…or a satanic cult, or worshippers of Aphrodite visiting the temple prostitutes, would you then be ok with it? Or it is because the debauchers happen to be in a religion that it is politically incorrect to criticise in the 21st century, that you have a problem?

And out of curiousity, do you also criticise Christians who want to speak out about Islam being a violent religion? Are you consistent in wanting to silence criticism of everyone, or do you only bash your ancestors based on having no understanding of the circumstances of history, resigning the next generation to bash you in the same way?

“To say Christians and Jews were at war, is that completely accurate?”

When they are working with the emperor to forcibly shut down the church, what would you call it?

“They certainly had times of scuffles but really who instigated it?”

Probably the emperor instigated it. I don’t think apportioning blame is the actual point however.

“And just because Luther came later than Origen or Chrysostom does not really make a difference because he is indeed founder of the Reformation age, therefore he is the father of Protestants in that sense.”

Since I’m not a protestant, it matters a bit to me. What are you BTW?

“Ok the question is not Judaizers, but Jews because he specifically says Jews.”

No doubt, but the actual context of the quotes are judaizers. I’m sure part of the argument is along the lines of saying not to follow the Judaizers, because these things are wrong with the Jews.

“Chrysostom argued that Jews will be crucified throughout history because they crucified Christ:… Is that really what happened or was that Judaizers who did that?

Obviously, Chrysostom is drawing a connection between Judaizers and Jews. Errr, and Chrysostom does seem to have been nothing if not accurate here, for better or for worse.

Peter the Venerable, Abbot of Cluny is not a church father either, or at least I wouldn’t count him as one.

“How much more should you have to read to understand that the hatred was again these people both ethnically and religiously”

You haven’t shown anything that shows it was ethnic. I mean, these guys aren’t stupid, they know that Jesus and the apostles were ethnically Jews. Chrysostom was in close contact with the bishop of Jerusalem, and you can be sure that many of those people were ethnically of Jewish origin.

“I think it is a shame you assume I don’t know who or what a Jew is.”

Is the issue who you think a Jew is, or who the people you are quoting think a Jew is?

“Laws were passed forbidding marriage with Jews…”

Uh, yeah. The apostle Paul started that when he said only to marry a believer.

“slavery of Jews, death for any Jew who entered certain cities… Forbidding Jews to be outside during Passover, and oh yes, my favorite, the old accusation of eating Christian children’s blood.”

Let’s see the citations so we know what we are talking about. We are talking about the church fathers still?

“To say it was war is whitewashing and to say they deserve it because of that is absolutely baseless and to defend Christians who did this is utterly inexcusable.”

I have no idea what they “deserved” back then, and neither do you. And what exactly is “this” that Chrysostom did? He said that they were involved in debauchery and drunkenness which had brought them to the level of the lusty goat and the pig. They know only … to satisfy their stomachs, to get drunk, to kill and beat each other”. Is that true or not true of the Jews in Antioch in Chrysostom’s time? Do you know or not know? If he’d been talking about pagans, or a satan

Kara,

In light of 300 years of Jewish direct and indirect persecution of the church and its continued daily prayer curse in the 13th daily prayer on Christians, Saint John Chrysostom’s comments are entirely understandable, especially in light of the renewed persecution by Jews of Christians during the reign of Julian the Apostate. I am ot excusing it, but to say that John was an anti-semite is anarchonistic.

How later peoples used those statements, including those from saint Paul in Galatians 4:21ff (“cast out the bondwoman and her son”) is not germane. You don’t stop using kitchen knives since people use them to kill others. The abuse doesn’t negate the proper use.

And the homilies you are referring to:

Adversus Judaeos

And in them he says Jews.

D. Williams
To say Christians and Jews were at war, is that completely accurate? They certainly had times of scuffles but really who instigated it?

Now you could say they did and using your concept of time and place for historical accuracy can you tell me where Jews were calling for mass killings of Christians? And just because Luther came later than Origen or Chrysostom does not really make a difference because he is indeed founder of the Reformation age, therefore he is the father of Protestants in that sense.

Ok the question is not Judaizers, but Jews because he specifically says Jews. Now the book I quoted from Luther was Von Den Juden und ihren Lugen…complete with umlauts that my keyboard does not have. That book in English is called Concerning the Jews and Their Lies.

