Why some hate the Jewish people?

Discussion in 'Abrahamic Religions' started by Amica, Jul 3, 2009.

  1. Jean freeman

    Jean freeman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0
    Could it be jealousy that they work hard and are successful? Most religons teach to love your fellow man and most Christains don't mention Jesus was a Jew if they can help it. Perhaps it is hard for people to watch a nation who were persecuted do the damage and carnage to the Palistinians, which was shown Worldwide on television.
     
  2. 17th Angel

    17th Angel לבעוט את התחת ולקחת שמות

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    9,437
    Likes Received:
    3
    That is an image of Cernunnos.
     
  3. Avi

    Avi Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,399
    Likes Received:
    0
    Welcome, edelentr and thank you for the interesting reference. Have you had any interaction with this institution ? If so, can you tell us about it ?
     
  4. Raksha

    Raksha New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    0
    Everyone,

    I wish I'd known this topic was here about a month ago. I recently got into yet another flame war on another Religion & Spirituality forum with a couple of my old sparring partners. One of them is a Christian Zionist, although he wasn't my major opponent in THIS particular brawl. This time it was his sidekick, a woman obsessed with the Book of Revelation who fancies herself a "prophetess." If China Cat Sunflower is anywhere in the neighborhood, he knows who I'm talking about. He is very familiar with both of them, and abandoned that board for this one years ago because of the way they dominate it. It's a very small forum, and I only stick around myself because of the old friends who still post there.

    Anyway, years ago on Prodigy Classic I considered this woman a kinda-sorta ally because in spite of our differences we both had a vision of a New Age that was just over the horizon, call it what you will--the Second Coming, the Messianic Age, the Great Turning, etc. etc. etc. But about five years ago, on Prodigy Internet, I noticed she was developing a definite anti-Semitic streak. It has become worse on this "successor" forum, and periodically she erupts in horrible anti-Semitic tirades where she trots out the most motheaten conspiracy theories...including Holocaust revisionism.

    Obviously I can't tolerate that, so I let her have it right between the eyes. It got so bad that the acting moderator did some "pruning" on both our posts to eliminate some of our more abusive observations on each other's character. It wasn't my first online battle with an anti-Semite, not by a long way. I'm Jewish, addicted to interfaith discussion boards, and VERY outspoken, so inevitably I'm a veteran of many of these online battles.

    Why is that? Why do interfaith discussions between Jews and Christians so often devolve into this kind of name-calling, even though they may start out with a pretense of civility? I said "a pretense of civility" because biting your tongue and refraining from telling the other person that he/she is damned to everlasting hell is NOT the same thing as tolerance! I believe it's because there is a fundamentally adversarial relationship between Judaism and Christianity, and 2000 years of history amply justify this belief.

    A number of things were different about this latest brawl than many of my previous ones, though. One is that the moderator is a good friend of mine and very much on my side, even if he did cut my posts along with my opponent's. He's been reading many of the books I've recommended to him--first on Judaism and more recently on Gnosticism. After the smoke cleared from the flame war, he started a new topic on my behalf, with the same subject line as a question I had put in all caps on the flame war thread, namely: Why do Christians Hate Jews?

    He did that because he wanted to know why Christian anti-Semitism exists at all. Not why has it been so persistent and so virulent, but why does it even exist? And he found he had no answer to that question. It isn't the first time I've asked that question, and THIS TIME I want to get to the bottom of it. Please note that it's a much more focused question than the subject line of this thread, namely "Why some hate the Jewish people?"

    As I said, it's a small forum and the question makes Christians very uncomfortable, so the thread has been dropping like a rock after an initial flurry of replies (most of them from me). Meanwhile, I started exploring the question myself on my brand-new blog, which some of you may want to take a look at:
    Raksha's Personal Blog

    It's going to take me some time to get up to speed on this topic, but I'm very interested in what everyone has to say on the subject. My latest blog post, called "The Sword of the Ashkenazim" is the first of a projected series of posts on Christian anti-Semitism.

    I should warn everyone though that there may be a detour into Gnosticism before I get back to the topic, because that's what we've started discussing on the other forum. And I'm an incurable syncretist as some of you know already.

    --Linda
     
  5. Jeremyw

    Jeremyw New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    1
    I think the State of Israel has led a lot of Muslims to hate Jews because they see them as colonists. A lot of people, however have great respect for the Jewish people either because they are the main people in the Bible or because of the large number of entertainers and academics that are Jewish.
     
