Anti-Semitism

[Scrawly]

Why focus on anti-semitism when it's a sub-set of general racism? Is it not the fact that when one singles out racism towards Jews, it ends up lending a hand to the general and wide-spread belief of Jewish exceptionalism?

[Cow Poke]

Just off the top of my head, antisemitism could be hatred of Jews for a number of reasons - for their religion or ethnicity... and there seems to have been a historic attempt to eradicate or eliminate or control them.

wiki

Extreme instances of persecution include the pogroms which preceded the First Crusade in 1096, the expulsion from England in 1290, the massacres of Spanish Jews in 1391, the persecutions of the Spanish Inquisition, the expulsion from Spain in 1492, the expulsion from Portugal in 1497, various Russian pogroms, the Dreyfus Affair, and the Final Solution by Hitler's Germany and official Soviet anti-Jewish policies.

© source where applicable

While it may be a subset, it's a very distinct and powerful segment.

[shunyadragon]

Why focus on anti-semitism when it's a sub-set of general racism? Is it not the fact that when one singles out racism towards Jews, it ends up lending a hand to the general and wide-spread belief of Jewish exceptionalism?

Because it has a particularly malicious religious element in the persecution and ethnic cleansing for over a thousand years. It is probably the longest most murderous, bloody and cruel vendetta to eradicate a religion and ethnic group in the history of humanity.

[Scrawly]

Because it has a particularly malicious religious element in the persecution and ethnic cleansing for over a thousand years. It is probably the longest most murderous, bloody and cruel vendetta to eradicate a religion and ethnic group in the history of humanity.

Indeed, and why do you think this is?

[shunyadragon]

Indeed, and why do you think this is?

Interesting question, and the answer is not just simply answered. 'Why?' is a tough one in this case.

One scenario is the following describing a brief factual history, but does not totally answer the question why.

There is an unfortunate set of circumstance going back to how the gospels and some of the letters in the New Testament were finalized by Roman Christians that portray Jews in life and death of Jesus leading to the conclusions of later generations of Christians to justify such actions against the Jews in Rome and later Europe based on scripture. Part of the slant of the gospels, and some of the letters was to deflect blame of Christ's crucifixion from Rome to the Jews. Thus in later history of the 'Passion plays of Europe portraying Jews as 'Christ Killers.' The persecution of Jews began to appear strongly in Rome during the years of Jewish rebellion in the first two centuries AD, but softened after the Jewish rebellions were crushed. Christians were also targeted for persecution in the second and third century pagan Rome. After Rome became Christian the persecution against Jews began again with the burning, destruction and confiscation of Jewish temples, and that of other pagan religions became common as well. Paganism faded and Rome became predominantly Christian with Jewish communities. Part of this trend was to depict Jesus as more Roman and Anglo Saxon, and Jews as Evil and in the image of satan. From then on Jews were targeted over the centuries for ethnic cleansing, extermination and exclusion. After Rome collapsed this periodically continued in Christian Europe up through the 1940's. Since then the persecution of Jews has subsided world wide, but not ended.

A more open ended explanation in the history of humanity is that cultures and religions that have strong exclusive claims tend to conflict and war against each other, and also tend exterminate other weaker competing religions and cultures. This warring and conflict trend is common between Jews Christians and Muslims. In this view it simply an unfortunate product of human territorial nature.

After some thought I may offer another explanation.

[Scrawly]

Interesting question, and the answer is not just simply answered. 'Why?' is a tough one in this case.

One scenario is the following describing a brief factual history, but does not totally answer the question why.

