A serious question about Jewish history

[MHunterB]

From the article Annika cited:

" It was only in the mid-twentieth century that the Catholic Church and many Protestant denominations issued major statements repudiating this anti-Judaic theology and began a process of constructive Christian-Jewish interaction. "

IOW, imho - it wasn't until the extent and degree of the genocidal actions of Nazi Germany (against LOTS of groups) were made evident, that Christian theologians officially began to seriously reconsider the historic Jew-hatred within their theology.

ANYONE can only applaud the Churches for that - except of course for the Churches which only got as far as 'we need to convert 'em rather than kill 'em' ....... but still, it's progress.

 

[MHunterB]

Iolo, there are something like 350,000 Jews in NYC living at/below the poverty line - but you'd be surprised how many people refuse to believe there was ever a single Jew who was poor. (Yes, the stats talk about 150% of the 'poverty income' - but this is NYC! )

Jewish Poverty FAQs - Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty

 

[sealadaigh]

there is a difference between expressing pride in your ethnicity by saying "we're good" and saying "we're better than.

very early in the discussion is an ecellent example of this and, albeit a bit extreme and lacking in subtlety, is not at all unusual.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean-debate-zone/280516-a-serious-question-about-jewish-history.html

personally, i have no problem acknowledging the acomplihments of jews as a group or as individuals, but some ethnicities do excel in certain areas and my experience has been jewish people interject themselves into the conversation in a manner that seems to be designed to elevate their accomplishments over those of the people in question.

it is the max baer/slapsie maxie rosenbloom paradox i have brought up on occasion.

 

[sealadaigh]

109 Locations whence Jews have been Expelled since AD250


YEAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .PLACE

250 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Carthage
415 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Alexandria
554 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Diocèse of Clermont (France)
561 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Diocèse of Uzès (France)
612 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Visigoth Spain
642 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Visigoth Empire
855 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Italy
876 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sens
1012 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mainz
1182 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - France
1182 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Germany
1276 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Upper Bavaria
1290 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - England
1306 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - France
1322 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - France (again)
1348 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Switzerland
1349 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hielbronn (Germany)
1349 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Saxony
1349 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hungary
1360 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hungary
1370 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Belgium
1380 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Slovakia
1388 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Strasbourg
1394 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Germany
1394 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - France
1420 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Lyons
1421 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Austria
1424 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Fribourg
1424 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Zurich
1424 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cologne
1432 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Savoy
1438 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mainz
1439 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Augsburg
1442 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Netherlands
1444 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Netherlands
1446 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Bavaria
1453 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - France
1453 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Breslau
1454 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Wurzburg
1462 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mainz
1483 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mainz
1484 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Warsaw
1485 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Vincenza (Italy)
1492 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Spain
1492 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Italy
1495 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Lithuania
1496 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Naples
1496 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Portugal
1498 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Nuremberg
1498 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Navarre
1510 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brandenberg
1510 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Prussia
1514 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Strasbourg
1515 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Genoa
1519 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regensburg
1533 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Naples
1541 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Naples
1542 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Prague & Bohemia
1550 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Genoa
1551 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Bavaria
1555 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Pesaro
1557 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Prague
1559 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Austria
1561 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Prague
1567 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Wurzburg
1569 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Papal States
1571 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brandenburg
1582 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Netherlands
1582 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hungary
1593 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brandenburg, Austria
1597 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cremona, Pavia & Lodi
1614 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Frankfort
1615 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Worms
1619 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Kiev
1648 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ukraine
1648 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Poland
1649 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hamburg
1654 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Little Russia (Beylorus)
1656 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Lithuania
1669 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Oran (North Africa)
1669 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Vienna
1670 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Vienna
1712 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sandomir
1727 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Russia
1738 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Wurtemburg
1740 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Little Russia (Beylorus)
1744 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Prague, Bohemia
1744 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Slovakia
1744 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Livonia
1745 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Moravia
1753 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Kovad (Lithuania)
1761 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Bordeaux
1772 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Deported to the Pale of
Settlement (Poland/Russia)
1775 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Warsaw
1789 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Alsace
1804 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Villages in Russia
1808 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Villages & Countrysides (Russia)
1815 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Lbeck & Bremen
1815 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Franconia, Swabia & Bavaria
1820 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Bremen
1843 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Russian Border Austria & Prussia
1862 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Areas in the U.S. under General Grant's Jurisdiction[1]
1866 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Galatz, Romania
1880s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Russia
1891 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Moscow
1919 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Bavaria (foreign born Jews)
1938-45 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Nazi Controlled Areas
1948 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Arab Countries

