>>11326519>Catholic takeoverLike what? 2000 years ago?
Still having to struggle, eh.
But jews never win.
>Christianity is antisemitic and anyone who claims otherwise is a jew and subverts things.Is a common point I hear, yet there was never a freshly converted christian nation with its first ruler who was ever antisemitic, but philosemitic instead.
>yeah that's cause they were still mostly paganNo, if heathens had given jews that many priviliges then there would have been no need for the first rulers of the new christianized nation to lift the jews up and give them protection.
>but there were antisemitic christian rulers in christian nationsYeah, always later though, never the first, you know, when the spirit of Christianity was still fresh and untouched, and not subverted.
These antisemitic christian rulers couldn't have been angry at jews if the ones who installed christianity and ruled before them didn't lift up and protect and nurture jews.
QED.
So, since every single christianization started out philosemitic, including the very first in Armenia with the 'illuminator' (which had great relations with jews in the first place)
One can only conclude that ANTISEMITISM is subversion of Christianity.
Otherwise, every single new fresh unsubverted conversion would not have had been as good to the jews as it has.
From the first nation, to the last.
Always philosemitic.
Aka, how Christianity is supposed to be.
>but jesusReality matters.
>but jews hate christiansReality matters.
Not a single instance of "fresh Christianity that was also antisemitic."
Even the Romans, Pontius Pilate, had no power because the jews were too influential, so yeah, no antisemitism there, if Rome had been Antisemitic while opening up to the credo of Christianity then Pilate would have had no problems, but he did.
This is because Christianity is, at its core, not antisemitic.
So, stop lying that it was.
