The Romans, not the Jews, killed Jesus

By Lewis Regenstein

For two thousand years, “the Jews” have been falsely blamed for the murder of Jesus. This charge of Deicide is the oldest and most damaging and pernicious of all the “blood libels” spread to provoke hatred and killing of innocent Jews by Christians through the ages.

But a careful reading of the Christian Bible, the “New Testament”, shows that it was not the Jews but the Romans who killed Jesus. Indeed, Jesus, his family, disciples,  followers and supporters were Jews, and they, like him, were the victims of the Romans, not the perpetrators.

Jesus Was a Faithful Jew

Jesus’ devotion to Judaism is indisputable.  According to the New Testament, especially the Gospel of Mark, Jesus, his family, and virtually all of his followers and disciples at the time were Jews, as probably were the writers of three of The Gospels.

Even Paul, the foremost proponent and founder of Christianity, was  by is own account Jewish, “circumcised on the eighth day, a member of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee” (Philippians 3:5).

Jesus claimed to be faithful to  the laws and teachings of Moses and the Hebrew prophets, and the early “Christians” considered themselves to be Jewish. Jesus and his disciples were devout Jews, keeping kosher, observing the Sabbath, fasts and festivals (“ The Last Supper” was a Passover seder or  meal), saying Morning prayers, and preaching the laws of the Torah. Jesus’ disciples called him “rabbi” (“teacher”).

Jesus repeatedly made it clear that he did not want to start a new religion, saying, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil” (Matthew 5:17).

The Book of John tells us that Jesus even attended a Hanakkuh party in Jerusalem (10:22), celebrating “the feast of the dedication” (of the Temple). There,  he lectured and argued with the guests, reiterating   his complete faith in the Jewish Bible, and saying,  the words cannot be changed or violated, “Scripture cannot be broken”  (10:35).

The Last Supper was obviously a Passover   Seder, a traditional Jewish  dinner celebrating the freeing of the Hebrews from Egyptian bondage.  In Matthew 26:23, Jesus is quoted as saying, “ He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me,” referring to the dish known as charoset, a sweet  pasty   mixture of fruits and nuts   representing the mortar that the  enslaved Hebrews used to  layer bricks.

And Jesus participated in the Jewish ritual of the purifying bath (the mikveh) when, in the wilderness, he was immersed in the Jordan River, or baptized, by John the Baptist, as mentioned in the Gospels..

Jesus’ words purportedly attacking  “the Jews”   (quoted by writers who never met him) are actually criticisms of the Jewish leadership. He  considered the Pharisees (rabbis) of his day  to be corrupt, self-righteous, arrogant, and hypocritical, teaching a form of Judaism based on literal law, formalism, ritual, and devoid of spiritualism and compassion.

Jesus preached almost exclusively to the Jews, who supported, dined and walked with him.  Jesus stated that his mission was for the Jews only, saying “I am not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matthew 15:24) and sending his twelve disciples out with the admonition, “Go not into the way of the Gentiles …But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (10:4-6).

Jesus’ Popularity with the Jews

Jesus was very popular with his fellow Jews, the “masses” and crowds of people mentioned throughout the Gospels who revered him, followed him  on his travels, gathered by the thousands to hear him speak, and protected him from the rulers who collaborated with the Romans. Luke 23:27 describes how Jesus was led away to be crucified, “and there followed him a great company of people, and of women, which also bewailed and lamented him…”

As an observant Jew, Jesus had travelled to Jerusalem for the Passover celebrations, where, upon entering the city crowded with fellow Jewish visitors, he received a hero’s welcome. Matthew 8:1-13 tells us, When he came down from the mountain, great crowds followed him…”

It was in large part his popularity with the Jewish people that caused Jesus to be killed by the ruling Roman authorities (with the coerced cooperation of  their clique of appointed Jewish agents and collaborators).

Indeed, Jesus was so popular with the Jewish people that the authorities were afraid to arrest him during Passover. As Mark 14:1-2 makes clear, It was now two days before the Passover and the feast of Unleavened Bread. And the chief priests and the scribes were seeking how to arrest him by stealth, and kill him;  for they said, ‘Not during the feast, lest there be a tumult of the people’.” Mark 12: 12 states, “And they tried to arrest him, but feared the multitude…”

So rather than the Jewish people wanting to kill Jesus, they actually protected him from the authorities who collaborated with the Romans.