Chrysostom argued that Jews will be crucified throughout history because they crucified Christ: “It is because you shed the precious blood, that there is now no restoration, no mercy anymore, and no defence.” Is that really what happened or was that Judaizers who did that?

Peter the Venerable, Abbot of Cluny “Truly I doubt whether a Jew can be really human… I lead out from its den a monstrous animal and show it as a laughing stock in the amphitheatre of the world. I bring thee forward, thou Jew, thou brute beast, in the sight of all men”

How much more should you have to read to understand that the hatred was again these people both ethnically and religiously, and I think it is a shame you assume I don’t know who or what a Jew is. Laws were passed forbidding marriage with Jews, slavery of Jews, death for any Jew who entered certain cities, Forbidding Jews to be outside during Passover, and oh yes, my favorite, the old accusation of eating Christian children’s blood.

Have you read their writings? If not then perhaps you need to go the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod homepage and see that they have specifically denounced Martin Luther as anti-Semitic and are distancing themselves from his speeches regarding Jews. To say it was war is whitewashing and to say they deserve it because of that is absolutely baseless and to defend Christians who did this is utterly inexcusable.

If you say these men were only saying what was politically correct for the time, remember they were the ones who created the policies of enforced religion.

Do you really want to keep saying what you just did? If you do then you whitewash what they did.

Kara, Luther is not a church father, and Chrysostom didn’t call for their deaths.

And it seems their problem is not ethnic but religious. Judaism is both an ethnicity and a religion.

I’ll bet you haven’t actually read Chrysostom and have no idea where these quotes come from. They appear to be from some homilies Chysostom wrote against Judaizers in the church. You weren’t around at the time to know if Chrysostom’s assessment is correct. Remembering that the Jews of Antioch were very aggressive and they tried to help Emperor Julian the Apostate to overthrow Christianity in the empire and return to the pagan religion. Their activities in Antioch where Chrysostom was were particular nefarious, succeeding in shutting down the Church there for a time.

So you’ve got to remember that Jews and Christians were at war – literally, in a winner take all battle. Haven’t you heard Christians in the modern day say negative things about Islam? Jews were the equivilent back in Chrysostom’s day. They had their own Osama bin Ladans, but they were Jewish, and they weren’t off in some remote land, but they were working with the emperor to shut down the church.

Now, are you willing to read these people in the historical context in which they existed?

D. Williams,
I can indeed give you examples if you wish.

John Chrysostom, 344-407 A.D., preached: “The Jews … are worse than wild beasts … lower than the vilest animals. Debauchery and drunkenness had brought them to the level of the lusty goat and the pig. They know only … to satisfy their stomachs, to get drunk, to kill and beat each other up … I hate the Jews … I hate the Synagogue … it is the duty of all Christians to hate the Jews.”

Martin Luther “Set Jewish synagogues on fire for the honor of God. God will see we are Christians when we get rid of the Jews. Likewise homes should be destroyed; they should be put in a stable; they are not heirs of promises of God and deserve to die. Deprive them of all prayer shawls, prayer books and communication, revoke all passports, stop them from doing all business, everything they possess we believe they stole and robbed from us. They do not have God’s blessings, drive them out of the country … get rid of them.”

Two examples from their writing themselves. How is is part of grace and mercy to promote and advocating killing people on the basis of their ethnicity?

I believe the definition of grace has been changed to accommodate certain people and their own idea of their election because they believe themselves better than someone else in the eyes of God. How much more can you be anti-Semitic than to call for their deaths from the pulpit?

Kara, can you define anti-semitism and then point us to what you’re talking about? People have accused the bible of anti-semitism too you know.

Perry
Again, I don’t hold to the theologies of the early church fathers. I believe they were in error because they advocated and promoted anti-semitism.
Their theologies led them into excluding a great portion of the European population and gave way to pogroms and expulsions in the name of Christian theology. So no, I don’t agree with them. They used philosophical viewpoints to infuse into theology, not the other way around.

Kara,

Paul is speaking of philosophies not according to Christ. How about those that are? The condemnation is not a carte blanch condemnation of philosophy. Besides, your view would toss out the theology of the Reformers. How will you state and defend Sola Fide without the idea of a Formal or Instrumental Cause? You can’t.