|
|
Subscribe to RSS
Christ's crucifixion: a double antisemitic whammy?
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Comments: 6
Comments: 6
Lying awake at night in my cell, my mind often ponders the fate of those who have had a cross to bear. I recognize that I am not alone. Others too have suffered.
I have, of course, also have had plenty of time for reading.
Martin Goodman in his scholarly and magisterial book, " Rome and Jerusalem" writes: "But more crucially in the development of antisemitism, to gain credibility in the Roman world after 70 Christians needed to deny their own Jewishness altogether. It would have been quite possible for early Christians to have maintained a view of Judaism as another, older, relationship with God. But if Christians were to maintain their own good name and seek converts in a Roman world in which, after 70, the name of the Jews excited opprobrium, it was easier to join in the attack and agree with the pagans that the defeat of the Jews and the destruction of the Temple were to be celebrated as the will of God. Some Christians, like Augustine, made the even stronger claim that the miserable state of the Jews was testimony to the truth preached by the Church, and that it was necessary to preserve Jews in subjection, in order that observation of their parlous condition might strengthen the faithful. For Christians, as for pagan Romans, it was unthinkable for nearly two millennia, until 1948, to allow a Jewish state to rise again.
Of course the antagonism to Judaism found in many Christian writings of the second century was given a theological gloss. The Jews were those who had rejected Christ and suffered accordingly; in a more extreme form, the Jews were those who had killed him. The accusation is too familiar to readily appreciate how bizarre it is. According to the Gospels themselves, Jesus gained many Jewish followers in Jerusalem, as did his disciples after the crucifixion. It was no more (or less) true that "the Jews rejected Christ" than it was true that the other inhabitants of the Mediterranean world rejected the missionaries who came to them; in all such places, some were persuaded, others were not.
Nor was it true that the Jews as a whole had killed Jesus... What is certain is that the order to execute Jesus was given ultimately by Pontius Pilate as Roman governor but that, when he washed his hands of responsibility, he succeeded in eventually whitewashing for later Christians not just himself but the Roman imperial regime as a whole....
The Gospel of John recounts a conversation that "the Jews" had with Pontius Pilate before the death of Jesus; when he told them to judge Jesus "according to your law", they stated "it is not lawful for us to put any man to death" It is possible that the restriction on Jewish use of the death penalty applied only at the specific time of year when Jesus' trial took place, since it coincided with the pilgrim festival of the Passover."
Like me, Jesus was a Jew. And above his crucifix, the Romans sneeringly wrote "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews". He was not executed as a Christian. He was executed as a Jew.
And of course, for ever and a day, the Jewish people have been blamed for his crucifixion.
A double antisemitic whammy. Just like the epithet "Nazi Israelis". One might conclude that nothing much has changed.
I have, of course, also have had plenty of time for reading.
Martin Goodman in his scholarly and magisterial book, " Rome and Jerusalem" writes: "But more crucially in the development of antisemitism, to gain credibility in the Roman world after 70 Christians needed to deny their own Jewishness altogether. It would have been quite possible for early Christians to have maintained a view of Judaism as another, older, relationship with God. But if Christians were to maintain their own good name and seek converts in a Roman world in which, after 70, the name of the Jews excited opprobrium, it was easier to join in the attack and agree with the pagans that the defeat of the Jews and the destruction of the Temple were to be celebrated as the will of God. Some Christians, like Augustine, made the even stronger claim that the miserable state of the Jews was testimony to the truth preached by the Church, and that it was necessary to preserve Jews in subjection, in order that observation of their parlous condition might strengthen the faithful. For Christians, as for pagan Romans, it was unthinkable for nearly two millennia, until 1948, to allow a Jewish state to rise again.
Of course the antagonism to Judaism found in many Christian writings of the second century was given a theological gloss. The Jews were those who had rejected Christ and suffered accordingly; in a more extreme form, the Jews were those who had killed him. The accusation is too familiar to readily appreciate how bizarre it is. According to the Gospels themselves, Jesus gained many Jewish followers in Jerusalem, as did his disciples after the crucifixion. It was no more (or less) true that "the Jews rejected Christ" than it was true that the other inhabitants of the Mediterranean world rejected the missionaries who came to them; in all such places, some were persuaded, others were not.