As Jesus is being led away to be crucified,  Luke 23:27 refers to the “great number of people” who were following him, and  in the next verse, Jesus speaks to the Jewish women in the group, calling them “daughters of Zion.” And it was  Jews who took Jesus off the cross, prepared him for “burial,” mourned him – and then got the blame for the crime.

The Jewish Mobs

But what about the howling, bloodthirsty mob, calling for Jesus’ death, that is described in the Gospels, supposedly  representing the Jewish people ? How could this be, since all four of these books agree that just five days before the trial, huge, friendly crowds greeted Jesus as he entered Jerusalem.

By this time, Jesus had become renowned in Galilee as a healer, a preacher, and an exorcist who might even be the Messiah, who would throw off the yoke of Roman rule. The Gospels note that the people surrounding and supporting Jesus, all of whom were Jews, were so numerous and enthusiastic that the chief priests (all privileged agents of Rome) were afraid to arrest him.

Thus, Ironically, Jesus was killed because the masses of Jews loved, not hated,  him.

Yet, the New Testament inconsistent account of the supposed Jewish mobs  calling for Jesus’ death seems to grow with each chapter. Mark: 15 8-11  speaks of  “the multitude” and “the people”.  Matthew 27:25 refers to “all  the people”;  Luke 23: 1-2 states that “the whole multitude of them arose and led him to Pilate, and the began to accuse him…”. In the  book of John (chapters 18 and 19), it is “the Jews” who are demanding  that Jesus be put to death.

The Jewish Collaborators with the Romans

Yes, a small group of Jewish priests and other collaborators in the ruling classes, led by the high priest Caiaphas,  are purported to have urged the Romans on, and even tried Jesus (in the dead of the night on the eve of Passover, already, which would have been illegal under Jewish law !). But in their relations with the Romans, the Jews and their leaders had no real political power.

Moreover, the Jewish leadership realized that if they did not deal with this “troublemaker” and his adherents, the Romans would do so in a much more brutal fashion, as they had done years before, killing thousands in an earlier Passover riot. John (11:47-50) quotes the priests as understandably worrying that the fate of the Jewish people might be at stake.

“If we let him thus alone,” they say, “…the Romans shall come and take away both our place and our nation,” to which Caiaphas replies, “…it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.” Such fears were not far-fetched, indeed they were realized a few years later, when the Romans responded to a Jewish rebellion by destroying the state.

Interestingly, Luke 7: 1-10  portrays the Jewish leadership not as opposed to Jesus but as seeking his help: “And when he [the Roman centurion] heard of Jesus, he sent unto him the elders of the Jews, beseeching him that he would come and heal his servant. And when they came to Jesus,  they besought him instantly…”

Later, Luke (9:22) has Jesus blaming the Jewish leadership, not the people, for his imminent crucifixion: “The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.”

  The Romans’ Brutal Role

During Jesus’ time, the Romans and their Governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, ruled the country with an iron fist, and were responsible for appointing Caiaphas to his post. All accounts make it clear that it was Romans who cruelly killed Jesus – whipping and torturing him, ripping and tearing his flesh, putting a crown of thorns on his head, spitting on him, nailing him to the cross, crucifying him, even running him through with a spear.

 

Pilate himself even “scourged” (whipped or lashed) Jesus.  He first  “washed his hands before the multitude, saying ‘I am innocent of the blood of this just person…’”, and then “scourged  Jesus” before “delivering him to be crucified” (Mark 15:15; Matthew 27:26).

Thusly do the Gospels describe how the Romans dealt with this popular Jewish reformer with a huge Jewish following, “The King of the Jews,” whom they saw as a threat to Roman law and order, and to the privileged position of their collaborators in the priesthood.

It is hardly conceivable that an unruly Jewish mob could have intimidated the powerful, tough, blood-thirsty Roman ruler Pontius Pilate, who is amazingly portrayed as weak, compassionate, and malleable, “the more afraid” (John 19:8), even eager to free Jesus.

