Opinion Did ‘the Jews’ Kill Jesus? - As the Catechism says, 'the historical complexity of Jesus' trial is apparent in the Gospel accounts.'

  • ⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
L | A
By Trent Horn

On May 2, 2024, the House of Representatives passed the “Antisemitism Awareness Act,” partly in response to an uptick in antisemitic displays at U.S. college campuses in recent years. The act could help students file civil complaints if they feel they have been victims of antisemitic discrimination.

The Catholic Church condemns all unjust discrimination, and Pope Francis even said this past February that the Church “rejects every form of anti-Judaism and antisemitism, unequivocally condemning manifestations of hatred towards Jews and Judaism as a sin against God.”

Some critics are concerned that the bill’s definition of antisemitism, which is drawn from the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, is too broad and would make basic Catholic doctrine antisemitic. They focus on one part that says it is antisemitic to “[use] the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.” In response, they say that the Bible and many Church Fathers speak about “the Jews” killing Jesus.

So is it accurate to say “the Jews killed Jesus”? Is it antisemitic?

The Second Vatican Council taught that “the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ; still, what happened in his passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today” (Nostra Aetate 4). Some Catholics, however, argue that all the unconverted Jews in the time of Christ (thus exempting the Blessed Virgin and the apostles) were responsible for Jesus’ crucifixion. Some even claim that all unconverted Jews in history since the Crucifixion carry a unique guilt for Christ’s death that other sinners do not share.

It is obviously false that all non-Christian Jews at the time of Christ’s death were responsible for his crucifixion, for the simple reason that not all of them were consulted! Only a tiny portion of the Jewish population called for his death. Further, many Jews who did not formally become Christian still had a positive attitude toward Jesus and his movement (see Acts 2:47) and almost certainly would not have approved of Jesus’ death.

When it comes to later Jews being responsible, this idea comes from an interpretation of Matthew’s Gospel, which describes Pilate washing his hands, saying, “I am innocent of this righteous man’s blood; see to it yourselves.” Matthew then says the crowd answered, “His blood be on us and on our children!” (27:25).

What do we make of this “blood curse”? To start, the biblical text never says God honored it. Nor would such a curse, even if it was honored, apply to every future Jew, since nearly all of them are not descended from the small crowd present at Jesus’ sentencing.

In the second volume of his work Jesus of Nazareth, Pope Benedict XVI writes:
When in Matthew’s account the “whole people” say, “His blood be upon us and on our children” (27:25), the Christian will remember that Jesus’ blood speaks a different language from the blood of Abel (Heb. 12:24): it does not cry out for vengeance and punishment; it brings reconciliation. It is not poured out against anyone; it is poured out for many, for all. . . . Read in the light of faith, it means that we all stand in need of the purifying power of love which is his blood. These words are not a curse, but rather redemption, salvation (187).
For another interpretation, the crowd’s exclamation in Matthew 27:25 may refer to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 as being part of a divinely appointed punishment upon those who rejected Jesus. It was not uncommon in Israel’s history for future generations to be afflicted because of the sinful actions of Israel’s rulers, such as Solomon’s idolatry (1 Kings 11) being the catalyst for the division of the kingdom and the Jews’ subsequent exile into Babylon.

Historically, some Catholics, including through medieval regional councils and in papal documents, did argue that Jewish hardships throughout history represented a similar kind of punishment for Jewish involvement in the Crucifixion. However, these assertions did not rise to the level of definitive magisterial teaching. In fact, the sixteenth-century Catechism of the Council of Trent rejects the idea that Jews bear more guilt for Jesus’ crucifixion than non-Jews:
In this guilt are involved all those who fall frequently into sin; for, as our sins consigned Christ the Lord to the death of the cross, most certainly those who wallow in sin and iniquity crucify to themselves again the Son of God, as far as in them lies, and make a mockery of him.
This guilt seems more enormous in us than in the Jews, since according to the testimony of the same apostle: If they had known it, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory; while we, on the contrary, professing to know him, yet denying him by our actions, seem in some sort to lay violent hands on him.
But even if Jews throughout history are not uniquely responsible for the death of Jesus, what about “the Jews” of Jesus’ time?

