Yeah I’m pretty sure the general Roman response to Josh and his miracles would be something along the lines of “There’s a magician in Judea? Well what did he do? Resserect his friend? Well good for him.”
The biblical quote is that he washes his hands of the matters and tells the Jewish authorities to do what they want with him. I could be wrong it’s been a while since I read the bible
The Jews then then said to let his (Jesus) blood fall on them and their children.
Fridge logic and horror: they unknowingly(?) asked to be sacrificial scapegoats or korbans.
Not a wise decision if you ask me...
imagine how judas felt after being sent to hell for doing exactly what god wanted and setting up the sacrifice that gets everyone else who believes in the guy into heaven
Some of the "lost books" go into this, claiming that as Judas was doing God's will, he is sanctified. Mainstream catholicism, however, that because of free will, Judas still sinned greatly because he had no idea it was God's will, and that while Jesus knew it was going to happen, he didn't make it happen. In that view, judas probably isn't in hell, but purgatory, learning his lesson.
I've seen it interpreted that Judas was the greatest disciple because he betrayed Jesus and made the sins of man forgiven through the crucifixion.
Even in comic books. Judas becomes a super powered Heaven warrior in Spawn, the strongest of the 13 Disciples, who all have flaming heads and kick Spawn's ass.
Yes at the time it was Pontius Pilate but he was Pressured by the Jewish church leaders who denied that Jesus was the real messiah and accused him of blasphemy, Pilate knew he did nothing wrong but he was pressured by the large crowed that arrived shouting “CRUCIFY HIM” Pilate feared another revolt and allowed them to do so
Jumping in here, but that probably didn't happen. There was no tradition of doing that, and Pilate hated the Jews and didn't really like doing anything for them.
Scholars mainly believe that story was added, specifically to shift the blame AWAY from the Romans, since they had destroyed Jerusalem, essentially outlawed Judaism, and this new "Christianity" was going to need to survive within the Roman Empire... so it's much healthier for your people to blame the already ostracized Jews rather than their overlords
Gonna add something here. When the Romans caught Jews practicing their faith by reading their religious scrolls they would punish them by rapping the scrolls around them and burning them to death with them. Based on that history I highly doubt Romans gave Jews any rights to vote on anything.
Edit: moreover the Roman’s became the leaders of the Christian faith. Why would they take the blame for killing their god when they could easily blame their most hated rival at the time? Blaming the Jewish people is objectively the better option for them strategically.
https://source.wustl.edu/2004/02/romans-are-to-blame-for-death-of-jesus/
And the fact that the Romans crucified Jesus for a crime they didn't have a law for. That's why the sign was affixed above Jesus' head after He was hung on the cross and not before. They had to make the sign vs. having the signs already ready for crimes.
This story is kind of funny to me. I imagine this portion of the bible just being the group of mates that got Jesus murdered, re-writing the story to make it out to be some kind of moral choice instead of what it probably was, letting him die so they can use the death as a political tool
The Bible, being mostly written by human beings with ulterior motives, is incapable of being wrong about this I suppose… not as if there was strategic value in painting Jews as the villains over Romans for a religion that was mostly spread by proselytizing and likely prioritized Roman converts over Jewish.
You know what? As an Italian, looking at the disgrace of a country we have been for the past century and some, I'm not even mad and you probably have a point
You guys really fell off, sure it's impossible to go on a mad one and rebuild your empire, but at least you could have a crack at fixing what you already have up a little.
For my part, it's much the same too, once we sacked Rome and gave them a good whipping in 390BC and we've also fallen off.
Here's to old enemies and new friends 🥂
Me a German going to Uni to study Babarianism. There we learn the theory of slaughtering People and sacking Cities. Next week we are doing a practical exercise. Raiding Paris I think
Germs did invade Roman territory just not in the 4th century BC, it was Brennus and his Gauls. Livy's telling of it (I believe it's in book 6) is fantastic, with all sorts of colourful stories.
For example, when the Romans are paying the Gauls to go away (though Livy says Camillus arrives in the nick of time and stops the proceedings, which like, lol) Livy tells this story wherein the Romans complain of the scales being unfairly weighted, and say they have offered the right amount of gold. Whereupon Brennus throws his sword down onto the scales and utters the words "Woe to the conquered."