There is an unfortunate set of circumstance going back to how the gospels and some of the letters in the New Testament were finalized by Roman Christians that portray Jews in life and death of Jesus leading to the conclusions of later generations of Christians to justify such actions against the Jews in Rome and later Europe based on scripture. Part of the slant of the gospels, and some of the letters was to deflect blame of Christ's crucifixion from Rome to the Jews. Thus in later history of the 'Passion plays of Europe portraying Jews as 'Christ Killers.' The persecution of Jews began to appear strongly in Rome during the years of Jewish rebellion in the first two centuries AD, but softened after the Jewish rebellions were crushed. Christians were also targeted for persecution in the second and third century pagan Rome. After Rome became Christian the persecution against Jews began again with the burning, destruction and confiscation of Jewish temples, and that of other pagan religions became common as well. Paganism faded and Rome became predominantly Christian with Jewish communities. Part of this trend was to depict Jesus as more Roman and Anglo Saxon, and Jews as Evil and in the image of satan. From then on Jews were targeted over the centuries for ethnic cleansing, extermination and exclusion. After Rome collapsed this periodically continued in Christian Europe up through the 1940's. Since then the persecution of Jews has subsided world wide, but not ended.

A more open ended explanation in the history of humanity is that cultures and religions that have strong exclusive claims tend to conflict and war against each other, and also tend exterminate other weaker competing religions and cultures. This warring and conflict trend is common between Jews Christians and Muslims. In this view it simply an unfortunate product of human territorial nature.

After some thought I may offer another explanation.

It seems that you are pretty much tracing this back to Christianity and the misplaced charge that the Jews killed Jesus making them guilty of deicide; and this mentality has permeated Western history and culture that “Christian” anti-Semitism provides a link between all manifestations of anti-Semitism.

But I think this theory is seriously flawed. For example, how do we explain pre-Christian anti-Semitism? And does Christian anti-Semitism adequately explain Islamic anti-Semitism? And what of Christian philo-Semitism, a direct result of the testimony of the very New Testament that allegedly produced worldwide anti-Semitism?

[shunyadragon]

It seems that you are pretty much tracing this back to Christianity and the misplaced charge that the Jews killed Jesus making them guilty of deicide; and this mentality has permeated Western history and culture that “Christian” anti-Semitism provides a link between all manifestations of anti-Semitism.

But I think this theory is seriously flawed. For example, how do we explain pre-Christian anti-Semitism? And does Christian anti-Semitism adequately explain Islamic anti-Semitism? And what of Christian philo-Semitism, a direct result of the testimony of the very New Testament that allegedly produced worldwide anti-Semitism?

It is not a theory. It is well documented account of history.

The other manifestations of anti-Semitism can be easily explained for very separate reasons. First, the tribal and Kingdom wars of the OT are no different than the relationships and wars between tribes and kingdoms throughout the Neolithic through Iron Age all over the world. The Roman wars and persecution of Jews were no different than any other tribe or Kingdom that Rome conquered. Rebellion against Rome resulted in similar consequences regardless of culture, religion or ethnicity. In fact up until the Rebellion of Jews against Roman rule Jews were accepted in the diversity of religions throughout Rome. After the Jewish rebellions had been destroyed. Rome slowly allowed Jews to coexist, until Rome became Christian. In fact, By the time Rome became Christian, there were a number of synagogues in Rome Rome took the side of the Jews in the early destruction of Jewish temples, and demanded Christians compensate the Jews.

Anti-Semitism in the Islamic world is relatively recent, and are directly related to rise of Jewish Zionism for the establishing the State of Isreal. In fact prior to the rise of Zionism, Jewish communities coexisted with Muslims peacefully, under the the laws of toleration in Islam. When the Christians conquered Spain, Muslims and Jews coexisted peacefully, and both suffered from the persecution, forced conversion, and ethnic cleansing that followed, and of course the Inquisition.

The consistent world-wide anti-Semitism has been dominantly and consistently Christian.

I will look into what you call philo-Semitism, but on the surface it represents a very recent distinct very very small minority if that. Pro-Zionism in Christianity is relatively recent, and related to anti-Islamic views, and the hopes that the formation of the State of Israel would fulfill prophesy.

[Scrawly]

It is not a theory. It is well documented account of history.