The Catechism of the Council of Trent refers to “the Jews” killing Jesus, and several Scripture passages (John 5:18, Acts 10:39) use similar language. In 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15, St. Paul says, “For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus which are in Judea; for you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the Jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, and displease God and oppose all men.”

Paul’s phrase “the Jews” is a reference not to all Jews, but to a particular group of Jews in Palestine who were persecuting the Church. Other scholars have proposed that the Greek word Ioudaiōn in the New Testament can also be translated Judeans and that in some verses, this context makes more sense than the broader term “Jews.”

John 7:1 says, “After this Jesus went about in Galilee; he would not go about in Judea, because the Jews sought to kill him.” But there were plenty of Jews in Galilee, so what is meant in this passage is not “Jews”—i.e., non-Christian followers of Yahweh—but rather Judeans, and specifically the Jews loyal to political leadership in Jerusalem. This interpretation also makes sense of Paul’s exhortation to imitate the Christians in Judea who withstood persecution at the hands of the persecutors in that area, the Judeans (a role Paul once held before his conversion).

The Catechism also gives this insight into how we ought to understand Jewish responsibility for Christ’s death:
The historical complexity of Jesus’ trial is apparent in the Gospel accounts. The personal sin of the participants (Judas, the Sanhedrin, Pilate) is known to God alone. Hence we cannot lay responsibility for the trial on the Jews in Jerusalem as a whole, despite the outcry of a manipulated crowd and the global reproaches contained in the apostles’ calls to conversion after Pentecost. Jesus himself, in forgiving them on the cross, and Peter in following suit, both accept “the ignorance” of the Jews of Jerusalem and even of their leaders (597).
It is inaccurate to say, as some critical scholars might allege, that the Romans were completely responsible for Christ’s crucifixion. Scripture clearly teaches that some members of the Jewish leadership saw Jesus as being such a grave threat to the social order that he needed to be killed (John 11:50). However, as we saw in the teaching of the Second Vatican Council quoted earlier, this guilt cannot be laid upon all unconverted Jews at that time, and much less so on Jewish people throughout history. Indeed, we must remember humanity’s collective involvement, through our sins, in Christ’s death on the cross. This is why the Catechism states that
in her magisterial teaching of the Faith and in the witness of her saints, the Church has never forgotten that “sinners were the authors and the ministers of all the sufferings that the divine Redeemer endured.” Taking into account the fact that our sins affect Christ himself, the Church does not hesitate to impute to Christians the gravest responsibility for the torments inflicted upon Jesus, a responsibility with which they have all too often burdened the Jews alone (598).
 
Why the fuck do you need an article for this? Just read the various texts or literally watch any media about Jesus' death lmao. It was the Romans that Physically killed him, but the jewish religious leaders at the time played a big hand in his prosecution and execution. There's also the whole mob mentality shit that happened once he was in custody where a bunch of his followers went from hyping him up to a ridicuous level to going "YEAH KILL HIM!"

Basically what you can easily take from the shit that led up to the execution is the more shit changes in the world the more equally retarded it can get no matter the era.
 
Xtianity is so retarded. What a waste of time and resources. Arguing over this nonsense for centuries. Imagine paying faggot nerd monks who are too afraid to talk to women for hundreds of years to hide out in mountains and spend all day arguing about fairy tales and writing letters back and forth. All for the privilege of being threatened with eternal torture if you don't worship the foreskin slurping jew god correctly.
 
Xtianity is so retarded. What a waste of time and resources. Arguing over this nonsense for centuries. Imagine paying faggot nerd monks who are too afraid to talk to women for hundreds of years to hide out in mountains and spend all day arguing about fairy tales and writing letters back and forth. All for the privilege of being threatened with eternal torture if you don't worship the foreskin slurping jew god correctly.
Found the fedora tipper :neckbeard:
 
Xtianity is so retarded. What a waste of time and resources. Arguing over this nonsense for centuries. Imagine paying faggot nerd monks who are too afraid to talk to women for hundreds of years to hide out in mountains and spend all day arguing about fairy tales and writing letters back and forth. All for the privilege of being threatened with eternal torture if you don't worship the foreskin slurping jew god correctly.
Jesus loves you.
 
