Post 192 (dhu):
Obviously, your understanding far exceeds mine. Heck, you can distill ideas in a few sentences that would take me chapters of reading to understand. Afraid that #192 is such a case: requires re-reading on my part and lots of time to turn it around in my mind.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->should we have expected the jews to take comfort in the fact that the romans were just occupiers and not homogeneizing monotheists.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->They merely need to know there was a difference between (1) the pogroms against them that the christos enacted since the early christian times, a recent instance of which was the pointed genocide of Jews by Hitler and his christo empire; and (2) the Roman wars and persecutions against Jews which resulted in genocide and mass-extermination of Jewry.
The intent in both cases was very different, whereas Gil-White is equating these two in intent (that both specifically hated Jewry and blamed them for everything) as well as in ideology (that both were fascist).
One can rightly blame the Romans for a lot of heinous things, but not the kind of christoislamic fascist anti-semitism that Gil-White is accusing them of.
Neither (1) nor (2) was in any way okay, but the Romans could (and showed signs that they eventually would) have learnt from the past, whereas christofascist belief is founded on anti-semitism. It is really central, in that it directly follows from the central doctrines of christianity.
And that's why some christos today still believe in the 'Final Solution', while a top-level catholic priest reiterates the eternal accusations of christianity against Jews and Judaism on TV ( Shadow of anti-Semitism hangs over Vatican - CBC News, 16 March 2000).
Obviously, your understanding far exceeds mine. Heck, you can distill ideas in a few sentences that would take me chapters of reading to understand. Afraid that #192 is such a case: requires re-reading on my part and lots of time to turn it around in my mind.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->should we have expected the jews to take comfort in the fact that the romans were just occupiers and not homogeneizing monotheists.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->They merely need to know there was a difference between (1) the pogroms against them that the christos enacted since the early christian times, a recent instance of which was the pointed genocide of Jews by Hitler and his christo empire; and (2) the Roman wars and persecutions against Jews which resulted in genocide and mass-extermination of Jewry.
The intent in both cases was very different, whereas Gil-White is equating these two in intent (that both specifically hated Jewry and blamed them for everything) as well as in ideology (that both were fascist).
One can rightly blame the Romans for a lot of heinous things, but not the kind of christoislamic fascist anti-semitism that Gil-White is accusing them of.
Neither (1) nor (2) was in any way okay, but the Romans could (and showed signs that they eventually would) have learnt from the past, whereas christofascist belief is founded on anti-semitism. It is really central, in that it directly follows from the central doctrines of christianity.
And that's why some christos today still believe in the 'Final Solution', while a top-level catholic priest reiterates the eternal accusations of christianity against Jews and Judaism on TV ( Shadow of anti-Semitism hangs over Vatican - CBC News, 16 March 2000).