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 (Latin: In 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>
MICHAEL-
For your information, which I should not have had to point out to you, this trivial and useless discussion is worth exactly the value of a single sheet of paper. any kind. ‘Also for your information, the map you show is about 5 inches across and means nothing. The description that I gave is accurate, the topography having having been closely observed by the writer)s). I take their word before anything in the Gospels, contradictory amongst themselves .
Also for your information those cities and areas were full of Goyim and not Jews.
“Over against Galilee” does not refer to the “Sea” but to the Galilee boundary. Any child can see that. “The country of” means jus that; the area occupied by those whose name is mentioned.
The Sea was then named Gennesaret, and Yam Kineret, because of it’s shape resembling a lyre or harp.
The whole Christian story is a Galilean one, Even their accents and language were different and instantly picked out as rustic Galileans, almost a different oountry, which had changed hands many times in history…
It was never referred to as the Sea of Galilee.
And Origen DID introduce a speculative Gergesa, unheard of until then, becuas ethey damned well did not know where the suppose fantastic miracle had occurred. Mark and Luke disagreeing on the site.
|This is understandable because they were not Jews and the Gospels were not written in Israel, and long ofter the time period.
culation of Gergesa unheard of until he mentioned it. Expert Biblical historians have so decided.
Not me….THEM…!!
@Tanna
I don’t know what you mean by “THE article by professor Saldarini”.
I have never heard of him, and I am pretty sure that he authored more than one article.
Please, supply a link or at least the title of the article.
About Prof. Nicholls’ book – I didn’t find it outdated, and I find that he explains and lists his sources very carefully.
Regardless, the thesis of his book, to put it very simply, is:
Christianity in its present form has nothing to do with Jesus’ teaching (he states that Jesus was a faithful Jew who wasn’t the enemy of either the Jews or the Torah), and, ideally, the Church must repent, drop its anti-Jewish teachings and return to the real Jesus the Jew.
He even expresses a wish that eventually Jews might be able to “repossess Jesus” as one of their own (obviously, after the Church repents, changes, etc.)
@Edgar
@Michael
Gadara is in what is now Jordan and is called Umm Qais [emphasis mine]:
Hi, Tanna. You said a couple of interesting things:
1. “Crow is treif, you should know that.”
Now that you mention it, I have read this; but of course, the issue doesn’t come up much. Most creatures that eat carrion are considered unclean. “Eating crow” is a common expression, meaning that you accept being bested in a bet. Actually, Edgar does this fairly gracefully; I’m more antisocial: I flat-out don’t like playing games with discussions of life and death — which the gospels are about.
2. “What puzzles me, is why someone would assume the Topo…. of Israel 2000 years ago was the same as today, from a satellite photo.”
In geologic time (I’m definitely NOT “Young Earth”), 2000 years is a blink of the eye. The Sea of Tiberias definitely is on a major fault line (The same one that has been so active lately in Turkey); but the features mentioned in the NT are all there today — the cities and villages, complete with synagogues, etc., the “Mount” of the Sermon on the Mount (actually cliff-like in form), the “pig” cliffs, etc.
3. Edgar and me, I’ve just watched a video, of a cowboy evaluating a horse to see if it’s rideable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-zNpUJ7tO0
We aren’t each other’s horses, of course, but God’s; and He definitely would like an “easy” relationship riding both of us. I confess to being only marginally rideable; but Edgar seems completely wild — he doesn’t even recognize his trainer (Jesus). God is very patient; I wish Edgar the best. 🙂
@Tanna
I have not followed your comments til now. Happy to have your participation. Please gives us a short bio of yourself..
I read “CHRISTIAN ANTI-JUDAISM: The First Century Speaks to the Twenty-First Century”. I found it to quite enlightening.
One sentence caught my attention. “After nineteen hundred years of vigorous religious life in intersecting communities, both Jews and Christians may safely conclude that theologically speaking God remains faithful to Israel as his people and that God has called the nations to worship and obey him through Jesus Christ.“ I’ll tell you why. I am not a religious or spiritual person. I am simply a nationalist Jew. I totally reject that part of the quote that is in bold. I don’t believe it at all. It is an entirely a Christian belief which I totally dismiss.
I also reject Jewish Christian dialogue because it involves a meeting of minds or perhaps faiths if you like. The Jews need no introspection not called for by the Tanach. The Christians do. There is nothing for Jews to respond to or to make amends for. We didn’t cause antisemitism. Christians did. We didn’t change anything, The Christians did. This is entirely a Christian problem. Efforts by Christians to reconcile are appreciated. The Evangelicals are our best gentile friends.