I never understood how people justify "the Jews did it" when Jesus was killed by Roman hands under Roman law.
He was killed by Roman hands under Roman law because the Pharisees kept shitting a brick about him and kept threatening civil disorder unless the Romans put a stop to it.
From the Roman perspective, this was all stereotypical Jewish infighting and they killed the guy making Jewish leaders throw a tantrum at them in the hopes it'd shut them up and restore order.

I think "Jews did it" is reductive and unhelpful, but it's not completely wrong and the bill is written broadly enough that even what I said above would count as anti-semitic.
 
I never understood how people justify "the Jews did it" when Jesus was killed by Roman hands under Roman law.
I mean, if you don't understand that, you probably just didn't read the text.
Pontius Pilate literally said that he didn't find guilt, and told them to judge them by *their* laws. The romans executed him, but it was the pharisaic elders that pushed for it, and they obliged because they didn't really give a shit and wanted peace and quiet.

It is worth stating that Pilate also sent him to the Vassal-King Herodes Antipas beforehand, and he didn't really care that much either.
 
Yes.
The answer is yes. God Himself ascribed blame to them for it, the same way you get charged for homicide if you call a swatting on someone and they die. Anything else is just cope because Jews realized nu-conservatives stopped watching TV long enough to read their Bible.
 
So, only give Jews credit for things like funding the Revolutionary War and their role in the Civil Rights Movement, but not having a hand in Jesus' crucifixion.
 
My biggest issue with "the Jews killed Christ" is the same issue I have with "Judas is the most evil person ever" - it was all predetermined, as Jesus liked to point out at every possible opportunity, even when it was inappropriate and he was freaking out his mum. Jesus needed the Jews to turn on him or else he couldn't die for our sins, and I always got the impression the people had no choice but to turn on him. The power of Christ compelled them.
 
Xtianity is so retarded. What a waste of time and resources. Arguing over this nonsense for centuries. Imagine paying faggot nerd monks who are too afraid to talk to women for hundreds of years to hide out in mountains and spend all day arguing about fairy tales and writing letters back and forth. All for the privilege of being threatened with eternal torture if you don't worship the foreskin slurping jew god correctly.
euphoric post
 
Wasn't his death necessary to absolve everyone from their sins?
Have you thanked the jewish religious leaders for prosecuting him, Judas for betraying him and the romans for executing him today already?
 
My biggest issue with "the Jews killed Christ" is the same issue I have with "Judas is the most evil person ever" - it was all predetermined
Suppose a person X takes a stroll through the ghetto and gets stabbed. Is the person who stabbed him considered innocent because person X should of known better than to take a walk in nigger town?
 
Wasn't his death necessary to absolve everyone from their sins?
Have you thanked the jewish religious leaders for prosecuting him, Judas for betraying him and the romans for executing him today already?
Of course it was necessary, due to the whole "living in a world tainted by sin" and all that. But that still doesn't absolve them, and if they didn't kill Him, they would have shown that man can restrain and overcome his sins sin on his own. That's obviously impossible, but were that to happen, that's my takeaway from it
 
I never understood how people justify "the Jews did it" when Jesus was killed by Roman hands under Roman law.
Pontius Pilate felt that Jesus did not deserve crucifixion. He gave the Jews a choice: to crucify a murderer (Brabbas) or to crucify Jesus. The Jews demanded that Jesus be crucified and that Brabbas be freed. That is why they are responsible. They were adamant about killing Jesus even though he did nothing wrong because he was a threat to the Jewish institutions that existed.

Luke 23:18-25

And they cried out all at once, saying, Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas: (who for a certain sedition made in the city, and for murder, was cast into prison.) Pilate therefore, willing to release Jesus, spake again to them. But they cried, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. And he said unto them the third time, Why, what evil hath he done? I have found no cause of death in him: I will therefore chastise him, and let him go. And they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be crucified. And the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed. And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required. And he released unto them him that for sedition and murder was cast into prison, whom they had desired; but he delivered Jesus to their will.
 
I never understood how people justify "the Jews did it" when Jesus was killed by Roman hands under Roman law.
It’s like how David had Uriah killed by deliberately placing him in a situation where he’d be killed. The Jews demanded Pilate do it and threatened him with a riot that would likely lead to Pilate’s own recall and execution in Rome. Pilate was weak, but the Jewish authority had checkmate.
 
Back
Top Bottom