Persecution Of Jews By Christians?

[Oscar_Kipling]

Take it from someone who the church has nearly entirely alienated, a church filled with Godly well meaning devout Christians ----------------------- Christians are the bad PR, as RK put it. There is no 'true Christian', ein Volk ein Kirche ein Gott fallacy to be had here.

I've seen you mention this a few times and I'm very curious about your current conflicts with your Christian community, but I don't want to dig into this and cause you even more stress/pain (knowing that I don't always display a great deal of emotional intelligence)...so do you feel like discussing this in detail with me? I completely understand if not of course.... To be clear i'm interested in how this all developed (your story I suppose), what other Christians are saying/doing, your take on the biblical position you are in, if you have a support system/ community, what would be a Christian resolution to this set of circumstances..idk stuff like that.

[journeyman]

Well, not to be a Nitpicking Nancy, but is a Christian that does something bad immediately transformed into a non-Christian until they ask for forgiveness...because like this sort of just defines Christians out of the possibility of ever doing anything wrong without accepting responsibility for the wrongs that Christians can perpetrate...that is you can say well 21 minutes ago I was a Christian, but 20 minutes ago when I kicked grandma down the stairs I was a non-Christian but 19 minutes ago I sincerely repentented and am Christian again...like technically within this paradigm no Christian did anything wrong but like only technically.

My view is God gives people time to grow. That's what our Lord taught, when he said,

leave it alone for one more year and I’ll dig around it and fertilize it. Lk.13:8

If I had a nickel for every time i've been slapped and a dime for every reaction I've had to said slap i'd have enough money to buy a 2 liter cherry vanilla coke if it was on sale.

You'd have enough for a 2 liter if the Jews beat you, but the Romans beat Jesus, so you could probably get three 2 liters. Messiah doesn't get a drop of cherry vanilla, because he didn't seek retribution. Personally, I would have ended their lives quickly and I'm grateful he didn't.

Anyway I can say that I never drowned every organism on earth save for one family and 2 of every kind of animal, I never destroyed a town or turned anyone into a salt pillar, I never genocided whole peoples or brought multiple plagues upon a country and I haven't killed a single first born son, I never made anyone wander in the wilderness ...you get the point, just saying God has been pretty temperamental at times and so have I, but in a game of never have I ever with the creator of the universe I think I'd come out looking like the more eventempered of the 2.

I think most people who take offense at other drivers would agree with you. 😊 But seriously, considering who Jesus is, was and always will  be, I don't believe any other human with that kind of authority would have endured a fraction of the abuse our Savior bore.

[Athanasius]

Let us imagine that this is the Christian stance: it is, in fact, not Christians who cause people to reject Christ, but unbelievers who may merely think they are Christians, claim to know Christ but actually don't, and so on:

think congregations are made up of believers and unbelievers. Only God knows the difference.

Obviously, this is an immediate dead end. If only God knows the difference, then the person who rejects Christ does so because of the actions or stated beliefs of people they believe are Christian. They don't know any better, so the difference is immaterial -- only God knows the difference, and He's not yet sharing. To us, a real Christian and a pretend Christian look the same unless it's really very painfully obvious. Even then, what we think are differences (e.g., thinking that everyone liberal must not be Christian) might not matter to God. It's difficult to judge these things. Impossible, even.

So, the Christian stance says, "No it definitely wasn't us. Oh, our proof? Well, look at how that person acted; it definitely wasn't us". But why should anyone believe that? And more to the point, are Christians immune from acting unwisely or being wrong, or doing anything any person with agency could possibly do? How is Christian PR in the US going at the moment?

"No true Christian would..."

I've seen you mention this a few times and I'm very curious about your current conflicts with your Christian community, but I don't want to dig into this and cause you even more stress/pain (knowing that I don't always display a great deal of emotional intelligence)...so do you feel like discussing this in detail with me? I completely understand if not of course.... To be clear i'm interested in how this all developed (your story I suppose), what other Christians are saying/doing, your take on the biblical position you are in, if you have a support system/ community, what would be a Christian resolution to this set of circumstances..idk stuff like that.

