Did the Jews kill Jesus?

why? because a loving God told his son.... get man to kill you or I will punish them for all for eternity?

when one thinks about that, it doesn't even make sense

...

 

Its because he had a message, he said even if you kill me I will love you, be perfect as the father in heaven is perfect. Love one an other even if the other is an enemy .... love your Brother and sister and parents...

 

God still hates Esau so maybe he should take Jesus' advice about loving and forgiving enemies.

 

He already did that,....

 

Not really true at all. Roman Judea was ruled as a tetrarchy by law if not in principle with the Roman procurator essentially in charge of all four parts. In the time of Jesus, that person would have been of equestrian rank. He would not have had legions available to him. His immediate superior would have been the Prefect of Syria, a Roman of senatorial rank. If things got out of hand he would have the legions.
Here's how it worked. The Jews could and would try people for religious crimes some of which carried the death penalty. HOWEVER, they had to ask permission from the Romans to carry it out who in the case of men, they would often perform the act. The Jews could not execute someone on their own. For the Romans, Jesus committed no crime against the state, therefore under Roman law he was guilty of nothing. When Pilate washes his hands it was the Roman way of saying this is upon you and not us. The Romans did not behave in a way that showed that Jesus was an enemy of the state. Otherwise, his disciples would have been rounded up with many of them sold into slavery. The Romans were a pragmatic people, a dead guy is a dead guy with no value, but a slave has value. In short, it was the upper level Jewish religious leaders who had Jesus killed, not the Romans who probably thought the whole idea a bit ridiculous. Pilate would have considered Jerusalem a crap hole and did not live there, his residence was at Caesarea, on the coast. He would only visit Jerusalem, once or twice a year to collect the Roman taxes and ensure all was well. Here's the other thing. Pilate sent Jesus before the Tribune in the Antonia Fortress. The Tribune was of Senatorial rank and was the Roman Senate's representative and would act as that body's eyes and ears. He also found no fault with Jesus, otherwise it's quite possible that would have never left the Antonia alive. There is one final thing. Pilate has options that does not include the death penalty, but it's the Jews who demanded crucifixion. Doubtless Pilate would have thought this bizarre as well as barbaric and you're talking about a Roman Procurator here, someone not particularly squeamish.

 

The Talmud never mentions Jesus of Nazareth.

- - - Updated - - -

Jesus was a Jew. His parents were Jews.

 

These Jews say they killed Jesus, and they're proud.

[video=youtube;B6dTDbDpAPc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6dTDbDpAPc[/video]

 

What's interesting to me is that, by the time you get to the Gospel of John, he actually leaves it ambiguous as to whether the Romans or the Jews themselves did the crucifying. Darn vague pronouns.

 

Maybe, but what have they done for us lately?

Anyway, you can't kill a God or a Son of a God, they just come back like zombies.

 

the bible God is not said to be perfect, that is why the flood, the bible God is also said to be a super Jealous God

 

On one side of this question......
many of the Orthodox Jewish Rabbi's on the modern somewhat newly formed Jerusalem Sanhedrin......
would consider "Sanhedrin" appointed by Herod the Great........ to be aposTate from real Rabbinic Judaism?!

Do you know who
Ariel Coren Alloro is?


https://www.youtube.com/user/FacingEachOther

 

The Jews killed Jesus, no question. BUT if they hadn't, there would be no resurrection or Christianity. I'm guessing the Jews wish they had kept Jesus alive.

 

Actually.... .these Jews are unaware of what really happened during the week of The Passion......
and so are about 99% of Christians who have never had a near death experience..........

Page 137 to 170 of the book that is quoted here......
has the potential to forever alter the Jewish - Christian - Islamic formula for diplomatic relations.......




http://www.thomastwin.com/6 A Thomas background.html

 

If in 2,000 years Hitler only appears in a religious context without corroborating historical evidence and in stories that are clearly non-historical (making things up), then maybe. As it is, though, there's no comparison between Jesus and Hitler in this respect. Jesus is more comparable to Hercules, someone we generally accept as mythical today but who was quite real and historical in the minds of Greeks long ago.

 

Didn't the Jews just follow God's plan and help fulfill Jesus's destiny?

 

I've never heard of it before. The closest thing I'm aware of is a Sanhedrin text about a vaguely similar "Yeshu" being condemned and stoned to death.

 

Okay....so some guy who no one can prove even existed, gets crucified by someone which also is in question and we are supposed to blame someone?

 

My understanding is that the historical record shows either the order to execute was documented by Pontius Pilate, or the death itself, like other executions in Jerusalem, secondary to a Roman order were Its about as certain as any fact regarding this Jesus of Nazareth.

 

Can you find something substantive to share? It would be very intriguing to see.

 

In the Bible God still hates Esau. Please send him a memo to change his attitude.

 

Here's a link with the relevant information about the fairy tale. It's too long to post so you can link it at your convenience. Just scroll down to the section titled: "The Talmud — Five Deaths to Jesus"

http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/chapt03.html

By their own words they confess to killing a character named "Jesus" using five different methods. If they got the wrong one too bad, so sad. They should have verified his ID.

 

the name "jesus" never appears in the Talmud

 

IT IS GODS FAULT. HE ADMITTED IT.

God said he BLINDED THEM to the truth. To save them for his own purposes in the future.

- - - Updated - - -

JOSEPHUS is the only proof that there is any non biblical reference to Jesus.

- - - Updated - - -

Josephus on Jesus
The extant manuscripts of the writings of the 1st-century Romano-Jewish historian Flavius Josephus include references to Jesus and the origins of Christianity.[1][2] Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD (nearly 25 years after the first known Gospel, Mark, dated around 70 AD),[3][full citation needed][full citation needed] includes two references to the biblical Jesus Christ in Books 18 and 20 and a reference to John the Baptist in Book 18.[1][4]

Scholarly opinion varies on the total or partial authenticity of the reference in Book 18, Chapter 3, 3 of the Antiquities, a passage that states that Jesus the Messiah was a wise teacher who was crucified by Pilate, usually called the Testimonium Flavianum.[5][6][1] The general scholarly view is that while the Testimonium Flavianum is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus, which was then subject to Christian expansion/alteration.[6][7][8][9][10][11] Although the exact nature and extent of the Christian redaction remains unclear,[12] there is broad consensus as to what the original text of the Testimonium by Josephus would have looked like.[10]

Modern scholarship has largely acknowledged the authenticity of the reference in Book 20, Chapter 9, 1 of the Antiquities to "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James" [13] and considers it as having the highest level of authenticity among the references of Josephus to Christianity.[14][1][2][15][16][17]

Almost all modern scholars consider the reference in Book 18, Chapter 5, 2 of the Antiquities to the imprisonment and death of John the Baptist also to be authentic and not a Christian interpolation.[18][19][20]

The references found in Antiquities have no parallel texts in the other work by Josephus such as the Jewish War, written 20 years earlier, but some scholars have provided explanations for their absence.[21] A number of variations exist between the statements by Josephus regarding the deaths of James and John the Baptist and the New Testament accounts.[18][22] Scholars generally view these variations as indications that the Josephus passages are not interpolations, for a Christian interpolator would have made them correspond to the New Testament

 

And he was repeating what others had claimed, AND some Christian had obviously altered what he had written.

I'd love to see a Roman record that would support the gospel story in any way.

 

I will look but not tomorrow. Memorial service to attend and then work.