I believe your mind is closed to any other explanations for Jewish persecution, but two religious scholars offer a thorough explanation for Jew hate at this website.
Christian Persecution of Jews Over the Centuries

i would expect the ushmm to present something like this. it is nice to have everything wrapped up in a neat little bow.

i mysel prefer the hard science, tabla rasa approach rather than working backwards to prove a conclusion. both have their validity and proponents, of course.

the problem i have with focusing on christianity, and in the above, principally catholicism, is that it ignores other and perhaps more compelling factors.

were this the work of catholicism, or christianity, i would think that it would be more widespread and over an extended period of time. what we have above is isolated cases occurring over different periods of time.

of course, it is hard to seperate the politics from the culture from the accepted faith at the time but too many times, no attempt is even made.

personally, i grew up catholic in europe and america and went to catholic schools and to be honest nwith you, i only recall one almost non-incident in high school that could even be remotely construed as anti-semitic. kid asks another kid to borrow a quarter in the lunch line. kid says "no" and the the other kid says "don't be a jew."

i am not saying that religion doesn't play a part in it. what i am saying is the vietnam war was not a war between christians and buddhists. it was more than that.

 

[MHunterB]

"there is a diference between expressing pride in your ethnicity by saying "we're good" and saying "we're better than."

Indeed there is - and yet some seem unable to distinguish between the two.

"very early in the discussion is an ecellent example of this and, albeit a bit extreme and lacking in subtlety, is not at all unusual."


To quote someone "could you be any more vague?" Seriously, if you're going to refer to something , quote it so we can all see 'the original' and eac decide if it fits the interpretation you are putting on it.


personally, i have no problem acknowledging the acomplihments of jews as a group or as individuals, but some ethnicities do excel in certain areas and my experience has been jewish people interject themselves into the conversation in a manner that seems to be designed to elevate their accomplishments over those of the people in question."

The last clause of that run-on bit above belies the initial stance - at least as it's written. The very usage of the phrase 'interject themselves into the conversation' has pejorative connotations and appears hostile in intent. Likewise the 'seems to be designed' appears not so much a qualifier as another 'subtle' suggestion of machination and manipulation. And the 'elevating their accomplishments over those of the people in question' is entirely too vague and general to really have much meaning.

"it is the max baer/slapsie maxie rosenbloom paradox i have brought up on occasion. "

Speaking of 'interjecting themselves into the conversation' and 'elevating their accomplishments over those of the people in question" - the poster appears to me to be insinuating thy are somehow 'authoritative' on the topic, and their personal views are something to be cited as a reference.

It's entirely possible that I'm mistaken about the above: I'm just going on the words as I read them. Perhaps something was not included which connects those thoughts together and so I've missed it?

 

[MHunterB]

"Introduction to Gerald S. Sloyan's article on Christian Persecution of Jews Over the Centuries
by
Rev. John T. Pawlikowski, OSM, Ph.D.
Professor of Social Ethics, Catholic Theological Union, Chicago
Chair, Committee on Ethics, Religion, and the Holocaust, United States Holocaust Memorial Council "

I daresay these two gentlemen have studied, researched and written other articles on the topic NOT in conjunction with any USHMM projects. They certainly do appear to have the scholarly and religious qualifications. .....