It is even more inconceivable that the Jewish “mob” could have pressured Pilate to release Barabbas, who had participated in a revolt against the Romans and even  “committed murder in the insurrection” (Mark 15:7).

Pilate himself admits in John 19:10 that he has the power to kill or set free Jesus:  “Pilate therefore said to him, ‘You will not speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to release you, and power to crucify you?’ “

Eventually, Pilate’s brutality, (even referred to by Luke), became so notorious that the Emperor himself in the year 36 recalled his procurator back to Rome, after he slaughtered several thousand Samaritans on their holy mountain to disperse a crowd gathered around one of their prophets.

Accounts of Pilate’s reign of terror in Judea appear in the works of the Roman historians Tacitus and Josephus. The Jewish king King Herod Agrippa I, who ruled from 37-44,  wrote to the Roman Emperor Caligula, describing Pilate’s “…acts of violence, plunderings…and continual murder of persons untried and uncondemned, and his never ending, endless and unbelievable cruelties, gratuitous and most grievous inhumanity.”

Jesus was just one of the estimated 250,000  Jews crucified by the Romans. After executing him, the Romans went on to kill his  closest disciples Peter and Paul, along with countless other Jewish “Christians”. They eventually killed or expelled from the region almost all of Jesus’ fellow Jews, following the Jewish revolts of around 70 and 135 C.E. .This set the stage for 2,000 years of Jewish dispersal, suffering and persecution, and for the violence and territorial disputes that plague the Holy Land today.

Moreover, if “the Jews” had wanted to kill Jesus, they would have stoned him to death – the  traditional Jewish method for executing the death penalty at that time.

The Historical Evidence

The only comprehensive historical source on this subject is the Christian Bible,  mainly the books referred to as The Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, whose authors, except possibly John,  never  knew or heard Jesus). Fragmentary accounts also appear in the book of Acts,  and works of the Jewish historian Josephus and  several Roman historians such as Tacitus.

Passages in the New Testament whitewashing the dominant role of the Romans in the murder of Jesus, which for centuries have been used to stir up hatred for Jesus’ own people, are traditionally believed to have been written 60 to 100 years after Jesus’ death. Thus, the authors (whoever they may have been) did not witness the events they describe, give different accounts of them, and may have been subjected to heavy editing prior to “publication,” at a time when the church was reaching out to gentiles and attempting to discredit traditional Judaism.

The original manuscripts of the books of the Christian Bible were written in Greek, and for fifteen centuries were copied by hand by  scribes, whose accuracy and objectivity cannot today be determined. But we can be certain that they were subject to political and religious pressures, as well as personal and cultural biases. It is thus hard to know the exact wording and meaning of the original texts, especially after they have been translated into various languages.

There were other compelling reasons at the time for minimizing the culpability of the Romans in persecuting Jesus and his mainly Jewish followers. It might have been impossible, indeed suicidal, to try to publish and distribute, under harsh Roman rule, books that were critical of, and might incite opposition to, Rome. Better to blame “the Jews,” Jesus’ own people and supporters, even though they were victims of Roman persecution and murder.

This is obviously the reason the mob is quoted by Matthew (27:25), incredibly, as cursing itself in generational self-incrimination,  “Let his blood be on us, and on our children,” the only place this statement occurs in the Bible.

In the unlikely event a mob of Jews did call for Jesus to be killed, it would have been composed of a small group of collaborators with the Romans, perhaps acting out a script written by the Romans.

This passage may also be a reference to Exodus 24:8, in which   “Moses took the blood [of the sacrificed oxen] , and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which YeHoVaH (the LORD) hath made with you concerning all these words {of the Book of the Covenant].” This would imply that the  writer felt that the mob considered Jesus  to have been sacrificed to atone for their sins.

This theme is repeated in Hebrews 9:19-22, which states that “Moses…took the blood of claves and of goats…and sprinkled  both the book and all the people…And almost all things  are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding with blood is no remission.”

The Gospels differ significantly in other aspects as well. Only Matthew and Mark have the Jewish priests mocking Jesus, while only Luke and John have Pilate  insisting that Jesus committed no crime.

