Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

shafique · Jan 27, 2010

It appears that our friend eh believes that the Biblical account of Jesus' trial is correct and he believes that the Romans were not responsible for killing of Jesus, but rather it was the responsiblity of 'Jews'.

This view is nowadays viewed as anti-semitic, but kudos to eh for having the courage of his convictions and sticking with the Bible. (I'm assuming he would have renounced the anti-semitic literal interpretation if he was one of the 21st century christians who now blame Pilate)

I fully understand why eh maintains his belief - as the Bible is pretty clear on the subject.

Matthew 27:23-26

Pilate asked, "Why do you want me to kill him? What wrong has he done?" But all the people shouted louder, "Kill him on a cross!" Pilate saw that he could do nothing to make the people change. And he saw that the people were becoming upset. So Pilate took some water and washed his hands so that all the people could see. Then Pilate said, "I am not guilty of this man's death. You are the ones that are doing it!" All the people answered, "We will be responsible for his death. We accept for ourselves and for our children any punishment for his death." Then Pilate freed Barabbas. Pilate told some soldiers to beat Jesus with whips. Then Pilate gave Jesus to the soldiers to be killed on a cross.

However, 21st century Christians argue that the above is not correct and it is actually Pilate who is responsible.

The Apostle's Creed states:

..He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.

Which notably does not absolve the jews of responsibility for the killing - as it only states that Pilate was the means by which the Jews killed Jesus. Matthew clearly states that Jesus was killed despite the best efforts of Pilate to get him released.

So, whilst I disagree with eh over many points - I can't fault him for sticking to the literal message of the Bible and not blaming Pilate for killing Jesus.

That said, if I've misunderstood eh's non-renunciation of the verse above, I'm sure he will clarify his belief.

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Jan 27, 2010

I see you've hit rock bottom stupidity now.

shafique · Jan 27, 2010

Let me quote you from the 18th century beliefs thread:

event horizon wrote:
I wouldn't have assumed you had these anti-semitic beliefs

There's nothing anti Semitic in the passage from Matthew you quoted. I mentioned Josephus previous, but for some reason, you thought I was talking about the crucifixion - oh forget, you're too dumb to know what I'm talking about.

So you believe that there is nothing anti-semitic in your belief that the Jews were responsible for killing Jesus. The Christians I've talked to all say it is anti-semitic to blame Jews for killing Jesus - but I guess they should speak to you and you'll put them straight.

Now, what has Josephus got to do with what is written in Matthew and your belief?

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Jan 27, 2010

No, claiming that Jews killed Jesus is not anti-Semitic. Why would it be? Josephus documents instances of the ancient Jews who put people to death that the Romans did not want/care to execute.

Now, saying that God wants the Jews destroyed and calls for believers to attack them (among other derogatory statements) is a different story.

shafique · Jan 27, 2010

Hey, I'm with you, I also don't get why Christians and Jews view the responsibility of the killing of Jesus as portrayed in Matthew (and also in Mel Gibson's 'Passion of Christ') as being anti-semitic. Both just say that Pilate went out of his way to free Jesus and then washed his hands of responsibility - with the Jews saying they were responsible and they would take the blame (and also putting on the heads of their children).

I'm still not sure what Josephus' accounts have to do with your belief that the Bible is correct to absolve Pilate of blame and lay it on the Jews?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique · Jan 27, 2010

Here's one Rabbi that thinks the belief in the Biblical account is anti-semitic:

You shouldn't get so angry at that Christian who insisted that the Jews killed Jesus. Your outrage is being directed at the wrong source. Your accuser was simply taking his New Testament a little too seriously. The Christian scriptures are quite clear about the subject of who is responsible for Jesus' death. In I Thessalonians 2:14-16, Paul writes,
. . . even as they have of the Jews, who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men, forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always; for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost!

Moreover, not only are the Jews completely vilified in the New Testament for Jesus' execution, but the Romans are completely exonerated. This vilification is not only directed toward those Jews who supposedly plotted and caused Jesus' death. Rather, the Christian Bible makes it clear that this blame is extended to all future generations of Jews throughout all time.

