Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
May all Catholics become imbued with the firely spirit of penance from the Saints, pure living, and genuine religious devotion, with Christ as their polestar and Guru. May all schisms and rifts be dissolved, and the unqualified jettisoned. May the Catholic Church attract new streams of virile young priests and pious young nuns.
While I agree that the poll was stupid and probably as a result of misinformation regarding the historicity of xianity, there remains a question that no one is asking.
Why do Jews make a specific statement that they did not kill jesus? Most theological research and scholarship suggests the jesus portrayed in the xian gospels did not exist and that there was at best a rebel of sorts in direct contradiction to the Jewish laws in those times. It stands to reason that an occupying force would enact their laws and limit the amount of Jewish laws pertaining to death penalties being exacted.
The way the gospels read suggest that the Jews conspired to make jesus the scapegoat and to have him offed by the Romans and as such needed to bring treasonous accusations against him. The way Jews deny the messiahship of jesus suggests that they agree that this man existed giving credence to a newly formed pagan religion and trying to shift the blame back to the Romans and suggesting this event actually took place.
Outside of the gospels, there really seems to be no other contemporary historical narratives confirming his existence and/or his execution from a Jewish perspective or Roman for that matter.
In a nutshell, why deny killing a person which probably did not exist in the first place?
Should you not rather be educating people wrt the Jewish history of that time? I do not see this too much.
For the Romans to hide the fact that they killed "the messiah" and then form a state religion surrounding this person reeks of a conspiracy theory likewise, the idea that Jews expunged all records they may have had of the existence of jesus.
An observation IMHO, it serves the Jewish people to "align" in part with christians concerning the myth of jesus as it gives credence to their faith seeing it is really by global standards insignificant. By that I mean, if christianity had not been invented and spread via the then Roman empire, we probably would have no idea of the Jewish religious roots of the ME (except Jews) and another pagan religion would have been the par for the course today.
It is convenient for Jews to acknowledge the inference of those that bless Israel will be blessed and those that curse Israel will be cursed, this being a mantra of the evangelicals in the US that are apocalyptic in their beliefs. Coupled to that, all three Abrahamic religions expect a 1st appearance of a "messiah" that will fix the ME viz the Jews and muslims and a second appearance by the xians. Personally I think this is wishful thinking as secular laws and governance have evolved/modernised for any majority to accept some sort of return to archaic governance of 2000 years ago.
I'll stop here as my thoughts are a bit rambled but would like to discuss this aspect as it has always puzzled me.
Good stuff in that post, SeekerSA. From my perspective, I do not think Jesus existed, and therefore feel no need to defend the actions of the Jews of the that time period. But perhaps I'm not in the majority of Jews on this? I think the less Torah-educated a Jew is, the more likely they will want to defend the Jews as not killing the guy. Jews obviously don't always do what is best for themselves, so it doesn't shock me if we're not going about the whole alleged Jesus myth properly.
While I agree that the poll was stupid and probably as a result of misinformation regarding the historicity of xianity, there remains a question that no one is asking.
Why do Jews make a specific statement that they did not kill jesus? Most theological research and scholarship suggests the jesus portrayed in the xian gospels did not exist and that there was at best a rebel of sorts in direct contradiction to the Jewish laws in those times. It stands to reason that an occupying force would enact their laws and limit the amount of Jewish laws pertaining to death penalties being exacted.
The way the gospels read suggest that the Jews conspired to make jesus the scapegoat and to have him offed by the Romans and as such needed to bring treasonous accusations against him. The way Jews deny the messiahship of jesus suggests that they agree that this man existed giving credence to a newly formed pagan religion and trying to shift the blame back to the Romans and suggesting this event actually took place.
Outside of the gospels, there really seems to be no other contemporary historical narratives confirming his existence and/or his execution from a Jewish perspective or Roman for that matter.
In a nutshell, why deny killing a person which probably did not exist in the first place?
Should you not rather be educating people wrt the Jewish history of that time? I do not see this too much.
For the Romans to hide the fact that they killed "the messiah" and then form a state religion surrounding this person reeks of a conspiracy theory likewise, the idea that Jews expunged all records they may have had of the existence of jesus.
