They, the Jews, must deny that Job was faithful, yet suffered, and denied Exodus, as the Israelites were faithful, yet after enslaved by Pharaoh's forces. And the Jewish concept of the afterlife is, I feel, a bit demeaning, as it lacks the same eternity prior expressed in the Second Temple, and supersessioned by the Church. It is this very neutral view of the afterlife which relies on human materialism far too much, as opposed to full communion with God. Contemporary Judaism often falls into these traps, where they must then define themselves against Christianity, and against the Second Temple, as the Second Temple faith contradicts their modern teachings, and essentially, they just play this game of "nuh uh" in opposition to the totality of God, that being, one in three persons. I don't see the point in this preservation of a false faith by these rabbis. The problem is that this is often quite materialistic, yet if even the material outcome is consistent, as in Job, Exodus, or even the contemporary Jewish claims about the suffering of the Jews in the State of Israel, and there is no sort of eternal afterlife, then why even follow Judaism? Of course, Christianity bypasses this easily with the ideas of eternal life and eternal death, and with fear being the beginning of wisdom and the love of God, with a reason to follow, i.e. evasion of hell; though with Judaism, in the modern sort of Rabbinic Judaism, we see nothing. Even if Judaism were true in the modern, abrogated form, why even follow? If a Jew, or anyone I suppose, but a Jew works better to demonstrate my point, is absolutely depraved, and wants to destroy everything, and genocide all of humanity, what stops them? The Jews could certainly say "just war, like with Moses and the Midianites", but the problem is they have no reason to even engage in just war if the outcome for everything is the same, just a neutral, abstract afterlife and no guarantee of a this-world reward, per Job and Exodus. This is why Christianity is more logical, as there is a heaven and hell, and a logical reason to evade hell, as it is total privation from Being, from Goodness, and even from the imago Dei. Why even follow? "it’s a different logic, one of faithful obedience, not transactional consequence." Why even follow this if there's no afterlife? It's the problem with duty ethics in general, no reason to follow. Why does a positive and negative afterlife cheapen anything if it can be the beginning of wisdom and love, providing a restraint, and moral obligation to fight these evils, both personally in one's original sin, and, for the state at least, to do a just war, or penalty for public indecencies. Christianity is true because it has reason and evidence as any apologist could prove, uniquely, unlike most other religions, which are far less falsifiable. And so we, the Christians, the new Israel, follow, from the beginning point of fear of judgement, and gradually to the love of God. Why is it wrong that fear is the beginning point? Why even follow Hashem if there is no afterlife? Who cares about a covenant? Better yet, why care? Only Christianity answers this in the afterlife, heaven and hell. Why be loyal? Whenever you make a claim from Judaism that is "because we are Jews", ask "why?" beforehand, as that is my response. Only in an afterlife does it make sense to follow. And to admit fault, yes, I acknowledge that Judaism has an afterlife, but I don't think it is very meaningful or nearly as substantive as Christian dualistic afterlife. Even so, I'm a bit more radical in this. All reason, love, and morality derive from God, and I think this is the ultimate redpill. There's no reason for anything without God, and without the eternal afterlives, one reward, one penance, both equal in their eternity and substance. And so to me, Judaism just seems like theistic Kantianism. The Jews follow God illogically, while the Christians follow logically. I say this, because why practice lishmah? Why be obedient if there is no substantive afterlife? I suppose my idea of the Christian faith is highly intellectual. In this regard, we reason why Christianity is true to affirm the ultimate metaphysical existence of God via historical evidence. This is highly distinct from ideas of Katian ethics which presuppose that duties ought to be followed, which is logically incoherent, as there is no "ought" derived from an "is", and no evidence of these duties, or even a reason for humanity to exist. Evolution similarly provides no logical "ought", and no reason to follow, or why humanity should exist, or why humanity even matters. They all presume we have a sort of unprovable "dignity" above anything else upon this earth, which they are unable to prove, or reason why to follow it or not slaughter everyone. Meanwhile, with Christianity, it is reason why a metaphysical reality, and ultimate eternal afterlife exist, as they are revealed in prophets, and in historical evidence such as the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The more religious Jews often disobey Sabbath laws anyway with loopholes. Just lawyering around moral commands, which itself is sinful. They often have these gadgets and and devices to get around the Sabbath laws. While the Sabbath laws no longer apply, many