 

[sealadaigh]

"Introduction to Gerald S. Sloyan's article on Christian Persecution of Jews Over the Centuries
by
Rev. John T. Pawlikowski, OSM, Ph.D.
Professor of Social Ethics, Catholic Theological Union, Chicago
Chair, Committee on Ethics, Religion, and the Holocaust, United States Holocaust Memorial Council "

I daresay these two gentlemen have studied, researched and written other articles on the topic NOT in conjunction with any USHMM projects. They certainly do appear to have the scholarly and religious qualifications. .....

scholarly and religious qualifications do not necessarily exclude bias.

i am quite sure i can find equally educated scholars that are raging anti-semites and conversely, some that are raging anti-gentile.

it might be of note that pawlikowski was appointed to his position by that notorious anti-semite, jimmy carter.

 

[sealadaigh]

"there is a diference between expressing pride in your ethnicity by saying "we're good" and saying "we're better than."

Indeed there is - and yet some seem unable to distinguish between the two.

"very early in the discussion is an ecellent example of this and, albeit a bit extreme and lacking in subtlety, is not at all unusual."


To quote someone "could you be any more vague?" Seriously, if you're going to refer to something , quote it so we can all see 'the original' and eac decide if it fits the interpretation you are putting on it.


personally, i have no problem acknowledging the acomplihments of jews as a group or as individuals, but some ethnicities do excel in certain areas and my experience has been jewish people interject themselves into the conversation in a manner that seems to be designed to elevate their accomplishments over those of the people in question."

The last clause of that run-on bit above belies the initial stance - at least as it's written. The very usage of the phrase 'interject themselves into the conversation' has pejorative connotations and appears hostile in intent. Likewise the 'seems to be designed' appears not so much a qualifier as another 'subtle' suggestion of machination and manipulation. And the 'elevating their accomplishments over those of the people in question' is entirely too vague and general to really have much meaning.

"it is the max baer/slapsie maxie rosenbloom paradox i have brought up on occasion. "

Speaking of 'interjecting themselves into the conversation' and 'elevating their accomplishments over those of the people in question" - the poster appears to me to be insinuating thy are somehow 'authoritative' on the topic, and their personal views are something to be cited as a reference.

It's entirely possible that I'm mistaken about the above: I'm just going on the words as I read them. Perhaps something was not included which connects those thoughts together and so I've missed it?

re "vague"...i inadvertantly left out the link...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean-debate-zone/280516-a-serious-question-about-jewish-history.html

whatever marg...your smart. i'm stupid. is that non "run on"-ish enough for your nit pickiness. i very seriously doubt if others had trouble with what i am saying, other than the missed link.

 

[SAYIT]

Well WESTERN Rome was falling apart in the third century CE, and Christendom had taken hold somewhat, so it might be possible that in some areas some of the landed gentry that still had some authority locally MIGHT have forced coversions of EVERYBODY to Christendom.

And IF that happened, it was probably as much an issue of TAXATION as theology.

Because for the Romans, religion was the method by which taxes were collected.

So one can definitely imagine that people might have been forced to pay taxes to some Christian chuches as an act of fealty to whomever was in charge of that area.

I'm pretty certain at least some of the expulsions were not fueled by hate but rather used anti-Semitism for justification.

Oh I wouldn't doubt that, either.
The question in this case is not why it happened but IF it happened.

There were instances of European monarchs expelling the Jews to avoid repaying debts to Jewish financiers. Anti-Semitism among the masses gave the King cover.

 

[Sunni Man]

There were instances of European monarchs expelling the Jews to avoid repaying debts to Jewish financiers. Anti-Semitism among the masses gave the King cover.

But the question is; Why was there so much alleged anti-semitism among the citizens?? .........

 

[MHunterB]

There were instances of European monarchs expelling the Jews to avoid repaying debts to Jewish financiers. Anti-Semitism among the masses gave the King cover.

But the question is; Why was there so much alleged anti-semitism among the citizens?? .........

Because it was continually re-inforced by the popular culture of the times - along with the official stance of the religion as taught, depicted in Church art and in 'pop culture' stories.

Do you happen to remember how many Jews there were in England when Chaucer wrote his Canterbury Tales ca 1400?



