talmud, Zohar, Kings Torah, all the Old and New Testament, the Quran, and only Jesus Christ has brought me closer to God. His teachings are from God.