Jews and Jesus Arrest and Crucifixion

[Duvduv]

Medicine was advanced because of the Holocaust. We should praise Hitler.

The last time I looked, Hitler was not part of any religious tradition, and was not part of a process leading to salvation and redemption because of who died in the war.

 

[Duvduv]

People are sinful and always look around for someone else to blame. The leadership should be steering away from that, but more often than not they used it for their own advantage.

It seems incredibly odd and naive to come to conclude that Jews killed Jesus therefore we should persecute jews, especially given the fact that all of the Christians in the beginning were Jews (at least until Cornelius is converted). Even after the inclusion of gentiles, the Jewish members remained Jewish and continued Jewish practices (which led to some clashes between the groups over circumcision).

I doubt any of the early Christians would have blamed Jews for killing Jesus, the scriptures indicate one important fact: we crucified Jesus. Had we not sinned, his sacrifice would not be necessary.

Blaming the Jews thus becomes a way of blaming others people for our own failings. It is just sinful behaviour and it still exists today - 'Get rid of the immigrants and things will be better' or even 'get rid of Christianity and the world will be better.'

AND YET it was built into the dogma of Christianity as we find in Acts 2:22......

 

[Duvduv]

But the bottom line is that Christian thinking throughout history was the self-contradictory idea that the Jews killed Jesus, who had to be killed and resurrected to allow for atonement of all mankind and their salvation. It's amazing Christian theology never did the reverse, and establish that Jews and Judaism were a very important and positive element in the unfolding of divine will and salvation of mankind. Really incredible. But of course there are other things standing in the way that essentially are internal contradictions in the New Testament teachings themselves, among the gospels and between gospels, and between epistles and gospels, and between epistles and Acts.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Praised for crucifying an innocent Man? That would be sinful.

On the flip side, praising God for His plan going exactly as He intended would be expected.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

AND YET it was built into the dogma of Christianity as we find in Acts 2:22......

Are you referring to the correct verse?

Acts 2:22-23 (my emphasis):
“Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man clearly attested to you by God with powerful deeds, wonders, and miraculous signs that God performed among you through him, just as you yourselves know— this man, who was handed over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you executed by nailing him to a cross at the hands of Gentiles. (NET)

It couldn't be plainer that both Jews and Gentiles bear some responsibility.

 

[Hammster]

The last time I looked, Hitler was not part of any religious tradition, and was not part of a process leading to salvation and redemption because of who died in the war.

I know.

 

[Clare73]

I still have difficulty understanding how any Christian theology and doctrine could come up with the idea of blaming anybody for the death of Jesus, and build up a case century after century against "the Jews" for killing the messiah

I understand, but as Christians we take our understanding of things Biblical from the NT, where we find Jesus declaring the
Jewish religious leaders guilty when he declared them not children of God nor of Abraham, but children of the devil because
they sought to kill him (John 8:38-47). He also declared them guilty and condemned them to hell when he declared
that the blood of all the righteous from Abel to Zachariah was on their heads (Matthew 23:29-36), because in seeking
to murder him, "the prophet who was to come" (John 1:45; John 6:14), promised by Moses (Deuteronomy 18:17-19),
and subsequently to murder his apostles
(Matthew 23:33-34), they were endorsing all such murders committed by their forefathers (Matthew 23:30-32) and
would suffer the penalty for those murders.
So it is Jesus that held the religious leaders of his day guilty of (Pilate was responsible for) his death.

So it is not surprising that the apostles likewise taught that the Jewish religious leaders of his day were guilty of the murder
of Jesus (Acts 5:28, Acts 7:51-52, Acts 3:12-15; 1 Thessalonians 2:15).

Acts 7:51-53 - (Apostle Stephen speaking before the High Priest in the Sanhedrin to answer charges against him
of "speaking words of blasphemy against Moses and God")
"You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers; you always resist the
Holy Spirit! Was there ever a prophet your fathers did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the
Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him--"

Acts 3:13-15 - (Apostle Peter speaking to the Jews after he healed the crippled beggar at the temple gate)

"The God of Abraham, Isaac and Joacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus. You handed him over
to be killed, and you disowned him before Pilate, though he had decided to let him go. . .You killed the Author of Life,
but God raised him from the dead."

Acts 5:28 - (The High Priest addressing the apostles who had been released from prison by an angel)
'You have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man's blood."

THe NT does not hold all Jews responsible for the murder of Jesus, only those who reject him.
And Christians take their view of things Biblical from the NT.

The Biblical principle involved is: Everyone is responsible for his own actions.

And God uses lemons to make lemonade.

 

[Clare73]

It really is unfortunate. Seems a rather avoidable fate, too, had the narrative been worded differently (in less of a demonizing way towards the Jews) by the authors of the bible.

The Son of God himself is the one who both described those in his day and declared the guilt of those in his day in
Matthew 23:29-36.

And Orthodox Jews continue to blaspheme Jesus Christ.

]I have to wonder if they realized that their words would have been used in such a way as they wrote them down. I would assume not, but then again, the bible is supposed to be divinely inspired/the word of god (depending on the personal belief of the person).

Is the outcome that so overwhelmingly unfolded what was to be intended? That antisemitism was to be a designed fate for the Jewish people? It seems to have unanimously and uniformly realized itself upon the face of the earth in the wake of Christianity as a whole throughout time and location. Only in recent history do we see this beginning to change.

