Actually it was the Jews that killed Christ and they are not Christian because they are still waiting for the Messiah to come. They do not believe that Jesus was the Christ...Thats why they had him put to death because they figured if he was truly the Christ he would of saved himself from death.
This is just getting stupid
by spiritwalker 21 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
gaiagirl
What I fail to understand is why Christians don't PRAISE whoever they think killed Jesus. According to Christian teaching, Jesus HAD to die in order to pay the ransom which 'pays off' their inborn sins. This was the whole point of his earthly existence. Had Jesus not died, then no believer would be eligible for everlasting life, because there would have been no payment of 'the ransom'. So instead of accusing Jews, Jewish leaders, Pilate, etc, Christians should be THANKING them.
-
avishai
That's it, I'm gonna go right out & star oppressing Italians, RIGHT NOW, because they killed our lord and savior tm
-
Leolaia
According to the Gospels, the Roman procurator Pontius Pilate tries Jesus and sentences him to death. The Roman soldiers mock and scourage Jesus. The Romans force Jesus to bear the cross to Golgotha. The Romans strip his clothes and cast losts to divvy them up. The Romans drive nails into his hands and feet and lift him up on the cross. And yet the Jews are blamed for his death? Why? Because of that mob that demands Pilate to crucify Jesus apparently. But why should a mob make Jews in general blameworthy when at that point, all of Jesus' apostles and disciples were Jews as well? Indeed, only the Gospel of John labels the mob as "Jews," the synoptics simply refers to it as "a crowd" or "the leading men and the people". The mob story, and especially the Johannine version of it, is regarded by most scholars as an attempt by later Christians to distinguish themselves from Jews and establish their own unique identity in contrast to them. The gospel narratives date after the Jewish War and Roman destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, and the Romans saw the Christians as a Jewish sect. Having already been traumatized by the Neronian persecution of A.D. 64, and aware that the Romans knew that the Roman authorities executed the founder of their sect, the attempt to shift blame to "Jews" had the intention of improving relations with the Romans. The Acts of Pilate, written in the second century, went even further in exonerating the Roman authorities. Earlier writings, such as that of Paul in 1 Corinthians 2:8 (written before the Jewish War), blame not the Jews but "the rulers of this age." Note also that the gospels were published by the Gentile church after the destruction of Jerusalem permanently cut it off from the original Jewish-Christian Church, led formerly by James the Just, brother of Jesus. The Gentiles, having no Jewish identity but as Roman citizens, were easily more inclined to find fault with the Jews and not with the Romans. This is exactly the situation with the Gospel of John (published in Asia Minor), which referred to Jesus' opponents simply as "Jews" as if Jesus weren't one himself. The Epistle of Barnabas is another good example of this thinking. Finally, there are certain aspects of the mob story which cause historians to doubt its historicity. For example, the name of the would-be substitute of Jesus, Barabbas, is Aramaic for "Son of the Father," which of course recalls the theological claim of Jesus as the Son of God, who calls to his Father as "Abba".
-
DevonMcBride
This may be a message from higher authority.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Movies/10/24/gibson.passion/
Lightning strikes Gibson's 'Christ'
Friday, October 24, 2003 Posted: 4:38 PM EDT (2038 GMT)
Mel Gibson, right, directs Jim Caviezel, playing Jesus, in "The Passion." ROME, Italy -- Actor Jim Caviezel, who plays Jesus in Mel Gibson's controversial film "The Passion of Christ" was struck by lightning during shooting.
Caviezel was uninjured, but a producer described how he saw smoke coming from the actor's ear.
An assistant director on the film, Jan Michelini, was also hit -- for the second time in a few months.
The first time, a lightning fork struck his umbrella during filming on top of a hill near Matera in Italy, causing light burns to the tips of his fingers, VLife, a supplement to Variety publications said in its October issue.
A few months later the second strike happened, a few hours from Rome.
Michelini was again carrying an umbrella, and standing next to Caviezel on top of a hill, the magazine said.
Both were hit, with the main bolt striking Caviezel while one of its forks hit Michelini's umbrella. Neither were hurt.
The film, which is spoken in Latin and Aramaic, has come in for criticism from some religious leaders. It portrays the last hours of Jesus, but some Jewish and Roman Catholic groups are concerned the film will fuel anti-Semitism.
Copyright 2003 CNN. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report. -
garybuss
For reading enjoyment . . .
p. 142
From the book:
God, Jews, and History
By, Max Dimont
MOSES, CHRIST, AND CAESAR
Another point which New Testament readers forget, or are not aware of, is that it was the Prophets who began the reformation of the Temple cult, eight hundred years before Jesus. In the days of Jesus there existed, side by side, two Judaisms, one the Judaism of temple and sacrifice, the other the Judaism of synagogue and prayer, just as two Christianities exist side by side today, one Catholic, the other Protestant. Jesus, then, was not the first reformer of the Temple cult. When he appeared on the scene, the reforms instituted by the Prophets were already doing away with the entire Temple cult itself. In this dying Temple cult, Jesus aimed to do away with two practices, the selling of sacrificial animals and the handling of money on Temple grounds.