Miachael, “Crow is treif, you should know that.” But, that only applies to a Torah observant Jew. Who follows Halakha. If one does not follow, then it is doubtful they even believe in God, since they would have no fear of God.? Just guessing out loud.
What puzzles me, is why someone would assume the Topo…. of Israel 2000 years ago was the same as today, from a satellite photo.
Reader, Did you read the article by Prof. Saldarini? I remenber reading Nicholls book back in the early to mid 90’s. I need to read it again; it’s marked up quite a bit. I would recommend it. Filling thru my copy and reading here and there, WN, did not know everything nor always draw the right conclusion. But giving the man credit, his book was published in 1993. Lot’s have changed since then and no doubt, this book has helped that change along. In his conclusion he admitted much of the scholarship he used was new and would take time to be digested. I do not recall all he said, but he did say; …… “The way forward for Christianity could only be for it to purge itself of it’s pagan elements. the adulteration of the pure metal of Jesus Jewish legacy, and to identify itself more radically than ever before with its own origins.”
Edgar, Did you even bother to read the article by Prof. Saldarini?
Edgar,
“Nicely picked up?” Are we scoring points in some sort of game? I’m sorry, if I made what I said look like a forensic tennis lob. Concerning your argument with the NT (not with me), please look again at the terrain map:
https://imgs.search.brave.com/DzCueknCRLGugyQzT6cj9HHiH1N3kuUtIWdwO1kz5f8/rs:fit:1200:656:1/g:ce/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cu/Y2hyaXN0aWFuLXRo/aW5rdGFuay5jb20v/Z2lkZHlnYWRkeV9o/dG1sXzRmNmEzYjBj/LmpwZw
Now let’s look at the NT scriptures you cited:
Mark.5
[1] And they came over unto the other side of the sea, into the country of the Gadarenes.
Luke.8
[26] And they arrived at the country of the Gadarenes, which is over against Galilee.
[37] Then the whole multitude of the country of the Gadarenes round about besought him to depart from them;
None of these specify a pinpoint location — which is exactly what you should expect, seeing the pig-herder was obviously in a rural location (like the farmlands in the picture, immediately above the cliffs. Both Gerasa and Gadara were in the country of the Decapolis, a Greek-culture, pork-eating, country of autonomous poleis.
MICHAEL-
Nicely picked up. I actually meant to say that Gergesa was near the Kinerret, and got mixed up.
Let’s settle this. Mark says Gerasa Luke says Gadera, The experts say that Origen, about 240, first introduced the name of Gergesa into the silly tale. Of course he was crazy, like the rest of those early Church fathers. But a great brain and a prolific writer. .Couldn’t keep himself quiet I suppose.
Gergesa is about 6 miles from the .Kinerret, and there is only a single narrow spot which could even remotely be called a “cliff”. Gaders is about , 35 miles away and I have no idea where Gerasa is. I’m sure you’ll produce it .turned on its side so as to produce a cliff.
My info is according to Wiki.. Dubious as it often is, it’s far more reliable than the Gospels.
Now do you really expect dem pore little piggies to runs full steam ahead for any substantial part of those distances. Even the debbil couldn’t make ’em do it.
Crow is treif, you should know that.
Edgar,
No cliffs? Would you care to eat crow?
https://imgs.search.brave.com/DzCueknCRLGugyQzT6cj9HHiH1N3kuUtIWdwO1kz5f8/rs:fit:1200:656:1/g:ce/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cu/Y2hyaXN0aWFuLXRo/aW5rdGFuay5jb20v/Z2lkZHlnYWRkeV9o/dG1sXzRmNmEzYjBj/LmpwZw
@Tanna (and whoever else is interested
in reading this)
I highly recommend this book written by a professor who is a Christian:
William Nicholls Christian Antisemitism: A History of Hate:
TANNA-
Thank you for your kind and basically impartial answer. But I think that it is complete futility for mere man, however learned and gifted, by arrogate to himself a knowledge of G-D’s Plan for the Cosmos.
This is an impossibility on EVERY level. Different religions have different formation myths, but none has the innate Jew-Hatred that Christianity has.
And Islam, since Jews freed themselves from their “jizya”, have followed suit.
t is THIS which has brought our world to such turmoil. Rabid Nationalism and economic greed, are close behind.
Edgar and others.
You all make valid points. History / historical myths are all hard to decipher 100%. I agree with each where I can but to camp out on either side of this issue without looking at the larger scope of things, I think is a mistake. If a person believes in the God of Israel – however we understand what has transpired in history – one has to acknowledge the “unseen hand in the affairs of the world”. I stumbled on this article late last night It would be worth the read from a Sholar who worked for peace between the two families / nations who cling to their God and the only scriptures they have, telling, relating his-Story. Like us- they are trying to understand the facts as they witness them during their lifetime.
