Here is a contentious topic that is very important to discuss. In the news today we hear a lot of discussion about antisemitism. However its origins are rarely discussed. A large and most likely the primary source is the antipathy that results from the jews refusal to accept the messiah and Christianity and also their sussposed role in the execution of Jesus. The other Abrahamic religion, Islam, also has a shorter but also terrible history with the Judiac religion. Many attribute antisemitism to Hitler but its roots are much deeper. One of the most revered Christian theologians and reformers was Martin Luther who was a vile antisemite. You can read a description and links to his antisemitic writing here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies
How do people talk about Martin Luther in a extremely positive and complimentary fashion without acknowledging his horrorific views which many think Hitler copied in the Holocaust.
I think the real question here is why does people religious faith lead them to view people who believe different than themselves as inferior and evil? This attitude also extends to the missionary zeal to save the heathens from their idolatry and deliver them to Christianity. Isn't much of this the basis of racism, where people who are different are feared and hated?
Why don't Christians and CoC take historical responsibility for antisemitism?
-
longdistancerunner
- Posts: 171
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2022 11:56 pm
Re: Why don't Christians and CoC take historical responsibility for antisemitism?
Christianity has historically been a " my way or the highway" religion. It's the truth, while truth. And nothing but the truth. If you held a different religious viewpoint you were hellbound and your character suspect. I suspect the literate Christian Church leaders also knew that in an honest debate the Jews would kick their ass so they manipulated their ignorant and uneducated masses into not wanting anything to do with Jews. The gospels take so many prophecies out of context to make them apply to Jesus and the apostle Paul did so, even changing the wording of scripture to make it fit what he needed it to.
The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.----Karl Marx
Re: Why don't Christians and CoC take historical responsibility for antisemitism?
In the Middle Ages, church authorities used to (occasionally) arrange for debates between some locally prominent rabbi and a church official.
It the Jew lost, that was proof Christianity was triumphant. If the Jew WON, he was usually fast tracked out of the country ASAP, because if he stuck around he might find himself burned at the stake.
You can find online info on some of these debates, they were very rarely 'fair' and when they were, the rabbi usually won - if you can call it 'winning'.
h**ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disputation_of_Barcelona
There is a movie about this one, but it is kind of talky. Rabbi ben Nachman (Nachmanides) is/was almost as famous as Maimonides (Rabbi ben Maimon).
It the Jew lost, that was proof Christianity was triumphant. If the Jew WON, he was usually fast tracked out of the country ASAP, because if he stuck around he might find himself burned at the stake.
You can find online info on some of these debates, they were very rarely 'fair' and when they were, the rabbi usually won - if you can call it 'winning'.
h**ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disputation_of_Barcelona
There is a movie about this one, but it is kind of talky. Rabbi ben Nachman (Nachmanides) is/was almost as famous as Maimonides (Rabbi ben Maimon).
History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction. That's why events are always reinterpreted when values change. We need new versions of history to allow for our current prejudices.
Re: Why don't Christians and CoC take historical responsibility for antisemitism?
h**ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disputation_of_Paris
I think this one is at least as interesting.
results - at least it was 'only' books that were burned - this time.
The Disputation set in place a train of events which culminated in a burning of a great number of Jewish holy texts, on 17 June 1242.[16] "One estimate is that the 24 wagonloads included up to 10,000 volumes of Hebrew manuscripts, a startling number when one considers that the printing press did not yet exist, so that all copies of a work had to be written out by hand."[16] The burning of the texts was apparently witnessed by the Maharam of Rothenburg, who wrote about the incident.[16]
Donin's translation of statements taken from the Talmud into French changed the Christian perception about Jews. Christians had viewed the Jews as the followers of the Old Testament who honored the Law of Moses and the prophets, but the alleged blasphemies included among the Talmudic texts indicated that Jewish understandings of the Old Testament differed from the Christian understanding.[17] Louis IX stated that only skilled clerics could conduct a disputation with Jews, but that laymen should plunge a sword into those who speak ill of the Christ.
I think this one is at least as interesting.
results - at least it was 'only' books that were burned - this time.
The Disputation set in place a train of events which culminated in a burning of a great number of Jewish holy texts, on 17 June 1242.[16] "One estimate is that the 24 wagonloads included up to 10,000 volumes of Hebrew manuscripts, a startling number when one considers that the printing press did not yet exist, so that all copies of a work had to be written out by hand."[16] The burning of the texts was apparently witnessed by the Maharam of Rothenburg, who wrote about the incident.[16]
Donin's translation of statements taken from the Talmud into French changed the Christian perception about Jews. Christians had viewed the Jews as the followers of the Old Testament who honored the Law of Moses and the prophets, but the alleged blasphemies included among the Talmudic texts indicated that Jewish understandings of the Old Testament differed from the Christian understanding.[17] Louis IX stated that only skilled clerics could conduct a disputation with Jews, but that laymen should plunge a sword into those who speak ill of the Christ.
History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction. That's why events are always reinterpreted when values change. We need new versions of history to allow for our current prejudices.
Re: Why don't Christians and CoC take historical responsibility for antisemitism?
If I remember correctly Nachman did such a good job the king admitted he won the debate but was still wrong. And the king later visited a Jewish synagogue for a service.
The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.----Karl Marx
Re: Why don't Christians and CoC take historical responsibility for antisemitism?
Yes he did - but he got a whole lot of pushback, and had to pull back some of his assurances. Nachmanides ended up leaving the country.
History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction. That's why events are always reinterpreted when values change. We need new versions of history to allow for our current prejudices.