  6. vizenos

    vizenos New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    Faithful Servant, I the unprofitable servant salute you. You have, I believe, spoken at least the beginning of the truth: that God loves the Jews and has "chosen" them (whatever that may mean) to show His light to the nations. By and large, it seems to me that they've done a rather good job of this, and continue to do so. Not a perfect job, of course--they're every bit as human as the rest of us, so for them as for the rest of us, perfection is a goal to be reached for, but never fully grasped.

    Also, in Torah we see that God has made a great many promises to the Jews, and those who hate God would love to make an oath-breaker out of Him by destroying the Jews before those promises can all be fulfilled.

    The account found in Numbers 22-24 is particularly instructive in this regard. Balaam the seer is hired by Balak, king of the Moabites, to curse Israel. He finds that, instead of cursing them--which he makes a due diligence effort to do--God commands him to bless Israel instead of cursing them, and as a seer Balaam cannot curse those whom God has blessed.

    And of course, the significance of this account arises from the fact that Balaam was not a Jew, and had every practical reason to desire to curse Israel rather than to bless them.

    There are many other places in the Jewish scriptures where it is clearly affirmed that God has an everlasting covenant with Israel, and I as an Orthodox Christian can neither ignore these nor deny them. Were God to fail to fulfill His promises to the Jews, that would prove, conclusively, that God cannot be trusted or relied-upon, which in turn would demonstrate that He could not possibly be God.

    It necessarily follows that anyone who hates and rejects God has a vested interest in preventing God from fulfilling those promises to the Jews. This is true whether the Jews as a people are "chosen" or not--whatever being "chosen" may actually mean.

    Regards,
    vizenos
     
  7. iBrian

    iBrian Peace, Love and Unity Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2003
    Messages:
    6,532
    Likes Received:
    8
    Odd - if Christians regard God as still having an everlasting covenant with Israel, then where's the point of Jesus?
     
  8. Sam Albion

    Sam Albion akaFrancisKing:ViveLeRoi!

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2010
    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    9
    bah.. I thought ppl had moved on from jew-hating? I thought we all we're supposed to hate Muslims now?
     
  9. bob x

    bob x New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,618
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some manage to do both. And of course, Muslim-hating doesn't work so well for Muslims, so they're stuck with Jew-hating, even though it's totally out of fashion nowadays, SOOOO second millennium!
     
  10. Saltmeister

    Saltmeister The Dangerous Dinner

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,130
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think the point of Jesus was to extend the covenant to include Gentiles, or to prepare the Gentiles for full compliance with the Noahide covenant. The spread of knowledge of the Tanakh was a part of this process.
     
  11. iBrian

    iBrian Peace, Love and Unity Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2003
    Messages:
    6,532
    Likes Received:
    8
    I thought the entire point of Christianity was that the covenant with God has passed from the Jews to the Gentiles?

    There's no suggestion in the Gospels that Jesus was targeting the gentiles - precisely the opposite - and in the epistles the whole issue of allowing gentiles was a thorny issue, to the point where the new Christian movement changed from being a Jewish sect to something distanced from Judaism.
     
  12. Saltmeister

    Saltmeister The Dangerous Dinner

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,130
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's the mainstream position, but not my personal position. I think it makes more sense to "inherit" a covenant than steal it.:) The original recipients keep their covenant. The rest of us are just coming along for the ride.

    But I don't want to be talking about the wrong covenant here. I don't know how the Jewish covenant might be "inherited" and when I learned of the other covenant, I realised that we had the option of embracing that one.

    The covenant with the Jews had to do with a "national revelation." All Jews are descendants of the Hebrews who received that national revelation first hand. The covenant applies to all descendants of these Hebrews by blood and by Law. By Law, I mean those who were not blood descendants, but assimilated into the way of life of those who were blood descendants by adhering to the Torah.

    I think of covenants as "collectively binding." The Jewish covenant applies to all Jews collectively. The Noahidic covenant applies to the entire human race collectively. When the covenant is broken by a large proportion of the associated "collective," that covenant is collectively broken and God's obligations to the covenant becomes void.

    I don't believe there is any "covenant" for Christians because there is nothing "collectively binding" on Christians. For example, according to "mainstream ideology," if an individual Christian denies that Jesus is their saviour, they go to hell. An individual Christian rejecting Jesus does not make all other Christians go to hell. Even if half or 99 per cent of Christians rejected Jesus, this would not cause the remaining 1 per cent to go to hell.