I do not think, I’m arguing from a Christian perspective. I try to argue from a biblical perspective, (yes, that includes the Christian N.T.) although limited by my finite knowledge of God’s plan for the Cosmos. Sometimes my footing is planted more in the Christian world / other times in the Jewish Rabbinic world. To help bring healing to the world, we have to stop fighting with each other. I have several siblings we all disagree as much as this Isrpundit family, but after burying our parents, we have mustered enough respect and love for each other that we have continue to maintain close bonds, although all living in a different place in our perspectives. One last thought: The Jews maybe(are) God’s chosen – but they cannot gain the redemption they hope for without the Christian(gentile), otherwise there would have been no need for God to create the other.
https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/research_sites/cjl/texts/cjrelations/resources/articles/saldarini.htm
JOSEPHUS-
I’ve read “Antiquities” from cover to cover 2-3 times but never came across that total figure. Perhaps it was in “Wars”, of which I read only excerpts.
I find it hard to believe, because even if they crucified everyone who fought against them in Israel it would not come to even half that amount.
I wonder where Josephus g ANd too many were killed and enslaved for that even to be viable. I wonder where he got his figures from, because although he lived in those Roman times, the country was devastated and upside down for many years. On the spot accurate information would be almost impossible to get even if he travelled with the Roman Army. And he wrote Antiquities around the year 95, many years after the War. I think he wrote Wars”” sometime in the mid to late 70s, not that long after Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed.
Still, the problem of collecting accurate information was the same. Perhaps even worse closeer to the War’s ending.
MICHAEL-
I see that you are spouting your nonsense again, but I know you can’t help it. As for the content, do you seriously think that any true Jew could ever in a million years, forgive the perpetrators of the Holocaust, or the Spanish Inquisition, the Poles, or the Ukraine atrocities and pogroms. The English slaughters.
Their descendants may be different, more civilised, and if so, that’s O.K. But the facts are, that residual Jew-Hate is still ingrained in their DNA, and so we deal with them politely but never trust them, and rightly so.
You cling to a chimera and I’m sorry for you, but if you’re happy that way, well that’s O.K. too, because it’s YOUR life. As for me, although I detest and despise Christianity for the misery it’s perpetrated on untold millions of innocents, I don’t feel the same about ALL Christian people. A person is a person. For instance…. you. I like you; because you’re sincere in your mishugas, and one who would never harm anyone deliberately.
I mentioned to the author, that the Gospels are not historical documents and his whole argument relies on them. He said yes but the Christians believe in the gospels so I wanted to use their own texts to make the case for who killed Jesus.
Just before dying, Jesus said,
“Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do!”
Israpunditeers, whoever “them” was, is irrelevant. Jesus did say, however, that those who refuse to forgive (like many here) will not be forgiven by God, nor by His son. THAT is relevant.
Most Forgotten:
TANNA-
There are many major differences between Judaism and Christianity -a pale copy of Judaism-. Not only the “idolatory” thing. Being touted as the Moshiach, although nothing that was supposed to have been done by the advent of the moshiach was ever done. Anyway the Moshiach concept is as silly as the Jesus concept. I explained how it in previous comments and my facts are correct
And, for your information. as well as Roman Emperors becoming gods after death, they were also gods in life. The Emperor was always the High Priest of Sol Invictus, and was regarded duting the rite as a god. Constantine, a lifelong pagan was one such god.
You bring up for too many tings to comment on, but , I saw that most were not accurate. You are looking at it from a Christian “the Gospels are true” stance, which puts every opinion of yours right away in limbo..
Your “Jesus was not a god”. comment is valid,. Recall, John, a historical JEWISH figure, and the supposed “forerunner,” knew nothing about him, and was executed late , in 37 several years after the “Gospels” death of Jesus. This is a historical fact, well documented. Also his baptism was not a holy rite. Why was a forerunner necessary anyway???
And a different John, supposedly Jesus’ brother, was the leader of the Ebionim, not Peter or Paul, or any prominent disciple.
Do you know that the followers of John the Baptizer still exist today. They believed that John was their Moshiach and the final “Prophet’ , and lived somewhere around the Euphratees I think. They are called “\Mandeans”. Since modern times, have spread all around the world.
As for the “Moshiach” itself , it meant only “anointed with oil”, which was a rite for every king and High Priest. ,,,Ugh …messy…….
Goyim call it “chrism”, and still use it in a variety of rituals.
@Tanna
Now you’re cooking with gas.
@Tanna
I heard many years ago (from an Orthodox rabbi) that if a Jew worships Jesus, it is considered idolatry but if a non-Jew worships Jesus it is not idolatry, when asked why, he said that it is because they need an intermediary.