Officially, NONE. That's right - those who weren't burnt to death in York in 1291(?) were exiled - and didn't get 're-admitted' until King James (and then ONLY to assure that 'Biblical prophesy' was fulfilled).

 

[sealadaigh]

"there is a diference between expressing pride in your ethnicity by saying "we're good" and saying "we're better than."

Indeed there is - and yet some seem unable to distinguish between the two.

"very early in the discussion is an ecellent example of this and, albeit a bit extreme and lacking in subtlety, is not at all unusual."


To quote someone "could you be any more vague?" Seriously, if you're going to refer to something , quote it so we can all see 'the original' and eac decide if it fits the interpretation you are putting on it.


personally, i have no problem acknowledging the acomplihments of jews as a group or as individuals, but some ethnicities do excel in certain areas and my experience has been jewish people interject themselves into the conversation in a manner that seems to be designed to elevate their accomplishments over those of the people in question."

The last clause of that run-on bit above belies the initial stance - at least as it's written. The very usage of the phrase 'interject themselves into the conversation' has pejorative connotations and appears hostile in intent. Likewise the 'seems to be designed' appears not so much a qualifier as another 'subtle' suggestion of machination and manipulation. And the 'elevating their accomplishments over those of the people in question' is entirely too vague and general to really have much meaning.

"it is the max baer/slapsie maxie rosenbloom paradox i have brought up on occasion. "

Speaking of 'interjecting themselves into the conversation' and 'elevating their accomplishments over those of the people in question" - the poster appears to me to be insinuating thy are somehow 'authoritative' on the topic, and their personal views are something to be cited as a reference.

It's entirely possible that I'm mistaken about the above: I'm just going on the words as I read them. Perhaps something was not included which connects those thoughts together and so I've missed it?

re "vague"...i inadvertantly left out the link...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean-debate-zone/280516-a-serious-question-about-jewish-history.html

whatever marg...your smart. i'm stupid. is that non "run on"-ish enough for your nit pickiness. i very seriously doubt if others had trouble with what i am saying, other than the missed link.

Not 'smart' - I was created to be a proofreader. Can't 'copy' type at all - opposite hardwiring, lol.

Your link wasn't specific enough: it didn't isolate a single post. Ad if you were referring to Lipush's sig line : it's obvious you lack comprehension.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/6871922-post10.html

that should be the one...unless things screw up again...if not...post 10...this thread.

 

[editec]

I'm pretty certain at least some of the expulsions were not fueled by hate but rather used anti-Semitism for justification.

Oh I wouldn't doubt that, either.
The question in this case is not why it happened but IF it happened.

There were instances of European monarchs expelling the Jews to avoid repaying debts to Jewish financiers. Anti-Semitism among the masses gave the King cover.

Yes, there were.

And lets remember that it wasn't always monarchs and not always nations, either. City states, small kingdoms whose names are largely forgotten today, made up many of the places that we now associate with nations. I mean there was no Germany or Italy until the 19th century for example.

I believe (its been a while since I read that history) that ducking out on the Kings debt to the Jews was the motivation for the expulsion of Jews from England in the 13th century.

 

[ima]

I'm pretty certain at least some of the expulsions were not fueled by hate but rather used anti-Semitism for justification.

True, anti-semitism does not equal hate.

It's really more of a dislike of the jews and not wanting to associate with them.........

But muslims HATE Jews and want to kill them all, I gave you the verses in a previous post. Not just don't like them and don't want to associate with them, that's more how infidels feel towards muslims.

 

[Two Thumbs]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SERIOUS ANSWERS ONLY as this is in CLEAN DEBATE for exactly that reason.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is NOT a thread about Israel/Palestine nor a hate thread of any sort.
It isn't pro Muslim, anti Christian or anti Jewish.
I don't want rubbish about the Palestine/Israel conflict or any modern arguments of any type.

I'm looking for a real answer to a serious question.

Jewish Persecution | Timeline of Judaism | History of AntiSemitism

This link is to a Jewish site that lists various horrors that have been done to Jews over the last couple of thousand years.
They've been kicked out, enslaved, massacred, mutilated, burnt alive, forced to convert to Christianity and generally abused where ever they've settled.