In reality, the early Christians and their Gospels could not have openly blamed the ruling Romans for the killing of Jesus. ( And without his crucifixion, of course, there would be no Christianity !).

But today there is no excuse for perpetuating these blood libels ( as in Mel Gibson’s  movie, “The Passion of the Christ”) which for two millennia have caused Jesus’ descendants to suffer such hatred and persecution.

Yet, such slanders continue to be prominently featured, such as in Mel Gibson’s  movie, “The Passion of the Christ”, and even in reviews of it in The New York Times.  Most ironic of all,  a few years ago, “La Stampa”, one of the largest newspapers in Italy – the nation of the people responsible for Jesus’ death —  ran a front page anti-Israeli cartoon showing an Israeli tank marked by a Star of David, rolling up to Jesus’ manger, with the infant crouching and crying out, “Oh, No, they want to kill me again.”

To continue to blame “the Jews”  is not only false and malicious, it is  a betrayal of Jesus and his followers.

 Until 1965,  the teachings of the  Catholic Church  widely spread the charge  that Jews bore collective guilt for killing Jesus. For centuries, this and other anti-Jewish smears have appeared in the writings of some of  the most famous and revered  Christian writers, especially Martin Luther (the founder of  the Protestant Church), Saint Augustine,  and Thomas Aquinas.

 Some of the most famous portraits of  Jesus’ crucifixion have  depicted Jews as the  sadistic perpetrators. As   Manachem Wecker observes in Mosaic magazine: “In paintings of the crucifixion, Jews have usually been depicted, in demonizing detail, in the act of leering at Jesus on the cross or torturing him during the passion. Hieronymus Bosch’s Ecce Homo (c. 1490) shows a particularly fierce mob with torches and spears—the figures have hooked noses and angry expressions—reaching toward Jesus on a platform. Stereotypical-looking Jews surface in Jan van Eyck’s Crucifixion (c. 1440-41) and in Venetian paintings like Jacopo Bellini’s Crucifixion (1450) and Titian’s Ecce Homo (1543). The trope is very nearly a cliché.”

The Catholic Church has belatedly partially recognized  the harm this historical falsehood has caused through the centuries, when Pope Paul VI , on 28 October 1965, issued the landmark document, Nostra aetate (LatinIn our Time) . The Declaration on the Relation of the Church with Non-Christian Religions of the Second Vatican Council states that Jesus’ death  “cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. The Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures.’

What Every Jew should Know

While Jews and Christians may disagree about Jesus’ divinity and whether or not he was the messiah, Jesus himself would have been shocked at the falsehoods and persecution to which his own people have been subjected. These lies, to which most Jews know not how to respond, have led over the centuries, even up to the present time, to widespread hatred and massive  persecution and killing of Jews.

Yet, such slanders continue to be prominently featured, such as in Mel Gibson’s  movie, “The Passion of the Christ”, and even in reviews of it in The New York Times. 

Most ironic of all, a few years ago, “La Stampa”, one of the largest newspapers in Italy – the nation responsible for Jesus’ death —  ran a front page anti-Israeli cartoon showing an Israeli tank marked by a Star of David, rolling up to Jesus’ manger, with the infant crouching and crying out, “Oh, No, they want to kill me again.”

Jesus’ murder is a subject that comes up some time in the life of every Jew. We should be able to defend ourselves against this blood libel, and the most effective response is to cite the story told in the New Testament, chapter and verse, as they say.

Rather than ignoring Jesus, every one of us should be familiar with the truth of his killing and teach it to our children.

We should  not allow  such anti-Jewish lies continue to appear, unchallenged, when the truth is well-known and documented in the Christians’ holiest book.

And since forgiveness is such an important concept in Christianity, perhaps Christians should find it in their heart to forgive the Romans, the true “Christ killers.” For were it not for them, Christians would have neither their religion nor their salvation.

Lewis Regenstein is an Atlanta writer and author. For almost two decades, he wrote a page 3 column for a local Atlanta Jewish newspaper, The Jewish Georgian, and am the author of about a dozen books and booklets, and hundreds of newspaper and magazine articles, many on Jewish subjects like the Holocaust and Jewish resistance to the Nazis.