 

[Clare73]

That's an explanation that I don't necessarily agree with completely or find all that satisfying, but the conversation has gotten to the point where it has more to do with opinion (mine and yours) than getting to the heart of the issue. Thanks for indulging my questions and thoughts!

The heart of the issue is what Jesus said and thinks about it, and we have that in Matthew 23:29-36.

 

[Clare73]

AND YET it was built into the dogma of Christianity as we find in Acts 2:22......

Beginning with Jesus Christ himself, the Son of God, in Matthew 23:29-36.

 

[Clare73]

But the bottom line is that Christian thinking throughout history was the self-contradictory idea that the Jews killed Jesus, who had to be killed and resurrected to allow for atonement of all mankind and their salvation. It's amazing Christian theology never did the reverse, and establish that Jews and Judaism were a very important and positive element in the unfolding of divine will and salvation of mankind. Really incredible.

But of course there are other things standing in the way that essentially are internal contradictions in the New Testament teachings themselves, among the gospels and between gospels, and between epistles and gospels, and between epistles and Acts.

Actually there really are no contradictions among those books at all.

Perhaps it would be helpful if you brought some forth for our examination and your edification.

 

[Clare73]

On the flip side, praising God for His plan going exactly as He intended would be expected.

At least you got it right. . .the gospel is not on your list.

 

[SigurdReginson]

The Son of God himself is the one who both described those in his day and declared the guilt of those in his day in Matthew 23:29-36.

And Orthodox Jews continue to blaspheme Jesus Christ.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, @Clare73.

 

[Clare73]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, @Clare73.

I was responding to your comment that "had the narrative
been worded differently (in less of a demonizing way towards the Jews) by the authors of the bible,"
reminding you that the penmen of the Bible were not the originators of the "demonizing" comments, but that they came
from the divine Son of God himself (Matthew 23:29-36), whom for Christians is the standard for truth and morality.

 

[Duvduv]

Are you referring to the correct verse?

Acts 2:22-23 (my emphasis):
“Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man clearly attested to you by God with powerful deeds, wonders, and miraculous signs that God performed among you through him, just as you yourselves know— this man, who was handed over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you executed by nailing him to a cross at the hands of Gentiles. (NET)

It couldn't be plainer that both Jews and Gentiles bear some responsibility.

At least there is the insinuation that no one should have anything to complain about since it was all planned by God for the salvation of mankind. Yet generation after generation in multiple denominations continued to cast aspersions on Jews. Why didn't they cast aspersions on themselves instead for not having been worthy enough that Jesus should be spared a crucifixion and still provide for salvation and atonement?

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

At least there is the insinuation that no one should have anything to complain about since it was all planned by God for the salvation of mankind. Yet generation after generation in multiple denominations continued to cast aspersions on Jews. Why didn't they cast aspersions on themselves instead for not having been worthy enough that Jesus should be spared a crucifixion and still provide for salvation and atonement?

Why would they cast aspersions on themselves. It is far easier to blame someone else for your problems than yourself - that goes all the way back to Eden - Adam blamed Eve and Eve blamed the Serpent.

There is no justification for these actions and the church should be ashamed for its actions (I know I am), but it doesn't change the past or those actions. All we can do is apologise and attempt to stop it happening again.

 

[Duvduv]

Actually, the reason for my frustration is that I am looking for "official" denomination positions on these issues aside from personal opinions of participants, in order to understand the traditional Christian views about these matters.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

Actually, the reason for my frustration is that I am looking for "official" denomination positions on these issues aside from personal opinions of participants, in order to understand the traditional Christian views about these matters.

In my experience denominations have no particular stance on the issue now. Individuals in the church have differing opinions and it para-church groups where you are more likely to find a better idea on the subject.

There are a few, International Christian Embassy in Jerusalem (ICEJ) is a group I used to belong to and I still have friends in. Also Jews for Jesus and Messianic Judaism, though I only know of those vaguely.

You also have writers like David Pawson: Defending Christian Zionism (book) and some of his sermons on the subject are probably on You Tube, though they might be dated (he died last year).

Historically there is the theology of the Roman Catholic Church and the Reformers, but I don't think the church today necessarily holds to these views (I could be wrong). It is possible that some denominations inadvertently exclude Jews as part of their particularly strict rules (e.g. Calvinism, but I'm not an expert on whether that is exclusive).

If you are looking for specific anti Jewish sentiment in churches, it is possible that some of the cults have specifics, such as Westbro Baptist Church - though I wouldn't take that personally, they have rules about pretty much every group that they don't like including other Christians!

 

[Clare73]

Actually, the reason for my frustration is that I am looking for "official" denomination positions on these issues aside from personal opinions of participants, in order to understand the traditional Christian views about these matters.

You can't get more "official" than the word of God written itself, as presented in post #27, above.

I doubt that there are any "official denomination positions" on this issue because it has nothing to do with the import of the gospel.

 

[FireDragon76]

I still have difficulty understanding how any Christian theology and doctrine could come up with the idea of blaming anybody for the death of Jesus, and build up a case century after century against "the Jews" for killing the messiah when the entire theology of salvation depended on his death and resurrection and salvation through justification, where Jesus took on the sins of everyone and was the chosen sacrifice.
It needed to happen this way, so why would anyone be blamed for it at any time in history? It's theologically ridiculous. Don't all Christian theologians discuss this? Why hasn't it been discussed by the leadership of Christian denominations?

It's very simple... the New Testament, in places, contains anti-Semitism. It's not surprising an early religious movement would seek to ingratiate itself to power by distancing itself from an unpopular religion that was seen as questionably loyal.