The short version is that at present, I'm effectively transitioning (male-to-female), having spent ~30 years trying to come up with an alternative solution to the gender dysphoria I experience, or my gender identity disorder, or gender incongruence, or whatever we want to call it. Why now? Two reasons:

1. Because I started having "fleeting thoughts of suicide". I ran out of time trying to figure out a solution that was effectively a kind of self-denial for the sake of Christ.
2. I was unable to continue standard treatment for (male) hypogonadism, having tried for a couple of years.

2. is bigger than it seems and should be well understood by anyone who has been hypogonadic for any extended period of time (I'm talking years). I'm not able to live without HRT of some kind, so I couldn't stop even if I wanted to. (I could but it's a very bad time, over decades.) Well, if TRT (testosterone replacement) is making me worse, and I'm trying to treat three serious medical issues, then why not try e2/p4 (estradiol/progesterone) to see what the impact is?

That's where I'm at. I'm not espousing some transgender ideology. I'm not neck deep in 'gender ideology'. I haven't suggested a free-for-all abandonment of 'biblical sexuality'. I haven't become a postmodernist absurdist neo-Marxist, anarcho-capitalist disciple of Lyotard raising my fist at Satre! I haven't mutilated a healthy body. But yeah, I'm on hormones, my body shape is different, my skin is softer, my hair is longer, I have breasts now, my clothes look funny, and I look funny in them, and if you're being a dick, I'll be one back and harass you about names and pronouns, so on, and so on. Hormones have consequences, and people, even Christians, make egregious assumptions. I used to look murderous, and now I'm merely complicated to be around.

But I'm not hypogonadic anymore (for now). I'm not suicidal anymore. My dysphoria/whatever you want to call it isn't a problem anymore. I have emotions, and I can actually project empathy, and I smile, and I'm not miserable to be around, and I'm happy to be alive, and I don't go to bed wishing I would die in my sleep. The hormones were a last-ditch effort. The thing I had done everything to avoid. I was losing myself and my family. I didn't know what else to try, and the best I got out of the church was, "uh well, don't do that, just pray some more". Or I'd get the "theological" answer that wasn't "pastoral" because that was a different question.

And you see, no true Christian would transition or do anything that might look like transition, and so I'm no true Christian; because no true Christian would contravene the plans of God, and transitioning is a contravention. No true Christian would ignore what's clearly taught in Scripture, and to transition is to do just that. No true Christian would spit in the face of Christ concerning their own creation, and transitioning does just that. No true Christian would engage in perversion, sexual deviancy, intentional sin, etc.

It's not fake Christians. It's Christians who read Deuteronomy and Paul and Jeremiah and think they're doing what they've been taught. It's good, God-fearing, mainline, 'conservative' Christians.

Note that I'm a bit ranty today as I have COVID. I can go into my history more if you're interested, but that might be more suitable to a DM.

[RabbiKnife]

The irony.

Athanasius is undergoing a purely medical protocol related to his hypogonadism (which is the result of a childhood issue, so this is decades long), the hormonal imbalance of which was destroying his mental health.  So, doctor prescribed medication (hormone therapy) with testosterone resulted in a physically and mentally more harmful outcome.  Change lanes and go with the opposite hormonal treatment and everything works much better, except for Christian societal acceptance.

So, although Athanasius has not undergone ANY surgical procedures, and has no intention of doing so, at least clothed, Athanasius has secondary sexual attributes of a female -- enlarged breasts, less facial hair, softer skin and hair. 

From a non-Christian societal perspective, Athanasius is a girl.  Athansius' appearance in society is feminine, yet his female wife knows otherwise in private.  Athansius is not a lesbian because Athansius is married to a cis-gendered female.

I have a friend who, as a last resort in treatment of his stage 4 prostate cancer, endured both oncological chemo and female hormonal treatment, and it did the trick.  It also grew him a nice pair of C-cups, eliminated his need for shaving, and radically changed his emotions. 