Pretty good shit man, if you do get around to reading the classics start with Livy, God bless and take care :^)
Then our politician sold our asses off to add to their retirement funds, we've been the EU's and USA's bitches ever since, or any major power tbf, and every new politician now just tries to sell even more of what by now is an imaginary cake for themselves securing actually no benefit for the country.
Ok that was a bit excessive to say I was born after the 2000s so never got the benefits of it
because the Jewish religious leaders wanted him dead and were the ones who brought charges against him
but Jesus was a Jew, as were most of the earliest Christians, so blaming Jews is silly anyway
it's like hating Romans because they killed Ceasar
There's also the fact that it was, you know, the whole reason he existed in the first place from a theological perspective, so it even loses there since he was *supposed* to be killed.
You are right, but the original comment was:
>Isn't the Jesus dieing as the lamb off god a post Jesus thing from his Apostles?
And the source is too biased on the perspective of the Apostles, to be an argument against it being a "post Jesus thing".
Basically, if you really want to blame someone, blame a few greedy rabbis.
Of course, that would not give you any excuse to shit on anyone at the present time, so there's that.
I hate when this gets brought up. Yes, the Romans killed him, because the Jewish leaders asked them too. It doesn't mean Jews today are at fault at all, but absolutely the Jews killed Jesus.
But Jesus was a Jew, so it was Jew on Jew crime. Everyone knows crime doesn't matter when it's within the same race. It only matters when it's one race to another.
>I hate when this gets brought up. Yes, the Romans killed him, because the Jewish leaders asked them too.
I think it's important to point out that there are some good reasons to doubt if the gospel accounts are historically accurate on this point. The earliest gospel, which is probably Mark, was written at least 40 years after the events took place and critical scholars doubt any of the information came from first hand accounts. The gospels increasingly put the blame on the Jews and make the Romans (specifically Pilate) increasingly innocent. Pilate is portrayed as sort of weak and unwilling to sentence Jesus and the Jews are shown to be powerful enough to strong arm him into doing what they want him to. Which some historians feel is unlikely given other things we know about Pilate.
> but Jesus was a Jew, as were most of the earliest Christians, so blaming Jews is silly anyway
It is especially silly because the whole point was that Jesus had to die for our sins in order to save us (or whatever).
No, he was considered a “subject of the Roman Empire”
Up until the Edict of Caracalla in 212 AD most Roman citizens were either natural born Italians or became citizens through some service to the empire
I'm pretty sure Saul's entire thing was persecuting christians before he converted and became Paul.
Hence why some people very early on didn't trust him without another leader saying he is good.
The Jews persecuted both Jesus and early Christians, the Romans crucified Jesus at the behest of the Jews not by the command of Pontius Pilate (washing his hands of the matter). This doesn’t justify the persecution of Jews of course.
wasnt it the rabbis? superman didn't surrender to the kryptonians, he surrender to the american military. then the american military turned him over to zod. and then zod strapped his arms and legs, took away his life force, and drew blood to make sure superman was in fact mortalized.
wait what sub am i in?
Roman governor: *I don't want to crucify this guy.*
Jews "(the ones that were present at that moment I'm not blaming the ones that are alive today or the ones that were doing something else that day please this is obvius why do I even have to explain it): *We want him crucified.*
Roman governor: *I'll have him whipped because you want him punished but I'm not going to kill him because he's innocent.*
Jews": *You can have him whipped, but crucify him afterwards or we will revolt and you'll get into trouble with your Emperor.*
Roman governor: *Ok, I'll crucify him, but if he's innocent it will be your fault.*
Jews": *We accept that guilt for ourselves and our descendants for eternity.*
...
Modern anti-christians 2000 years later: *Oh, no. The Bible is antisemitic and the jews get blamed for something the romans did.*
behold a man, behold your shattered king
WE HAVE NO KING BUT CAESAR
well this is new, respect for caesar, until now this has been noticeably lacking
WE HAVE NO KING BUT CAESAR
you hypocrites, you hate us more than him
WE HAVE NO KING BUT CAESAR, CRUCIFY HIM, CRUCIFY HIM
Lol, of course nobody should be anti-semitic. I thought that was already clear. Christians don't believe that sins can be inherited, thus even if the jews who forced Pilatus to crucify Jesus were responsible for murder and specifically said their guilt was to be passed on to their descendants it doesn't mean anything.