It was a long-established custom in those days to sell sacrificial doves and pigeons outside the Temple, just as it is the custom to sell candles and crosses inside churches and cathedrals today. As Jewish pilgrims came from many lands to offer their sacrifices in the Temple, it was also a custom for vendors to make change from one currency to another as a service to these pilgrims. Some Sunday-school textbooks hint that- there was gambling involved, an understandable elaboration, but this theory is not supported by any of the four Gospels. Jesus objected, not to the making of change, but to the handling of money on Temple grounds, just as he might object to the custom of handling money inside churches and cathedrals today when collection plates or baskets are passed to worshipers.*
When Jesus arrived at the Temple, smashing the tables of the vendors and driving the money-changers down the Temple stairs, those Jews who wanted these services were as out- raged as Christians would be today if someone were to storm into their churches during Easter services, smash the candles and crosses offered for sale, and drive the gentlemen passing the collection plates down the church steps. Does anyone doubt that such an intruder would be arrested at the orders of the priest or minister? Yet the Jews did not arrest Jesus at this time. They wanted no trouble with the Romans and hoped the incident would be forgotten.
But this hope was not to be realized. News of the commotion in the Temple tensed the Romans. Was this the event that would set off a riot? An uprising? A rebellion? Responsible Jewish citizens, fully aware of the danger of the slaughter, rapine, and torture which would take place if the Roman legions were unleashed, might have felt that Jesus should be restrained until after Passover, until the excitement had died, until the legionnaires' had departed and the semisiege lifted. Cautiously they waited to see what would happen. The adherents of Jesus were now for the first time beginning to speak of him openly as "king of the Jews" and as "the messiah," further arousing the suspicions of the Romans. The Jews, according to the Gospels, arrested Jesus on the third day after his appearance at the Temple.
Twelve eventful hours in the history of mankind now took place. The only accounts we have of the twelve hours which followed the arrest of Jesus are contained in the Four Gospels, which were written forty to ninety years after the event itself. Their many contradictions aside, the Gospel accounts say essentially this: Jesus was arrested at night by orders of the Sanhedrin, the highest court in the land, and condemned to death by the Sanhedrin for the crime of blasphemy, or religious corruption, at the palace of the High Priest with the aid of suborned witnesses. The Gospel versions then go on to relate that Pontius Pilate, who had to approve the sentence, did so most reluctantly because he was afraid of the Jewish multitude.
Any person familiar with Jewish judicial procedure in Biblical times will find it difficult to take the Gospel accounts literally. According to Jewish law at that time, no one could be arrested at night. It was illegal to hold court proceedings after sundown on the eve or the day of the Sabbath or a festival. The Great Sanhedrin could convene only in the Chamber of Hewn Stones, never in the palace of a High Priest or in any other dwelling. Nor could the Sanhedrin initiate an arrest. No one could be tried before the Sanhedrin unless two witnesses had first sworn out charges against him. As there was no prosecuting attorney, the accusing witnesses had to state the nature of the offense to the court in the presence of the accused, who had the right to call witnesses in his own behalf. The court then examined and cross-examined the accused, the accusers, and the defense witnesses. The Talmud, in fact, decreed that even as a condemned man was led to his place of execution, a herald had to precede him crying out to all: "So and so, the son of so and so is going forth to be executed because he has committed such and such an offense, and so and so are his [accusing] witnesses. Whoever knows anything in his favor, let him come and state it."* These facts make it very unlikely that a Jewish High Court would defy every law in its own code and act contrary to time-honored custom. Such action by the august body of the Sanhedrin is as inconceivable as the United States Supreme Court's seizing a man at night - searching for "witnesses" during the night to accuse him of crime condemn him to death without a trial, and clamor or immediate execution all within the space of twelve hours.
A historian familiar with the cruelty and rapacity of Pontius Pilate will find it equally difficult to accept the portrayal of Pilate as a tender and merciful judge, zealous for the welfare of one Jew. In fact, Pilate's cruelty and rapacity became so notorious that the Emperor Tiberius had to remove him because he brought dishonor to Rome. It demands too much credulity to think that this Pontius Pilate, a Roman general in command of many legions surrounding the city, was cowed by a Jewish "multitude" armed with nothing more fearful than phylacteries (small amulets wrapped around one arm during prayer).
Does it not seem more probable that Jesus was arrested by the Jews to protect him from the Romans (who never had any compunction about crucifying one Jew more or less),that this protective arrest was to no avail, and that the Romans demanded that the Jews turn Jesus over to them for punishment? There is evidence in the Gospels themselves for such a theory. According to the Gospels, it was the Roman soldiers who scourged and tortured the body of Jesus.
*The Talmud, Sanhedrin, Mishna 43 a.
**As one wit expressed it: "Some Christian scholars do not believe Jesus existed, but they are all convinced that the Jews killed him."
********** -
SixofNine
They don't make Jews like Jesus anymore ~ Kinky Friedman, singer/songwriter of The Texas Jewboys
Some Christian scholars do not believe Jesus existed, but they are all convinced that the Jews killed him
Now that's funny! -
Robdar
According to Christian teaching, Jesus HAD to die in order to pay the ransom which 'pays off' their inborn sins. This was the whole point of his earthly existence. Had Jesus not died, then no believer would be eligible for everlasting life, because there would have been no payment of 'the ransom'. So instead of accusing Jews, Jewish leaders, Pilate, etc, Christians should be THANKING them.
I totally agree with Gaia's statement and feel the same can be said about Judas.
-
Dawn
Even if the Jews of the 1st century CE, were responsible for Jesus' death, that's not the fault of any Jew living today.
I agree! However, I think that as an American I can sympathize somewhat.....although what happened to the slaves and the Indians is not the fault of any American living today, it still impacts our society and we still carry the stigma. So I can relate.
Regardless - I agree with the PC comments.....we've gotten way too worried about being politically correct - to the point of stupidity!
-
shiloh
Garybuss, Thanks for the post. A very interesting read!
Mel Gibson, right, directs Jim Caviezel, playing Jesus, in "The Passion."