Short Refutations to Anti-Semitic Claims (WIP)
To contribute to this list msg drket on Discord.
Jews
Expelled from "109" Countries
160 countries did slavery, are they all wrong? Yes. Most countries are immoral, especially back then.
⠀
Whites/Christians were also expelled from many places — Muslim countries, African countries, Communist countries, and so on.
Yet we dont victim blame them.
For example, Japan expelled Portuguese in 17th century. Look at all the countries that expelled Whites in Africa.
Protestants were expelled from Catholic lands, and Catholics from Protestant ones.
Armenians, Greeks, and countless other minorities faced mass displacement.
We dont say "guyss isnt a coincidence that whites were persecuted in so many places"
⠀
Jews were expelled alongside others, for example in Muslim lands they were expelled alongside Christians, and in Christian lands the Jews were expelled alongside the Muslims, and other "heretics", even protestants, catholics.
The French king who expelled Jews also expelled the Christian Knights Templar to get rid of debt which he owed both.
⠀
Back then everyone was tribalistic, and when you are guests in someone else's land then you are walking on thin ice.
It didnt help that Jews were a small enclosed community, easy to blame problems on, and never had numbers to fight back slanders.
⠀
When investigating each of the "109" cases, they are all unjustified:
- Start with the time they were expelled from Israel by Rome, is that justified? Obv not, Romans were invaders, and this is what caused the dispersion of Jews in the first place.
- Empires that only permitted Jews to be tax collectors or finance. Everyone hated tax collectors, and medievals were upset at Jews in finance even tho it was the only jobs permitted to them.
- Places that kicked Jews over natural famines and disasters. Jews were often scapegoats for plagues, famines, or economic failures. Blaming them was easier than rulers taking responsibility. Back then people were superstitious. If a natural disaster occured, they interpreted it as God being angry, or a bad omen for accepting Jews.
- Empires that gave Jews option to convert or face deportation (such as Spain): Jews who converted were allowed to stay, and Jews who chose not to convert were expelled, this means they werent expelled for behavior, rather explicitly for refusal to convert.
- Muslim countries have a history of persecuting not only Jews, but also Christians, Druze, Assyrians, Coptics, Persians, Yezidis, Blacks, and others.
Most importantly you need to understand that Jews rejected other people's religions, and because Jews are not considered "dumb", then people resorted to supernatural explanations as to why Jews rejected their beliefs, ie Jews are "demons" who "know the truth, but choose to be disbelievers".
When Jews rejected Muhammad's religion, he started to demonize them shortly after, and as a result Islam's scriptures is full of slanders about Jews.
Muhammad said to the Jews: "Earth belongs to Allah and his messenger, convert or be expelled" (Sahih Bukhari 3167)
Hence Jews refused to forcefully convert and Muhammad expelled them.
Sahih Muslim 1767a says that Muhammad expelled both Jews and Christians, proving again that it wasn't unique to Jews.
This creates a butterfly effect of millions of Muslims searching for reasons to hate Jews just to conform their religious biases and to validate their worldview.
Also the “109” number is fabricated, they inflate the list by including duplicates, counting cities and villages under nation-wide bans, and projecting 21st-century map borders onto vast medieval kingdoms.
The actual number is far lower than 109 "countries".
If you count distinct sovereign realms (kingdoms and empires, not every village or town), the number of true "national expulsions" is around 20–25 major instances, across 1000 years.
If you stretch and include every duchy, principality, and city ban, you could get into the 50–60 range, but that’s still nowhere near 109 "countries".
Judaism
Rabbinic "loopholes" circumventing the Law
People completely misunderstand what's happening here: the goal is not to evade God but to obey Him more carefully.
Rabbinic law exists to build “fences” around the Torah (Pirkei Avot 1:1), meaning extra layers of precaution so people do not accidentally break an actual biblical commandment.
They aren't trying to "fool God" by any stretch: they have placed extra safeguards not to break the biblical commandments, and the loopholes and arguments revolve around those safeguards, not the actual commandment itself.