Yet no one (at least to his face) accused him of "violated God's plan for humanity."

By and large, the church is extraordinarily shallow and unthinking and unequipped to deal with serious medical issues and their consequences.  The fact that our society is currently consumed with transgenderism only makes this more difficult for folks with serious medical conditions the treatment of which results in significant issues with secondary sexual characteristics, as the assumption is that any observable change is desired by the person for the worst possible reasons.

Christians can be ridiculously unloving.  So a man married to a woman is A OK, but if that same man undergoes hormone therapy for underlying medical conditions and the result is that his outward public appearance changes to female, people in the church assume that he is now thinking that he's a lesbian?  Good Lord, people can be dense.

This is a bit of a side discussion.

But the real issue is, yes, Christians are often their worst PR because they believe their own PR.

[Oscar_Kipling]

The irony.

Athanasius is undergoing a purely medical protocol related to his hypogonadism (which is the result of a childhood issue, so this is decades long), the hormonal imbalance of which was destroying his mental health.  So, doctor prescribed medication (hormone therapy) with testosterone resulted in a physically and mentally more harmful outcome.  Change lanes and go with the opposite hormonal treatment and everything works much better, except for Christian societal acceptance.

So, although Athanasius has not undergone ANY surgical procedures, and has no intention of doing so, at least clothed, Athanasius has secondary sexual attributes of a female -- enlarged breasts, less facial hair, softer skin and hair. 

From a non-Christian societal perspective, Athanasius is a girl.  Athansius' appearance in society is feminine, yet his female wife knows otherwise in private.  Athansius is not a lesbian because Athansius is married to a cis-gendered female.

I have a friend who, as a last resort in treatment of his stage 4 prostate cancer, endured both oncological chemo and female hormonal treatment, and it did the trick.  It also grew him a nice pair of C-cups, eliminated his need for shaving, and radically changed his emotions. 

Yet no one (at least to his face) accused him of "violated God's plan for humanity."

By and large, the church is extraordinarily shallow and unthinking and unequipped to deal with serious medical issues and their consequences.  The fact that our society is currently consumed with transgenderism only makes this more difficult for folks with serious medical conditions the treatment of which results in significant issues with secondary sexual characteristics, as the assumption is that any observable change is desired by the person for the worst possible reasons.

Christians can be ridiculously unloving.  So a man married to a woman is A OK, but if that same man undergoes hormone therapy for underlying medical conditions and the result is that his outward public appearance changes to female, people in the church assume that he is now thinking that he's a lesbian?  Good Lord, people can be dense.

This is a bit of a side discussion.

But the real issue is, yes, Christians are often their worst PR because they believe their own PR.

i'm curious, what are the worst possible reasons? from my perspective this post expresses an attitude that directly contravenes the ostensible intention of the post....which is actually, dramatically and colloquially ironic. What a time to be alive!

[RabbiKnife]

The “worst possible reasons” would be a desire to intentionally reject God and His plan for human sexuality for the purpose of the gratification of one’s own lusts.

Many people claiming to be Christian start from a default position of “anything that does not line up with every jot and tittle of my personal opinion” = an intentional act of knowing rebellion against God

[Oscar_Kipling]

The “worst possible reasons” would be a desire to intentionally reject God and His plan for human sexuality for the purpose of the gratification of one’s own lusts.

Many people claiming to be Christian start from a default position of “anything that does not line up with every jot and tittle of my personal opinion” = an intentional act of knowing rebellion against God

fair enough, perhaps i've been too harsh in my assessment.

[journeyman]

So, the Christian stance says, "No it definitely wasn't us. Oh, our proof? Well, look at how that person acted;

I disagree. To me, the Christian stance is, "Look at how I acted", because the purpose of the law is to show me that I'm the sinner, so to condemn anyone only makes me a hypocrite.

