What is antisemitism?

[OneSheep]

Note, I said they were participating in evil, you gave a rhetorical question designed to imply I had said they were evil.

I was right after all. I retrieved the unedited version from my email. This is what I responded to:

We most certainly do need to continue to call the Nazis ( and communists, bte) evil.

It appears that you have edited out those words. I appreciate that, please know that I also sometimes take out what I did not mean to say.

 

[tafan2]

I was posted way back, I edited nothing out. I copied my exact phrase that you copied when you posed the question. It s clear you were responding to what I copied (unedited) and not this post of mine from earlier.
Good evening.
Have it your way. You are certainly intent on never admitting any wrongdoing on this thread.

 

[OneSheep]

It does look like your words are still in this thread (way back, like you said). All I can figure out is that I must have had those words in mind when I called attention to this comment:

We are justly saying that those who hold those ideologies are/were participating in evil

Which is a comment that i agree with, but I must have conflated it with this comment:

We most certainly do need to continue to call the Nazis ( and communists, bte) evil. That should be always the emphasis.

So, the mix-up there was my error.

On your side, you did say this:

Note, I said they were participating in evil, you gave a rhetorical question designed to imply I had said they were evil.

So, you did say they were evil, and you said that was to be the “emphasis”. So the question remains, are Nazis and communists “evil”? Do you stand by that comment, or have you come to forgive them?

You’re treading in waters that you should probably study further.

I can always appreciate new perspectives, yes, I could study more.

There are entire courses devoted to forgiveness and reconciliation after genocide.

Do the courses teach that some people are evil? Do you agree with comments calling entire groups evil? Do the courses teach people to hang onto negative feelings, including considering others evil? I’m not implying that they do, but I am interested.

Respectfully, it doesn’t seem that your thoughts here are informed by that content in any way.

Okay, please find one of my “thoughts” that seems to indicate that I have not forgiven or reconciled. But when you do find one, first ask yourself how you might give me the benefit of the doubt on a comment, rather than immediately tying them to something you heard from someone who promoted hate. Please, be charitable in this regard.

 

[Beryllos]

Friends, I think you’ve analyzed the dialogue of this thread thoroughly enough, and it might be time to put that to rest and see if there are any other worthy topics in antisemitism in the wide world as opposed to the little world of CAF.

 

[OneSheep]

As I also said earlier, it’s called the longest hatred for a reason.

https://www.ushmm.org/confront-antisemitism/antisemitism-the-longest-hatred

Okay, I have made some reference to this article a bit, and I will now explain how the article inadvertently exacerbates the problems that lead to genocide. The article itself, put out by the US holocaust museum (I think) is well-intended and does at least begin to address the problem, but is far too superficial.

Now, before I address that article, I am going to call attention to one of the most important parts of the Gospel that gives us clues as to how to “love our enemies”, as Jesus asks of us:

Mark 11:25 New International Version (NIV):

25 And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive them, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins.”

What does it mean to “hold something against” someone? It means we have judged a person, we hold their actions against their value and dignity. When we see another person as evil, having some kind of negative affect, we are living in an illusion, as De Mello said in a quote I posted earlier in this thread. Hatred is an issue, but hatred itself begins with resentment, the feeling we have when we hold something against someone else.

Here is one part of the article I now wish to address:

Early Christian thought held Jews collectively responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus. This religious teaching became embedded in both Catholic and Protestant theology during the first millennium, with terrible consequences for Jews.

What the article does not mention is that anyone who “holds responsible”, meaning a “holding against” is already not following the words of Jesus. If the article would really like to change minds and hearts of people who consider themselves Christian, then this could certainly be mentioned. Also, although the crowd calling for Jesus’ crucifixion was historically mostly Jewish, what did Jesus do? Jesus forgave them, and he gave us the tools, the gift of understanding to forgive when He said this:

New International Version
Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”

We can come to forgive through understanding that people do not know what they are doing when they hurt others, as I elaborated on earlier in this thread. So Jesus forgave, but some (many?) followers failed to do so.

(continued)

 

[OneSheep]

However, the article says that the hatred of Jews long ago is attributable to “early Christian thought”. The article inadvertently indicts the blame, the resentment, of Jews as “Christian” when it is far, far from what Jesus asked of people.