In Matthew 27:22-25, Pontius Pilate is made out to appear as if he wants nothing to do with Jesus' crucifixion, and he symbolically washes his hands of the affair. In fact, the Gospels consistently portray Pilate as the one fighting with the Jews for Jesus' release. The Jews, on the other hand, continue to scream and call for Jesus' crucifixion until Pontius Pilate finally relents to their incessant demands and reluctantly hands Jesus over to be crucified. Before Jesus is crucified, however, one of the most devastating and catastrophic statements was placed in the mouths of the Jewish people by the author of the first Gospel. In response to Pilate's desperate pleas for Jesus' life, the Jews assure him that, "We take his blood upon ourselves and our children!" Read Matthew 27:22-25 (below). These verses will provide some insight as to how the mind and soul of your acquaintance were poisoned by the words of the New Testament. Pilate said to them,

"What then shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?" They all [the Jews] said to him, "Let Him be crucified!" Then the governor said, "Why, what evil has He done?" But they cried out all the more, saying, "Let Him be crucified!" When Pilate saw that he could not prevail at all, but rather that a tumult was rising, he took water and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, "I am innocent of the blood of this just Person. You see to it." All the people answered and said, "His blood be on us and on our children."

Moreover, in the fourth Gospel, which is considered by many to be the most anti-Semitic of all, John has Jesus completely
exonerating the Romans for the crucifixion while placing the complete blame for Jesus' death on the head of the Jews. In a
conversation between Jesus and Pilate, Jesus assures the Roman procurator of Judea that he has no power of his own, and therefore "the one who delivered me to you [the Jews] bear the greatest iniquity" (John 19:11). In fact, nowhere in the New Testament are the Romans ever condemned for the crucifixion of Jesus. Unfortunately, this cannot be said about the Jews. It is therefore not difficult to understand how Pontius Pilate could be venerated as a saint by many churches throughout North Africa. This is made clear in Acts 2:36 where the Jews alone are held accountable for the death of Jesus. Notice how the Roman culpability is never mentioned anywhere in this verse.

Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.

....

It is important to bear in mind that although, as a result of this despicable charge of deicide, countless Christians have committed unspeakable atrocities against the Jewish people, many decent Christians condemn it. The reason for their condemnation, however, is often varied. While many of these Christians who denounce anti-Semitism operate out a genuine affection for the Jewish people, for others, however, their motives are not as pure. Unfortunately, many Christians who loudly declare their love for the Jewish people and condemn this charge of deicide have an ulterior motive: They do not want to be perceived by their potential Jewish converts to Christianity as being anti-Semitic or associated with Christendom and its long history of hate.

Sincerely yours,

Rabbi Tovia Singer

http://www.outreachjudaism.org/jesuskillers.html

event horizon · Jan 27, 2010

shafique wrote:Hey, I'm with you, I also don't get why Christians and Jews view the responsibility of the killing of Jesus as portrayed in Matthew (and also in Mel Gibson's 'Passion of Christ') as being anti-semitic. Both just say that Pilate went out of his way to free Jesus and then washed his hands of responsibility - with the Jews saying they were responsible and they would take the blame (and also putting on the heads of their children).

I'm still not sure what Josephus' accounts have to do with your belief that the Bible is correct to absolve Pilate of blame and lay it on the Jews?

Cheers,
Shafique

Cool - I also agree that merely reporting what Jews in a crowd said, whipped up into a frenzy and paid off by the Jewish leadership to crucify Jesus, is not anti-Semitic.

And to claim that the New Testament is 'anti-Semtic' is an an anachronism. Antisemitism was the hate of Jews based on ethnicity. Anti Judaism would be more accurate, but there is no 'hate' of Jews, because of their religion, in the New Testament that I can think of.

A simple and full reading of the Gospels makes it absurd to claim that the Jews, as in all Jews (both in those times and forever) are to be blamed for Jesus' death patently ridiculous.

But hey, I'm actually surprised that you're trying to argue that the New Testament is 'anti-Semitic' based on one or two verses. Aren't you having a conniption fit when I quote the Koran, in context, to show that Jews and Christians are to be attacked by Muslims?

event horizon · Jan 27, 2010

In I Thessalonians 2:14-16, Paul writes,
. . . even as they have of the Jews, who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets,

So is the Koran anti-Semitic because it also says that the Jews have killed their own prophets?