There is a concept of the divinity of Christ which was established ~17(?) centuries ago, so, to a believing Christian, he is certainly not “a man just like you and I” (aside from a couple of groups from the ME which survived since before the Islamic conquest).
Zorn,
“There’s no point in quoting the New Testament. After the Tanakh, Judaism and Christianity went in different directions.” That sounds like the reverse of the Christian argument.
“As the author states in the beginning, the main difference is that Judaism doesn’t recognize the divinity of Jesus or any human being. Judaism regards that as idolatry.”
That is correct, Jesus was not divinity. But a man just like you and I, although, a man called for a high calling just like the others in the Jewish story, Moses, Samson, Samuel, Jereimah, Isaiah and Elijah. Christians (gentiles) years later, not understanding the idea of a Jewish king, got him confused with the Roman emperors who became Gods after they died. He’s just a man sent from God to do a mission, just like all the other characters in the Old Testament. Who he is, and what his mission was will be determined at some date in the future when Mashiach gets here.
The Rabbis, spend a fair amount of time discussion if the Idolatry of the Gentiles in believing in the deity of Jesus, rises to the level of Idolatry for a Gentile. They seem to think so for the Jew, but not the gentile. But even some orthodox Jews believe in Yeshua, they just understand that he is an agent for YHVH and not YHVH himself. But, Christians are unlearned in this, thinking that a man can be his own father.
To the others: you can go cherry pick things from Scholars, history or whom ever, but all that, does not do away with what the writers of the N.T. were trying to relay to their readers that they believed about this person Jesus.
If you go back and spend the time to read my post and look up the reference, you should see that they made a connection. Not I. IF you had listened more in your Torah studies, you would recognize some of the same things going on in the N.T. are the same things going on in Midrash. A story / narrative is being presented, it’s not all to be read as literal. The writers of the N.T. where quoting scripture of the O.T. and giving their midrash on it. They were trying to understand the Prophets and applying it to the happenings in their day. And some scholars say, they were trying to tie it all in with the weekly torah reading. Where they correct? Could they have been delusional and confused? Maybe, but when you look at what has happened since, and apply the same rules of interpretation to the O.T. as to the N.T. one is left to wonder……. maybe if there is a GOD, he’s involved with these two books in a way, us little pee brain humans don’t fully understand. But then, that would require faith on our(humans)part.
As to Christians having to have faith. Yes, they have to believe. But the secret that the Jewish community tries to play down…… they have to have faith also! The last time I checked neither community has ever seen the face of GOD. They both have to believe in something they have never seen nor touched…… GET THAT…. never experienced with their five senses! If the almighty, appeared at Mt Siani and showed himself to Israel and the world……. and I believe he did just as record in the O.T. that still has to be taken by faith. There is no other way to believe in a 5000 year old story, except by faith.
“The purpose of Christianity was supersession. It was designed to replace the nationalistic and militaristic messianic movement in Judea with a religion which was pacifistic and would accept Roman rule. (p.19)”
If I remember Francisco Gil White emphasizes that Judaism had significantly spread among the poor in a wider area too, attractive to the poor.
Spo Christianity was an imperialistic manufactured ideology cum way of living.
Seems to be a pattern. Create an underdog and victim figure. Bring power of state to bear in its promotion.
Aka
The Palestinians
Jihadists
The Meinmar
Zelensky
Nothing is impossible in the hands of powerful. A Fascist history like Stepan Bandera murder of 1.5 million Jews – add to that millions Poles, Russians, Gypsies – Voila you have the most adorable leader ever Zelensky.
And what they created, Christianity the force of everything reactionary since.
As indeed it is the force and power behind Zelensky being cheered to the rafters in the Irish Dail
@Edgar G.
These were exactly my thoughts when I read some of the book – I didn’t finish it because of the large number of textual comparisons and stuff but I came up with my own hypothesis which is much simpler and was much more doable in those days:
What if the Romans after they destroyed the Temple, killed or enslaved a couple of million Jews, plowed everything under, destroyed all the cedars of Lebanon, renamed Jerusalem – Aelia Capitolina, and Judea – Palestina, and, allegedly, invented the “Hep-Hep” (“Herosolima est perdita”) toast, could someone write a sarcastic broadside upon reading of which the Greeks/Romans would roll on the floor laughing and the Jews would weep and gnash their teeth?
Of course, sarcasm is a double-edged sword because in order to “get it” one must know the context very well, and as the time passes, the context is forgotten, and the meaning is taken literally, and this is how this text might have become the first Gospel.
There were many versions of the Gospels until a Bishop of Lyon Irenaeus decided (around 180 C.E., I think) that there should be only four, and then they were changed by others.
The New Testament wasn’t completely canonized until 367 C.E.