The other manifestations of anti-Semitism can be easily explained for very separate reasons. First, the tribal and Kingdom wars of the OT are no different than the relationships and wars between tribes and kingdoms throughout the Neolithic through Iron Age all over the world. The Roman wars and persecution of Jews were no different than any other tribe or Kingdom that Rome conquered. Rebellion against Rome resulted in similar consequences regardless of culture, religion or ethnicity. In fact up until the Rebellion of Jews against Roman rule Jews were accepted in the diversity of religions throughout Rome. After the Jewish rebellions had been destroyed. Rome slowly allowed Jews to coexist, until Rome became Christian. In fact, By the time Rome became Christian, there were a number of synagogues in Rome Rome took the side of the Jews in the early destruction of Jewish temples, and demanded Christians compensate the Jews.

Anti-Semitism in the Islamic world is relatively recent, and are directly related to rise of Jewish Zionism for the establishing the State of Isreal. In fact prior to the rise of Zionism, Jewish communities coexisted with Muslims peacefully, under the the laws of toleration in Islam. When the Christians conquered Spain, Muslims and Jews coexisted peacefully, and both suffered from the persecution, forced conversion, and ethnic cleansing that followed, and of course the Inquisition.

The consistent world-wide anti-Semitism has been dominantly and consistently Christian.

I will look into what you call philo-Semitism, but on the surface it represents a very recent distinct very very small minority if that. Pro-Zionism in Christianity is relatively recent, and related to anti-Islamic views, and the hopes that the formation of the State of Israel would fulfill prophesy.

Good response and good points, as to which I agree with most of what you have said. However, as a Christian, I disagree that anti-Semitism is a Christian phenomenon; although I will concede that it partly a “Christian” phenomenon. Moreover, philo-Semitism - a direct result of the NT writings can be traced back to well before the relatively new movement of dispensationalism/pro-Zionism.

[shunyadragon]

Good response and good points, as to which I agree with most of what you have said. However, as a Christian, I disagree that anti-Semitism is a Christian phenomenon; although I will concede that it partly a “Christian” phenomenon. Moreover, philo-Semitism - a direct result of the NT writings can be traced back to well before the relatively new movement of dispensationalism/pro-Zionism.

for a less biased perspective I have to view the history of Anti-Semitism form the secular historical and factual perspective first, and not from perspective of belief, as in 'However, as a Christian . . .' Yes, there are conflicts, anti this and that between many religious, ethnic and racial groups in history, and anti-Semitism has had other causes as in Islamic relationships with Jews since the late 1800's, since WWII the general view of Christianity has moderated considerably, but the dominance of anti-Semitism for the past ~1600 years or so has been predominantly Christian for reasons previously cited.

Yes, philo-Semitism to some extent can be traced back to NT writings, but it is not very apparent until recently.

[Scrawly]

for a less biased perspective I have to view the history of Anti-Semitism form the secular historical and factual perspective first, and not from perspective of belief, as in 'However, as a Christian . . .' Yes, there are conflicts, anti this and that between many religious, ethnic and racial groups in history, and anti-Semitism has had other causes as in Islamic relationships with Jews since the late 1800's, since WWII the general view of Christianity has moderated considerably, but the dominance of anti-Semitism for the past ~1600 years or so has been predominantly Christian for reasons previously cited.

Yes, philo-Semitism to some extent can be traced back to NT writings, but it is not very apparent until recently.

Briefly, two problems seem to emerge here:

I think your first problem would be to think that a "secular" view of history is unbiased. Further, Christianity is a religion that is rooted and grounded in actual history. So I would be cautious in creating a dichotomy between Christianity and historical reality - the two are complimentary, not in conflict.

I think your second problem would be your insistence that anti-Semitism is a Christian phenomenon. You see, even if I grant that the Bible teaches that Jews are the enemies of Christian's (which I don't), Christian's are still obligated out of their love for Christ to love even their enemies and to do good to those who persecute us. Indeed, Philo-Semitism is a result of being a Christian and obeying the Scriptures - which condemns racism in all its forms. A secular perspective might not be of much assistance in dissecting these pesky details.