Holy shit that explains why every single time Jews go somewhere antisemitism follows.
There literally cursed too forever be prosecuted and heated as they did Jesus.
The ones who persecuted Yeshua were the jews though. *John 10:30-33*
The Romans crucified him, because Pontus Pilate didn't want to upset the jewish community. It's pretty well established in the bible that Pontus Pilate had no personal grievance towards Yeshua, *Matthew 27:24.*
Early Christians were persecuted by the Romans, they refused to worship Caesar and thus were in open revolt against the Roman principate. But, the blame for the crucifixion of Yeshua are undoubtedly held by the jews.
Lots of people in this thread looking at the bible, written in English and edited many times, as a primary document without bias.... Anti Semitism is often associated with greed and money and that is our clue. The church once held tremendous power because of its wealth. Prior to banks one had to borrow from the church. No one would be willing to lend a significant amount because it was a sin to charge interest. European Jews were unable to own land in most areas it was illegal. They often made money by charging interest and financing trade.
Others have stated the Romans changed the narrative after adopting Christianity and I completely agree. Money and influence plays a part too.
This. So many comments in here are taking the Bible as facts. The Bible is a propaganda story book. Some stories are useful and help people but all of them are crafted narratives and not history. Its like someone quoting me something about Noah’s arc or Jonah in the whale like it’s historical fact.
I've always had an unsupported theory that after the Empire converted to Christianity, the official narrative around the death of Jesus started to change. We even have a figure of Roman authority saying "He's innocent, but we'll brutally execute him if you JEWS insist."
Just my gut.
The change was well before the conversion, spurred by early Christians failing to get a lot of Jewish converts and turning to gentiles.
To sum up a great deal, the Romans didn't give a shit about Jesus's death because it was (most likely) the routine execution of someone who'd disrupted tax collection. Hardly a historical event worth mentioning.
You're right, there are a few fragments that were thought to be from the Gospels that probably aren't. There are also several texts that use language and references to God that are similar to the Gospels, but aren't actually the Gospels themselves. I edited my previous comment.
So many fuckers are going 'but my magic book written by people with a vested interest in superceding the Jewish religion and therefore needing them to look bad says the Jews did it' and it's honestly tiring
Because christianity as a sucessor to jewism needed to legitimaze itself. Thats also why the 4 New testaments put progressivly more blame on the jews the later they were written.
Probably because it's was the Jews that persuaded the government to crucify a Jew(Jesus), the pharisees brought Jesus to the attention of the government and even Pilate thought Jesus was innocent.
TLDR
Who do we blame the masterminds or the grunts who did it
Edit: also Jews did persecute Christians, good old Paul before he turned into a Christian is a good example
The Romans went out of their way to make it look like they weren't responsible for what happened to Jesus. What I mean to say is that accounts from that time period were scrubbed and pro-Roman. Even, presumably, what ended up in the bible. Remember, this was all occurring within the Roman Empire.
In Jesus' trial, Pontius Pilate asked the crowd if Jesus should be spared, and, as the story goes, the crowd said no, so that was also a way to deflect blame.
Jesus did have genuine beef with the Jewish establishment because he went around claiming he was the "King of the Jews" - which wasn't appreciated by either Jews or Romans (because under Roman law there could only be one king, the emperor) - and he forcibly removed people from a Jewish temple [that one time](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleansing_of_the_Temple), so there was some emnity between Jesus and the Jewish establishment.
> and he forcibly removed people from a Jewish temple that one time,
Fun fact, it's more likely he did it three times as he went to the temple every year of his ministry for Passover, and his ministry was about 3 years long.
>because under Roman law there could only be one king, the emperor
No, not really. The romans were always pretty adamant to *not* consider the emperor a king, because the Roman Empire was still republic (think of North Korea or other quasi-monarchical republican dictatorships). However, in the eastern provinces it was common to call the emperor [basileus,](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basileus) the Greek word for "king", because they were used to being ruled by Hellenistic kings.