Copyright 2010 Lewis Regenstein  <regenstein@mindspring.com>

February 16, 2023 | 62 Comments »

Leave a Reply

12 Comments / 62 Comments

  1. Thanks Edgar. My position is close to Prof. A.S. in regard to listening to each other instead of fighting. The Jews and Christians have changed the world. I think their relationship was recorded in a movie years ago. “The war of the Roses”. Most marriages ended up fighting about who’s on top.(pun intended).

    In the last 30 years or so Christians and Jews have come to understand each other better. But they have a long way to go. The Rabbis teach that there is a “sins of the fathers to the third generation” What stops this ripple effect is when the son, corrects the father’s sin and does the tikkun, repairing the previous breach. That means…. stop doing the sin! But, make no mistake about it, regardless of how my great, great grandfather treated your great, great grandfather, I have not done anything to you. If you follow my analogy. Somewhere, this baseless hatred has to stop. The Hatfield’s and McCoy’s have been feuding way to long, we each have our positions and theological differences. But like the Midrash of Jacob and Esau, when their father passed away, they put their difference aside for the greater good.

    Now to the idea of the Messiah. A false Christian understanding of messiah has colored the Jewish understanding of the messiah. In the text of the Tanck messiah is not spelled out as such, but there are illusions to the office and mission. Religious people need to move from a thumb nail sketch to the full length movie. The fuller picture is to be found in the oral torah. There is a two-part function, messiah ben joseph and messiah ben David. one is modeled after Joseph and his mission and the other after David. If one reads the N.T. with the Joseph model in mine, it changes things somewhat. Remember, Maimonides rules. You must believe in messiah. I would go on to say: Christians would have a hard time supporting their idea of Messiah if they had to do it with the O.T. text only! But you can support it using the oral torah. The big problem is who’s picture is on the drivers license. But the idea and concepts are there.

    Paul was correct in that everyone (humanity)must approach God by faith.

    I do lean more toward Judaism. The breast from which I was drawn and the womb in which I was created. The daughter(christianity) needs to remember who’s the MOMMA.

    Michael, the amoeba. He’s got ears now….. quite…… he’ll hear us.

    As to the text changing. as I remember the Isaish scroll in Israel, the oldest ever found is different then MT text used in every Jewish bible today. I agree, they would not have changed it like the Romans did to the N.T. but changes have crept in. I’m not making a judgement as to how or why. When one lives in a hostile world and just trying to survive, things happen.

    As to the sacrifice of Isaac. You know, if you have 3 Jews you have 5 opinions. There is a teaching that Isaac, just as the text says was taken up for a burnt offering: (olah). Read the text. Gen, 20-22?? two go up one comes down. Then later Isaac, appears in the field at the well.

    The Jews of the first century knew these story’s and traditions. They could have shoehorn Jesus into these story’s but I don’t think so.

    Shalom

  2. TANNA-

    Correction. Isaac was NOT sacrificed after all…”Jesus” seemingly was. And for hundreds of years was depicted, not as a person, but as a “lamb”, Many pictures of people carrying lambs, representing Jesus, right up to mid medieval times are extant.

    Sikhism began also with the Guru Nanak asking for a number of young men to be executed for their belief, which was held back at the last moment , proving their faith was true. (silly story no doubt) he had read about Isaac I understand, and thought it a good “test”.

  3. TANNA=

    I like what you say. I read that link to the professor yesterday. He is very pro Jew for which I am thankful. A shame he died so young. But several of his positions are factually wrong. And not only in my opinion. But after all he was only human and believed that there was a Jesus who was the Messiah. His idea of the meaning of the Messiah was completely different from the Jewish one. it was an IDEA Only, born from desperation at the constant destruction and invasions happening in Yehuda. I dealt with htis at somelenfth a couple of days ago.

    The obscure remarks in Torah that were cobbled together to produce a |Moshiach was only a “hoee”. And what he would do on arrival, was NOT what Christian fnatasy produced.

    Christianity could assume all sorts of miracles and “don of god” attributes, which don’t mean they’re true. 100X 0 =ZERO.

    The so called Paul said if you don’t believe by faith alone than all is jsut a story, (paraphrasing). the only TRUE think I think he ever said.