[shunyadragon]

Briefly, two problems seem to emerge here:

I think your first problem would be to think that a "secular" view of history is unbiased. Further, Christianity is a religion that is rooted and grounded in actual history. So I would be cautious in creating a dichotomy between Christianity and historical reality - the two are complimentary, not in conflict.

No, I did not say unbiased. I said less biased then any particular view of one religion. When I say secular I am referring strictly academic history sources. ALL the major religions are rooted a grounded in actual history. Yes in cases dichotomies arise due to the assumptions of one or another religious perspective.

I think your second problem would be your insistence that anti-Semitism is a Christian phenomenon. You see, even if I grant that the Bible teaches that Jews are the enemies of Christian's (which I don't), Christian's are still obligated out of their love for Christ to love even their enemies and to do good to those who persecute us. Indeed, Philo-Semitism is a result of being a Christian and obeying the Scriptures - which condemns racism in all its forms. A secular perspective might not be of much assistance in dissecting these pesky details.

I did not say all anti-Semitism is totally a Christian problem. Please quote me properly. The issue I will address is the Christian problem of anti-Semitism.

You cannot deny that a number of quotes from the gospels and the letters can be and were interpreted by the churches and individuals as anti-Jewish, and acted on over the course of history. The Roman Church and the principle founder of Protestant movement, Martin Luther, as well as many others, did in fact see sufficient a Biblical basis for not only anti-Jewishness, but the active persecution, forced conversion and ethnic cleansing of Jews.

[Scrawly]

No, I did not say unbiased. I said less biased then any particular view of one religion. When I say secular I am referring strictly academic history sources. ALL the major religions are rooted a grounded in actual history. Yes in cases dichotomies arise due to the assumptions of one or another religious perspective.



I did not say all anti-Semitism is totally a Christian problem. Please quote me properly. The issue I will address is the Christian problem of anti-Semitism.

You cannot deny that a number of quotes from the gospels and the letters can be and were interpreted by the churches and individuals as anti-Jewish, and acted on over the course of history. The Roman Church and the principle founder of Protestant movement, Martin Luther, as well as many others, did in fact see sufficient a Biblical basis for not only anti-Jewishness, but the active persecution, forced conversion and ethnic cleansing of Jews.

Of course, I accept the fact that the Bible has been interpreted to further many abominable actions - which include persecutions by the "Church" against the Jewish people. Although, I am not really all that interested in wild interpretations that make the Bible say whatsoever we choose to make it say. I am interested in what the Bible actually does say, and we can reach this point through contextualization and good exegesis and hermeneutics.

Once again though I really feel the need to drive this point home: Never judge a religion by it's abuse. Any time a "Christian" persecutes another due to religious beliefs, race, ethnicity, etc. they simply are not acting in accordance with the gospel message and what it means to be a Christian. That is not to say that they are not Christian at all, but rather, that particular action is un-Christian. If you beg to differ, quote me some verses and we'll exegete them at that point.

[shunyadragon]

Of course, I accept the fact that the Bible has been interpreted to further many abominable actions - which include persecutions by the "Church" against the Jewish people. Although, I am not really all that interested in wild interpretations that make the Bible say whatsoever we choose to make it say. I am interested in what the Bible actually does say, and we can reach this point through contextualization and good exegesis and hermeneutics.

Once again though I really feel the need to drive this point home: Never judge a religion by it's abuse. Any time a "Christian" persecutes another due to religious beliefs, race, ethnicity, etc. they simply are not acting in accordance with the gospel message and what it means to be a Christian. That is not to say that they are not Christian at all, but rather, that particular action is un-Christian. If you beg to differ, quote me some verses and we'll exegete them at that point.

Thee quotes do not represent wild speculation

Matthew 23:35 (also Lk 11:50-51)
And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.

Matthew 27:25

All the people answered, "Let his blood be on us and on our children!"

John 8:44 (also Rev 2:9)

You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire.

1 Thessalonians 2:14-16

You suffered from your own countrymen the same things those churches suffered from the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to all men in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last.