Nor was it true that the Jews as a whole had killed Jesus... What is certain is that the order to execute Jesus was given ultimately by Pontius Pilate as Roman governor but that, when he washed his hands of responsibility, he succeeded in eventually whitewashing for later Christians not just himself but the Roman imperial regime as a whole....
The Gospel of John recounts a conversation that "the Jews" had with Pontius Pilate before the death of Jesus; when he told them to judge Jesus "according to your law", they stated "it is not lawful for us to put any man to death" It is possible that the restriction on Jewish use of the death penalty applied only at the specific time of year when Jesus' trial took place, since it coincided with the pilgrim festival of the Passover."
Like me, Jesus was a Jew. And above his crucifix, the Romans sneeringly wrote "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews". He was not executed as a Christian. He was executed as a Jew.
And of course, for ever and a day, the Jewish people have been blamed for his crucifixion.
A double antisemitic whammy. Just like the epithet "Nazi Israelis". One might conclude that nothing much has changed.
5686 Gerrit Retief
[ Friday, January 29, 2010 | 10:39:27 AM ]
Who actually crucified him is of lesser importance than the idea that he had arisen from the grave. There is fascinating evidence that a prophet from Israel was spirited away to Kasmir at the time of the crucifixion and that this prophet was revered as being sent by Allah. His tomb is situated in Srinagar for all to see...I have the references if anybody's interested
5629 Gerry P
[ Monday, January 25, 2010 | 4:59:15 PM ]
Does the theistic opinions and definitions matter? At the end of the day, all religions are all about political power.
5626 Lyndall Beddy
[ Monday, January 25, 2010 | 11:41:50 AM ]
Christianity, which was non sexist and communal, was corrupted by the Romans to a system on the basis of their own society with a Caesar (Pope), Generals (Bishops) etc and almost all other versions were persecuted - which Dan Browne did get right in the Da Vinci Code
Jesus Christ was a Jew, said he was a Jew, and his disciples were Jews. Only AFTER his death was the vision sent to Peter that the message must also go to the gentiles, not only to the Jews
Jesus Christ was a Jew, said he was a Jew, and his disciples were Jews. Only AFTER his death was the vision sent to Peter that the message must also go to the gentiles, not only to the Jews
5624 Bernie Madoff
[ Monday, January 25, 2010 | 5:57:13 AM ]
In the Gospel of John (19:19-20), the inscription is explained:
"And Pontius Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS. This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin." (King James Version)
"And Pontius Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS. This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin." (King James Version)
5623 Bernie Madoff
[ Monday, January 25, 2010 | 5:50:25 AM ]
Jewish virtual library:
"Christianity's only hope for gaining legitimacy was to "prove" to Rome that its crucifixion of Jesus had been a terrible error, and had only come about because the Jews forced Pilate to do it. Thus, the New Testament depicts Pilate as wishing to spare Jesus from punishment, only to be stymied by a large Jewish mob yelling, "Crucify him." The account ignores one simple fact. Pilate's power in Judea was absolute. Had he wanted to absolve Jesus, he would have done so: He certainly would not have allowed a mob of Jews, whom he detested, to force him into killing someone whom he admired."
"Christianity's only hope for gaining legitimacy was to "prove" to Rome that its crucifixion of Jesus had been a terrible error, and had only come about because the Jews forced Pilate to do it. Thus, the New Testament depicts Pilate as wishing to spare Jesus from punishment, only to be stymied by a large Jewish mob yelling, "Crucify him." The account ignores one simple fact. Pilate's power in Judea was absolute. Had he wanted to absolve Jesus, he would have done so: He certainly would not have allowed a mob of Jews, whom he detested, to force him into killing someone whom he admired."
5622 Bernie Madoff
[ Monday, January 25, 2010 | 5:44:35 AM ]
The following is from the Jewish virtual library:
"Crucifixion itself, a Roman form of execution, was forbidden by Jewish law because it was torture. Some 50,000 to 100,000 Jews were themselves crucified by the Romans in the first century. How ironic, therefore, that Jews have historically been associated with the cross as the ones who brought about Jesus' crucifixion."
"Crucifixion itself, a Roman form of execution, was forbidden by Jewish law because it was torture. Some 50,000 to 100,000 Jews were themselves crucified by the Romans in the first century. How ironic, therefore, that Jews have historically been associated with the cross as the ones who brought about Jesus' crucifixion."
| Previous Articles |