This is a postscript to to what I wrote about Christian antisemitism:
i) It might be argued that Jewish rejection of Jesus is more culpable than gentile rejection of Jesus. I think that's sometimes the case, but it needs to be carefully qualified:
ii) Thousands of Palestinian Jews witnessed the public ministry of Christ. For them to reject Jesus is clearly worse than for those who lack that firsthand observation.
iii) In one respect, the situation of Diaspora Jews is no different than Gentiles. Their knowledge of Jesus would be secondhand.
In another respect, their knowledge of the OT would give them an advantage over the average gentile in assessing Jesus in light of Messianic prophecy.
iv) However, after Christians began persecuting Jews, it could be argued that their disbelief is mitigated rather than aggravated by their Jewishness. Christian antisemitism would naturally harden them against the Gospel. That extenuating circumstance makes them less culpable.
v) Conversely, professing Christians who, say, were raised in an evangelical church, but renounce the faith, are generally more culpable than Jews. Some Jews read the OT, but never read the NT, and some Jews never read the Bible at all. By contrast, if a gentile has been instructed in the entire Bible, then rejects Jesus, his disbelief is more culpable than a Jew who didn't have those advantages.
vi) Finally, Jews naturally resent being saddled with collective guilt for the death of Christ. But, ironically, many Jews saddle Christians with collective guilt for antisemitism. To be consistent, if Jews en masse don't wish to be blamed for the death of Jesus, then they should avoid blaming Christians en masse for the persecution of Jews in church history. Historical memory can be a curse.