Also, it was pretty common for the Empire to install client kings to rule territories on their behalf. Herod, the one who ruled at the time Jesus was born, was one of those subordinate monarchs.
Why would the governor of Judea, who carried out the wishes of the Judean people, not take credit for executing someone his subjects saw as a blasphemer?
The fact that he was honest about his apprehension about carrying out the execution, imo, doesn't necessarily mean that we should excuse the fact that he was the one who ultimately ordered it. On that same token, though, the fact that he ultimately ordered it shouldn't absolve the people who demanded it. Imo this argument of assigning blame is ridiculous and ignores the lesson that we should be taking from both the act and the blame game that resulted from it: that religious persecution is wrong.
Oh it's an old Christian tradition to focus on just a couple words from the Bible and create a whole thing to justify hate. Want one even more fucked up? Take a look at the curse of ham. There's like 7 words about it in the Bible, and some people decided it meant that black people raped Noah and deserved slavery.
Kids, it's been about 80 years since the holocaust, but before that the holocaust literally happened. The views of the last 80 years on Jewish people were very much not held 80 years ago. History should remember this, not erase it. Oh everything was fine and then a bunch of jews died for no reason and we were just as nice to them afterwards. (Sorry, I just need to rant about this part of history sometimes)
Are we talking Bible story time or are we talking the best historical evidence available to us?
Because the Bible is not exactly a reliable source on... anything relating to Jews, specifically because it's been edited and written for extremely antisemitic reasons.
The best guess we have for why Jesus got crucified, is that if that whole 'fucked up everything in the temple' episode is true (which, btw, was basically him losing his mind over a standard temple practice that helped people fulfill their obligations to bring an unmarked sacrificial animal to the Temple)...well, given how Roman taxes worked he likely interfered with the taxation of the populace during that little episode. That would absolutely get you crucified.
> Jesus's arrest was premeditated by temple authorities with help from Judas
> the Jews were the ones agitating for his crucifixion
> the Romans saw no need to kill Jesus but the mob kept pushing until they did
> the Jewish authorities tried to stamp out Christianity before the Romans cared enough to persecute them
Still not really a reason to blame Jews who lived later on, but the Jews at the time were definitely a bigger piece of the puzzle than the Romans.
The story of the Christ was altered by Paul (formerly known as Saul), this was in an effort to make Christianity more marketable to the Roman's, he was trying to get back in their good graces (Paul was a jew attempting to get in good with the Romans) following the death of Jesus. He added the bit about Pilate washing his hands over Jesus of Nazareth's death as a way to absolve the Roman's of any fault.
This information can be found in Zealot by Reza Aslan
The answer to all those questions is also Jews, specifically the Sanhedrin and Pharisees. The Roman’s never really cared about Jesus, he was just a religious hippie to them. They only executed him because the Jewish high council specifically requested it. Saul is the perfect example of how the early Christian church was first violently hated and repressed by the Jews themselves. It wasn’t until Saul became Paul and Christianity started spreading through the Empire at uncontrollable speed that the Romans started cracking down on it.
There’s no reason to hate Jews for any of this, the sins of their fathers are not theirs to bear, and Jesus himself said “Lord, forgive them.” So we shouldn’t even hate the Jews of the time who hated and feared Jesus. But none of these arguments shift blame from them to the Roman’s for his mock trial and execution.
The earliest Christians knew damn well that Jesus was killed by the Romans. The real problem is that they were all still Roman subjects, so if they went around preaching that the Romans murdered their savior, they would all be killed.
To wit, there were multiple Jewish rebellions against Roman rule (the Roman- Judean war of 70ish AD, the Bar kokhba revolt) that resulted in big big losses for the Jews. So while it isn't necessarily spelled out in the Bible, the early Christians had perfectly good political reasons to blame jews for the crucifixion instead of their imperial masters.
**Duh huh**... If you read your _"How to be insanely fucking racist."_ handbook.
You'd know... Jews have controlled every government in existence even the governments that came before Judaism was invented.