An observation IMHO, it serves the Jewish people to "align" in part with christians concerning the myth of jesus as it gives credence to their faith seeing it is really by global standards insignificant. By that I mean, if christianity had not been invented and spread via the then Roman empire, we probably would have no idea of the Jewish religious roots of the ME (except Jews) and another pagan religion would have been the par for the course today.
It is convenient for Jews to acknowledge the inference of those that bless Israel will be blessed and those that curse Israel will be cursed, this being a mantra of the evangelicals in the US that are apocalyptic in their beliefs. Coupled to that, all three Abrahamic religions expect a 1st appearance of a "messiah" that will fix the ME viz the Jews and muslims and a second appearance by the xians. Personally I think this is wishful thinking as secular laws and governance have evolved/modernised for any majority to accept some sort of return to archaic governance of 2000 years ago.
I'll stop here as my thoughts are a bit rambled but would like to discuss this aspect as it has always puzzled me.
I think many historians will deny that the Jesus AS portrayed in the Gospels existed, but that a Jesus probably did exist and was executed for sedition. By historical standards, there's very little (if anything) that one can say concerning the life of Jesus - but this holds true for many historical events.
I don't think the Romans can be accused of hiding their execution of Jesus, as this was a later practice of the Gospel writers - many years after the fact, and written during times of great political upheaval. I don't think there was a Roman conspiracy, so perhaps the conspiracy example isn't applicable. The rule of Pontius Pilate was a bit embarassing, though.
I'm not sure what to make of the rest of your post - Jews should align with Christians for survival? Unforunately, it's the "Jesus" Issue that has put such a wedge between the two groups. And stemming from that, we still have some people that literally believe that the Jews are the spawn of Satan.
Now, with that said - and the difficulty expressed - ecumenical councils and churches have made great strides in inter-faith relationships lately, and much work has been done with members of different faiths. The Anchor Bible series being a case in point - this monumental undertaking has involved members of both faiths in an effort to combine forces in producing a new translation of the Scriptures. That's only one example - there are frequent meetings of faiths to discuss doctrinal and theological issues among them. There may be hope for the future in this area, if the extremists are prohibited from taking part.
Whoppers, just to clarify, re read what I said concerning the "alignment" in part with xianity. It is my observation.
Put it another way, the tenets of the Jewish faith was taken globally by the then Roman state religion albeit in a twisted form. Had they NOT tacked on their new religion to the Jewish one, we would have likely simply had another pagan religion that probably would have died out.
The pagan roots of xianity are not too hard to find and likewise the pagan origins of Judaism. While the modern Jew (IMO) cleaves more to a cultural aspect which I find interesting, my guess is few of them take much of the original Hebrew scriptures literally any more.
As you said the jesus myth divides; yet at the same time seems to serve a useful purpose. Being loosely associated with a 2Bn strong following, by global terms is far better than a mere 15M or so current Jews worldwide (my numbers may be out of date as that was approx 2006 figures from a Jewish website)
I just read one of Walter's links and quote verbatim the intro;
Quote:
Jews don’t like the apostle Paul. Jesus they can live with; he was a good-hearted rebbe whose words were twisted to say things he didn’t mean.
If everyone would have listened to the facts Fox News reported about barry, before he was ever elected, we'd never, as a country, have found ouselves in this plight we are stuck in today.
You should have watched and you should have listened.
While I agree that the poll was stupid and probably as a result of misinformation regarding the historicity of xianity, there remains a question that no one is asking.
Why do Jews make a specific statement that they did not kill jesus? ... [snip]In a nutshell, why deny killing a person which probably did not exist in the first place?
Should you not rather be educating people wrt the Jewish history of that time? I do not see this too much.
[snip].
That's just what Jews need. Not only reject Christ as a God, messiah, but go further and deny he was real. Christians would treat that as nothing more than an effort by Jews to absolve themselves of 'Christ-killer' label. Among others for whom Christ is important, the approach you suggest would drive the Pope meshugga.
I don't think it's stupid to track a trend in what % of the public believe Jews killed Christ.
That's just what Jews need. Not only reject Christ as a God, messiah, but go further and deny he was real. Christians would treat that as nothing more than an effort by Jews to absolve themselves of 'Christ-killer' label. Among others for whom Christ is important, the approach you suggest would drive the Pope meshugga.
