Congrats! By your standard you just engaged in hate speech.
For important and unique reasons, including a treasury of shared Scripture and an ancient heritage that belong to us in common but that also contain our dividedness, we look particularly for such opportunities with Jews. United Methodist participation in Christian-Jewish dialogue and relationships is based on the following understandings:
1. There is one living God, in whom both Jews and Christians believe.
While the Jewish and Christian traditions understand and express their faith in the same God in significantly different ways, we believe with Paul that God, who was in Christ reconciling the world to God’s own self (2 Corinthians 5:18-19), is none other than the God of Israel, maker of heaven and earth. Above all else, Christians and Jews are bonded in our joyful and faithful response to the one God, living our faith as each understands God’s call.
1. Jesus was a devout Jew, as were many of his first followers.
We know that understanding our Christian faith begins by recognizing and appreciating this seminal fact. Neither the ministry of Jesus and his apostles nor the worship and thought of the early church can be understood apart from the Jewish tradition, culture, and worship of the first century. Further, we believe that God’s revelation in Jesus Christ is unintelligible apart from the story of what God did in the life of the people of Israel.… 1. Christians and Jews are bound to God though biblical covenants that are eternally valid… 1. As Christians, we are clearly called to witness to the gospel of Jesus Christ in every age and place. At the same time, we believe that God has continued, and continues today, to work through Judaism and the Jewish people.
Okay show me several Christian denominations that say all Jews are going to hell.
You’ve already dismissed them as “weird sects” so what’s the point?
Also, you already said “{…} No doubt some weird sects {…} are indeed anti-Semitic {…}”
So I’m supposed to show you what you already agreed exists?
Dude. Lemme bold something for you.
In no way whatsoever is the Vatican’s document responsive to a comment about postmillennialism and its influence on the modern religious right.
ISTM that the trouble is that you didn’t know what he was talking about. LHoD explicitly stated that he was talking about a particular subset of conservative Christians that espouse postmillennialist beliefs.
Countering that by appealing to official Roman Catholic and United Methodist doctrines was entirely beside the point that LHoD was making.
I was not replying to LHoD. I replied to this:
…which was, as I quoted above, a response to what I’d written. “they” and “their” in that quote has “postmillennialist movement” as its antecedent.
Look on the bright side, your non sequitur knee-jerk response to defend Catholic doctrine when it wasn’t being criticized has distracted attention from the fact that religious nutjob or idiotic theocrat clearly don’t fit your own (good) definition of hate speech.
“…very root of Christian antisemitism.”
I paid not attention to your post and in no way shape or form was I replying to it.
Note that that was made clear in this reponse:
Where he did not mention he wasn’t talking about just the post-millenialist movement .
So, your arguments are wrong.
I do not get why several posters here, who claim to be the opposite of racist are arguing so strongly for bigotry… as long as thet get to choose their target.
And I do not get why you are seeking to protect bad ideas from criticism by mischaracterizing criticism of ideas as bigotry against the cultural identity of a broad class of people. Well, okay, do get it. You just don’t like people criticizing Catholics. But you have no moral high ground or claim to superior moral consistency here. You want privilege.
That being clear, I think that your misunderstanding has claimed enough attention in the thread.
I wasn’t misunderstanding jack shit.
Okay, you can’t argue with bigotry it seems. Go ahead, pat yourselves on the back and hand out woke medals while being ageist, racist and bigoted.
I can’t change your minds, I give up. But I am ashamed of this board.
But you obviously were. Recap:
LHoD asked “What if someone’s religious beliefs are that Christ will only return after a millennium of Christian rule on earth–the post-millenialist movement that’s so influenced the modern religious right?” The referent is clearly the specific subset of religious-right Christians that hold these postmillennialist beliefs.
CMC replied to LHoD, quoting that very sentence that I just quoted: “And we shan’t go into what they claim their god’s plan is for the Jews . . . because it’s the very root of Christian antisemitism.” CMC is clearly talking about the same specialized subset of Christian views that LHoD was.
Then you, DrDeth, responded to CMC with the angry accusation “You don’t know what you are talking about” and a completely irrelevant citation of Roman Catholic doctrine on “God’s plan for the Jews”. You clearly completely missed the point that this discussion was about postmillennialist Christian theology, which does not include Roman Catholicism.
And high time, too. You can’t change anybody’s mind on this because the posts clearly illustrating your initial missing of the point are still right here in the thread for all to read.
I mean, I get that maybe you still don’t quite see the point that LHoD and CMC were making, so you honestly believe that you didn’t misunderstand it. But for the other readers of this thread, it’s pretty clear that they were making a narrowly targeted criticism of a specific subset of conservative Christian theology that didn’t involve any kind of anti-Catholic bigotry (or any reference to Catholicism at all, in fact), and you just missed it.
The embarrassment is not in your initial inadvertent misunderstanding, which could happen to anybody, but in your subsequent increasingly angry and unconvincing denials.
Pretty much this.
The thing about @DrDeth is that they never, ever, in any way, shape or form change their mind. It’s been demonstrated time and again, at least as far back as the GoT kerfuffle some… ten (?) years ago.
Engaging them will only ever lead to rules lawyering, nitpicking and the thread degrading to the DrDeth show. It’s very similar to The Dio Show, The Liberal(tarian) Show and numerous others.
Well, I mean, before you went all off-the-rails with your misunderstanding of the conversation, there was an actual question in the post that you “paid not attention to”. Maybe pay some attention to it and try answering it? Starts here, but please don’t respond just to this bit, but instead to the whole post:
checks fly
Umm, who’s arguing for bigotry here? I see folks arguing that certain bigotry exists and you desperately wanting to ignore that fact.
I mean, certainly, we can ignore what Martin fucking Luther had to say about the Jews,
In a paragraph from his On the Jews and Their Lies he deplores Christendom’s failure to expel them. Moreover, he proposed “What shall we Christians do with this rejected and condemned people, the Jews”:
- “First, to set fire to their synagogues or schools … This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians …”
- “Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed.”
- “Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing, and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them.”
- “Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb …”
- “Fifth, I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside …”
- “Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them …”
- “Seventh, I recommend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow … But if we are afraid that they might harm us or our wives, children, servants, cattle, etc., … then let us emulate the common sense of other nations such as France, Spain, Bohemia, etc., … then eject them forever from the country …”
Martin Luther and antisemitism - Wikipedia
What shall Christians do with this rejected and condemned people, the Jews? Ethnically cleanse them out of existence of course!
I mean, it’s not like he’s an important figure in non Catholic Christanity right?
The question is, can I call Martin Luther a nutjob, without being a bigot?
What if I call him a nutjob based on his religious beliefs–does that make me a bigot?
If I can only call him a nutjob if I’m not referencing his religious beliefs–even though it’s precisely those beliefs that render him nutjobbertastic–we’re in a farce.
It may be worth DrDeth familiarizing himself with the Tolerance Paradox.
Yup, we’re at that point where calling out and exposing bigotry is being called bigotry. See: The OP of this thread.