BTW, in what we think of is Year One, no one there knew it was Year One because it was not established until the year which became the Year 500.
READER-
That’s a very interesting postulation, which I’ve never heard or thought of before. It makes a certain amount of sense. But it does seem a bit forced, and very laborious to carry out.
If it DID occur that way, why was it that the Gospels were all unnamed, and the present names were given by chance.
I’ll have to look out for that book and see if I can get the “feel” of it.
Perhaps that’s why the so-called Paul, said that he was a Roman citizen, an otherwise impossibility.
I can’t recall which Epistle says the place was Gadera, but certainly the s0-called Luke puts the supposed event at Gerasa, which is about 35 miles away. Gadera is close to the Kinerret, and certainly there are no cliffs at either place..
In one of my books this was pointed out and the geographic surrounds were closely described.
It just occurred to me that I have heard of Atwill. I think S Achariya heavily criticized something by him. I always read her, and found her very acute and clever.rand especially M.M. Mangasarian) So I just now looked him up on WIKI and found an entry for “Caesar’s Messiah”. I’ve read it just now and whilst I’ve come across some of it’s items before with other writers, it seems extremely fanciful. He tried hard to make X=Y.. He says that the Testimonium Flavianum in Josephus is genuine, which I don’t accept for a moment. He accepts also as a genuine the “John, the brother of Jesus” as genuine, which I don’t. Nor do many scholars, who describe them as “interpolations”…
On another point, not mentioned by Atwill, , Paul was called to Jerusalem, and met John and the others. This, according to nearly all NT scholars indicated that John was the leader, not Peter, or any other of the leading disciples. Until then, there was no indication that John was in any way involved with them.
The only problem is that I can’t recall which if Paul’s letters contains it, a genuine or a forged one..
@Edgar G.
There is a book by Joseph Atwill Caesar’s Messiah: The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus
After studying the Dead Sea Scrolls, the New Testament, and Wars of the Jews by Flavius Josephus, he claims to have discovered that:
About the “swine” episode [he relates it to the battle of Gadara]:
Sorry about the strange way my comment turned out. Just read it now. My computer is very balky and often jumps several lines and also begins new sentences in the middle of ones already written, as shown in this comment above., where my points about the Maccabiim were split into two.
I rarely re-read and only cath them afterwards when too late to “edit”. My fault.
TANNA-
Jogn could not havebeen the “forerunner” of Jesus. The Roman Census of the year 6 CE showed that a John, middle aged, dressed in haircloth emerged at the banks of the Jordan River and was “baptizing’ people. The Year SIX.
His baptism was not a holy ritual in ANY way. Josephus states very clearly that it was a “cleansing of the body to match a soul already cleansed”..
In other words just a bath. This was only about 10-12 years after any possible birth year for Jesus.
And there are records about the death of John. Even in the gospels he asks if Jesus is th expected one> So he didn’t know him at all, never heard of him.
\now it has been proven that this was around the year 37.
Herod Antipas had been defeated by rhe hing of Nabatea, Aretas, . He appealed to the Roman Governer in Syria for aid. The Roman had first to get permission from Rome. The only way was by sean which took weeks,
He eventually got that permission and moved his army, but when he got to Jerusalem on his way, he heard that Tiberius had died (this was all in 37), so he waited to find out what the ew Emperor would order him to do.
So John was at least alive in 37,imprisoned by Antipas. And he was NOT associated in any way with a Jesus, because he was executed soon after.
These are authentic FACTS.
By the way, on a totally different point. Jewish history asevidenced in the Torah, was so messed up, with the country being devasted time afte time after time and occupied by Goyim, hunting the Jews who didn’t surrender, that there are THREE (that I know of) different lists of the descent of the High Priests from Zadok, the only authentic lineage.
Partly because of war disruptions, partly because they were written much later after the times, and partly because many of the names were the same, So a great-grand-father could be registered as a great-grandson and so on. We are inclined to pass over this quickly and not notice it. but it came to a boil when the Makabiim took both the kingship and High i in the same person. The Priesthood was sacrosanct to the descendants of Aaron the brother of Moses. The most prominent was Zadok the High Priest of David and Solomon.
And about an earlier point I meade. The tribe of Benjamin assimilated into Yehud after Solomon, in about *99 B.C.E, and totally lost to history about 600B.C.e because of the Babylonian captivity and the meagre numbers who returned.
He wasn’t called “king” but Leader and Governor for all time and it was made hereditary by the people to his descendants.
he had very much opposition about this as history relates, which lasted until the Romans came.
RAPHAEL
Thank you indeed for the compliment. However, the points I made , I do not consider debatable, because there is ample evidence for every issue I mentioned.