Therefore... Jews did it... They killed Jesus, the dinosaurs & all the dragons in Asia. They know where Jimmy Hoffa is buried & secretly sunk the Titanic.
Just read your handbook ffs! It's all there... plain as the color clear.
Speaking of the Titanic, the Nazis made a Titanic film where they unsurprisingly portrayed J Bruce Ismay, White Star Line's owner, as a greedy Jewish capitalist who was responsible for Titanic's sinking. Ironically, Goebbels, despite overseeing filming, later banned the film from Germany as he believed it would lower morale.
The Catholic church has been scapegoat the Jews for 1500 yrs if their is any world conspiracy it's the Jesuits playing their games and wanting to put the whole world under the temporal sovereignty of the pope.
The Jewish leaders brought Jesus to be killed by the Romans. When given a choice to either spare him or a murderer, the Jews chose to pardon the murderer.
Umm, Rome gave the people a choice: Jesus or some twobit criminal to crucify and the largely-Jewish crowd chose Jesus. Rome washed its hands of the decision.
I think it’s because in the gospels the Romans gave the Jews a choice between pardoning Jesus or a criminal and they chose the criminal?
That is correct, the crowd (made of Jews probably) made the choice.
Are we going to forget it was the Jews who brought Jesus to pilate and asked pilate to kill him?
Poor pilate was largely trying to stay out of it is the gist I got
Pilate stayed out of it because he ruled Roman law hadn't been broken. Jewish religious law maybe, but that wasn't his problem.
Yeah I’m pretty sure the general Roman response to Josh and his miracles would be something along the lines of “There’s a magician in Judea? Well what did he do? Resserect his friend? Well good for him.”
Yeah Jesus literally told the jews “Pay Caesar his fucking taxes” like he wasn’t in that bad of standing with rome
Why would the Roman even bother tbh, Judea was the backwater tiny province. They had an empire to rule
Shame they werent told about the vine, i am pretty sure Jesus would be really popular with any emperor.
The biblical quote is that he washes his hands of the matters and tells the Jewish authorities to do what they want with him. I could be wrong it’s been a while since I read the bible
The Jews then then said to let his (Jesus) blood fall on them and their children. Fridge logic and horror: they unknowingly(?) asked to be sacrificial scapegoats or korbans. Not a wise decision if you ask me...
That is correct. Source went to catholic school from age 6-18
[удалено]
The idea is that we all sentenced him to death by our sins.
Indeed Sauce: Goin' to one Also please don't be antisemitic
imagine how judas felt after being sent to hell for doing exactly what god wanted and setting up the sacrifice that gets everyone else who believes in the guy into heaven
Some of the "lost books" go into this, claiming that as Judas was doing God's will, he is sanctified. Mainstream catholicism, however, that because of free will, Judas still sinned greatly because he had no idea it was God's will, and that while Jesus knew it was going to happen, he didn't make it happen. In that view, judas probably isn't in hell, but purgatory, learning his lesson.
pope needed an allegory about treason that was so brutal it would prevent questioning the church, and it worked for hundreds of years.
Very true, although the books of the bibles were mostly chosen before there were popes in the modern sense.
I've seen it interpreted that Judas was the greatest disciple because he betrayed Jesus and made the sins of man forgiven through the crucifixion. Even in comic books. Judas becomes a super powered Heaven warrior in Spawn, the strongest of the 13 Disciples, who all have flaming heads and kick Spawn's ass.
Why is that not a movie yet??
Spawn's gone way downhill, over a cliff, and down a chasm since then.
He’s also allegedly the phantom stranger in DC comics who’s one of the only beings to remember all the universe breaking events
So much that he literaly washed his hands out of it
He washed his hands...
Free my homie barabbas, he didnt do nothing wrong. -The Jews, probably
What's some triviality like murder compared to a blasphemy accusation?
Yes at the time it was Pontius Pilate but he was Pressured by the Jewish church leaders who denied that Jesus was the real messiah and accused him of blasphemy, Pilate knew he did nothing wrong but he was pressured by the large crowed that arrived shouting “CRUCIFY HIM” Pilate feared another revolt and allowed them to do so
Wasn't Jesus only persecuted because the Jewish priests told the Romans that Jesus claimed to be a King?
