The misuse of "Judeo-Christian" and the creeping subversion of Christian History

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

No, you can't. Christianity rose from Judaism. It worships the same God, enjoys the same tenets, follows the same prophets and believes in the same prophecies.

To erase Judaism from Christianity, and call those Christian who don't "Judaizers" is anti-Semitic. In fact, it's the very definition of anti-Semitic, and is the very root of anti-Semitism.

I would say Europe is more helleno-christian than judeo-christian. The combination of rationality from the Greek philosophers of antiquity, and Christian values and morals in general.

Chistianity in itself is Judeo-Christian. Jesus is a Jew, the Old Testament is Judeo & New Testament is Christian. Christianity encompases both. Many Christians observe the 10 commandments & so do many Jews.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

No, you can't. Christianity rose from Judaism. It worships the same God, enjoys the same tenets, follows the same prophets and believes in the same prophecies.

To erase Judaism from Christianity, and call those Christian who don't "Judaizers" is anti-Semitic. In fact, it's the very definition of anti-Semitic, and is the very root of anti-Semitism.

Dude, AugustusMasonicus is very correct. The term Judeo-Christian is a term made up by American protestants to embrace the Old Testament into their practice. Christians up till then believed the OT to be a sort of guide or history up to the birth of Jesus. All Christians worship Jesus. No Jewish people worship Jesus. I mean maybe there are a sect or two that do, but most Jewish people do not believe that Jesus Christ is to be worshiped or considered to be a word or medium of a relationship with God. This is important and this is why the word Judeo Christian is incorrect and a very abused term.

Also, US law, and most Euro laws are not formed on the back of anything to do with the Bible. They come from Roman and English law in the US and mostly Roman law in the rest of the "west". Of course there is a direct source to say the Ten COmmandments but you can find that the source of that goes earlier to the Babylonians. Those laws are possibly the first laws that recognized that a human being outside of royalty could own property and that their very lives were also their property. In that, yes, western law does stem from that. But the Roman's were without a doubt the father and mother of all laws and the way they are created and enforced.

a reply to: Fools

Christians up till then believed the OT to be a sort of guide or history up to the birth of Jesus.

Jesus disagrees with you, according to his biblical teachings.

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Saint Peter disagrees with you. And you know Peter is the one who Jesus established that upon this rock I shall build my Church...

Paul, the self proclaimed apostle, named Peter as a Judaizer, paving the way for the Catholic persecution of Jews, whether or not they proclaimed Christ as the Messiah.

Shortly after Paul's anti-Jewish preaching, the Romans thoroughly demonized the Jews, destroyed their Temple, tortured hundreds of thousands of Jews during the Siege of Jerusalem and caused The Great Diaspora . www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

As stated by others, the term Judeo-Christian is a U.S. political coinage, at least the popularity of it's use. Michele Bachman is one of the popularizing influence. So as an exercise:

en.wikipedia.org...
Bachmann was a longtime member of Salem Lutheran Church (Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod) in Stillwater. She and her husband withdrew their membership on June 21, 2011, just before she officially began her presidential campaign. They had not attended the church for over two years.[38] More recently, according to friends, the Bachmanns began attending Eagle Brook Church, an Evangelical Protestant Baptist church closer to their home.[39]

Bachmann has cited theologian Francis Schaeffer as a "profound influence" on her life and her husband's, especially his film series How Should We Then Live?.[14][15] She has also described Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity by Nancy Pearcey as a "wonderful" book.[14] Journalist Ryan Lizza has argued that Bachmann's worldview is deeply influenced by the Christian movement known as Dominionism, citing the influence of Schaeffer and Pearcey as evidence.[14] Others have criticized Lizza's article, especially its connection of Schaeffer with Dominionism.[40][41][42] Religion writer Sarah Posner broadly concurs with Lizza, pointing to the influence of Christian Reconstructionists Herb Titus and R. J. Rushdoony on Bachmann via the curriculum at O. W. Coburn School of Law.[43][44]

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Fools

Christians up till then believed the OT to be a sort of guide or history up to the birth of Jesus.

Jesus disagrees with you, according to his biblical teachings.

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Saint Peter disagrees with you. And you know Peter is the one who Jesus established that upon this rock I shall build my Church...

Paul, the self proclaimed apostle, named Peter as a Judaizer, paving the way for the Catholic persecution of Jews, whether or not they proclaimed Christ as the Messiah.

Shortly after Paul's anti-Jewish preaching, the Romans thoroughly demonized the Jews, destroyed their Temple, tortured hundreds of thousands of Jews during the Siege of Jerusalem and caused The Great Diaspora . www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...

And yet almost the entirety of all other sermons disagree with the "vengeful" duties of adherents to the OT line as far as it is concerned with promoting existing Judaic law. I do applaud you for searching out something to carry your idea forward though.

You do have to understand that the first "powerful" Christian church are the Eastern Orthodox and the Roman Catholic varieties. There is little love or compromise held in those two branches for Judaic Law. Even in the early forms of Protestant Christian thinking and philosophy Judaism was seen in direct opposition to Christian faith in the "trinity". It may be that Jesus sought to teach from the OT in many regards since he was Jewish. However, the NT and the OT are like day and night as far as how an individual builds a dialogue with the individuals Godhead. The OT is command and control. The NT is respect and accept.

