Jewish hatred of christianity

[MBZ]

Hi all!

Joasia, you posted:

We have examples of Jews, Muslims and Christians who have exhibited hateful actions towards others. And we all say that this is due to the individual's choice within that group. Of course, there are many individuals with the same feelings, so we can see groups forming within the Jews, Muslims and Christians that act with hatred. They DO NOT represent the rest of us in these religions. They are the extreme.

Well said.

You asked:

My question is...what is the driving force behind the hatred of those that act with such hatred?

My theory is that if A hates B, B is merely the external focus of some deep, pre-existing spiritual unease in A's heart; B is merely the external focus, the object which A has latched onto as an outlet.

Look at Korah's attempted coup d'etat against his cousins Moses & Aaron.

Look at the several versions of Numbers 16:1.

The KJV says:

Now Korah...took [men]..."

The NKJV is the same but without the square brackets.

The NASB says:

Now Korah...took action...

What exactly did Korah take? The original Hebrew doesn't say. In the original Hebrew text, no object is provided for the verb vayikakh ("took"). A better translation of the whole verse would be:

Now Korah, the son of Yitzhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, with Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliav, and On, the son of Pelet, sons of Reuben, took and they rose up in face of Moses...

There was a very, very good commentary on Korah in the 18.6.04 edition of Ha'aretz, one of Israel's English dailies. Here http://tinyurl.com/32la3 is the whole article. I'll quote the last two paragraphs:

It is interesting to look at first words of the parasha: "Vayikakh Korah" ("Now Korah took") (16:1). The verse is left hanging in the air, with no mention of what he took. The commentators have completed it in various ways. Some said that Korah "took himself aside" to set himself apart from the rest of the community. Others said that Korah tried to take other leaders and convince them to join his revolt.

Perhaps most importantly, the verb "vayikakh," in the way it stands alone, alludes to Korah's psychological state as he heads out to stir up controversy and obstruct law and order. There are times when an aggressive mood settles on us but the emotions are not translated into action until a later stage. Only after we decide on the course of action is the verb joined by an object. First our souls burn with hatred, and only afterwards do we decide what to burn.

Be well!

MBZ

[Nikodemus]

In my view you must make a distincition between criticism and hate. Criticism is hate if the object of criticism is rooted in a spiritual privation of love. Hate is a privation of a good, of love (according to the church-father Blessed Augustine). You can suspect hatred toward a group if you generalize to a whole population without distinction. Criticism should never generalize to a whole people, but it can however be generalised to a state. Many would, for example, agree that the government and state in Kambodjaduring Pol Pot was evil (he slaughtered a fourth of Kmbodjas population. Many would also agree that the Turkish state did wrong when they allowed one million armenians to be slaughtered durng the 19 th century. Many would also agree that a state that persecutes a people who have lived in that region thousand of years is wrong, as happened in America with the indians and as is happening today in Israel where 800 000 palestians have lost their property, land, dignity, in mny cases even life.

[Nikodemus]

Ebor

If your read my posts I never generalised to all jews. But I regret this argumentation, because I was wrong in focusing on the authors I studied recently on this questions and not studied the other side enough. I am therefore thankful to Melk for making some things more clear to me. The intention behind quoting Israel Shahk was to focus on something that should shock any christian who is not informed about this. According to Melk and MBZ, israel Shahak is wrong and spreads hate towards jews...Melk refers to his book as jew-hating literature. I quoted him because he knows hebrew, is a human-right activists, a (secular) jew and suffered in a Nazi-concentration camp. These things made him an authority for me in these questions. But this was wrong of me, because his writings are so dangerous that it must be checked with other data. I therefore wrote about a jewish rabbi-Paul Photiou who expressed a similar view about the Talmud. Melk and MBZ said that he was wrong. Because I dont speak hebrew I therefore cannot say anyting informative about what this rabbi wrote and Israle Shahak wrote. At the same time I defend myself on the following points:

1) I never generalized to all jews and pointed this out many times
2) I pointed out that my criticism (not hate as MBZ perhaps would say) was not ahout an ethnic group but about ideas and isms
3) I proved this by quoting peple who would in one or more aspects call themselves jews or ex-jews.
4) I admitted my mistakes
5) I believe it is bad of my opponents not to take the discussion of Israels treatment of palestinians more seriously...and silence it.

[Ekaterina]

Hmmmmmmmmmm....оправдание ....isn't that a sin too?

Katya

[Nikodemus]

Ekaterina

If I exuse myself in sin, this justification is wrong. But I dont excuse myself in my virtues, I defend myself from accusations of hatred and generalizations. Perhaps you should read the lent prayer of Holy Ephraim the Syrian one more time.

[Ekaterina]

My spritual father used to say that if you have to justify yourself you have not done well for yourself. From the one side is whatever sin and from the other is still a sin...pride. It is better, he said, to say I'm sorry and strive never to do it again then to try to explain your error, even if you do not preceive it as an error.

Katya

[Nikodemus]

This discussion is so empty, so boring and so non sequitur that I dont want to continue to discuss your interpretations of my "sins" anymore. Only because you claim to be orthodox I tried to say that you should not look at other peoples sins...it is what my spiritiual father would say.

Furthermore...I firmly believe that many zionists in Isrtael and USA are racist toward the arabic population in Palestine and other countries in the middleeast. Ariel Sharons is a butcher (remember Sabra and Shatila) with so much suffering and blood on his hands that you can compare him with Djingis Khan in cruelty. The stupidity of a president that calls this man " a man of peace" have not been seen in the history of man, I belive. I also believe that it is a sign of intellectual dishonesty not to want to discuss this serious questions, when I ponit them out. I also find it reavealing that if you explain the secular jewish invovement in the Russian Revolution, you get attacked on all sides by people who on this questions seems to have nothing more than conformist opinions. Still, when a person admits a mistake in another questions he still get attacked for this wrong doings by people who claim to be better christians than him.