3rd and 4th c judaizers had all but destroyed the apostolic trinitarian churches with a number of popular heretical sects, hard to say it beats what the synagogue has pulled off in the 19th and 20th.

replacing all mention of Israelites with joos and making Jesus jooish is absolute insanity and you continue to hear it from every "Christian" pundit, podcaster, etc.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49410560)

--

Historically, Jews and Samaritans have been two closely related ethno-religious groups descended from the Israelites; Jews trace their ancestry to the tribes that inhabited the Kingdom of Judah, namely Judah, Benjamin, and partially Levi, while Samaritans trace their ancestry to the tribes that inhabited the Kingdom of Israel and remained after the Assyrian captivity, namely Ephraim, Manasseh, and partially Levi. Furthermore, Judaism and Samaritanism are fundamentally rooted in Israelite religious and cultural traditions.[22][23][24][25] There are several other groups claiming affiliation with the Israelites, but most of them have unproven lineage and are not recognized as either Jewish or Samaritan.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49411592)

it makes sense as an abstract. it's just distorted by the political structure. "judeo-christian" already existed from the inception of christianity. it's complicated, but judaism is built into the foundations of the belief system

what makes less and less sense as time goes on is "Roman christianity", which isn't a dig at the contemporary catholic church, but something else entirely

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49411507)

i played a bit of this recently https://royalur.net/ and had a very good time doing so

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49411528)

yhwh, hashem, el elyon, and beyond doesn't think of itself as jewish

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49411533)

this is why the sign of the cross is insisted upon, and why more Christians are seeing the masoretic text for what it is, "Abrahamic" ecumenicalism is an absurdity and is central to the hasbara blindfold

enjoy riding out Satan's little season

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49411551)

By contrast, how did the Jews feel about Rome? We can guess that from a thousand signs, but it is sufficient to treat ourselves again to the Apocalypse of St. John, that wildest of all written outbursts which vengeance has on its conscience…

The Romans were indeed strong and noble men, stronger and nobler than any people who had lived on earth up until then or even than any people who had ever been dreamed up. Everything they left as remains, every inscription, is delightful, provided that we can guess what is doing the writing there. By contrast, the Jews were par excellence that priestly people of ressentiment, who possessed an unparalleled genius for popular morality…

Which of them has proved victorious for the time being, Rome or Judea? Surely there’s not the slightest doubt. Just think of who it is that people bow down to today in Rome itself, as the personification of all the highest values — and not only in Rome, but in almost half the earth, all the places where people have become merely tame or want to become tame — in front of three Jews, as we know, and one Jewess (in front of Jesus of Nazareth, the fisherman Peter, the carpet maker Paul, and the mother of the first-mentioned Jesus, named Mary). This is very remarkable: without doubt Rome has been conquered."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49411527)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish%E2%80%93Roman_wars

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49411532)

Roman opinions of Jews were generally pretty good according to the historians. Romans thought well of most of the peoples of the nearer provinces. That said the Judean wars were a blip in Roman history and more important to jews and jews writing history today than they were to the romans

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49411541)

I also think that the friction between the two sets of practices has been highlighted later on as jews tend to add what's effectively political castigation to their religious commentaries and perhaps this distorts the essential and eternal truth about the matter (s that the religious commentaries should be containing)

Wrt the jewish vehemence on civic religion, this appears to be more about proscribing Rome rather than a real blanket prohibition on the ideas that animate "civic religion", which israel at times has itself displayed

Maybe this is controversial but this is the place for it

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49411553)

they're certainly chosen by the Prince and power of the air if that's what you mean

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49411563)

There are also different notions of what comprises "God" at play there and that's what makes it particularly messy

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49411564)

They don't hate Christians as a whole but some do hate the ones that advocate for the Christian model over the Jewish one

Tbh I think a lot of the hate for Islam is performative and/or a hatred of small differences type thing and there's a lot more commonality there, especially with Shiite islam, than either party is willing to come to the table and recognize. If it wasn't filled with so much tragedy and butchery the Middle Eastern religious drama would be quite funny as a meta-sitcom

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49411573)

Historically? Yes and I agree with the Jewish grievances about the "conversos" and what have you as nobody should be forced into any particular religious practice but this was also a time of straw huts and boiling cat leather in piss so

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794656&forum_id=2#49411580)