i don't think humus sapiens is assuming the worst about the motivations of others my sense of it is that he just sees things differently and is perhaps more passionate and yes a bit self righteous about it than some of us factual accuracy there are at least three ways to view these events let a persecution of christians by some jews a institutional persecution of christians by jews let b christian persecution of jews first the perspective that we all reject the jews persecuted the christians and this justifies years of christian anti semitism this is a happened and a justifies b second the perspective that is i believe the mainstream position some jews persecuted the christians enough so that the christians viewed this or at least cast this as an institutional rejection of christianity culminating the hypothesized council of jamnia the polemic and conflict arising out of this sectarian conflict colored christian attitudes policies and behavior towards jews for the next years this anti semitism is rooted in the original conflict between jews and christians during the formative years of early christianity however most people today reject the notion of the events providing any legitimate justification for anti semitism this is a happened a was used to justify b but many people argue a does not justify b third the perspective that some liberal theologians are pushing the nt account is ahistorical because there is no corroborating evidence outside the new testament or the writings of the church fathers note forgive me if i am overstating the position according to this perspective the persecutions either never happened or were exaggerated by either the nt authors or later interpreters of the nt authors for example it is possible that the incidents in the nt represent isolated incidents and do not represent an institutional policy later events post bar kokhba may have led to a re interpretation of the isolated events into a perception of institutional policy this is a never happened a happened a was used to justify b but many people argue a does not justify b i believe that all of these perspectives yes even the first one should be presented in the article we should give due weight to each perspective citing sources who support each view finally i think that we are agreed that we should not say jews persecuted the christians but rather according to the nt jews persecuted the christians if this formulation were used uniformly throughout the article would there still be a dispute over factual accuracy