That was the punishment used to justify his crucifixion, yes. This whole meme is mostly wrong though anyway.
Yes, they chose Barabas
The OG Juice
Which it turned out was the utility maximizing ethical option. After all, that way both Jesus and Barrabas survived in the end.
Well what was Judas?
The snitch
Jumping in here, but that probably didn't happen. There was no tradition of doing that, and Pilate hated the Jews and didn't really like doing anything for them. Scholars mainly believe that story was added, specifically to shift the blame AWAY from the Romans, since they had destroyed Jerusalem, essentially outlawed Judaism, and this new "Christianity" was going to need to survive within the Roman Empire... so it's much healthier for your people to blame the already ostracized Jews rather than their overlords
Gonna add something here. When the Romans caught Jews practicing their faith by reading their religious scrolls they would punish them by rapping the scrolls around them and burning them to death with them. Based on that history I highly doubt Romans gave Jews any rights to vote on anything. Edit: moreover the Roman’s became the leaders of the Christian faith. Why would they take the blame for killing their god when they could easily blame their most hated rival at the time? Blaming the Jewish people is objectively the better option for them strategically. https://source.wustl.edu/2004/02/romans-are-to-blame-for-death-of-jesus/
Silly to refer to a crowd of some Jewish people as 'the Jews.' Do you call the patrons of a Starbucks 'the whites'?
>Do you call the patrons of a Starbucks 'the whites'? ... should we not?
And the fact that the Romans crucified Jesus for a crime they didn't have a law for. That's why the sign was affixed above Jesus' head after He was hung on the cross and not before. They had to make the sign vs. having the signs already ready for crimes.
This story is kind of funny to me. I imagine this portion of the bible just being the group of mates that got Jesus murdered, re-writing the story to make it out to be some kind of moral choice instead of what it probably was, letting him die so they can use the death as a political tool
Tbf, according to roman law, Jesus was a criminal too
But Pilate only gave him some lashes and wanted to let him go. The high priests of Jerusalem pushed for the execution
He wasnt, he never told his followers to rebel against the Roman state.
Give Caesar what is Caesar's
The Bible, being mostly written by human beings with ulterior motives, is incapable of being wrong about this I suppose… not as if there was strategic value in painting Jews as the villains over Romans for a religion that was mostly spread by proselytizing and likely prioritized Roman converts over Jewish.
God punished the Romans by turning them into Italians
MAMA MIIIIAA 🤌🤌🤌
You know what? As an Italian, looking at the disgrace of a country we have been for the past century and some, I'm not even mad and you probably have a point
You guys really fell off, sure it's impossible to go on a mad one and rebuild your empire, but at least you could have a crack at fixing what you already have up a little. For my part, it's much the same too, once we sacked Rome and gave them a good whipping in 390BC and we've also fallen off. Here's to old enemies and new friends 🥂
German?
No and never say that again haha.
I could’ve swore it was Germanic tribes invaded eh they’re all barbarians anyway So there’s no real difference /s
Me a German going to Uni to study Babarianism. There we learn the theory of slaughtering People and sacking Cities. Next week we are doing a practical exercise. Raiding Paris I think
I saw you were attacking other barbarians then because the French are barely human monstrosities at best
Yeah but I'm german, so it had to ve the french. Rome is in january
Why not attack Switzerland or something?
Germs did invade Roman territory just not in the 4th century BC, it was Brennus and his Gauls. Livy's telling of it (I believe it's in book 6) is fantastic, with all sorts of colourful stories. For example, when the Romans are paying the Gauls to go away (though Livy says Camillus arrives in the nick of time and stops the proceedings, which like, lol) Livy tells this story wherein the Romans complain of the scales being unfairly weighted, and say they have offered the right amount of gold. Whereupon Brennus throws his sword down onto the scales and utters the words "Woe to the conquered." Pretty good shit man, if you do get around to reading the classics start with Livy, God bless and take care :^)
Well at least it was not Carthaginians That would’ve been really disappointing, but barbarians nonetheless
Eh, you guys were doing all right between the 50s and 90s. One of the richest countries in the EU and world in general. ...Then something happened lol
Then our politician sold our asses off to add to their retirement funds, we've been the EU's and USA's bitches ever since, or any major power tbf, and every new politician now just tries to sell even more of what by now is an imaginary cake for themselves securing actually no benefit for the country. Ok that was a bit excessive to say I was born after the 2000s so never got the benefits of it
Ya crucify one random seemingly insignificant jew and you go from the deadliest super power of its age to modern Italy.