You really shot yourself in the foot with that quote.

Your rabbi is not the best historian either. Polemic against the Jews for killing Jesus only started in the 11th century. Before that, the charge against the Jews was for not accepting Jesus as the Messiah or for not interpreting their Bible the same way as Christians had or for accusations they corrupted the Bible to leave out passages in the Old Testament that mentioned Jesus.

Ironically, the last three reasons that caused anti Judaic beliefs for the first one thousand years of Christianity are identical to the Muslim charge against Jews and Christians today and some are explicitly found in the Koran - that Jews and Christians are corrupters, Jews do not accept the Messiah, etc. are right there in the Koran, along with the charge against the Jews for killing their prophets.

What's worse, God says in the Koran that Jews are the lowest of his 'created creatures', Jews, like Christians, take someone as a son of God and should be destroyed, and that Jews and Christians should be fought.

That's in addition to numerous passages in the Koran promising hellfire for Jews and Christians and disbelievers in general.

shafique · Jan 27, 2010

event horizon wrote:
In I Thessalonians 2:14-16, Paul writes,
. . . even as they have of the Jews, who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets,

So is the Koran anti-Semitic because it also says that the Jews have killed their own prophets?

Many Jews do believe Islam is anti-semitic. As I said, I don't believe that the Bible stating that the Jews were responsible for killing Jesus is anti-semitic - it's just stating what happened (according to the authors).

Paul is categoric, it was the Jews who killed Jesus (not Pilate).

It's not anti-semitic for God to point out the historical facts about sins committed by Jews - in fact the OT points out quite a few, and even details the punishments he meted out to them (eg wandering the deserts for 40 years)

Are you therefore agreeing with me that Mel Gibson is not an anti-semite for merely portraying in his film what the Gospels say happened?

If so, then it is great we agree on that point.

You and I can both ask the Christians (and Jews) who consider the above quote from Matthew why they consider it anti-semitic. The Rabbi is pretty brutal about why he maintains the belief is anti-semitic.

Bravo for sticking up for Mel Gibson, Paul and the Bible - don't let anyone tell you that you should move with the times and NOT absolve Pilate of blame!

I have to say, I did think you would argue that Jews didn't kill Jesus and it was the Romans, but I have to admit I was wrong and you've come out in favour of Paul who said the Jews killed Jesus and Matthew who lays the blame on the Jews. You don't see this belief as anti-semitic - so the Rabbi and other Christians who believe this is anti-semitic are wrong.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Jan 28, 2010

Well, I think that most Jews you talk to believe the Koran is anti-Semitic is because the Koran is anti-Semitic.

The Koran, not the New Testament, says unbelievers are the worst of created beings.

The Koran, not the New Testament, promises that Jews will burn in hell for eternity if they do not accept Muhammad as their prophet.

The Koran, not the New Testament, accuses the Jews of taking Ezra as the son of God and has Allah saying that Jews should be destroyed.

The Koran, not the New Testament, specifically singles out 'people of the book' as the worst of created beings (that's the second reference in the Koran making that claim).

The Koran, not the New Testament, calls for warfare (violence) against Jews because they are 'disbelievers'.

The New Testament, not the Koran, says that the Jews and Romans who tormented Jesus on the cross are to be forgiven.

The New Testament, not the Koran, says to love your enemy.

The New Testament, not the Koran, is especially favorable to Judaism - with all of the major protagonists from the New Testament being Jewish themselves and proud of their Jewish religion/origin.

Paul is categoric, it was the Jews who killed Jesus (not Pilate).

Actually, the context of the passage wouldn't have made sense to bring up Pilate. Paul was drawing an analogy to the persecution of Gentiles at the hands of Gentiles to the persecution of Jews at the hands of Jews. Of course, you have never read Paul's epistles beyond snippets provided off of websites, so you're unaware of Paul boasting of his Jewish background in Romans 9 and other epistles.

