Jesus was a Jew. Why do some Christians and Muslims hate Jews?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Netanyahu (and Steven Miller)- is a Jewish Nazi.

You are just being an illiterate yank idiot. Apartheid refers to a very specific regime, in one particular country, at a particular time in history, as does Nazism.
Bloody yanks and your bloody worthless 'education' system.

stop being a pedantic nitwit, i know the Apartheid history -and yes it was different in its particulars (including Indians where were in the middle).

duck is a duck does, Naziyahoo quacks, so he affirms Apartied and is a nazi.

its that simple nitwit.

It is nothing to do with being 'pedantic' (ANOTHER word that illiterate yanks love to misuse).

[Immanuel Can]

I doubt you value Leviticus.

It's a harder book, for sure. But I do value it. It has some really neat things in it, and I'm pretty sure that if I don't appreciate it enough, the fault's with me.

so tell my why you like those works above Sir!

Oh, different reasons...not all for the same reason, obviously.

Why did you pick those you picked?

[Greatest I am]

Jesus was a Jew. Why do some Christians and Muslims hate Jews?

Christians don't. I've been a Christian a long time, and I've never met even one Jew-hating Christian. I did meet a Jew-hating Atheist once, but he told me it was because of things other than his Atheism...it was because he spoke German, and that wasn't popular with Jewish folks in his town. At least, that's what he said.

And you're quite right: if a person calls themselves a Christian, then can't hate Jews, by definition. "Christ" is the Latinization of the Jewish term, "Messiah," meaning "anointed one of Israel." So anybody who understood that would have to be fine with Jews. All the disciples and apostles were Jews. The entire early Church was made up only of Jews, and the question addressed at the very first Church council was "Is it even possible for a Gentile (non-Jew) to be a Christian?"

The answer turned out to be "Yes." But this is quite a reversal from what your question supposes. The Church is, in origin, a Jewish institution. The Gentiles were late-comers.

Again, history shows that any knowledgeable Christian cannot justifiably hate Jews.

A good synopsis and I have no points to argue.

Your last is correct, but Christianity of the past, given their use of inquisitions against Jews, seemed to think they did.

That same Christian hate was Hitler's friend.

Hate crimes are rising these days and I think it is mostly Christian hate at work.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

My thoughts are that that Gospel of Mark was Jewish, Matt and Luke also - but also heretical per the pure view of no man being born as YHWH's son (i.e. so the followers of Matt/Luke gospel who viewed themselves as may "new Jews" would be viewed as not Jews by the "hard shell Jews.

same WRT Followers of Gospel of John (which is different from Mark and Matt/Luke theologically and followers of them prob would not affirm the theology of John - though followers of John would also view themselves as "new jews" - and so Jews).

There are differences in the gospels, no argument. Likely Rome's revisions and not Christianity's.

Way too many people wrote whatever they wanted to see. That is why they seek older writings to see what the real original thinking was.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Religion is theology and not philosophy and you might have noted that philosophical discussions usually end in close to the same way.

I tend to reciprocate and do not raise my voice till the volume coming to me is high

except you told me to in effect fuck myself last year, even after you and i conversing in that other now gone forum "bible-disscussion" for what? 10 years?

You likely deserved it. I can't remember.

If interlocutors are thin skinned ----- they may not belong in such places.

In wars of words, all words are allowed.

Regardless, you know I am a feisty sort.

Regards
DL

[Immanuel Can]

Your last is correct, but Christianity of the past, given their use of inquisitions against Jews, seemed to think they did.

So your view is that "Catholic" and "Christian" are the same thing?

That's both historically and theologically incorrect, of course. And the Inquisition is Rome's issue, not everybody else's.

That same Christian hate was Hitler's friend.

Hitler was, if anything, an occultist. There's no possibility of attaching his doings to the Jewish Carpenter of Nazareth. But he did sign a concordat with Rome. You'll again have to ask them about that.

Hate crimes are rising these days and I think it is mostly Christian hate at work.

And your evidence for this is???? Nil.

[Greatest I am]

Your last is correct, but Christianity of the past, given their use of inquisitions against Jews, seemed to think they did.

So your view is that "Catholic" and "Christian" are the same thing?

That's both historically and theologically incorrect, of course. And the Inquisition is Rome's issue, not everybody else's.

All Christians have Yahweh as their vile god.

That is close enough for me not to have to compare the what. 3,ooo different Christian cults.

That same Christian hate was Hitler's friend.

Hitler was, if anything, an occultist. There's no possibility of attaching his doings to the Jewish Carpenter of Nazareth. But he did sign a concordat with Rome. You'll again have to ask them about that.