It’s debatable only to those who are convinced, however wrongly of their opposing belief.
As has been said and re-said .One must have “Faith” or it is all a fraud, I paraphrase of course, but I believe it was Paul, and I can be corrected if wrong.
my coment on Roman Citizenship complexities is etched in stone, which alone proves Paul a liar.
of the hundreds of thousands who lived in Rome, comparatively few were actual Citizens. there are records of families who had lived there for centuries and who were NOT Roman Citizens. some had a very limited and as I said temporary kind of minor legal right , but NOT citizenship.
My comment about Herod was absolutely accurate. Books have been written about this alone. when Julius was besieged in Alexandria and on th verge of death, he was rescued by Herod, already a long time client king. Herod sent soldiers, food, equipment, and saved his life. He continued to bolster Roman presence in that area, and yet it took him, I believe 34 years for be granted citizenship.
And as I said, when he died, none of his surviving children had inherited it. It was not possible as I’ve already explained.
in later centuries when Rome had begun to disintegrate than it was not so special and almost anyone could claim citizenship.
but a lowly tent maker, the lowest form of craft, and Tarsus is actually over 2,000 on modern roads from Rome. How could Paul’s father, likely also a tent maker be a “citizen”, and even if so, Paul certainly could NOT inherit.
So how much of Paul’s tales Letter setc are not lies. Very few I believe. Of his 13 “Letters” I think 7-8 have already been proven by experts to be forgeries. Or it may be 6-7.????
Even the genuine ones cannot be believed seeing his truth level. His visions, his paralysis, etc. A very mentally sick person, but cunning and clever, not uncommon.
I’s sorry to say all this to you Raphael, because I feel you to be a sincere devout believer in the G-D of the Torah, as well as your own god.
If you can find in a library books by S.G.F Brandon, I recommend you read them. He is a fine writer, often overlooked but very pragmatic and convincing. When younger I discovered him, being well knwn then. He writes from a neutral sort of stance, although an Anglican priest with a parish as well as a theologian.
His views assume that a Jesus lived, but totally different from the common belief. I know that you will enjoy his books, they are brilliant. I have several but all in storage and unavailable to men
@ Edgar G We have butted heads before. You are a formidable opponent. I thank you, therefore, for taking the time to respond to me. All of your points are certainly debatable, except I would hold that Jesus, regardless of what you may think of him, was a real historical person.
The “early Christians” who were not calld Christians then, but “Ebionim” or “the Poor”., split from Judaism to a certain but not large extend after Bar Kocheba.
The Christian “records” if they can be believed, show that every leader up to then was a Jew.. There is evidence that Bar Kocheba was referring to this small group in a village, when he told his second in command,, that if they well not join him, then “put them in chains”, This was found written on a sherd, many years ago.
Even in the early middle Ages Solomon Zeitlin writes that every Spring, the ignorant peasants always sought out a Jew to make a prayer for a good crop. Judaic “tendencies” were always creeping back into the early Christian ritual, and there were many bloody purges to eliminate it.
During the iInquisition, not only were “lapsed” Jews condemned and burnt, but Christians also.
The “Disputatians” that happened periodically, were because of the inferiority that Christians felt compated to Judaism, and were determined too “prove” superiority. They always failed.
One famous Rabbi told the King who was “presiding” “How can one believe in what one does not believe”.??? That was unanswerable.
It may have been Nachmanides at Barcelona or another, I can’t recall, although I once knew.
This writer is ignorant as well as dumb.But his intentions are good and his headline is correct.
What does he think of someone who says he is not wanting to break the Law but to FULFIL it.
Does this not mean that this person regards the Torah as unfinished and not perfect.. How could he “fulfil” the Torah which was for ever. A very presumptions comment.
I suppose he was talking about Moshiach. but that belief itself was comparatively modern and not mentioned in the Torah.
Some have gathered obscure phrases and sentences, the meanings of which were already lost hundred of years earlier, and cobbled them into a “Moshiach” belief.
It was because the Jews who were true to Torah were always being invaded and the country devastated, and generally under the heel of some great power or other, that they assumed that they were sinning…somehow, and strove to find out what they were doing wrong.
This is a very simple matter actually, they were not doing “wrong” they were just too small and too weak to withstand the movements of great Empires, which in those days always included Egypt. Unfortunately Israel
was the BRIDGE , so any Empire warring against Egypt needed Israel fpr strategic and tactical purposes.
That was the whole reason for Israel’s constant subjugation as a client state of others for most of it’s existence. There were a few rare times when these Empires had their own internal problems and Israel could breathe again…for a short time only. These times are regarded as “golden ages”.
