 POV  talk section moved POVive tried to clean things up a bit though someone else will have to remove the vandalistically applied christianity template lest i be reported for edit warring by humus   ive added a link to the christianity and judaism portals in the see also section   these links are more fitting than claiming this is part of the series on christianitythis article was very heavy on antijfj stuff  a lengthy criticism section as well as criticisms inserted into nearly every other section  the missionaries are taught to speak in hebrew these people already went to hebrew school and jfj is known to target vulnerable jews oh really and most of the funding comes from christians well did we think it was coming from muslims and religious jews and the current leader is not jewish even though his mother father all grandparents were apparently jewishsome of the criticisms references were just opinion pieces from religious jews who oppose conversion  most come from biased publications that dont meet wikipedias reliable sources standards  including these references is analogous to editing the buddhism article to say that all buddhists will burn in hell along with a reference to some firenbrimstone websiteanyway if all were trying to get across is that some even many jewish people and groups oppose jfj we dont need to spread it all over the article  it isnt at all surprising that religious jews dont want other jews to accept jesus  every missionary movement is opposed by someone Friend your edits pushed your delusion that J4J is just another Jewish denomination that a bunch of longbearded Hassidim oppose You dont seem to comprehend how the group ruffles feathers throughout the whole length and breadth of the Jewish community even among commies and even among a lot of Christians as it is contrary to the spirit of modern ecumenicism J4J is as much defined by the hostility to it as anything else That is the state of play I think that you can make a case if you feel the wording is not neutral but you cant water down the unanimous opposition to J4J and call that NPOV Thanks for the friend nice words are always welcome even though the rest is not   Please dont accuse me of pushing my delusions   Some jewish groups may strongly oppose them but theres no way to show that all mainstream jewish groups including secular groups strongly oppose them without taking the liberty of defining who all the mainstream jewish groups are and what degree of opposition is strong  Can you really not see this simple truthBeyond that it just isnt appropriate to overwhelm this article with criticism  I outlined this above already   Statements like j4j approachs vulnerable jews are unabashedly POV  and tautological  If anyone converts then its clear they were vulnerable to conversion  so if anyone approached converts then j4j has approaches vulnerable jewsIts not in question that all missionary groups are converting someone from some belief system to another but it is only barely notable that someone opposes this conversion  Does McDonalds oppose Burger King and try to put them out of business at every turn  Yesbut who cares  Do drug smugglers strongly oppose DEA agents coming along and busting up their operations   Yesbut it would be silly to put it in an article   Everyone has opposition and it just goes without saying   Still I wouldnt be strongly opposed to his article having a section on opposition but nearly every corner of this article is littered with criticism that is all essentially the sameCompare this article to that of any other missionary group   In the article christianity is there a section labeled incompatibility with paganism and a belief that is incompatible with paganism and all pagan groups strongly oppose christianity   Do we see incompatibility with catholicism in the protestant article   I know this analogy is not going to be satisfying but no analogy is ever completeWhat are the further objections   Yes the group may be called Jews for Jesus and that offends people but what would you have them call themselves   Would Jews that are now christians but still consider themselves jewish be better  They did use Jackie Mason in a pamphlet   They also used Steve Jobs and Curious George and a whole bunch of others but i dont see Steve Jobs supporters here furious about Jews for jesus deceiving ipod owners into believing in jesusIve given up on the fair play of

    ####Prompt- Does the next message are offensives ? reply with a JSON object (without carriage return or new lines)
    with keys :
    isoffensive (True if it's offensive).
    This this the message : 
 POV  talk section moved POVive tried to clean things up a bit though someone else will have to remove the vandalistically applied christianity template lest i be reported for edit warring by humus   ive added a link to the christianity and judaism portals in the see also section   these links are more fitting than claiming this is part of the series on christianitythis article was very heavy on antijfj stuff  a lengthy criticism section as well as criticisms inserted into nearly every other section  the missionaries are taught to speak in hebrew these people already went to hebrew school and jfj is known to target vulnerable jews oh really and most of the funding comes from christians well did we think it was coming from muslims and religious jews and the current leader is not jewish even though his mother father all grandparents were apparently jewishsome of the criticisms references were just opinion pieces from religious jews who oppose conversion  most come from biased publications that dont meet wikipedias reliable sources standards  including these references is analogous to editing the buddhism article to say that all buddhists will burn in hell along with a reference to some firenbrimstone websiteanyway if all were trying to get across is that some even many jewish people and groups oppose jfj we dont need to spread it all over the article  it isnt at all surprising that religious jews dont want other jews to accept jesus  every missionary movement is opposed by someone Friend your edits pushed your delusion that J4J is just another Jewish denomination that a bunch of longbearded Hassidim oppose You dont seem to comprehend how the group ruffles feathers throughout the whole length and breadth of the Jewish community even among commies and even among a lot of Christians as it is contrary to the spirit of modern ecumenicism J4J is as much defined by the hostility to it as anything else That is the state of play I think that you can make a case if you feel the wording is not neutral but you cant water down the unanimous opposition to J4J and call that NPOV Thanks for the friend nice words are always welcome even though the rest is not   Please dont accuse me of pushing my delusions   Some jewish groups may strongly oppose them but theres no way to show that all mainstream jewish groups including secular groups strongly oppose them without taking the liberty of defining who all the mainstream jewish groups are and what degree of opposition is strong  Can you really not see this simple truthBeyond that it just isnt appropriate to overwhelm this article with criticism  I outlined this above already   Statements like j4j approachs vulnerable jews are unabashedly POV  and tautological  If anyone converts then its clear they were vulnerable to conversion  so if anyone approached converts then j4j has approaches vulnerable jewsIts not in question that all missionary groups are converting someone from some belief system to another but it is only barely notable that someone opposes this conversion  Does McDonalds oppose Burger King and try to put them out of business at every turn  Yesbut who cares  Do drug smugglers strongly oppose DEA agents coming along and busting up their operations   Yesbut it would be silly to put it in an article   Everyone has opposition and it just goes without saying   Still I wouldnt be strongly opposed to his article having a section on opposition but nearly every corner of this article is littered with criticism that is all essentially the sameCompare this article to that of any other missionary group   In the article christianity is there a section labeled incompatibility with paganism and a belief that is incompatible with paganism and all pagan groups strongly oppose christianity   Do we see incompatibility with catholicism in the protestant article   I know this analogy is not going to be satisfying but no analogy is ever completeWhat are the further objections   Yes the group may be called Jews for Jesus and that offends people but what would you have them call themselves   Would Jews that are now christians but still consider themselves jewish be better  They did use Jackie Mason in a pamphlet   They also used Steve Jobs and Curious George and a whole bunch of others but i dont see Steve Jobs supporters here furious about Jews for jesus deceiving ipod owners into believing in jesusIve given up on the fair play of