I was unable to open the website you provided on Luthers' anti-Jewish writings, but I did look up Kristallnacht. It kind of reminded me of the Rodney King debacle, where store owners properties were vandalized and citizens of unlike color were beaten because of mistreatment of a few police officers. Of course there are differences, but the point is, we have no right to harm people who have done nothing to us. Above this, our sweet Jesus didn't harm people who did mistreat him. That's the true gospel.

[Oscar_Kipling]

So, the Christian stance says, "No it definitely wasn't us. Oh, our proof? Well, look at how that person acted;

I disagree. To me, the Christian stance is, "Look at how I acted", because the purpose of the law is to show me that I'm the sinner, so to condemn anyone only makes me a hypocrite.

I was unable to open the website you provided on Luthers' anti-Jewish writings, but I did look up Kristallnacht. It kind of reminded me of the Rodney King debacle, where store owners properties were vandalized and citizens of unlike color were beaten because of mistreatment of a few police officers. Of course there are differences, but the point is, we have no right to harm people who have done nothing to us. Above this, our sweet Jesus didn't harm people who did mistreat him. That's the true gospel.

I agree that there are parallels between the king riots and Kristallnacht, but reducing the actions and reactions down to what a few police officers did or what a single assasin did sort of misses the broad social/political cultural and historical influences and interactions that filled the powder keg so that a spark could ignite an explosion of truly egregious behavior or idk maybe you do see it and you just didn't calibrate your statement as I might have.

[Athanasius]

I disagree. To me, the Christian stance is, "Look at how I acted", because the purpose of the law is to show me that I'm the sinner, so to condemn anyone only makes me a hypocrite.

But that's also to highlight how the other person acted. There's no getting around it.

I'm not sure where you're going with your thoughts on Kristallnacht. My point was that it fell on Luther's birthday and Nazi propaganda made a point of that fact.

[journeyman]

I agree that there are parallels between the king riots and Kristallnacht, but reducing the actions and reactions down to what a few police officers did or what a single assasin did sort of misses the broad social/political cultural and historical influences and interactions that filled the powder keg so that a spark could ignite an explosion of truly egregious behavior or idk maybe you do see it and you just didn't calibrate your statement as I might have.

I see it and our calibrations aren't the same, because sin is egregious to God regardless of number or time,

That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth Mt.23:35

Why on earth would they be guilty killing Abel? And guess what...so are unrepentant Nazis'.

[journeyman]

But that's also to highlight how the other person acted. There's no getting around it.

You understand I'm speaking from the standpoint of judgment, right? It's only to highlight to God...how the other person acted,

Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight; so you are right in your verdict and justified when you judge. Psa.51:4

What about Uriah? David murdered him. So to sin against another human being is to sin against our Lord.

I'm not sure where you're going with your thoughts on Kristallnacht. My point was that it fell on Luther's birthday and Nazi propaganda made a point of that fact.

Thanks. The article I read just talked about the excuse for which it happened...a young Jewish man kills a Diplomat after seeing government oppress his people.
What happened to innocent Jews in the aftermath was horrific, but that's pretty much how Jesus' stay on earth went. Except our Lord overcame all their sin against him by rising from death. 😊

[Oscar_Kipling]

My view is God gives people time to grow. That's what our Lord taught, when he said,

leave it alone for one more year and I’ll dig around it and fertilize it. Lk.13:8

yeah so it is still not clear to me how this reconciles the idea that it is non Christians that are the main influencing factor in leading people away from Jesus, is it possible to explain yourself without simply referring to a bible verse that we may not interpret in the same way?

You'd have enough for a 2 liter if the Jews beat you, but the Romans beat Jesus, so you could probably get three 2 liters. Messiah doesn't get a drop of cherry vanilla, because he didn't seek retribution. Personally, I would have ended their lives quickly and I'm grateful he didn't.