    This is why Christians are not bound by a covenant. We are under no obligation to enforce anything on other, fellow Christians. We may want to, but that is entirely up to us. We are not responsible for the conduct or beliefs of other adherents.

    The Noahidic covenant I assume is also collectively binding because if the human race as a whole violates it, God will not prevent our world from being destroyed by, say, nuclear weapons. Our dependence on technology, rape of the planet's resources and slavery to capitalism might be thought of as a form of "idolatry."

    I wouldn't agree that "Christianity" changed, but rather that a new "variant" of "Christianity" emerged. With approval from James the Just, leader of the Nazarenes, Paul created the basis of a "Gentile variant" of Christianity. Paul believed that there was "no longer any difference between Jew and Gentile," but I don't think his Jewish counterparts back in Jerusalem were as enthusiastic about that idea as he was.

    Apparently, the Nazarenes were not in any hurry to get rid of the wall of separation between Jews and Gentiles. The Nazarenes were Christians and the new adherents of "Pauline Christianity" were also Christians. Their belief systems were vastly different, the Nazarenes being rooted in Judaism, the "Pauline Christians" being rooted in Hellenism.

    The Nazarenes (the Jewish variant) were later declared heretics and wiped out by the "orthodox" Christians (the Gentile variant) in the 4th century. What made them both Christian was that they both thought of Jesus as their spiritual leader and both variants were monotheistic.

    Christianity didn't change. A new version of it was simply introduced.

    The idea of Christianity being extended to the Gentiles would have been inspired by attitudes already present in Pharisaic Judaism. You may have heard stories of the two most important Pharisees of that time: Hillel and Shammai. There is the story of a Gentile going to each of them, asking them to teach him the Torah. Shammai drives him away. Hillel responds by saying, "What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbour. That is the whole Torah. The rest is commentary, go study!"

    Shammai inspired revulsion toward Gentiles, while Hillel probably inspired Paul's idea of "grace." The rules proposed by the Nazarene leadership for the Gentile Christians are similar to the Seven Noahide Laws proposed by Hillel.

    As "Gentile Christians" and adherents of "Hellenistic Christianity," we have often thought of our version of Christianity as the only correct version, when in theory there are other legitimate variants, not necessarily rooted in Judaism or Hellenism, but possibly Buddhism as well, or other Asian, African, aboriginal and tribal traditions. This is the arrogance of Hellenistic Christianity.:)

    The NT Canon is an important historical document exploring the issues that arose from the intermingling of the Jewish and Gentile worlds and how it led to the spreading of knowledge of the Tanakh/Old Testament. If Muslims collectively were willing to study it, Islam might also be considered another "variant" of Christianity.:) At the moment, however, most of them disregard the NT Canon and thus all the issues it contains.
     
  13. vizenos

    vizenos New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    I for one hope this simply isn't true....

    "The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away.
    The Lord is an indian-giver."
    --1 Opinions 6:66

    If I make a promise to you, today, knowing that tomorrow I will rescind my promise to you and give it to someone else, would that not make me a liar and a warlock (oathbreaker) from the moment I make that promise to you?

    Precisely! And as I read Romans 9, it appears to me that Paul is saying that the whole point of the Church is that it is a grafting-in of the gentiles into Israel, which would be entirely pointless, if God's "Berith Olam (Everlasting Covenant)" with Israel became null and void with the advent of Christianity.

    This claim that God's "Everlasting Covenant" with Israel is taken away from Israel and given to Christianity is utterly absurd, if we are to accept that God keeps His promises, because if a promise made to a specific party is to be considered fulfilled, it has to be fulfilled to the party to whom the promise was made, not to some other party. Therefore, this claim strikes me as a direct attack on God's honesty and trustworthiness.

    English common law bears this out. If I promise to marry Jane, but instead marry Gloria, then Jane can sue me for Breach of Promise. The clear fact that I married someone is no defense, because my promise was to Jane, not to Gloria.:D

    So unless we are to assume that the ethics of English common law are superior to the ethics of God, we must acknowledge that God's "Everlasting Covenant" with Israel is still in effect, and that, obviously, Israel remains the beneficiary of that covenant.:cool:

    "God is not a man, that He should lie;
    Neither a son of man, that He should repent:
    Hath He said, and shall He not do it?
    Or hath He spoken, and shall He not make it good?"
    --Balak ben Beor, Numbers 23:19

    Regards,
    vizenos
     
  14. vizenos

    vizenos New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Balak ben Beor" should read "Balaam ben Beor".
     

Share This Page