Revelation 3:9

I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars - I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.

[Scrawly]

Thee quotes do not represent wild speculation

Matthew 23:35 (also Lk 11:50-51)
And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.

Matthew 27:25

All the people answered, "Let his blood be on us and on our children!"

John 8:44 (also Rev 2:9)

You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire.

1 Thessalonians 2:14-16

You suffered from your own countrymen the same things those churches suffered from the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to all men in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last.

Revelation 3:9

I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars - I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.

Indeed, these quotes do not represent wild speculation; rather, they represent the historicity of the events. The Jewish people absolutely had a hand in the crucifixion of the Jewish Messiah - Jesus. Moreover, the Jewish people persecuted the early Church and the Apostle Paul met constant resistance from his fellow Jews. The Bible accurately records this.

Now, can these quotes be used to justify anti-Semitism? Well, I’m sure that those with predetermined hatred take whatever they can --from the OT & the NT-- to justify their stance. For example, Matthew 15:26 could be used to justify hatred for Gentiles! However, can such a reading stand up once we factor in the totality of the gospel message, and exegetical methods that incorporate the social context?

Matthew 27:35 is clearly a rebuke against the Pharisees and teachers of the Law. Jesus is asking how they’ll escape being condemned to hell because He is and had been sending them prophets, wise men and teachers, which some of them will kill, crucify and flog. Therefore, upon them will come all the righteous blood (see vs. 30) of the martyrs. This prophecy was fulfilled, at least in part, in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in A.D 70.

Matthew 27:25 It should be noted that in this passage it was not God, but rather, it was the people themselves who uttered these words. Indeed, there is no evidence here that God granted their request. Although, if there was fulfillment, it was most likely in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D 70.

John 8:44 In this passage Jesus warned His Jewish opponents of the reality of Satan's murderous and deceitful influence. You see, the Bible teaches that all those who oppose/reject Jesus are fundamentally Anti-Christ - this includes both Jews and Gentiles. But should they be persecuted as a result? Absolutely not. Moreover, since "salvation is from the Jews" (4:22 - context again rears its ugly head), Jesus' words do not apply to the Jewish people as a whole. Indeed, His warning should caution both Jews and Gentiles to follow Abraham's true example.

Rev. 2:9 This was written to the Church in Smyrna, which was a proud Asian city closely aligned with Rome and emperor worship. Plus, it was a large and actively hostile Jewish population which made it extremely difficult to live there as a Christian. But what about referring to the Jews opposed to Christ, as Satanic? Well, once again, the Bible teaches that all those - Jew and Gentile - which are opposed to Christ and His salvation are fundamentally Anti-Christ, and thus, Satanic. This applies to Rev. 3:9 as well. See 1John 3:8 for further clarification.

1 Thessalonians 2:14-16 At the time of Paul's initial visit to Thessalonica, persecution instigated by the Jews apparently was carried out by Gentiles (See Acts 17:5-9). Although Paul had great love and deep concern for the salvation of his own race (See Romans 9: 1-3; 10:1), he did not fail to rebuke harshly Jews who persecuted the Church.

So as we can see from the passages used to justify an individual's hatred, well, it simply falls short in light of the fact that just because there is a majority of a particular ethnic group in a particular geographical locale at a particular moment in history which may band together and act in concert to perpetrate a social injustice does not indict all individuals everywhere who share that ethnicity.

Indeed, the New Testament teaches that ethnicity should have nothing to do with the practice of the Christian religion—which includes how we see ourselves, as well as how we treat others. Listen carefully to Paul’s declarations on the subject: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham's seed” (Galatians 3:28-29, emp. added). Jesus obliterates the ethnic distinction between Jew and non-Jew:

For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity (Ephesians 2:14-17).

So, I hope you can see that Anti-Semitism is sinful and unchristian. Those Jewish people responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus are to be pitied. However, the Bible accurately records the historicity of sinful men mistreating the Son of God. Yet, even Jesus said concerning them: “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do” (Luke 23:34).