I am having a difficult time interpreting this generously, but that may very well be beside the point. If I am allowed to seperate myself into "Hero Oscar" and "Calamity Oscar" I too could claim that "Hero Oscar" has never once sought retribution because everytime he was slapped he de-escalated or showed restraint and empathy. I think that would be about as dishonest as claiming that Jesus who is also God (and also some kind of other nebulous ghost thing too) never once rained down fury and devastation on human transgressors (as well as animals animals that surely cannot be blamed for all the offensive sex, debauchery and idol worship people were apparently engaged in).... all that to say that if I don't get to seperate out all of the times that I was really cool, mature and understanding about the slings and arrows directed at me into another personage that can be discussed as having separate responsibilities than the personage that reacted with violence and fury then there is no way that Jesus is off the hook for turning a dude's wife into salt for looking back at the town that Jesus was also mercilessly turning into ash and rubble.

I think most people who take offense at other drivers would agree with you. 😊 But seriously, considering who Jesus is, was and always will  be, I don't believe any other human with that kind of authority would have endured a fraction of the abuse our Savior bore.

To me this is about your claims and how they don't even maintain consistency even when reasoning within your framework. Jesus didn't let every transgression slide without meting out justice...sure he didn't leap off of the cross and Jackie Chan all of the Romans (though I would pay to see that movie), but literally anything that anyone does that doesn't fall under the constraints of what the creator of the universe has laid out as acceptable thought/behavior and/or repentance for failure to think/behave has wages and those wages are exceedingly dire. No one gets away with anything, not a jot nor a tittle gets past the great auditor...So what do I mean really? Who cares if Jesus didn't curse out the joker that gave him vinegar to drink right there on the spot because he created a universe that demands payment one way or the other... I can say that there are some people that slapped me that have gotten off totally scott free, at least when it comes to personal retribution by me...Jesus is not nearly as chill as you seem to want to paint him in this discussion.

[journeyman]

yeah so it is still not clear to me how this reconciles the idea that it is non Christians that are the main influencing factor in leading people away from Jesus, is it possible to explain yourself without simply referring to a bible verse that we may not interpret in the same way?

Sure. A Christian is someone who leads others toward Jesus, not away from him.

I am having a difficult time interpreting this generously, but that may very well be beside the point. If I am allowed to seperate myself into "Hero Oscar" and "Calamity Oscar" I too could claim that "Hero Oscar" has never once sought retribution because everytime he was slapped he de-escalated or showed restraint and empathy. I think that would be about as dishonest as claiming that Jesus who is also God (and also some kind of other nebulous ghost thing too) never once rained down fury and devastation on human transgressors (as well as animals animals that surely cannot be blamed for all the offensive sex, debauchery and idol worship people were apparently engaged in).... all that to say that if I don't get to seperate out all of the times that I was really cool, mature and understanding about the slings and arrows directed at me into another personage that can be discussed as having separate responsibilities than the personage that reacted with violence and fury then there is no way that Jesus is off the hook for turning a dude's wife into salt for looking back at the town that Jesus was also mercilessly turning into ash and rubble.

I never said the preincarnate Son never killed sinners. I also never said Jesus will never bring anyone to judgment.
I thought you understood I was referring to the Messiah while he walked as a human among us, because the Judge of all living and dead said,

I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. Jn.12:47

Then added that the word he spoke would judge later.

To me this is about your claims and how they don't even maintain consistency even when reasoning within your framework. Jesus didn't let every transgression slide without meting out justice

Yes he did. What you're saying is contrary to,

God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. 2Cor.5:19

...sure he didn't leap off of the cross and Jackie Chan all of the Romans (though I would pay to see that movie), but literally anything that anyone does that doesn't fall under the constraints of what the creator of the universe has laid out as acceptable thought/behavior and/or repentance for failure to think/behave has wages and those wages are exceedingly dire. No one gets away with anything, not a jot nor a tittle gets past the great auditor...So what do I mean really? Who cares if Jesus didn't curse out the joker that gave him vinegar to drink right there on the spot because he created a universe that demands payment one way or the other... I can say that there are some people that slapped me that have gotten off totally scott free, at least when it comes to personal retribution by me...Jesus is not nearly as chill as you seem to want to paint him in this discussion.