    I like your sincerity and dedication, and I like to read your comments. I feel you lean more to Judaism than you know. You’re not off-kilter like Michael, who although a scientist seemed to have nothing better to do than memorise the Bible; and doesn’t seem to realise that he began as an amoeba.

    As for rabbi’s tampering with text you are totally wrong. Believe me NO rabbi would dare. In fact if you knew the Torah you’d see where copyists made eye slips and perhaps repeated lines or wrote wrong letters.

    THOSE ERRORS HAVE NEVER BEEN REMOVED. NO Jew would ever dare. The Torah is Holy. even the errors. Just the correction is written immediately above. so please disapbuse yourself of that belief.

  4. Ted:
    You ask for a short Bio…… I don’t think that’s possible but I’ll try. I was born in the southern U.S. half my family was religious/middle of the road Christian the other half good people but no use or thought for God going back three generations. Church was for weddings and funerals.

    My father earned his business degree at the university. I have 9 siblings’ some professional people, some not. Two are dead. One lost his way going through his teen years never graduated high school. But, he’s worth 5 to 10 million dollars now. I think he might be Jewish……. That’s a joke. Due to circumstances and family history, I think we could come from a line of Jews that have been lost to history. Family tree goes underground in the late 1600’s.

    I am not a Christian preacher/pastor, messianic nor a Rabbi. I am a student of both Bible and biblical history. I like to read and observe people and human nature. I could be wrong about what I have learn and reasoned. I’m open to change as I learn new things. I can’t go to church or to synagogue. I ask hard questions that make people uncomfortable. I study the weekly Torah readings. My oldest brother said, I think too much.

    I have always enjoyed WORK. But I have never chased money. I am semi-retired. Wife and I have 8 children and 14 grandchildren. My career and degree is in business. I worked for 5 major fortune 500 corporations, they all present themselves different from the outside, but from the inside they are all the same. Kind of like the church and synagogue. They each have their positions and put on a good show. In my pursuit of truth, I managed not to become a reprobate, atheist, agnostic or whatever else. I have held on to my deep belief in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. I try to hang out with and read after people smarter than I. That’s why I like Israpundnt.

    I have set at the table with religious / secular PHD’s and Orthodox Rabbi’s. Literally! I am not Christian although, I do think there are truths in their tradition, but history tells us they are farrrrrr……. From where they started in the first century. Messiah will straighten out both the Jews and Christians when he gets here, if they don’t kill him first. We all read through filters, have our bias and are too emotional and not objective in our thinking.

    I agree the church has much to ask forgiveness for and the national of Israel needs to repent also. But it’s the people in the pews that matter in the end, the building will rot to the ground. The way I read the Bible, Jews/Rabbis are the teachers. The almighty has not spoken to another people. Even Paul said this in Romans. I believe people of faith and fear of God need to stop fighting and learn to listen to each other.

    I have explored all the major religions and tossed all of them to the dust ben of history except that which has been revealed through Abraham. The Jews/Israel came through Isaac. Jacob and Esau where two nations in their momma’s belly. They have the same DNA. There still fighting / struggling with each other till today. One of the things I do not understand are the Nationalist Zionist, most seem not to be religious or observant. According to the Constitution of the Nation of Israel.(Given at Mt. Siani) The only claim the Jews have to the land is if they keep the commandments of Moses(TORAH). Otherwise, they are just like all the other goyim.(nations).

    I disagree with you on the need for Jewish / Christian dialogue. Look at some of David Novak’s books on this topic. I thoroughly enjoy your work. Christians and Jews both have the sacrifice of a human being at the core bedrock of their religion. Isaac for Jews and Jesus for the gentiles.

  5. Edgar:

    If the person you never heard of is the professor I spoke of here is the link again.

    https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/research_sites/cjl/texts/cjrelations/resources/articles/saldarini.htm

    I have read many of those books you mentioned. Most of those have some age on them. More newer books bring forth newer Insights. Since the Dead sea schools – much has been learned.

    N.T. confuses the hell out of me also….. sometimes, But then so does Midrash.

    As to the holy sites in Israel, and all the money makers on religion. to many cooks spoil the stew. I agree it is amess. I have some Christian friends’ pastors after 30 years and thousands of dollars spent on chasing the “Historical Jesus” just gave up on all religion. Men must smarter than I.