[shunyadragon]

Indeed, these quotes do not represent wild speculation; rather, they represent the historicity of the events. The Jewish people absolutely had a hand in the crucifixion of the Jewish Messiah - Jesus. Moreover, the Jewish people persecuted the early Church and the Apostle Paul met constant resistance from his fellow Jews. The Bible accurately records this.

Now, can these quotes be used to justify anti-Semitism? Well, I’m sure that those with predetermined hatred take whatever they can --from the OT & the NT-- to justify their stance. For example, Matthew 15:26 could be used to justify hatred for Gentiles! However, can such a reading stand up once we factor in the totality of the gospel message, and exegetical methods that incorporate the social context?

Matthew 27:35 is clearly a rebuke against the Pharisees and teachers of the Law. Jesus is asking how they’ll escape being condemned to hell because He is and had been sending them prophets, wise men and teachers, which some of them will kill, crucify and flog. Therefore, upon them will come all the righteous blood (see vs. 30) of the martyrs. This prophecy was fulfilled, at least in part, in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in A.D 70.

Matthew 27:25 It should be noted that in this passage it was not God, but rather, it was the people themselves who uttered these words. Indeed, there is no evidence here that God granted their request. Although, if there was fulfillment, it was most likely in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D 70.

John 8:44 In this passage Jesus warned His Jewish opponents of the reality of Satan's murderous and deceitful influence. You see, the Bible teaches that all those who oppose/reject Jesus are fundamentally Anti-Christ - this includes both Jews and Gentiles. But should they be persecuted as a result? Absolutely not. Moreover, since "salvation is from the Jews" (4:22 - context again rears its ugly head), Jesus' words do not apply to the Jewish people as a whole. Indeed, His warning should caution both Jews and Gentiles to follow Abraham's true example.

Rev. 2:9 This was written to the Church in Smyrna, which was a proud Asian city closely aligned with Rome and emperor worship. Plus, it was a large and actively hostile Jewish population which made it extremely difficult to live there as a Christian. But what about referring to the Jews opposed to Christ, as Satanic? Well, once again, the Bible teaches that all those - Jew and Gentile - which are opposed to Christ and His salvation are fundamentally Anti-Christ, and thus, Satanic. This applies to Rev. 3:9 as well. See 1John 3:8 for further clarification.

1 Thessalonians 2:14-16 At the time of Paul's initial visit to Thessalonica, persecution instigated by the Jews apparently was carried out by Gentiles (See Acts 17:5-9). Although Paul had great love and deep concern for the salvation of his own race (See Romans 9: 1-3; 10:1), he did not fail to rebuke harshly Jews who persecuted the Church.

So as we can see from the passages used to justify an individual's hatred, well, it simply falls short in light of the fact that just because there is a majority of a particular ethnic group in a particular geographical locale at a particular moment in history which may band together and act in concert to perpetrate a social injustice does not indict all individuals everywhere who share that ethnicity.

Indeed, the New Testament teaches that ethnicity should have nothing to do with the practice of the Christian religion—which includes how we see ourselves, as well as how we treat others. Listen carefully to Paul’s declarations on the subject: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham's seed” (Galatians 3:28-29, emp. added). Jesus obliterates the ethnic distinction between Jew and non-Jew:

For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity (Ephesians 2:14-17).

So, I hope you can see that Anti-Semitism is sinful and unchristian. Those Jewish people responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus are to be pitied. However, the Bible accurately records the historicity of sinful men mistreating the Son of God. Yet, even Jesus said concerning them: “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do” (Luke 23:34).

Of course there are different interpretations when looking through the scriptures, as the sky is blue on a clear day at noon on the 4th of July. My point is clear and specific that taking the above quotes as leading to anti-Semitism is most definitely not wild speculation. It is as a fact of ~1600 years of history from burning synagoges in Rome,, Luther's specific instructions as to how this was to be done to the pogromes of Europe through the centuries, particularly on Good Friday.