In any event, saying the Jews killed Jesus would not preclude that the Romans killed him also. The New Testament is clear that it was the Romans who actually did the killing. A simple reading of the New Testament (as opposed to getting your information from dot com sites) makes it clear that not even all of the Sanhedrin/Pharisees were in support of executing Jesus.

shafique · Jan 28, 2010

It is fascinating that your comparison of anti-semitism in the Quran vs the Bible stops and the words and doesn't actually look at anti-semitic actions. If you are right and the Bible has fewer anti-semitic verses, then we could expect fewer acts of killing of Jews by European Christians when compared to Muslim anti-semitic attacks. Even if we discount the Holocaust, a handful of the medieval pogroms and genocidal attacks on whole Jewish populations will swamp the cumulative attacks against Jews in the first 1400 years of Islam.

But, alas, the Quran does not say the Jews killed Jesus - that is in the Bible.

As I said, kudos for sticking by the Bible and not considering Paul (or Matthew) as liars when they put the blame squarely on the Jews and explicitly absolved Pilate of the blame.

You therefore will agree with Mel Gibson that he was just accurately portraying what the Bible says in his film the Passion of Christ - where he shows the Jews taking responsibility for killing Jesus.

I give you credit for continuing to believe that the Bible is true and disagreeing with all the 'experts' who now say it wasn't the Jews who killed Jesus. I'm also impressed that you have an argument against their assertion that to believe Jews killed Jesus is anti-semitic.

So, in summary, the Bible says Pilate was not responsible for killing Jesus (says Matthew) and you believe the Bible is true. Paul says Jews killed Jesus, and therefore agrees with Matthew. You also believe it is NOT anti-semitic to believe Matthew and Paul are correct when they state that Jews killed Jesus.

(I guess you agree with the Bible that the Jews were responsible for killing Jesus - but forced Pilate to carry out the sentence on their behalf - hence the washing of his hands. So technically, the Romans carried out the killing on behalf of the Jews - i.e.- they were the gun, the Jews pulled the trigger, so to speak)

Thank you for clarifying this point. I shall use this as an example of a 21st century Christian who still believes Jews killed Jesus and argues this belief is not anti-semitic.

However, I sense a reluctance on your part to state that you agree with Matthew that Pilate was not responsible and washed his hands of the affair. Why is that?

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Jan 28, 2010

As I said, kudos for sticking by the Bible and not considering Paul (or Matthew) as liars when they put the blame squarely on the Jews and explicitly absolved Pilate of the blame.

This should be fun.

Based on your logic, the Koran definitely advocates offensive warfare against unbelievers, based on one verse, no?

shafique · Jan 28, 2010

Now, I understand your fervent desire to bring up Quaint Belief No 1 again - but we've already discussed your interpretation of the Quran and why I don't share your quaint belief.

What is clear though, and I'm sure you'll agree, is that the Quran does not say the Jews killed Jesus. It is only the Bible which says this - but I've still got your back and will defend you for believing the Bible to be true. (We will agree to disagree as to what happened - as God says explicitly in the Quran that the Jews 'surely did not kill him')

That said, I will repeat my admiration for your convictions and applaud you for sticking to the view that the Bible is correct to say Pilate was NOT responsible for killing Jesus, but it was the Jews.

Have you convinced anyone else that this view is not anti-semitic? (Mel Gibson shares your view and you're just agreeing with Matthew's explicit account)

When I read the criticism of Gibson - it appeared that many Christians and Jews did consider the belief that Jews were responsible for killing Jesus as anti-semitic. Was I mistaken about their objections?

Cheers,
Sahfique

event horizon · Jan 28, 2010

Are you still posturing? It was really a simple question.

Why can't I conclude that the Koran advocates warfare based on one or several verses?

shafique · Jan 28, 2010

You can conclude what you like about the Quran - I've already made a list of your 'quaint beliefs' and QB1 already records your quaint interpretation.

We agree, however, that the Quran specifically has God saying that the Jews did not kill Jesus (because that's what God says there).

This thread is about whether you believe the Bible when it blames Jews for killing Jesus or whether you agree with the 'new and improved' version of events that puts the blame on Pilate and dismisses Matthew's account as wrong.

As I said above, kudos for sticking up for Paul and Matthew in the face of the 'new and improved' interpretations of the Bible which stick the blame on the Italians! Good on ya!

(I'm sticking with the Quran's version, obviously.)

