The source of modern anti semitism?

basically what happened at the time was he saw a christian woman entering a shul which housed the local beis din to sign a shtar. at the time judaism was still held in high regard as jesus himself was a practicing jew. it was common for christians to practice judaism in one form or another. they were called judaizing christians. they held jews in high regard and valued their courts as honest and trustrworthy.

anyway a few decades prior the church was established after the council of nicea…christianity became an organized religion. before during and after the council there was a civil war being fought between pagans and christians. essentially a struggle for power. religion WAS power at the time. the dominant power was the dominant religion. the purpose of the council was to unify the myriad christian sects and solidify the church’s position in the world thus enabling it to conquer the pagans. appearing as a unified force was more imposing than hundreds of scattered separate little groups of christians.

another purpose was to make christianity more palatable to christians such as the inclusion to a degree of pagan holidays etc into the church calendar. the point is that it was of paramount importance that the pagans be either converted, defeated, or at the very least, seriously marginalized. so it would seem of utmost importance for preachers who a the time were essentially political leaders who were helping the church in its fight against paganism. apparently the idea of judaizing christians and jews holding any standing in society at all was repugnant to john chrysostom which makes sense considering that judaism was not in accordance with church doctrine.

so this guy made it his business to tell the world of the evil of the jews. he perpetuated the idea that the jews were singlehandedly responsible for the death of jesus, and the idea that that gave christians a right to do as they please to the jews. from the time of the churban until him there was no one as outspoken against the jews as he.

remember, the churban had absolutely nothing to do with christianity as far as history is concerned, taht was all the act of pagans. up until nicea christianity wasnt even all that popular and as i said above, paganism, not judaism, was the church’s biggest problem. so when he got up and preached his homilies every sunday before his congregation, he shifted focus from the pagans to the jews and essentially validated any violence against a jew by using the death of jesus as justification. he made it his purpose to draw attention back to the jews. he made it his purpose to see that jews get persecuted by anyone who would listen to his sermons. he gave the christians the reasons they needed to become the rabid anti semites history has shown them to be.

so throughout the centuries whenever a christian killed a jew and blamed it on his involvement in the death of jesus or the sort, that stems from john chrsysostom. teh intense hatred felt specifically by christians stems from his rousing homilies against us.

as for your point about the new testament itself condemning the jews as jesus’ murderer, you have to remember that until nicea the new testament didnt exist as it does today. the text were canonized AT the council and john chrysostom was only a few decades after the council. peasants etc were not literate or wealthy enough to own or read a copy of the new testament so they got all their religious information from preachers like john chrysostom. am i saying that he was the only anti semite at the time? certainly not. but he was certainly the most gifted one in terms of oratory skill and he was certainly the most outspoken on that specific agenda.