DON'T GET INVOLVED IN RITUALISTIC ANTI-SEMITISM!

Why nobody should present themselves for holy communion

MAIN POINTS:

Children should not be put forward for holy communion as the underlying doctrine, what communion is about, is anti-Semitist. 

The Church says Jesus said family ties don't exist any more in the afterlife so the same would apply to your race.  Jesus would not be a Jew anymore.  Thus you cannot say the chalice at communion is Jewish blood or the body is Jewish flesh.  The argument is that the risen Jesus is the one present in the Eucharist.  This is blatant anti-semitism for when Jesus said bread was his body and the cup his blood he was speaking as a Jew before he rose again.  The time sequence is messed up.

Jews and Christians, according to Christians, are the same religion except the Jews failed to accept the reforms and the mission of Jesus.  Christianity then is an updated Judaism.  So regardless Jews should have rights in the Catholic Church and are not given them.  No Jew will be allowed to minister to the sick for Christians.  This is schism.  For Jews, religion is race and race is religion so Christianity is racist.

Animal sacrifice was a huge religious-economic business in the Temple.  The early Church supposedly on Jesus' instructions turned against this form of temple worship.  The early Church led by Paul said that the need for the rites and the priests was replaced by the sacrificial death of Jesus.  This was a cynical means of demoralising and financially harming Judaism.

Christians hated the Jews so much that they watered down and even chose to ignore the fact that Jesus had a normal Jewish faith and commitment to his religious devotions as a Jew. His commitments to his race as a Jew by race is another subject they don't want to think about.

There is no way the idea of bread becoming flesh and wine becoming blood can follow from Judaism.  It smacks of paganism.  The Mass separates Jesus from his tradition.

The rite is about the body and blood of Jesus which are shown separated by blessing bread which corresponds to the body and wine which corresponds to the blood.  It refers to the murder of Jesus. 

Why of all the things Jesus did does such an inflammatory and loaded rite have to be central?

The rite is demanded by anti-Semitist writings, the gospels, which accuse the Jews of murdering Jesus.  There is no respect for innocent until proven guilty here.  The book of Acts has the Jews complaining that the apostles were trying to fix Jesus' death on them.

The rite is based on respect for these writings - they are respected even as the word of God.  They should not be respected on the human level never mind the religious and spiritual level and that extra respect is just adding insult to injury.

Jesus upheld the Jewish Law as sacred and from God and said there is no error in it even though its purpose was to eliminate Jews who rebelled against the theology of the prophets.  Thus a lot of people died by stoning for homosexuality and idolatry so that the Jewish religion could be stable enough to fulfil the purpose Jesus said it had - to pave the way for him. Jesus and Christianity are built on the corpses of innocent men and women and children.

The miracles of Jesus could have been made up to make the Jews look bad and insincere and inexcusable.  We have a right to religious faith but not that kind of faith even if it is possible that the miracles are true.  We cannot be sure enough to justify hurting so much as one Jew - normally its children who suffer.

The top miracle is Jesus being murdered to get rid of him and then his victorious return from the dead to live eternal life and be with his people forever.  The Mass is based on the resurrection.  The gospels do not give any spiritual reasons why the resurrection is important.  Paul does that by saying Christianity is useless if Jesus is dead for we are still in our sins and there is no hope.  The resurrection then in the gospels cannot be just a nice story.  It is a slap against the Jews.

The Bible threatens anybody who takes communion who is not checking if they have any serious sin, or who has serious sin or who does not believe communion is what it is supposed to be with sickness and death.  No religion has the right to threaten people over purely religious ideas.  It follows that a Jew taking communion just as a mark of respect for Christians and to signify friendship is condemned.

The religion of Jesus is the first thing you think of when you think of antisemitism. Jesus did not even intend to start a new kind of Judaism or a Jewish party never mind a brand new religion. The irony is that a Jew has been used to create a religion to abuse the Jews with. Lots of anti-Jewish abuse was put into Jesus' mouth in the New Testament. To steal a man from his religion and do that to him and use him as a weapon is sacrilegious.

The Mass is based on the idea of sacrifice to God. God supposedly got rid of Jewish animal sacrifice in the Temple to replace it with the Mass and to make way for it.  The end of the Temple meant the end of the old.

In 70AD, Titus and his men had been responsible for the altar of the Temple being covered with the abomination of murdered Jewish bodies. Blood was everywhere. The Temple was then set on fire. The gospel predictions about the abomination of desolation and the destruction of the Temple which allegedly came from Jesus and for which there is no evidence that they were written before the event must be seen for what they are: a sick attempt to exploit extreme tragedy. Jews are unified by their wish to see the Temple restored so we must remember how disgraceful it is for Christianity to take away their hope.