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique · Jan 28, 2010

Here's a hymn from 1889 which includes the following reference to deicide by the Jews. I guess this is the kind of hymn that some may consider anti-semitic, but which eh has no problem with (eh, care to confirm whether you'd be ok singing this hymn?):

THOU, THE CHRIST FOREVER ONE
...
Though the Blood betrayed and spilt,
On the race entailed a doom,
Let its virtue cleanse the guilt,
Melt the hardness, chase the gloom;
Lift the veil from off their heart,
Make them Israelites indeed,
Meet once more for lot and part
With Thy household’s genuine seed.

...
Speed the day of union sweet
When with us in faith allied,
Israel’s heart shall turn to greet
Thee, whom Israel crucified;
Thee, in all Thy truth and grace,
Owned at last as Salem’s King,
While her children find their place,
Gathered safe beneath Thy wing.

You can sing along to the music after the link (which has the full hymn):
http://www.hymntime.com/tch/htm/t/t/ttcforon.htm

event horizon · Jan 28, 2010

Nope - I'm just trying to establish some ground rules so, in the future, you do not flip-flop by claiming something is 'contradictory' in the New Testament but not the Koran - even though the Koran undoubtedly contains numerous contradictions.

Going back to the New Testament, I still have not seen you answer my last question - should all of the accounts in the Gospels be taken into account, so we know that when 'the Jews' are mentioned as crucifying Jesus, we are only talking about the Sadducees and the Sanhedrin (and not even all of the Sanhedrin)?

A simple reading of the New Testament does not support your belief that 'the Jews' were responsible for killing Jesus, since context is provided as to who these Jews actually were.

Of course, this contrasts with the Koran, where the 'enemy' is often not named, such as verse 9:123 in the Koran which says to fight unbelievers who are near to the Muslims.

event horizon · Jan 28, 2010

shafique wrote:Here's a hymn from 1889 which includes the following reference to deicide by the Jews. I guess this is the kind of hymn that some may consider anti-semitic, but which eh has no problem with (eh, care to confirm whether you'd be ok singing this hymn?):

THOU, THE CHRIST FOREVER ONE
...
Though the Blood betrayed and spilt,
On the race entailed a doom,
Let its virtue cleanse the guilt,
Melt the hardness, chase the gloom;
Lift the veil from off their heart,
Make them Israelites indeed,
Meet once more for lot and part
With Thy household’s genuine seed.

...
Speed the day of union sweet
When with us in faith allied,
Israel’s heart shall turn to greet
Thee, whom Israel crucified;
Thee, in all Thy truth and grace,
Owned at last as Salem’s King,
While her children find their place,
Gathered safe beneath Thy wing.

You can sing along to the music after the link (which has the full hymn):
http://www.hymntime.com/tch/htm/t/t/ttcforon.htm

Hey, if you want to read hymns on the 'sins' committed by 'Israel', just read the Hebrew Bible.

shafique · Jan 28, 2010

Fair enough, let's establish ground rules. Where there are contradictions in the Bible, one has to choose which version of events to believe. Where the Bible categorically states something and that 'fact' is not contradicted elsewhere (Jews responsbile for killing Jesus), then the choice becomes whether you accept the Bible as true or reject it as false.

As for the Quran, same rules apply. Your interpretation of 9.29 is contradicted by other verses (as you rightly pointed out), and therefore we must choose which message is correct. I maintain that your interpretation is wrong and there is no real contradiction - but that's moot, the principle still applies. Same goes with any clear instructions in the Quran - either we accept as true (eg. Jews did NOT kill Jesus) or we reject it as false (eg believe the Bible is right to blame the Jews for killing Jesus).

God says in the Quran - the Jews 'surely did NOT' kill Jesus. This is clear and I believe this account.

Bible says (Matthew and Paul, as quoted above) say Jesus was killed by the Jews. Matthew says Pilate is not to blame.

You believe Bible is correct and disagree with those who call this belief anti-semitic.

The charge against the Jews is actually 'deicide' - a charge that Muslims can't make, as we don't believe Jesus was God (and in any case, the Jews didn't kill Jesus - God tells us).

Ergo, on who killed Jesus, we are applying the same rules it seems - we believe in what the Quran and Bible say respectively (I don't believe Jews killed Jesus, you do).