This is because there are biblical verses specifying they need to be diligent and cautious with the commandments, those verses are what caused this pedantic behavior — because if they truly believe the bible the word of God, then rabbis cant afford to ignore any word, they must take it seriously.
It's not in their mind "I'm fooling God, he can't see this", God is omniscient in all of Jewish theology. (Psalm 44:21 "would not God have discovered it, since he knows the secrets of the heart?")
As an example, if Torah says the speed limit is 60mph, the Sages would make the speed limit 50mph to be extra cautious, and then the "loopholes" and arguments would be revolving around that 50mph rule, such as going 55mph under special conditions.
"Metzitzah B'peh" blood sucking circumcision ritual
Saying jews do metzitzah bpeh is like saying Christians abuse children because of a couple of priests. Over the span of 8 years, there were about 9 cases of babies infected from this sinful practice, but interestingly most of them were all traced to 1 guy doing it.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1336756/
It isn't official teachings, it was thought back then in medieval times that licking wounds heals them faster (because they observed animals licking theirs) but they started to realize it has risks and endangers life so chief rabbis in the early 1800s already started condemning the practice, and in 1955 the chief rabbi of Israel condemned it too and ever since it has become very rare.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brit_milah
The vast majority of Rabbinical Jewish circumcision ceremonies do not use metzitzah b'peh,⁶⁶ but some Haredi Jews continue to perform it, while traditional Karaites and Beta Israel never practiced it.⁶⁷ ⁶⁸ ⁵⁷
...
Rabbi Moses Sofer, also known as the Chatam Sofer (1762–1839), observed that the Talmud states that the rationale for this part of the ritual was hygienic — i.e., to protect the health of the child. As such, the Chatam Sofer issued a ruling to perform metzitzah with a sponge instead of oral suction in order to safeguard the child from potential risks. He also cited a passage in Nedarim 32a as a warrant for the position that metzitzah b’peh was not an obligatory part of the circumcision ceremony.⁸⁰ ⁸¹
(Chatam Sofer was the preeminent leading rabbi of Europe in ~1800, his rulings had a huge impact on Orthodox Judaism)
There is a principle in Judaism that pikuach nefesh (the saving of a life) takes precedence over practically all other laws; as the ancient practice of metzitzah b'peh is life endangering, there is really no dispute over the issue; it simply should not be practiced. Ironically though, it was initially introduced because of reasons of pikuach nefesh - it was beleived to lessen the risk to the child given the poor medical knowledge at that time; now that current medical science shows otherwise, there is no religious justification for continuing it.
Only a few ultra-orthodox communities whom are disconnected from the outside world might practice this, but in mainstream Orthodox Judaism, and in Conservative and Reform Judaism, this practice simply isn't a thing.
Israel
USS Liberty = Israel bad ally
The radio signal failed to reach Liberty, and they weren't supposed to be that close in proximity to Israel - so a pop quiz question:
Can you imagine a friendly fire incident happening, when a tiny strip of land is being attacked by all 6 of its neighbors and is fighting for its life under immense war pressure?
Japan actually had a worse attack on an American ship during a period of non aggression, friendly fire incidents also happened with the Brits. The US shot down an F-18, did a gun run on British troops countless times throughout history, shot down a British tornado in 2003 killing 2 pilots...
5-30% friendly fires are common in 1-front wars, now imagine a 6-front war.
Israel apologized within a few hours without hiding anything and paid yearly compensations.
They weren't allies at the time of USS Liberty incident and America even sold weapons to Egypt. The USS was an intelligence gathering ship.
Even if it was intentional (because Israel wasn't about to gamble about their existence), blaming 1 commander's choice on all Jews 60 years later is silly, especially because it was a time under heavy duress.
Personally, I think it's a good idea to stay away from a small piece of land when it's being attacked by 6 bigger countries, because blunders are more likely to happen under those circumstances when they're fighting for their lives from all directions.
Christians
"Jews Killed Jesus"
Jesus killed himself, not Jews. He said: "No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord."
Consider:
- Bible is against ancestral guilt [Deut 24:16, Ezek 18:19-20...]
- if you want to apply ancestral guilt in the same way then you can say "Jews followed and accepted Jesus" because all the earliest followers of Jesus were Jews.
