So Luther had no problem with a person of Jewish origin who followed Luther -- yet if they didn't listen to him, he called for fire and brimstone on them. Luther called Calvinists and Catholics the same -- essentially he was brilliant and had a massive ego (this is separate from his theological views - I'm talking about his person, and that's different from his theology) -- he basically hated anyone who didn't follow him
NO ONE until the 1800s hated Jews for their race. If a Jew converted to another faith, he was no longer a Jew
Modern day anti-semitism is based on a flawed understanding of Darwin's evolution. Various European and American people who knew a little bit of science (a little knowledge is a dangerous thing) came to the conclusion that races are "evolution" - starting from the "lowest races" such as sub-saharan Africans or Irishmen (yeah, the racist idiots considered the two equally "low") all the way up to the "Aryan superman" -- again a stupidity as "Aryans" are properly only Iranians or North Indians.
Luther wasn't an anti-semite like the Nazis and neither were Catholics in the Middle Ages. Both of these would have been appalled at the Nazi killing
Luther wasn't an anti-semite like the Nazis and neither were Catholics in the Middle Ages. Both of these would have been appalled at the Nazi killing
You mean we can actually agree on something? Some RCs would take issue with you here. And both Catholics and Luther could attack not only Jewish beliefs but also the contemporary Jewish culture (which I do not think was characterized by doing things that endeared them to the public) without attacking the race, just as we can attack the American black culture, which is not the same as attacking the race (unless you are race-card holding liberal).