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Jan 28, 2010

Fair enough, let's establish ground rules. Where there are contradictions in the Bible, one has to choose which version of events to believe.

Unfortunately, those aren't the ground rules I'm referring to.

I need to know what is a contradiction in the New Testament and what is a contradiction in the Koran.

Hopefully, you will apply the same set of guidelines as what determines an actual contradiction.

Your interpretation of 9.29 is contradicted by other verses

Cool - a contradiction in the Koran to start off with. Let's see how you address this contradiction, where Allah clearly says to attack unbelievers because they are unbelievers.

I maintain that your interpretation is wrong and there is no real contradiction

Ok - so a contradiction is not a contradiction because you 'maintain' that it is not.

How long did that take you to think out? Absolutely brilliant.

eg believe the Bible is right to blame the Jews for killing Jesus

For starters, the assertion is pointed. A reading of the Gospels and Paul does not support your belief that all of the Jews are to blame for killing Jesus. So, we first have to establish what the New Testament actually says to see if verses in other Gospels provide context to the passages in the Bible that say 'the Jews' killed Jesus. Or if the surrounding context actually shows that 'the jews' actually means a crowd of people gathered or a group of religious elders.

shafique · Jan 28, 2010

event horizon wrote:I need to know what is a contradiction in the New Testament and what is a contradiction in the Koran.

Ok, easy.

There are no contradictions in the Quran, the only example you've found is where God contradicts your interpretation of 9.29.

A contradiction in the NT would be where one verse says women should not speak in Church and another implies women were deacons. Another would be a verse which says people saw but did not hear anything when Paul had his vision on the road to Damascus, and then another verse says people heard but did not see.

Simple.

event horizon wrote:
eg believe the Bible is right to blame the Jews for killing Jesus

For starters, the assertion is pointed.

Not an assertion - just a simple statement of fact that Matthew and Paul explicitly state Jews killed Jesus and it wasn't the responsibility of Pilate.

As I said, bravo on not joining the other 21st century Christians who call Matthew a liar and do put the blame on Pilate (and not the Jews).

But hold on, you're not going to do a flip-flop on this are you?

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Jan 28, 2010

A contradiction in the NT would be where one verse says women should not speak in Church and another implies women were deacons. Another would be a verse which says people saw but did not hear anything when Paul had his vision on the road to Damascus, and then another verse says people heard but did not see.

Ok, cool. We have examples. For another (theoretical) example, would a verse in the NT that says to fight against disbelievers because they are disbelievers contradict a verse that says to fight after being attacked?

Simple.

Let's wait to see your response to understand how 'simple' this actually is.

Not an assertion - just a simple statement of fact that Matthew and Paul explicitly state Jews killed Jesus and it wasn't the responsibility of Pilate.

I understand that, but I am referring to other verses in the Bible. Duh, that was the entire point of determining if something is a contradiction.

shafique · Jan 28, 2010

Sorry, I'm a bit lost now.

How is your belief that Jews killed Jesus related to the contradictions in the Bible? I'm not aware of any Biblical verse that contradicts Paul's statement that Jews killed Jesus or Matthew's detailed account which puts the responsiblity of killing Jesus on the heads of the Jews (and their children).

Pilate is absolved of blame by Matthew and the Bible does not contradict this statement.

Perhaps you really wanted to start a new thread about Biblical contradicitions? This thread is about your belief that Jews killed Jesus and Pilate was not to blame (as this is what Matthew says).

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Jan 29, 2010

How could this be? I thought you were an expert on the Bible? Do you mean to tell me that you're pontificating on the New Testament without knowledge that Jesus' crucifixion is blamed on the powers that be?

shafique · Jan 29, 2010

It just goes to show that one should always check out assumptions and beliefs.

I thought you'd reject Matthew's account which says Pilate was not responsible and put the blame on Jews for killing Jesus (and therefore disagree with Paul when he says "Jews killed Jesus")- but you see, I checked first and now I don't look foolish for assuming your had bought into the 21st century view that Matthew's account is a lie (and that it was Pilate who was responsible).

You should be pleased, it is a clear point of difference between us - Bible says Jews killed Jesus, Quran says Jews did NOT kill Jesus.