This is clear, all through the Torah,
Jews have no problem with Christians being Christians and certainly Israel welcomes the moral and political support of Christian Zionists going back two centuries, It’s when Christians try to turn Jews into Christians that problems arise. Everybody needs to stay in their own lane.
We all feel this way. It’s a national thing. Even secular Jubus like myself.
humor
https://aish.com/78624517/
This writer is full of bull. The “Tribe of Benjamn” had been assimilated into YAHUD about 850 years earlier, and had no existence since that time.
I’m too rushed to comment more but some things are egregiously WRONG.
He;s following the NT for his “info”. Oy Veh.i
RAPHAEL-
Get your facts straight, because you have none. There is Major doubt that a Jesus ever existed. The Gospels, our only source were not written by Jews and not in Israel, and many years past thr supposed cruxifiction.
Paul, the real Founder was a first class liar which can be peoven. LOOKUP how hard it was tomobtain Roman Citizenxhip. Read how LONG it took Herod to get it, over 30 years of sending soldiers, food other aid to save Julius Caesar from death in Alexandria and muxch more.
A miserable tent maker a very low class occupation over 1000 miles from Rome “ingerited” his Roman citizenship from his father.
Oh Yeah. RC ended when each emperor died and beeded to be regranted by the senate.
The vast majority of “Christians were theGod-fearers the Noachians who crowded into the synagogues, and behave exactly like Jews but for circumxision.
And MUCH MUCH more. Christianity is a religion built on myth, fabrications, misreading of Torah, and deliberate lies. Can and has been many times proven. The Church Fathers went over every word and what they didn’t like, they made “interpolations” which means Pious forgery, the end justifies the means etc.
If Jesus existed he was a Sicaarius, one of the Kana’im.But he didn’t.
The NT is geographically very incorrect, there were no cliffs for the swine to jump off withing many miles of thr stated area. and. as I said…Much Much More. I’m rushed for time , have another project or I’d really give you ther much more info and quote sources.
Swine with devils inthem….Phooey.
@Tanna There’s no point in quoting the New Testament. After the Tanakh, Judaism and Christianity went in different directions.
As the author states in the beginning, the main difference is that Judaism doesn’t recognize the divinity of Jesus or any human being. Judaism regards that as idolatry.
I read this article yesterday, but needed to smoke it over before a comment. I set here and look 20 – 30 books dealing with the subject matter. As Liz stated. The author did an excellent job. I believe in a fair and objective way, being Jewish himself. simpletoremember, the posted site is outdated and needs to be rework with a more objective view on this article. I agree with some/disagree with some, of the article Zorn posted.
Point #4= The revelation to a whole nation. “What then was the basis of [Jewish] belief? The Revelation at Mount Sinai, which we saw with our own eyes and heard with our own ears, not dependent on the testimony of others… as it says, “Face to face, God spoke with you…” The Torah also states: “God did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us—who are all here alive today.” (Deut. 5:3)” Correct! God has always had a remnant, those that had not bowed a knee to BAAL. Just because YHVH revealed himself to the whole nation- The WHOLE nation did not see/hear, nor obey! Only 7,000 in Eliyah’s day. Do you think, there are that many (percentage wise) in 2023?
The New Testament spends time linking Yeshua up with the binding of Yitzchak, they also link up Yeshua with Isaiah 6:8-10.i.e. Mt.13:14-15, Mk.4:12, Luk.8:10,Jn.12:38-40, Acts28:26-27. The text of the N.T. tells the story of hundreds if not thousands who lived in the time period of the first century that believe the message that was being told by those JEWISH followers of Yeshua.
The N.T. writers spend time linking up “the promise and oath YHVH swore to the fathers” with Yeshua and his forerunner John the man going around screaming repentant and getting people to go to the mikveh. Put that in your Jewish pipe and smoke on it. Have you ever thought about what they were trying to accomplish?
At this point we know it looks like they failed. But, YHVH is not done yet so let’s hold off just a little bit. If one reads closely and carefully you can see that the actions of both Abraham and Yitzchak are wrapped up in the narrative of the New Testament personified in the life and teaching of this man, we know as Yeshua. To continue to attack this man regardless of what one’s believes personally about his life and the lies that are told on him, put’s one in the camp of an ANTI-SEMTIE. Do you really want to be a JEWISH ANTI-SEMITIE?
Both the Jewish communities and the Chrisitan communities have lots of people in them who just take up space and come to the Synagogue or church to get their weekly spiritual FIX. They never think about God except when they need something. As my father (of bless memory) use to say, “God sends them in to help pay the electric power bill”.
I’m suggesting, maybe we follow the rule of our fathers, as recorded in book of Acts in the N.T. Acts 28:23-25 (HCSB)
23 After arranging a day with him(Paul), many came to him at his lodging. From dawn to dusk he expounded and witnessed about the kingdom of God. He tried to persuade them concerning Jesus from both the Law of Moses and the Prophets.