I guess Jesus descending from the cross would make anyone who abused him care.
But to answer your objections, the Messiah showed us how patient (not short suffering, but how) longsuffering his Father is toward the worst type of sin imaginable on a daily basis. To become a son is to be trained by God and the training is experience. The only begotten Son was trained that way, but only as an example to adopted sons, because he didn't need the training...because he knew what it felt like to be sinned against before he was born into this world.

Our Savior plainly taught that judgment falls on the unrepentant when he decides.

[Oscar_Kipling]

Sure. A Christian is someone who leads others toward Jesus, not away from him.

such sticky territory this, If i'm repelled from the very idea of Jesus by your posts here then does that give me the power to determine your Christianity? Or lets say its more subtle than being repelled, let's say your posts are not well calibrated to my sensibilities or level of biblical understanding because you answer questions with bible verses that are essentially inscrutable to me and that leads me to conclude that Christianity is vacuous gibberish with no application to modern life much less my life. I don't personally blame you for quoting the bible or anything, but we must admit that quotations and pithy statements are not necessarily the height of communicating ideas, sort of like in Enter the Dragon your Christian-ness would seem to some degree to depend on my ability to recognize that you are trying to point out the moon instead of getting me to look at your finger. Just saying even if you aren't doing anything inherently sinful you can be a total failure at leading people towards Christ.

I never said the preincarnate Son never killed sinners. I also never said Jesus will never bring anyone to judgment.
I thought you understood I was referring to the Messiah while he walked as a human among us, because the Judge of all living and dead said,

I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. Jn.12:47

Then added that the word he spoke would judge later.

You're right , you never said that I just assumed it because like if you weren't then it's really not analogous to any human reaction to getting slapped because God always reacts...seems inconsequential that God/Jesus didn't do anything right then in the moment or for his whole life (which is eternal) because everything the Romans did was judged and the verdict had eternal consequences. It's more like if someone slapped me and I didnt do anything right then, but 50 years later I show up at their deathbed and demand a sincere apology or failing that I slap them.

Yes he did. What you're saying is contrary to,

God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. 2Cor.5:19

Oh word? So what happened to all of those transgressors that didn't repent and become followers of Jesus? Were they judged & what were the wages of their sins? Was it eternal life or the other thing?

I guess Jesus descending from the cross would make anyone who abused him care.

It would at least freak them out lol

But to answer your objections, the Messiah showed us how patient (not short suffering, but how) longsuffering his Father is toward the worst type of sin imaginable on a daily basis. To become a son is to be trained by God and the training is experience. The only begotten Son was trained that way, but only as an example to adopted sons, because he didn't need the training...because he knew what it felt like to be sinned against before he was born into this world.

Our Savior plainly taught that judgment falls on the unrepentant when he decides.

What does it even mean to be long suffering as an eternal being? Say "Eternal Oscar" tolerates someone being rude and disrespectful for 70x7 days if I literally always have and always will exist was that a long time? Like I could tolerate it until the end of time and still there would be an infinite existence of me not tolerating it...There is only one way to be long suffering as an eternal being and that is to not ever do anything about it, never demand repentance or justice, anything short of that is mathematically insignificant. Also all sin costs the same, so what difference does it make? does God not find all sin equally anathema, if he doesn't why does he charge the same price for all sins? The degree of sin is as meaningless a concept as long suffering in relation to God. God in Jesus form or in Ultimate Final form or in Ghost form is really just a bit of sleight of hand because God can only pretend he's not God, You cannot actually kill him, a lifetime of suffering is a dimensionless slice sandwiched between eternities as God. God cannot suffer enough to be an analogy to human suffering because God gets to go be God afterwards, its roleplaying like undercover boss or living like a homeless person for a week so that you can "really understand the plight of the underprivalidged". If God would have died on that cross and stayed dead then I'd call that a sacrifice, short of that its histrionics.