Jesus it seems got a lot of hostility from the Jewish powers that be of his day. It is antisemitist to accuse the Jews of Jesus' day of being unreasonable for Jesus did nothing to save them from Roman terror and died like any other criminal. His hurting of their feelings when they were so oppressed by attacking their Temple is gross antisemitism. Jesus shouts at the Jews that the Temple is their house as if it were not God's house any more. Christians following the letter to the Hebrews say that the age of sacrifice is done so there can be no valid new Temple. This means they see the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD as God reflecting that fact. These teachings are grossly antisemitic.

Baptism qualifies for communion as does accepting the message of the Mass.  The whole system is full of tacit and explicit prejudice against one of the most hated and persecuted minorities of all time.  The demand for communion brought Germans together and led to them receiving Nazi propaganda and we know how that turned out.

CULTURAL APPROPRIATION

Cultural appropriation is becoming a big issue in these times. It is seen as sort of racist and disrespectful when a person from a country that has oppressed another nationality or race starts to borrow from the culture of the oppressed - eg music or clothing style.

Christianity is top of the list when being considered for condemnation and censure for its cultural appropriation. Action needs to be taken particularly in the wake of the Jewish Holocaust which Christianity itself has a lot to answer for. Look at the whole picture and see that this is virtually the only cultural appropriation that really counts.

The Protestants tend to copy the synagogue service more than Catholics do but Catholicism is adamant that the first part of the Mass readings etc is based on the synagogue service. What will happen when these religions get accused of cultural appropriation in these politically correct intolerant times? What will happen to pictures of the Virgin Mary in a kimono? The continual portrayal of Jesus as white in pictures is definitely an insult to Jesus if he existed and to his race. That is the kind of cultural appropriation we should worry about.

WHY CARE?

The Jews were oppressed and abused and murdered by the Romans in Jesus' time. They lived in fear of Romans desecrating their Temple or putting an idol up in it. Jesus came to bring more trouble by abusing the religious leaders and attacking the Temple. Like a racist or a yes-man, he never once criticised the Romans but had a lot to say about the Jews. He told them off for not obeying the Old Testament commands from God to torture and execute sinners such as rebel sons. A religion that endlessly faced tragic and barbaric death did not in his opinion have enough of death! He even attacked Jewish culture as it was then as a pile of man-made traditions that disgraced the people in the eyes of God. However he gave no authority to his followers to drop Judaism completely but that is what has happened. Despite the New Testament saying we can live by Jewish law if we want to and as long as we don't see obeying it as a way to Heaven the Churches are guilty of complete schism from Judaism. This is purely sectarian. 

The Jewish people or their stock have to endure being accused of terrible things in the New Testament. That nobody cares about the absence of independent evidence or their side is antisemitism. Every time the New Testament is honoured as God's word in a Church there is antisemitism at least implicitly. If you respect Jews then you spit on the New Testament. At Easter in particular, the insults delivered to Judaism increase during Christian worship. On Good Friday, Catholics take the role of Jesus murderous Jewish enemies during the gospel reading. That we have Catholics and Protestants claiming to follow Jesus a lifelong Jew is antisemitic and shows no respect for his religious allegiance. Using a Jew, Jesus, to stir up things against the Jews is passive aggressive irony. The answer as to why Christian activists seem immune to information about the falsity of their version of Jesus and faith is that they are using it/him not respecting it/him. That is why they don't care. They hide any discomfort for that is their way of trying to undermine your confidence in the truth.

I wonder when the gospel of Matthew says the Jews called the blood of Jesus upon themselves and upon their children, did this slur against the Jews lead to the creation of the Eucharist?  There the blood of Jesus is pictured and you are forced to ask who killed him and are reminded of the Jews embracing his bloody faith and revelling in it.  Was the Eucharist really an excuse for picturing this hate filled idea that the Jews as good as murdered Jesus?

The Jews would not have understood the Christian notion that the wine literally became the blood of Jesus.  This would have been seen as an attempted attack on the core Jewish belief that blood is sacred so much that even drinking animal blood is a sin.  They would see it as an attempt to violate the rule against drinking blood even if the Christians were only imagining that it is blood.  The rite is meant to exclude and insult Jewish religion.

The Jewish Bible belongs to the Jews.  There is no evidence that Christians have the right to use it and claim it.  The Mass and Eucharist are based on the Jewish Scriptures and the scriptures are read and distorted in a way that makes Jews look wrong at best and evil at worst.

No Copyright