Talk:History of antisemitism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cut unrelated content[edit]

After Jesus' death, the New Testament portrays the Jewish religious authorities in Jerusalem as hostile to Jesus' followers, and as occasionally using force against them. Drawing from the Jewish prophet Jeremiah (31:31–34), the New Testament teaches that with the death of Jesus a New Covenant was established which rendered obsolete, and in many respects superseded, the first covenant established by Moses (Hebrews 8:7–13; Luke 22:20). Observance of the earlier covenant traditionally characterizes Judaism. This New Testament teaching, and later variations to it, are part of what is called supersessionism. However, the early Jewish followers of Jesus continued to practice circumcision and observe dietary laws, which is why the failure to observe these laws by the first Gentile Christians became a matter of controversy and dispute some years after Jesus' death (Acts 11:3; 15:1ff; 16:3). Stephen is executed by stoning.[1] Before his conversion, Saul puts followers of Jesus in prison.[2] After his conversion, Saul (Paul) is whipped at various times by Jewish authorities[3] and is accused by Jewish authorities before the Roman courts.[4] However, opposition by gentiles is also described,[5] and more generally there are widespread references in the New Testament to the suffering experienced by Jesus' followers at the hands of others, particularly the Romans.[6]

Article structure[edit]

I find this article to be very weirdly structured. It should either be completely classified by country or chronologically. Currently it is chronologically structured and then some countries get a special mention (seems random which ones, I guess according to whoever wrote the chapters). Any suggestions for how to tidy it up? LGLou (talk) 10:24, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The long section on "Antisemitism in the English-speaking world" seems like a mix of an undue explication of a single source and some original research, and its most important content should be folded into the chronological history. BobFromBrockley (talk) 10:33, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Might be worth looking at reviews to see how strong the Rubenstein book is before going to the trouble of re-incorporating the content. I'm looking one that begins, "Rubinstein begins with an interesting premise." This is not a good omen for an academic review, and the rest spares the work little. However, I am unfamiliar with Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies, the outlet publishing this review. The more familiar American Historical Review had a more positive review from Frederick M. Schweitzer, though he describes the book as both uneven and revisionist, bucking against the prevailing narrative of Jewish history. This means it is probably not at the center of today's scholarship.
Bottom line: might be worth decreasing use of this work significantly. Freelance-frank (talk) 22:39, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Egyptians[edit]

No mention of enslavement by ancient Egypt— big miss 2600:1700:4640:9DC0:BC4B:C90A:BFDB:CB9B (talk) 04:24, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]