The fact is that Christians resented Jews when some Jews rejected Jesus, and Jews probably resented Christians for resenting them, and there was probably some animosity in both directions, it is all very natural and predictable. We also have evidence that there was a great deal of conflict concerning Christian inclusion of the “uncircumcised”, which meant letting go of common resentment between Jews and “gentiles”.

The fact is that we are all human, and all of us can have our resentment triggered.

The article states “this religious teaching became embedded in (Christian) theology”.

What will be the reaction of the modern reader, a reader with a conscience? How will they feel about that statement? They will (hopefully) see such embedding as awful, and will be inspired to blame early Christians. Does the article do anything to give the other side of the story? It does not. It does the same as most modern media, it only gives one side of the story, and the reader is left with the feeling of blame toward Christians, rather than giving the reader the tools and information that lead to understanding and forgiving them. So what we are shown is “the longest hatred” in history, and Christians are to blame. What are the tools needed to overcome blame? Understanding and forgiveness. Readers need to know that all people are capable of resentment, and there was most likely plenty of resentment in both directions. Anyone who hangs onto resentment is not following the Gospel, and not following the example of modern people, like Eva Kor, who exemplify the value of forgiveness.

And here is more minor point about the article: the title in itself comes across as editorial and has no support whatsoever. Does the author actually compare, for example, the “hatred” between Persians and Jews, which is to some degree “still” evident today? Are there not likely areas all over the world that also have long-standing resentment between peoples? And is any of it constant, as the title implies? How could the author possibly know that? Because of the editorial nature of the title, the article ends up being just as provocative as “news and comment” on the nightly news.

Do I think that the author purposely tried to be provocative? Absolutely not. He or she was merely pointing out that the hatred appears to have been around a long time. Since hatred is taught, to some degree, then it is possible that it has been taught from one generation to the next. However, the “holding responsible” part, meaning blame, is not a Christian phenomenon, but a human one. These are the sort of facts that will lead to real change, that will lead to genuine elimination of future genocide.

Now, Grace, I invite your counterpoint! (non-judgmental, please)

 

[OneSheep]

Happy Birthday Beryllos!

Yeah, we got caught up in a lot of “who said what”, but I think we have gotten through it now.

Have a great day; if and when it pleases you to read my latest lecture (posted above) feel free to comment.

Blessings to you

 

[Beryllos]

Thank you for your good wishes and blessings.

I have read your latest and intend to respond after giving it some thought.

 

[niceatheist]

One of the things to remember here about the Early Christian community, and I’ve alluded to it above, is that they weren’t the sources of anti-Semitism. There was a general dislike of Jews in the Hellenic world long before Jesus came on the scene. That’s why I don’t really ascribe the spread of anti-Semitic sentiment among Christian Gentiles to early conflicts over how much Jewish custom Gentiles should abide by. Certainly that may have been a sticking point (I know if membership in a religion meant I had to be cut “down there”, I’d probably be pretty resistant, and I think Paul knew that very well, he was nothing if not the greatest of marketing men).

In general, I think the anti-Semitism that grew into Christianity was adopted along side a good deal of other Hellenic culture. Conflicts between Rome and Jews in Palestine probably played a part too, but Jews had been the objects of persecutions by Greeks, for instance, in Alexandria in 38AD, when Christianity was just a minor Jewish sect of little note anywhere outside of Roman Palestine. So my theory is that anti-Semitism crept into Christianity via Greek converts, who quickly found a justification for it via notions like the Jews putting Christ to death. When Jews became a minority within the Christian community (by the end of the 2nd century), then the Jewish communities throughout the Empire became a much easier target.

 

[OneSheep]

There was a general dislike of Jews in the Hellenic world long before Jesus came on the scene.

Really? What was the source of that?

 

[niceatheist]

niceatheist:

There was a general dislike of Jews in the Hellenic world long before Jesus came on the scene.

Really? What was the source of that?

Likely from the Seleucides. When Judea was part of the Seleucid Empire, there was a generally poor view among Hellenic Jews and Greeks in that Empire against the observant Jews. The Seleucides sided with the Hellenic Jews when conflict broke out with the observant Jews. Antiochus IV in particular attempted to crush observant Jewish tradition by banning a number of Jewish practices like animal sacrifice and circumcision.