I believe the Quran's version, you are with Mel Gibson and the others who say the Bible is correct - Pilate was not responsible, but it was the Jews.

Now, what is fascinating is that you don't believe this charge of deicide against Jews is anti-semitic. On this point, I agree. Blaming the Jews for killing Jesus is just a Biblical belief - and as you say, the Hebrew Bible is replete with other sins the Jews committed.

So, do your Israeli friends know you believe their ancestors killed Jesus?

(It will be interesting to see if you flip-flop from this stance and take the view that Matthew and Paul were lying to believe that Pilate was NOT responsible - so over to you)

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique · Jan 29, 2010

To keep things in perspective, let us see what the Bible says on the simple question - Who Killed Jesus?

Paul says it was the Jews:

In I Thessalonians 2:14-16, Paul writes,
. . . even as they have of the Jews, who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets,

[/quote]

Matthew says it was not the Romans who were responsible, but the Jews and they even said their children will also be responsible:

Matthew 27:23-26

Pilate asked, "Why do you want me to kill him? What wrong has he done?" But all the people shouted louder, "Kill him on a cross!" Pilate saw that he could do nothing to make the people change. And he saw that the people were becoming upset. So Pilate took some water and washed his hands so that all the people could see. Then Pilate said, "I am not guilty of this man's death. You are the ones that are doing it!" All the people answered, "We will be responsible for his death. We accept for ourselves and for our children any punishment for his death."

I assumed that eh would take the view of most 21st century christians and reject the charge of Deicide on Jews and blame the Romans, and therefore agree with the argument that Matthew and Paul are wrong to blame Jews. Matthew is wrong also to absolve Pilate, because the new theory is that he would not hesitate to kill Jesus and would not have given Jews the opportunity to choose between Jesus and the criminal - i.e. Matthew lied - what is written didn't actually happen.

However, I am pleasantly surprised to see that eh agrees with Mel Gibson and others that the account in Matthew is not to be rejected and that Pilate is not to blame. The blame lies on the heads of those who accepted responsibility and put it on them and their children.

Over to you now eh - remember, we are just after what you believe, I'm not that fussed about 'why' you believe it (there are arguments on both sides - Mel says Bible is true, the others say Bible's account is false)

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Jan 29, 2010

Actually, Paul says the rulers that be were responsible for Jesus' death. So, your belief that the passage your rabbi quoted is 'categorical' (in laying the blame on the Jews) is simply wrong.

shafique · Jan 30, 2010

So, let's clear this up. Those who believe Matthew is wrong to blame Jews have their arguments - it is clear that historically Christians HAVE blamed the Jews for deicide and that this view changed in the 20th century. To absolve the Jews of responsibility, the 20th century christians have had to conclude that Matthew's account is a lie.

However this is moot right now, as the question is, eh...

What do YOU believe?

Is Matthew wrong to absolve Pilate of guilt for killing Jews, or do you believe he was right to blame the Jews for deicide?

Who was responsible for killing Jesus - the Jews or Pilate?

a. Jews.
b. Pilate.

Matthew says a, Jews - Mel Gibson, says a. Jews, 19th and early 20th century Christians say a. Jews -

eh says...?

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Jan 30, 2010

Hey, I'm just pointing out that the New Testament explicitly blames the rulers for Jesus' death.

But I'm sure you knew this before you started pontificating.

shafique · Jan 31, 2010

Hey, perhaps I wasn't being clear.

We can go into the 'WHY' of you chose the option of either 'Jews were responsible for killing Jesus, not Pilate' or 'Pilate was responsible for killing Jesus, not the Jews'. I can't see how you could choose 'both were responsible' as there seems to be no overlap.

First you need to tell us which of the two camps you belong to.

Who do YOU believe was responsible for killing Jesus?
a. Jews
b. Pilate

(It appears you are laying the foundations for a flip-flop and will come up with an excuse for why Matthew is wrong to absolve Pilate and put the responsibility only on the Jews - but I don't want to assume anything, you need to tell us first what you believe.)

Cheers,
Shafique

Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

Eh - Jews Responsible For Killing Jesus?

Go To

Dubai Discussions

Dubai Expat Forums

Dubai Business

Dubai Tech Discussions

Dubai Classifieds