smellincoffee

When I was growing up a fundamentalist, I beleived antisemitism was wrong, because the Jewish people are god's chosen. Since they were God's chosen, and because they did not accept Jesus, I thought this was why they had been persecuted throughout history -- God made people hate Jews to punish them for not accepting his son, and before Jesus God made people hate Jews to punish them for not listening to him or simply because they were jealous. (You would think that God would realize that his chosen people don't really want him. )

Now that I no longer believe in that god, I must rationalize antisemitism. After Christianity it makes sense -- there was this misguided notion that the Jews killed Jesus, and therefore they were completely evil. Before Christianity, everybody hated everybody, especially tribes who say they alone are god's chosen people and expect you to leave your city, your gold, your animals, and your virgin daughters to them. I'm more or less satisfied with this line of thought, but are there more rational explainations for anti-semitism out there?

Malachi151

I have an article on it here:

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/ar...ng_fascism.htm

Basically, yeah, its a product of Christianity.

Peter Kirby

Christianity is not the whole explanation. In numerous cases throughout history, people have despised their cultural neighbors, people of different nationality yet in close proximity; in Asia, in Europe, in Africa, in the Americas, everywhere we see examples of this. After the destruction of the Solomonic Temple, Israel became a "diaspora nation," maintaining a separate way of life, customs, and religion wherever they went--not assimilating to the cultures they lived around. It is, sociologically speaking, only expected that the Jews would be hated for this reason. And we find that they often are--before and independent of Christianity.

kind regards,
Peter Kirby

coloradoatheist

I agree with Peter, while it's not right they when have been seen as distinct group and distinct groups to get singled out. Also in several cities jews were outlawed from certain practices and one of the industries they could be in was finance so they also became rich. Constantine's Sword was a good book about the long standing semitism and it was a combination of Christianity and culture.

Mike

douglas

There was certainly allot of "hate" floating (as there is today), but there was also a fair amount of respect for the Jewish faith. Some gentiles admired the Jews austerity and their perceived morality, but the price of admission for an adult to the Jewish faith was high - Circumcision. Ouch!

In my opinion, one of the most significant things Paul did to help spread Christianity was to help abolish the circumcision requirement. This definitely improved the "sell" for early non-believers.

"You mean I get all my sins forgiven, have eternal life, get to lord over my woman, but I have to cut part of my pecker off? Um... let me think it over and get back to you."

Malachi151

Opposition to Jewish lack of integration (which was actually only a small subset of Jews, many did integrate) was purely based on circumstance prior to Christianity, i.e. this was only an issue when dealing explicitly with this caused a problem and people were dealing with it.

When Christianity came along, however, hatred of Jews became a part of the religion, and a part of the overall culture, removed even from actual experience. Then, people hated Jews simply because they were Jews, whereas before that wasn't the case.

douglas

Is it not also fair to say that some of pre-christian antisemitism came from within the jewish faith itself? For example, The Jesus-era Jews vs. Samaritan Jews. Pharisees vs. Sadducee's. The Roman's were fairly tolerant of the Jews as long as they paid their taxes and didn't claim authority over Caesar, which is ultimately what got Jesus in trouble.

Jews were definitely persecuted, but it was mainly because they were parked on land that someone else wanted, not simply because of their faith. Once conquered, they were often forced to observe the favored religious practices of the invading force.

I agree with Malachi151. It wasn't until Christianity gained steam that antisemitism became institutionalized.

EssEff

In the Middle Ages usury was a sin, but since Jews didn't believe in Catholic sins, they could make loans and charge interest. The borrowers apparently didn't sin, just the "usurers."

Jews also became adept at "portable" crafts because they were forbidden to own land, and might get expelled at any point. That's how they became musicians, doctors, and jewelers.

douglas

It seems like modern day anti-(insert belief or ethnic group here) is more intense the closer the "relative." For example...

Protestant vs. Catholic (ie. Northern Ireland)
Sunni's vs. Shiite Muslims
Hutu vs. Tutsi
Christian vs. Jew
Jews vs. Muslim
Muslim vs. Christian
Ohio State vs. Michigan

When hating someone because of some belief that's bouncing around inside their head, it seems like the hate is stronger the more similar their beliefs are to yours. Maybe because it's harder to discard the competing beliefs, and the opposing ideas seem that much more blasphemous and offensive.

Geographic distance between the factions plays a part, I'm sure, but you'd think that the more similar the beliefs, the more they'd have in common, and they less they'd fight. Northern Ireland Protestant and Catholics probably have many reasons to hate each other, but I wonder if the hate would come as easily, or would be as violent, if it was Catholic vs. Hindu?

This is just a rambling observation. Feel free to refute...

Malachi151

This assumes that the reasons for conflict are doctrinal, when in fact they usually aren't.

For example, Caths. vs. Prots. in Ireland. This conflict comes from the following facts:

1) Ireland was converted to Catholicism peacefully back in what, the 6th century?
2) The Irish benefited from Catholicism overall, or at least from the institutions that came with it.
3) The rest of Britain was not Catholic until they were forced under Catholic rule during the Norman Invasion.
4) As such, the rest of Britian hated Catholocism because they saw it as an oppressive outside force.
5) With King Henry VIII, the English started going Protestant and waging a war on Catholicism, kicking it out of the country was seen as a matter of national pride and defiance of the Mainland.
6) The English viewed the Irish (rightly so in some cases, and I am part Irish) as uneducated savages and criminals.
7) The English tried to force Protestantism on the Irish.
8) The Irish responded by defending Catholicism as a matter of national pride.

Etc.

So, Catholicism is seen as both a symbol of foreign invasion and the mainland by the English, as well as a symbol of the uneducated, while Protestantism is seen as a symbol of foreign invasion and oppression by the Irish.

So, these things have little to do with doctrine really.