- Romans are the ones who did the physical killing according to the gospels.
- Jesus said multiple times that he is killing himself and no one else can take his life from him, so you are basically undermining his message when you say Jews killed him (John 10:17-18)
- Jesus said "lord forgive them" not "lord blame their ancestors 2000 yrs later".
- Other groups also reject Jesus in the same ratio as Jews. Less than 2% of Japan are Christians.
- He was crucified alongside 100 thousand other Jews that challenged roman authority.
- Same God told them to kill blasphemers, thats why Jesus said its fate.
- Christian persecution of jews throughout history.
- The Jews that people associate with the killing of Jesus were the Sadducees, not the Pharisees. Sadducees no longer exist as a distinct group.
Many "Christians" hate Jews for "killing Jesus" asserting He should not have died. For this very act, Jesus rebuked Peter, saying, "Get behind me, Satan," indicating that avoiding His crucifixion contradicts God's plan for salvation.
Could it be that "Christians" who hate the Jews over the Crucifixion and wish it had never happened are, in essence, heretics? Are they not undermining the very foundation of their faith, which hinges on the necessity of Christ's sacrifice for salvation? Without the Crucifixion, Christianity would cease to exist as a theological system. No atonement for sin would have occurred, No fulfillment of prophecies, No redemption of mankind, No basis for salvation, No Christian faith at all.
"Synogogue of Satan"
Are Jews "the Synagogue of Satan"?
The term "synagogue" is of Greek origin (synagein, “to bring together”) and means “a place of assembly.” or "congregation", it wasn't exlusive to Jews.
Only much later was the term adopted exclusively to Jewish synagogues. The verse was referring to congregations in modern day Turkey.
⠀
The condemnation in Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 is CLEARLY spoken to people who say they are Jews and are NOT. This disqualifies every Jew living in the world today, and shows that those who believe in Replacement Theology are in the fact the real "synagogue of Satan".
⠀
Also, Jesus called Peter satan, which just means 'adversary' and that is what Peter was being to Jesus, because his words were adverse or opposing to what Jesus had just said.
"Christians" who push anti-semitism are wolf in sheep's clothing, using Christianity as a vessel to push their own demonic agenda.
Anti-Semite = Anti-Christ. Because Christ was a Semite.
"Star of David is the satanic Star of Remphan"
The Star of David symbol is actually derived directly from the Old Testament scriptures in various ways.
This requires a long format answer so I will link these two resources
Article format: https://researchingjournal.com/star-of-david
Video format: https://youtu.be/A-wx7aU_AEg
"Talmud says Jesus is burning in hell"
Regarding "Talmud says Jesus is in hell",
Jews dont believe in hell, Talmud believes in 12-month purgatory, or annihilation of the soul.
On the other hand: Christians believe Jews go to hell, and Muslims believe both Christians and Jews end up in hell — this is simply a difference of beliefs, there is no need to be childish about it.
Taking the opinion of one rabbi 2000 years ago, when they were under heavy tensions, and projecting it onto all modern day Jews, is misleading.
But furthermore, the story of Jesus in hell is not actually an opinion or teaching, rather it is Aggadah (legend/folklore), so the implications are different and obscure.
The early Church Fathers have said much worse about Jews as a whole, but Christians are upset when this 1 passage 2000 years ago is ridiculing 1 single Jew (our own guy). In Judaism gentiles aren't considered heretics and their criteria of liability is less stringent, Jesus is only spoken of harshly because he is considered a Jew leading astray other Jews.
The head of Sanhedrin, Rabbi Gamliel, taught in Talmud to not persecute Christians and to not bother them, this is also recorded in the Gospels.
"Talmud says Mary is an adulterous"
Regarding Mary being an adulterous, it isn't meant as an insult - if people reject Christianity then they have to come up with natural explanations for the supernatural birth, i.e. that Mary cheated and had to lie about her virginity (to escape harsh stoning or being an outcast), this isn't a "Jewish" position — it's also atheist, Hindu, and those who reject Christianity whom are forced to adopt a different explanation for the miraculous birth.