of these people are still knowingly violating the law which was once in effect, and are intentionally defying commands with this wordplay. Romans 14:23 and all, for my reasoning on this. Not every Jew is this legalistic and so abhorrently against God, but many are, which is greatly unfortunate. Why is Judaism so protected? I feel it is as false as Islam, in the modern form, while Second Temple Judaism is correct, but obsolete in the revelations of the Church. I suppose it is the Holocaust, which, for some reason, takes precedence over every other genocide in history. Look how many people forget the Darfur genocide, not that the Holocaust should be equally obscured, rather, that it just seems disproportionate in its primacy, and its effect on the West. Churches have become dispensationalist to appease modern kraterocracy, as opposed to standing for truth in supersession. They reject supsersessionism for political expediency, which is what Islam does with child marriage. We, the Christians, should not align ourselves with this cult of modernity, and should never conform Christianity to modernity, and should be against the world if the world is wrong. I agree with the Church fathers. Israel is the Church, not a state of people whose religion is a rejection of the divine Son. This Jewish theology is only around 1800 years old, and radically redefines God, and dispensationalism only emerged in the 19th century. Many Jews, not all of them, not at all, but those who are guilty know who they are, they manipulate Christians into abandoning Church teachings, and turn them away from the Eastern Orthodox Church, and away from what God taught. I do not support Holocaust guilt, for none are guilty of such sins today beyond members of the SS which persist today. I shan't subscribe to this notion that if we dare criticize Israel, or worship God as he commands, that another Holocaust will ensure. God has not commanded as a part of the current covenant that the State of Israel is our new God, and we must command our billions of dollars to help defend a state of people who mostly do not believe in God. This notion of progressing Christianity is a filthy notion which blurs the distinction between creation and Creator. Man is not the moral lawgiver, and the teachings of the Church fathers are supersessionist. Any who attempt to destroy Christianity for political expediency sin against God. The problem with softening or abrogating Church teachings is that you could change Church teaching for anything as long as it is politically expedient, "we should permit murder because of interfaith dialogue, or because if we don't permit and embrace murder, something bad will happen!", as if changing Church doctrine is not sinful, or daring to say morality exists beyond God. The problem with softening or abrogating Church teachings is that you could change Church teaching for anything as long as it is politically expedient, "we should permit murder because of interfaith dialogue, or because if we don't permit and embrace murder, something bad will happen!", as if changing Church doctrine is not sinful, or daring to say morality exists beyond God. There is no morality beyond God, and if the Church is against the world, then it should not accommodate the world. Attempting to reform Christianity is terrible, as it asserts God is not perfect, or that his teachings must be changed by men. Is it not demonic to attempt to change Church doctrine and Tradition? Turning people away from God to worship the morality of fallible humans? Galatians 1:8. Matthew 23:13. 2 Timothy 4:3-4. Those who distort the Gospels, even for good intentions, are keeping people away from theosis, misleading people and turning them to Hell. 2 Corinthians 11:14. Fallible people are attempting to destroy the Church, and the Gospels, from Arius to our postmodern times which try to turn Christians away from supersessionism. Morality exists exclusively in God. Why is antisemitism wrong? Why is the Holocaust wrong? Only in God can these be answered. Both are wrong because murder is unnatural, like homosexuality or rape or pedophilia, and humans are made in the imago Dei. That is all. I cannot bear to witness the Church be defiled. Many theological liberals say these things, "The shared spiritual heritage of Jews and Christians." Jewish theology is like 1800 years old. Younger than Christianity, and wholly reactive. "A rejection of collective Jewish guilt for the crucifixion." Sure. A man's sins are his own, and it is the fault of the Pharisees. Seeing as there are no modern Pharisees beyond contemporary Jews (who do not share the temporal guilt of the ancient Pharisees, but are liable before God for their rejection of the divine Son all the same), but this does not mean we accommodate by supporting Israel, or destroying Church teachings, John 14:6. "A new emphasis on interfaith dialogue and reconciliation." This is unbiblical and violates Tradition. John 15:18. The world must conform to God, not the other way. We are creation, and pushing God away leads us into Hell. When the world was pagan, did the missionaries become polytheists and practice human sacrifice in the name of "interfaith dialogue"? This is why I am so committed in fidelity to the Eastern Orthodox faith.