24 Some were persuaded by what he said, but others did not believe.
25 Disagreeing among themselves, they began to leave……………
http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/jewsandjesus
In the politically charged climate of the times, there were certainly some “Jews” who were instrumental in the decision to execute Jesus of Nazareth, although it was Pontius Pilate, the Roman magistrate, who had the final say in the matter. Roman soldiers (probably not actual “Romans”) carried out the order. So, the responsibility for the actual crucifixion is shared, to one extent or another, by multiple individuals of various ethnicities.
The more mature view, however, is that every descendant of Adam is responsible for Jesus’ death, because “Christ came into the world to save sinners” by dying an atoning, sacrificial death. The identities (and nationalities) of the actual players in the events of that day are immaterial. It is a travesty of justice, therefore, that the Jewish people have been singled out for blame.
“Maybe Jesus didn’t like your chocolates”
“So aliens come to earth and they’re Sooo nice. There’s a huge televised event with all the world leaders in attendance.
The Pope asks, “Do you know of Jesus Christ?”
The aliens say, “Do we Ever? Awesome guy!! Swings by the planet every couple of years to say Hi!”
The Pope exclaims, “Every couple of years?? What!!?? We’re still waiting for his second coming!”
The alien replies, “Maybe he didn’t like your chocolate?”
The Pope is flabbergasted, “What does chocolate have to do with anything?”
The alien says, “Well when he came the first time, we gave him a huge box of chocolates! Why? What did you guys give him?”
—
“There is no white Jesus”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APMu32sC2nM
——
“St. Peter was guarding the Pearly Gates, waiting for new souls coming to heaven. He saw Jesus walking by and caught his attention. “Jesus, could you mind the gate while I go do an errand?”
“Sure,” replied Jesus. “What do I have to do?”
“Just find out about the people who arrive. Ask about their background, their family, and their lives. Then decide if they deserve entry into Heaven.”
“Sounds easy enough. OK.”
So Jesus manned the gates for St. Peter. The first person to approach the gates was a wrinkled old man. Jesus summoned him to sit down and sat across from him. Jesus peered at the old man and asked, “What did you do for a living?”
The old man replied, “I was a carpenter.”
Jesus remembered his own earthly existence and leaned forward. “Did you have any family?” he asked.
“Yes, I had a son, but I lost him.”
Jesus leaned forward some more. “You lost your son? Can you tell me about him?”
“Well, he had holes in his hands and feet.”
Jesus leaned forward even more and whispered, “Father?”
The old man leaned forward and whispered, “Pinocchio?”
—
NO ONE KILLED HIM.
HE HAS NEVER EXISTED IN THE FIRST PLACE.
IT’S A FAIRY TALE – END THE DISCUSSION!
Veet, I understand that you consider religion to be just a form of superstition and an expression of primitive ignorance. But, this kind of a rant is really out of place here. The shock value doesn’t achieve what you are hoping for. It just undermines your credibility and makes it difficult to take you seriously when you have insights to share about other important matters.
vivarto@ How many of God’s laws did you just break…….like 3 X? May a merciful and just God give you your punishment. 3 X.
A man born from a virgin is a total freak that deserves to be killed.
Really being born from a virgin is more against nature than having a rectum on ones forehead.
But that’s not all.
The freak was also defying the laws of nature and God by walking on water.
Still worse, he as bringing back to life a decaying stinking corpse.
All that is against God’s laws.
Certainly one deservers to be killed for breaking God’s laws.
Whoever killed him did the right thing.
A man born from a virgin is a total freak that deserves to be killed.
Really being born from a virgin is more against nature than having rectum on ones forehead.
But that’s not all.
The freak was also defying the laws of nature and God by walking on water.
Still worse, he as bringing back to life a decaying stinking corpse.
All that is against God’s laws.
Certainly one deservers to be killed for breaking God’s laws.
Whoever killed him did the right thing.
I man born from a virgin is a total freak that deserves to be killed.
Really being born from a virgin is more against nature than having rectum on ones forehead.
But that’s not all.
The freak was also defying the laws of nature and God by walking on water.
Still worse, he as bringing back to life a decaying stinking corpse.
All that is against God’s laws.
Certainly one deservers to be killed for breaking God’s laws.
Whoever killed him did the right thing.
Excellent article. Educated Christians are already familiar with these facts, but sadly the Christian Bible has been used to foment antisemitism by all the major churches, at least until very recently. I have printed this piece in order to show it to anyone who is ignorant of what it contains. As Easter is only two months away, it might be timely to publish it again in early April.