This is why context is always very important. You can’t just take, for instance, Paul’s general distaste for some Jewish practices, at least so far as they should apply to Gentiles, out of the context of the history and culture of the mid-1st century, nor can you discount that Gentile converts often came with their own baggage. But it goes a long way to demonstrating that at least observant Jews became objects of derision and persecution long before Christianity was any significant force, and as Christian numbers swelled in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, as Christianity ceased to be a Jewish sect, and became a proper tradition on its own, it became unmoored from its Jewish roots, and it was generally accepted that the Jews had ceased to be a chosen people, and began to take the roles of willful deniers of Christ.

This refusal of observant Jews to convert to Christianity was something that troubled many Christians from the earliest days right on through the Middle Ages and into early modern times and beyond. Luther, for instance, fully expected that with his new and cleansed Christianity, the Jews would just flock into the churches (as if the only thing that had held them back from converting was Papal misconduct), and became decidedly anti-Semitic when that didn’t happen.

 

[Rabbi]

I just discovered this thread, and, being Jewish, thought I’d give my two cents on the matter.

Obviously, anti-Semitism is something we have to deal with, and I’ve been told to get into a Nazi gas chamber (the worst so far)! But I think the Jewish view is that we desire suffering, in fact, we want more of it. Because only through suffering do we finally overcome it.

So why does anti-Semitism exists? Lots of reasons, ranging from false claims that the Talmud mocks Jesus to Goyim getting upset because Jews supposedly get rich (talk to the Baal Shem Tov or Karl Marx on that one, these guys couldn’t afford shoes).

Plus, people are just upset that we have our Torah, and the Goyim did everything in their power to stop us from reading it.

Lastly, some people are just plain stupid, and they hate Jews because it’s “cool” or makes them “fit in” with the crowd. Sometimes I wonder if there’s more intelligent life on Mars when I think of these skinheads.

 

[OneSheep]

When Judea was part of the Seleucid Empire, there was a generally poor view among Hellenic Jews and Greeks in that Empire against the observant Jews

Really? Why did they have a poor view of observant Jews?

This is why context is always very important.

Thank you for giving some context. We’ll get to the source yet!

 

[tafan2]

Really? Why did they have a poor view of observant Jews?

May I charitably suggest that if you are going to comment on anti-Semitism 2000 years ago, you spend some time researching the subject.

 

[Beryllos]

May I charitably suggest that if you are going to comment on anti-Semitism 2000 years ago, you spend some time researching the subject.

Sure. Go ahead. You may begin (to charitably suggest).

Seriously, can’t a fellow ask a question? Is the answer supposed to be obvious? What sources do we consult? I wouldn’t know where to begin. Google?

 

[tafan2]

That’s fair enough, one can ask, and answers can be given. It just seems strange first write a long critique on an article giving the history of subject.

For what it’s worth, I heartedly suggest Paul Johnson’s book: History of the Jews.

 

[OneSheep]

I just discovered this thread, and, being Jewish, thought I’d give my two cents on the matter.

Nice to have you here, Rabbi.

Obviously, anti-Semitism is something we have to deal with, and I’ve been told to get into a Nazi gas chamber (the worst so far)! But I think the Jewish view is that we desire suffering, in fact, we want more of it. Because only through suffering do we finally overcome it.

Very interesting. You desire suffering so that you can overcome it? How does that work?

I’m sorry to hear about the antisemitic comments made to you.

So why does anti-Semitism exists? Lots of reasons, ranging from false claims that the Talmud mocks Jesus

Yes, I can see how that false claim would lead to some resentment.

to Goyim getting upset because Jews supposedly get rich (talk to the Baal Shem Tov or Karl Marx on that one, these guys couldn’t afford shoes).

Doesn’t every ethnicity or race have some wealthy people though? So, do Jewish people get upset when Goyim get rich? I don’t see how that adds up by itself.

Plus, people are just upset that we have our Torah, and the Goyim did everything in their power to stop us from reading it.

Wow, that’s just ridiculous. Why on Earth were people upset because you have your Torah?

Lastly, some people are just plain stupid, and they hate Jews because it’s “cool” or makes them “fit in” with the crowd

Well you can count me in on being a bit stupid, but I certainly don’t hate Jews.
I can’t see how such a person could even know a Jewish person. If he did, he would come to see that Jews are people just like you and I. It is certainly a lack of awareness on their part. I can relate to taking on certain ideologies in order to “fit in”, but with growth of awareness and maturity, one would think that the stance would change unless there were other factors involved. There is a dynamic where people obsessively wish to conform, but then feel controlled and smothered by the group, so they pull away, then come back, etc.