It is kind of telling that you, who in reading other posts by you, a complete leftist, is so interested in keeping Christians confused about their actual religious heritage.

a reply to: rickymouse

Some people also do not think of Catholics as Christians, they are. I can't understand why anyone would make that determination. I have heard that quite a few times over the years, I have heard people say it to me in person. I did not try to correct them, Christians should not be arguing among themselves, that is not what Jesus would have wanted. But it is happening a lot and it has been happening for many many centuries.

There are multiple reasons for the denial of Catholicism being Christian even as far back as the first century Nazarene's but to explain this would take a lot of posts and much time. Actually the rift began with the Romans slaughtering the disciples of Christ Jesus in 68 to 70 AD. and then polluting their religion into the Roman Catholic establishments. From that point on it has been a blood bath till even today. The Nazarene's Jesus was and is not even now remotely the same understanding.

a reply to: pthena

So here is what Dominionism aka Christian Reconstructionism is all about:

” We must base our laws on faith, not reason."
—Mark Rushdoony, son of R.J. Rushdoony

Dominionism or Christian sharia ("Charia") (and sometimes used interchangeably with Christian Reconstructionism and theonomy, ... an ideology of Totalitarian theocracy. It holds that Christians should not withdraw from the earthly world to avoid becoming corrupted by involvement in earthly politics and patiently await the second coming of Christ, as old-school Christian fundamentalists do. Rather, it asserts that Christians should seize earthly power and use it to forcibly fulfil biblical prophecies and bring him back. Where in the Catholic world these debates about withdrawal/domination are played out behind closed doors, in the Protestant world it manifests as an open split between Fundamentalists and Dominionists. The United States is the Dominionists' stronghold and seizing control of the US is the movement's first major objective. Note that almost no Dominionists actually call themselves such.

Dominionists believe that the civil laws laid down by the Old Testament (as distinct from the moral laws such as the Ten Commandments) should be enforced by reforming the U.S. legal system along theocratic lines, which would entail a substantial increase in the use of capital punishment. They also believe that that biblical injunctions regarding slavery should be followed.[2][3] Dominionists are the direct, Christian equivalent of Islamists demanding Sharia law.
rationalwiki.org...

I made a thread in 2012 called The One Sided Nature of Jewish and Christian Dialog

By which I mean, the Jewish side stands firm and the Christians do all the bending and conciliating. Jewish-Christian Relations groups and organizations seem to exist for the sole purpose of allowing Judaism and the so-called Jewish State of Israel to dictate to Christians what their doctrine should be and what their political positions should be.

And since I picked Michele Bachman as an example, here is what I was pointing out then:
Michele Bachmann Apologizes for 2015 Remarks on Converting Jews to Christianity, 05-14-2018

Speaking at a Knesset interfaith Bible study in Jerusalem Sunday, former Minnesota Republican congresswoman Michele Bachmann made an emotional speech, apologizing for her past "ignorant" comments about the Jewish people.
…
"We recognize the shortness of the hour," Bachmann told Washington Watch in 2015, "and that's why we as a remnant want to be faithful in these days and do what it is that the Holy Spirit is speaking to each one of us, to be faithful in the Kingdom and to help bring in as many as we can — even among the Jews — share Jesus Christ with everyone that we possibly can because, again, He's coming soon."
…
"We are so grateful to President Donald Trump for his recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital," she continued. "He's taken that element of warfare off the table. That element of warfare is a propaganda tool that says the Jewish people do not have a right to this land. Donald Trump says not only do they have a right, but they have a legal and legitimate right to designate Jerusalem as their capital. That is a powerful statement."

Interesting. She made more than 20 trips to Israel. She thinks that the U.S. should be a Christian Theocracy. She goes to a special Knesset interfaith Bible study, and she must humbly apologize for suggesting that Jews should become Christian.

I'll paraphrase here:
"You American Christians must support Israel's right to own Palestine as part of Land of Israel the Jewish state because your Bible says so. But never, never even hint that Jews aren't better than Christians even if they care nothing about your Jesus.

"Please continue to say Judeo-Christian in America, just never say it here, to us. "

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: rickymouse

I think, possibly, when ppl refer to Catholicism as non Christian, they do so because of the many incidents in history of murder, genocide, and intolerance by the Vatican, and members of the Catholic church.

They weren't "Christian" acts, in their opinion.

These events are a matter of historical fact. I'm not taking a side. Just answering your question.

The Catholics were misdirected Christians when they did all that. The Catholic church these days is much better. I did not actually like the way the Vatican was acting, but it is getting a little better over the last few years. I know lots of Catholics, they are good people. They are good Christians. I even knew a couple of nuns really well and I have a relative who works with the nuns at a convent. Nuns are a little different than many in society, but they are really good people.

Judeo-Christian is not correct since Jesus said that He is The Only Way to The Father and no one knows The Father except to whom The Son reveals and The Father is in Him and seeing Him is seeing The Father.


Jews worship a different god, not Jesus Christ. In fact, Jews persecuted Christians who worshipped Jesus Christ as Lord. Muslims also persecuted Christians even to today. Jewish Noahide Laws and Muslim Shariah Laws would make The Worship of Jesus Christ illegal as idolatry.


Jesus reveals God because in The Body of Jesus Christ is The Mind of God The Father and His Word is Spirit and Life, The Holy Trinity as ONE, not three, revealed in The Person of Jesus Christ.