Hate crimes are rising these days and I think it is mostly Christian hate at work.

And your evidence for this is???? Nil.

White supremacy and both Christians and Muslim loony right wing groups are creating more militias.

What else need saying?

Regards
DL

[Immanuel Can]

White supremacy and both Christians and Muslim loony right wing groups are creating more militias.

Not seeing any. Muslim groups, yeah. Christians? No.

There used to be some white-supremacist, self-declared-'Christian' groups around, like the KKK. And at one time, they were the militant wing of the Democratic Party in the South, and could march in the streets of Washington. But by no account could they be considered "Christian," even then. And nowadays, one never sees them or hears from them.

[Greatest I am]

White supremacy and both Christians and Muslim loony right wing groups are creating more militias.

Not seeing any. Muslim groups, yeah. Christians? No.

There used to be some white-supremacist, self-declared-'Christian' groups around, like the KKK. And at one time, they were the militant wing of the Democratic Party in the South, and could march in the streets of Washington. But by no account could they be considered "Christian," even then. And nowadays, one never sees them or hears from them.

Not so but those aside, Christianity has always been a fascist entity. Most religions are and that is why a Hitler type can enlist the help of the Vatican and it's bank.

Bastards all.

Regards
DL

[Immanuel Can]

White supremacy and both Christians and Muslim loony right wing groups are creating more militias.

Not seeing any. Muslim groups, yeah. Christians? No.

There used to be some white-supremacist, self-declared-'Christian' groups around, like the KKK. And at one time, they were the militant wing of the Democratic Party in the South, and could march in the streets of Washington. But by no account could they be considered "Christian," even then. And nowadays, one never sees them or hears from them.

Not so

Actually, yes so. I could show you the pictures of the KKK marching in Washington. And at that time, ever last one of them was a Democrat.

...that is why a Hitler type can enlist the help of the Vatican and it's bank.

Again, that's just Rome.

You've completely overlooked all the Christians who hid and rescued Jews. But I expect that, because anti-Christian prejudice is a real thing...just like antisemitism is.

[Greatest I am]

I C

Tribal instincts are what create religious tribes.

Those instincts show their worst side via religions, cults, et all of the various ideologies and political, philosophical, theological and religious thinking systems.

Have you noted that the most peaceful and law abiding states are secular and have the least amount of religion.

Secular spirituality is better than religious dogmatism. It is a better religion.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

I C

All religions have their good in group benefits and have contributed greatly to what the world is. Kudos to all.

That does not take away the fact that they have yet to join the better morality in the secular form of spiritual living.

The religious who put god above man do not want to recognized that humans are the closest thing that they will ever see to a god.

Man is the only one who can articulate what a god is.

Regards
DL

[Immanuel Can]

All religions have their good in group benefits and have contributed greatly to what the world is.

I thought you said Nazism was bad? And what great benefits do you see Islam as currently having? How about Thugees, or headhunters, or Voodoo, or cults? Are there no bad religions at all? I would think you'd recognize a few, at least.

Moreover, I have the impression that you think your Gnosticism is better than some alternatives...which means you think there are not-good things about all "religions," except for Gnosticism of your particular kind. And were it not so, I suspect you would have converted to something else, would you not?

Why would one not choose the form of "religion" one felt or knew to be "most true"? That would be silly, surely.

the secular form of spiritual living.

That's an oxymoron. If something's "secular," then it is, by definition, not "spiritual." If it's "spiritual," then it's not "secular."

[Greatest I am]

All religions have their good in group benefits and have contributed greatly to what the world is.

I thought you said Nazism was bad? And what great benefits do you see Islam as currently having? How about Thugees, or headhunters, or Voodoo, or cults? Are there no bad religions at all? I would think you'd recognize a few, at least.

Moreover, I have the impression that you think your Gnosticism is better than some alternatives...which means you think there are not-good things about all "religions," except for Gnosticism of your particular kind. And were it not so, I suspect you would have converted to something else, would you not?

Why would one not choose the form of "religion" one felt or knew to be "most true"? That would be silly, surely.

the secular form of spiritual living.

That's an oxymoron. If something's "secular," then it is, by definition, not "spiritual." If it's "spiritual," then it's not "secular."

All labels aside; all have a tribal nature and all have a spiritual side.
We also have a want or need of fellowship of the tribe/religion. That aside.

Do not deny gods their omnipresence.

Ask that little bit of god in you.

Secular law has shown to be a damned site better than the laws of the old worn out mythical gods.

Welcome to the future.

Regards
DL

[Immanuel Can]

All labels aside; all have a tribal nature and all have a spiritual side.

Atheists say not. So do other Materialists.

So I guess you'd have to say they were lying or misguided.