Good grief! In most of that "long posting" I am talking about the ancient Jєωs as mentioned in the Bible - before they rejected Christ, and the transition from that ancient covenant of God to the current covenant of Christ. I guess by rum's standards, no one should have followed Moses out of Egypt, and maybe we should be rooting for Goliath rather than young (king-to-be) David, and maybe it's a shame the Greeks didn't succeed at womping the Maccabees.
These ancient Jєωs were every bit as much in the center of God's plan as we traditional Catholics are today, so therefore I rejoice as much in their successes as I do in ours. As for modern Jєωs, I can easily go with Fr. Fahey, but that is as far as I go.
How about explaining your views that I posted in the OP?
You equate Jєωιѕн persecution of Christians with Christian self-defense against Jєωs. You claim that the h0Ɩ0cαųst isn't fiction:
In the early days of Christianity, the Christians were persecuted by the Jєωs. It was only several centuries later they had sufficiently grown in size to “turn the tables” and even begin persecuting Jєωs, which seems a rather shocking lack of Christian forgiveness as I see it.
.........
"Must we too now proceed to endure centuries of persecutions and pogroms as the Jєω has long known far too well? Must we remain scattered and few and disunited until some such time, centuries hence, that some monstrous regime slaughters six million of us?"
Similar to your comments in the OP, from the 2007 AllExperts post:
I know that in a certain prayer recited by the Church once a year we make reference to “perfidious Jєωs.” But is “perfidious” a descriptive adjective or classifying adjective? Does it mean to imply that all Jєωs are perfidious, or does it mean to single out certain particular Jєωs who merely happen to also be perfidious?
And by the way, I just thought I would mention here that “perfidious” in this particular liturgical usage merely means “unbelieving,” and in this case, quite specifically “unbelieving in the messianic claims of Jesus of Nazareth.” It was never meant as an insult and should never be so taken. It is simply a bare fact that they themselves would not deny (as understood here) and why it is they are in our prayers.
You acknowledge that perfidious is a synonym for unbeliever, but say it doesn't apply to all Jєωs. You then say that it does apply to all Jєωs, but isn't meant as an insult. You wanna make a bet? The Church calling a group of people unbelievers is an insult. The Church singling out the Jєωs for this special prayer is because the Church views the Jєωs as having an especially potent anti-Christ spirit. The Jєωs should be offended by the prayer. And let them be.
At most, one might concede a disproportionate number of those in the conspiracy to be of Jєωιѕн ancestry, due to the simple fact that the price of entry is a great deal of money.
The entire Jєωιѕн nation is one large army specifically opposed to Catholicism. They are a nation within nations. So they represent one large conspiracy in spirit against Christendom.
That I should have to point these things out to a guy who passes himself off as an expert on traditional Catholicism is a joke.
Topic: Griff Ruby is Questionable on the Jєωs (Read 4648 times)