    As to the crow – We do have a since of humor. Everyone knows it taste like chicken.

    You are correct on the name Tanna. it does mean teacher. When I was signing up to be on Israpundit, I was having a problem back then. For some reason it would not take my sign up. Then without any reason it excepted my sign on and it gave me my name. I thought that’s a good a name as any. I new what it meant. I also, use to watch Dan Tanna(spelling) the detective in Vegas years ago on TV. I always like his character. so I kept it. Works for me.

    you said: “Considering that this supposed event took place well within historical and recorded times, why are the facts so dubious.??” I think, the monks monkeyed with the text to protect the innocent or the guilty. Just like some of the Rabbi’s monkeyed some with the text. It will all come to light one day. –

  6. @Edgar G.

    I feel the same about locusts

    Not all locusts are kosher.

    To determine whether it is kosher, you have to catch one and look at its stomach – if it has the Hebrew letter Chet on it, it’s kosher.

  7. TANNA_

    If this is your real name, in Hebrew it means “teacher’, and the Tannaim were those mentioned in Talmud who were after the Zugot, the adversarial “pair” of heads of the Sanhedrin, of whom the last are the most quoted today; Hillel and Shammai.

  8. A LONG FORGOTTEN VIGNETTE_

    Which shows the power of Halacha.. Chaim Cohen who’s book I mentioned, was refused marriage in Israel, because the woman had been divorced and he was a Kohen. So they went to (I believe) Cyprus – to be married, as many Jews did in those days.

  9. Why is a simple throw off comment like “crows are treif” need to be discussed seriously.

    Treif ir not, I doubt that anyone Jew or Christian would eat a crow unless starving to death. I feel the same about locusts although they are reputedly kosher. I think because they are in the Torah as food during the Sinai “40 years”…. But who would eat them. savages ………maybe.

    You folks should get a sense of balance and humour. Lighten up…! !

  10. TANNA-

    I never heard of such a person. But I’m sure I’ve read many books. both pro and con.

    My first book on the subject was by Ernest Renan. Educated by priests and a renowned Semitic Scholar. I believe he was later excommunicated. My second was by a converted Jew ,Christian D. Ginsberg, also a great scholar, who, along with Dupont-Sommer destroyed the reputation -and life- of Moses Shapiro, whose parchments are now believed to be valid and by many hundreds of years the oldest copy of Torah..

    and a couple of hundred books from then on. I’ve read ALL the well known ones pro and con. and not ONE SINGLE book had any marked influence on me that caused a second thought.. I approached them from an intellectual direction.
    When I first read the Gospels, I could hardly believe that such stuff had caused such unheard of horrors to humanity. I said that “this is a story for children”.

    Many of the Christian writers, like S.G.F. Brandon was working priests, but also dealt with the subject from an impartial view point. I recommend his works. Perhaps 2-3 were Jews but not more.

    Take just ONE example…..”The Jesus Trial (and crucifixion)” .. Most, considered the the crucifixion as described was an improbability, or impossibility,, although many made tortuous efforts to align the story with the known Jewish practices, of Sanhedrin sittings, and the Shabat observances, the overwhelming power of Pilate,

    It just could not be done. And there are 2-3 4 different supposed sites for where it took place. All run today by Christian who make their money from tourists. all guaranteed “THE genuine place.”…

    Haim Cohen, a Former Chief Justice of Israel, a noted scholar, approached the “Trial” from a legal stance of those times. he concluded that the Gospel account was untrue and concocted to attack the Jews. Others had the same opinion..

    Even W.W. Bruce, from a staunch Christian viewpoint, and whose books reflect this, casts doubt on the Gospels description. Schweitzer, Tillich, Bauer,Spong, also. Strauss, Reimarus, Loisy , Gesenius, Bonhoeffer, De Chardin,,Cravieri, Crossan, Vermes, Harnack, and many others whose names I can’t recall.. I have read them all. I have the books of some.

    Considering that this supposed event took place well within historical and recorded tmes, why are the facts so dubious.??

    For me the best answer is,that it never occurred at all. but was propaganda to make Romans look “good” and jews look “bad”.