All said and done, they've been given a pretty crap time of it.
So, my question is, what caused so much hate in all these places?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once again - SERIOUS ANSWERS ONLY as this is in CLEAN DEBATE for exactly that reason.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

They take care of their own and only their own.

for example; they are jewish Americans

I don't know anyone that says they are muslim Americans, catholic Americans, Southern Baptist Americans, and so on

They separate themselves now so as to claim a victim class and a minority.

 

[Indofred]

Does your hate of Muslims blind you so much, you can't see Muslims are exactly the same as Jews - ie, diverse in opinions and beliefs?

Muslims and Jews have one common trait. They're individuals that make up a group, not a group consciousness, all of one mind.

Anyway, the first events were clearly nothing to do with Muslims as there was no Islam at that time so, like Sunni, please stop with the hate filled rubbish.

I have learnt one thing from this thread; some people are so scared of finding out they may have common problems and/or so worried they'll find out their great enemy isn't really an enemy at all, they'll do anything to spam the thread off the boards.

Perhaps the world has no future at all until the rest of us find out there really is an enemy, the people who create and encourage the hate.

I'll bet, if we both managed to get rid of our idiot end, we could all live in peace with each other.

 

[Indofred]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SERIOUS ANSWERS ONLY as this is in CLEAN DEBATE for exactly that reason.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm looking for a real answer to a serious question.

Jewish Persecution | Timeline of Judaism | History of AntiSemitism

The second event in the link is:

224 C.E. Italy Forced Conversion

I can find nothing, not a sausage,bugger all.
The forced conversion wasn't to Christianity as the Romans of the time were using Christians as lion food and street lighting so I looked for forced conversion to paganism in as many search strings as I could think of.
Still nothing.

Can anyone help with this one?

Nothing at all.
I must assume error, a typo or a lie but I don't have enough information to decide which one.

On to

325 C.E. Jerusalem Expulsion

I'm taking a shot this was Constantine's conversion to Chrisitianity and the earlier revolts against Rome but watch this space.

 

[Indofred]

Now this is interesting.
First Council of Nicaea, set up by Constantine, had to sort of the the sticky questions regarding the bits of Christianity they weren't too keen on.
One of the bits they were messing about with was, the separation of Jewish religious dates with their new versions, all polished up for Christianity, mostly Easter.
The real killer was the council deciding the the Christ dude was in fact the son of God, not a prophet.
That left Jews as the murderer of the son of God - a great way to upset the new Christians.
That put the Jews and Christians at greater odds than before and really bugged both sides but, as the new Christians had the Roman army to solve their problems for them, the Jews didn't stand a chance.
Constantine's idea to rebuild bits of Jerusalem to reflect the bible must have been the last straw.

One more act of stupidity because of religious extremism and people knowing exactly how right they were, thus, how wrong everyone else must be.
That was an easy one.

What's next?

351 C.E Persia Book Burning

 

[Indofred]

Complex one but may be something to do with wars and who was on what side.
Some dude called, "Artaxerxes III" seems to be a big player here but this will take a while to sort out.

I did find one thing of interest to ima.

The Jews of Babylon

The oldest and most stable of Jewish communities was saved from the Christians by Muslims sweeping through the Middle East.

I don't know if Muslims saving Jews will annoy ima or sunni the most

I've search a load of sites so far with a wide variety of strings but have found nothing so far about book/scroll/torah/whatever burning.
All the material so far suggests, Jews were generally welcomed in Persia and have been there in peace for a very long time, right up to today.

 

[Indofred]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I'm rather hoping this thread will encourage posters to question what they've been told and open their eyes so they can see what's going on.

I know for a fact, some more extreme Muslim outlets depict Jews as baby eating bastards and I'd be more than surprised if the more extreme Jewish teachings didn't claim pretty much the same about Muslims.

I'm hoping posters will read the list in my OP, research at least a few parts of it for themselves and realise there isn't really an enemy in the whole of the opposing theological group, just the mad fools in both groups.