No, ‘the Jews’ did not kill Jesus

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I agree! The entire procedure was irregular and wholly contrary to the Jewish laws. They were intent upon getting rid of Jesus with some pretense of a court proceeding to take to Pilate. If the authors of the NT records were trying to perpetuate a fraud then they would have done a better job!

Modern news tells me that people who are bad at making fraud can get rich.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Especially given that women were not considered to be lawful or credible witnesses.

But they would have been expected to touch dead people.

 

[Colt]

Who witnessed it, since the apostles had run off?

The only apostle there was John. Others include his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene the soldiers and perhaps the jeering crowd that heaped abuse on Jesus as he made his way through the streets. Joseph and a Pharisee and believer named Nicodemus went to claim the body, its unclear if they witnessed the crucifixion.

 

[Colt]

Modern news tells me that people who are bad at making fraud can get rich.

There is no indication that the apostles made money by leaving their religion to become followers of Jesus.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

One way to experience the hatred by some that Jesus encountered is to view YouTube videos of how Christian street preachers are received in Jerusalem today.

If they are like Ray Comfort, hatred is entirely fair

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I’ve encountered Jews who explain that, once the Temple is rebuilt Judaism will resume practicing OT sacrifices and laws which I assume will include the death penalty for a number of offenses?

Capital punishment can result in eternal salvation. What is the problem?

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I realize that the Sanhedrin was comprised of chief priests, elders, and scribes. During the 3+ years of his public ministry, Jesus had many open confrontations with the Jewish authorities.

Bureaucrats must be literate, so where are their notes?

 

[Colt]

Bureaucrats must be literate, so where are their notes?

Jerusalem was sacked not long after killing the Son of God. There are no records of much of anything from that period. They certainly didn’t write glowing reports about Jesus.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

There is no indication that the apostles made money by leaving their religion to become followers of Jesus.

If you lied about how much you gave to the ministry, you died!

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Jerusalem was sacked not long after killing the Son of God. There are no records of much if anything from that period. They certainly didn’t write glowing reports about Jesus.

Pompeii got obliterated and we can still find something.

 

[Colt]

Pompeii got obliterated and we can still find something.

Because Pompeii was preserved in an instant.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Of course it was deliberate. The historical setting of the Gospel must be considered. All gospel authors wrote for the benefit of their community and John's church had been expelled from the synagogue as a heretical cult. As I previously stated, they are now subject to the persecution of the Roman's, having lost the protective umbrella of the Jews, So, the Jewish establishment referred to in the synoptics becomes for John's church 'the Jews' period.
There are many other questions raised in this Gospel.



Maybe better, blown out of proportion. The present situation of the Johannine community at the time of writing is retrojected back onto Jesus' ministry.

So saying that "the Jews" killed Jesus is faithful to the Bible, but you don't think that the Bible was faithful to actual history?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Jerusalem was sacked not long after killing the Son of God. There are no records of much of anything from that period. They certainly didn’t write glowing reports about Jesus.

There are some records. There's Josephus, who hated Herod and wrote about his reign extensively, but who failed to mention the genocide of children committed by Herod that the Bible describes.

Why do you think that Josephus left this out?

 

[Colt]

There are some records. There's Josephus, who hated Herod and wrote about his reign extensively, but who failed to mention the genocide of children committed by Herod that the Bible describes.

Why do you think that Josephus left this out?

If Josephus knew about the murder of the innocents maybe he couldn’t corroborate the story so didn’t write about? The Jewish writers of the gospels wrote about the events around Jesus’ life so they included it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If Josephus knew about the murder of the innocents maybe he couldn’t corroborate the story so didn’t write about?

Can you describe any plausible scenario where:

- a ruler has every male child in his kingdom murdered, and
- a historian in the same country, writing within the lifetime of eyewitnesses, participants and survivors, isn't able to corroborate that the massacre happened?

You seem to be taking me for a fool.

The Jewish writers of the gospels wrote about the events around Jesus’ life so they included it.

The Jewish writers needed a way for Jesus to be from Bethlehem, Nazareth and Egypt all at the same time.

 

[Colt]

Can you describe any plausible scenario where:

- a ruler has every male child in his kingdom murdered, and
- a historian in the same country, writing within the lifetime of eyewitnesses, participants and survivors, isn't able to corroborate that the massacre happened?

You seem to be taking me for a fool.



The Jewish writers needed a way for Jesus to be from Bethlehem, Nazareth and Egypt all at the same time.

The murder of the innocents was confined to the small village of Bethlehem. Murder and intrigue was common with Herod. Jesus wasn’t from Bethlehem, he was born there when his parents traveled for the required census. .

 

[Colt]

Then you believe differently from me. I don't see errors or ridiculous exaggerations in what you call the "OT." But does this mean that you are accepting that there are errors in the gospels?

And there are plenty of books of fiction full of misrepresentations of misunderstood systems so the gospels fits right in.

I don't recall saying they were.

What I have is an understanding of the process of the Jewish judicial system, something sorely lacking in the gospel accounts, all written well after the fact based on guesswork and invention.

Their reason was to justify their beliefs. Within a generation, myth would take hold and people would die for beliefs. It isn't unique to Christians.

Yes, there are errors in the Gospels. I believe the Bible books to be written, redacted and rewritten by holy men, some more holy than others. I don't use religious books as a fetish or golden calf. Its a peculiar thing, the fact that humans are imperfect, no matter how well intentioned, is universally understood. Except for religious writings which later generations come to venerate. Those writings are seen as actually written by God, and when religious institutions base their authority on those writings as having come directly from God then further growth is stunted and leadership is too invested and too proud to admit error or inconsistency.

 

[rosends]

Yes, there are errors in the Gospels. I believe the Bible books to be written, redacted and rewritten by holy men, some more holy than others. I don't use religious books as a fetish or golden calf. Its a peculiar thing, the fact that humans are imperfect, no matter how well intentioned, is universally understood. Except for religious writings which later generations come to venerate. Those writings are seen as actually written by God, and when religious institutions base their authority on those writings as having come directly from God then further growth is stunted and leadership is too invested and too proud to admit error or inconsistency.

so your faith is intrinsically different from mine. Best of luck to you.

 

[pearl]

So saying that "the Jews" killed Jesus is faithful to the Bible, but you don't think that the Bible was faithful to actual history?

John took the present situation of his community, no longer accepted by the Jews, and wrote as though it was so from the beginning. History was not a priority with the authors, faith in Jesus was. The Gospels were not simply formed at one writing but the formation of the Gospels went through stages over a period of several years, decades.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

John took the present situation of his community, no longer accepted by the Jews, and wrote as though it was so from the beginning. History was not a priority with the authors, faith in Jesus was. The Gospels were not simply formed at one writing but the formation of the Gospels went through stages over a period of several years, decades.

This seems like a long-winded way of saying that you agree with me: the Bible was not faithful to actual history.

You just described how the author of the story, to suit his own agenda, added aspects to the story and presented them as fact despite them not having actually happened.

I understand the motives they would have had to fabricate parts of the story, but this doesn't change the fact that they fabricated parts of the story.