I don't think it's stupid to track a trend in what % of the public believe Jews killed Christ.
But according to the myth, jesus never died, a hiatus in hell for what 2 days? is hardly dead.
The xian doctrine is silly as jesus was supposed to die for your/our sins and then the xians get their knickers in a knot when he does (according to the myth) The "reality" is that the jews were playing out their part they were supposed to in the grander scheme of things, just like judas who betrayed him.
Outside of the NT, there is no other evidence of jesus' existence as portrayed therein and the story is derivative of earlier pagan man-gods.
Whoppers, just to clarify, re read what I said concerning the "alignment" in part with xianity. It is my observation.
Put it another way, the tenets of the Jewish faith was taken globally by the then Roman state religion albeit in a twisted form. Had they NOT tacked on their new religion to the Jewish one, we would have likely simply had another pagan religion that probably would have died out.
The pagan roots of xianity are not too hard to find and likewise the pagan origins of Judaism. While the modern Jew (IMO) cleaves more to a cultural aspect which I find interesting, my guess is few of them take much of the original Hebrew scriptures literally any more.
As you said the jesus myth divides; yet at the same time seems to serve a useful purpose. Being loosely associated with a 2Bn strong following, by global terms is far better than a mere 15M or so current Jews worldwide (my numbers may be out of date as that was approx 2006 figures from a Jewish website)
I just read one of Walter's links and quote verbatim the intro;
This is the kind of "passive acceptance" I am talking of.
Yes, I see what you're saying.
But what's done is done.
Whether Christianity gave Judaism a boost or not could be debatable, I suppose. The Jews were already living in diasporic conditions (for a long time - Judea was not the only home for them, with Jewish communities prospering in other countries), so it is possible that it already had a firm enough foothold to last as long as it has without any help from Christianity. Perhaps it could be said further that it's very existence now, despite the efforts of many to persecute or kill them, is a potent testimony to the lasting power of Judaism? About 2500 years of conflict and strife is a pretty good witness to it's resiliancy, and it's ability to adapt when needed.
The Romans respected Judaism because of it's supposed antiquity, and it was this factor that the Christians coveted to help give their sect a boost in the eyes of Rome. They achieved this by keeping the Hebrew Bible, but relegating it to the "Old" Testament (or Covenant - better translation).
I agree with some of what you say, but I see no wrong in fixing a mistaken historical view fostered by Christian Gospels - no matter what might happen today, Jesus was killed (if we assume that a historical person named Jesus was killed for being a rebel, at least), the Jews were blamed and the rest is history. Historians have already virtually unanimously relegated the culpability of the Jews in Jesus' death to the realm of religious propaganda, so it's already a done deal.
I think the "passive" alignment must come to grips with this issue of the so-called "Christ Killer" image - and it has! Modern Theology has opened dialogue in this area, and Jews and Christians are able to work together ecumenically, accepting what has happened in the past, and mostly by realizing that the Gospels made a mistake. This acceptance of history over a biased Gospel is a great step that has, in a way, "aligned" the two religions together yet again. They have been separate for a long time, especially over this issue. Thankfully, modern biblical scholarship and historical analysis has helped to enable this ecumenicalism - it's the groups that don't participate in biblical scholarship or historical analysis at all that really are excluded from these ecumenical movements, for they resist any sort of change involving their conservative and orthodox views.
The irony in some of this is that conservative and orthodox Jews are able to participate in the "debunking" of the "Christ-Killer" myth and still remain conservative in their views, while it is the Christians that must really alter their own conservative and orthodox views in this matter. This may seem like a small matter, but I think it's important.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Modern Theology has opened dialogue in this area, and Jews and Christians are able to work together ecumenically, accepting what has happened in the past, and mostly by realizing that the Gospels made a mistake. This acceptance of history over a biased Gospel is a great step that has, in a way, "aligned" the two religions together yet again. They have been separate for a long time, especially over this issue. Thankfully, modern biblical scholarship and historical analysis has helped to enable this ecumenicalism - it's the groups that don't participate in biblical scholarship or historical analysis at all that really are excluded from these ecumenical movements, for they resist any sort of change involving their conservative and orthodox views.