Have you had the experience yourself, perhaps as a young man, of wearing some clothing or even believing a certain ideology in order to fit in? I am quite certain that many “liberals” and “conservatives” have many specific opinions just because the people they like opine the same. What I am asking is if you recognize this potential in your own nature. I certainly recognize it in my own.

 

[niceatheist]

niceatheist:

When Judea was part of the Seleucid Empire, there was a generally poor view among Hellenic Jews and Greeks in that Empire against the observant Jews

Really? Why did they have a poor view of observant Jews?

Well, think about it. Hellenic Jews were Jews that had immersed themselves in Greek culture. They were students of Aristotle, they were synthesizing Greek philosophy, scholarship and learning into Jewish culture. These Hellenic Jews are the forebears of Christianity, Islam, and modern forms of Judaism, the merging of a Classical Greek worldview with the Hebrew religion. You can well imagine that observant Jews of that era, highly conservative, who rejected Hellenic culture, would view their Hellenic brethren as, at best, wrongheaded, and at worst heretics.

You can still find the shadow of the civil war even in the Gospels. The Pharisees of the NT were the descendants of the Observant Jews of a century before, whereas the Sadducees were the 1st century Hellenized Jews (there was another group, the Essenes, who probably were the immediate forebears of early Christians, though it’s much more complex than that). All these groups were in part religious sects, in part political parties, and in part social classes, and there is a pretty clear link between them all and the rise of the Jesus sect that would ultimately become Christianity; either as inspiration, or as opponents.

So perhaps what the Hellenic world deeply disliked was the conservative Jewish sects which rejected Hellenic society. That violence and civil war in Judea between Hellenic and observant Jews left its mark both on Jewish society, and the general view of Jews by Greeks, and it was out of that distrust of the Jews that Greeks had which lead to the first riots and pogroms that we see, the attacks in Alexandria in 38 and 40 AD being among the first recorded violent attacks on Jews.

 

[tafan2]

Certainly the Seleucid Empire had a bias against the Jews, one can read the books of Maccabees and get a rough idea of why, they revolted and the powers to be tend to resent that. But the Romans took over and things were a little more complicated.

Prior to the time of Christ, there was already a widespread dispora of Jews throughout the Roman Empire (well illustrated by the story of Pentecost in the Book of Acts). Now, the Jews, wherever they settled, established their own communities, and stayed rather isolated from their neighbors. This was mainly due to their religious laws and customs. This bred a certain level of distrust and resentment. So that is part of it.
However, in many places the Jews were very well respected among the educated and upper classes. Their strict way of living, their laws, etc were viewed by many, for example the Stoics, as attractive. And dispite being a non-proselytizing religion, they attracted not a few converts everywhere they went. Hence you see the Septuagint version of Jewish scriptures. The flip side of this, is that a very foreign religion was attracting converts and that bred religion in an era where religious unity was highly valued in any local society.

On top of that, there was the view of favoritism given by officials towards Judea. Jews, in Roman empire were exempted from pagan laws. Herod’s children were invited to be raised in the imperial court. Herod (the one at the birth of Christ), while infamous in the bible, was given the title Herod the Great and looked upon as almost a hero throughout the eastern half of the mediteranean. He supported building projects throughout Asia Minor and Greece. He funded the ancient Olympic Games. But this too, bred resentment and distrust in many places.
What you had were these isolated communities, throughout the ancient world, given imperial favors, would not practice local religions, attracting a lot of “establishment” support: the people did not trust them.

there is my short summary.

 

[niceatheist]

But without that Jewish diaspora, it’s likely Christianity would have died in infancy in Palestine. Whether later Christians liked it or not, for the first century or more of Christianity, it was these diaspora communities which served as the incubators of Christianity throughout the Roman world. They of course also spread and magnified the tensions that had been welling in Jewish society for two centuries. I often think many Hellenic Jews were attracted to Christianity because it represented a solution of sorts between Hellenic thought and their religious heritage. Obviously the observant Jews viewed Christianity as dimly as they did the more Hellenized variants of Judaism, and for precisely the same reason. In an interesting way, it’s still a divide within Jewish communities to this day.