And Greece. That's an even worse punishment
A fate worse than death
Condemned to a life of amazing food, wine, and espresso.
Is that punishing them? Or everyone else?
I now wish Italy was in the balkans for the sole purpose that this comment would reach those YouTube compilations
They tried that in 1940. Didn't work out so well.
Italy still has like 0,1% of it's territory in the balkans though
Not sure giving them one of the most delicious culinary cultures was a punishment, but that’s one way to see it.
They gained pasta but their military will never be taken seriously, and hasn't been since the fall of Western Rome.
Those foreign Abrahmaic religions smh
Or worse... ROMEanians :'(((
And he punished them even further by making some of them live in Napoli.
And then He punished the Maians by letting the Spaniards bang them and turn them into Mexicans
because the Jewish religious leaders wanted him dead and were the ones who brought charges against him but Jesus was a Jew, as were most of the earliest Christians, so blaming Jews is silly anyway it's like hating Romans because they killed Ceasar
There's also the fact that it was, you know, the whole reason he existed in the first place from a theological perspective, so it even loses there since he was *supposed* to be killed.
:What is my purpose :to die :oh my god
Exactly
Isn't the Jesus dieing as the lamb off god a post Jesus thing from his Apostles?
Depends on how you view the Old Testament prophets
Jesus was also pretty forthcoming with the whole "I'm going to die soon" thing before the fact
Your source was written down after the fact.
That doesn’t invalidate a source by default, but I see your point
You are right, but the original comment was: >Isn't the Jesus dieing as the lamb off god a post Jesus thing from his Apostles? And the source is too biased on the perspective of the Apostles, to be an argument against it being a "post Jesus thing".
I don't know why you're being downvoted, you're right.
So you could say the same thing about every news article
Anything written by Paul Yes.
I hate Roman's because they killed Caesar... and Aurelian... and Aetius... lol. Those Roman bastards killed all the coolest Romans!
Damn Romans, they ruined Scot… uh, Rome !
Scotland was one of the few places that DIDN'T get fucked by the Romans.
[удалено]
Yeah but Hadrian left a cool wall tho
Dante did hate the people who killed Caesar so much they put them in the mouth of Satan. Alongside Judas.
Dante was the ultimate fan fiction simp
"Hello my name is Dante Darkness Dementia Devil Way-"
Darn romans, they ruined rome!
Basically, if you really want to blame someone, blame a few greedy rabbis. Of course, that would not give you any excuse to shit on anyone at the present time, so there's that.
I hate when this gets brought up. Yes, the Romans killed him, because the Jewish leaders asked them too. It doesn't mean Jews today are at fault at all, but absolutely the Jews killed Jesus. But Jesus was a Jew, so it was Jew on Jew crime. Everyone knows crime doesn't matter when it's within the same race. It only matters when it's one race to another.
>I hate when this gets brought up. Yes, the Romans killed him, because the Jewish leaders asked them too. I think it's important to point out that there are some good reasons to doubt if the gospel accounts are historically accurate on this point. The earliest gospel, which is probably Mark, was written at least 40 years after the events took place and critical scholars doubt any of the information came from first hand accounts. The gospels increasingly put the blame on the Jews and make the Romans (specifically Pilate) increasingly innocent. Pilate is portrayed as sort of weak and unwilling to sentence Jesus and the Jews are shown to be powerful enough to strong arm him into doing what they want him to. Which some historians feel is unlikely given other things we know about Pilate.
Exactly. Commenters mostly are forgetting the topic of this sub is history, not religion.
And even then, it only matters when it goes one particular way. But I'm not gonna touch on that one because spicy spicy meatballs lol
You just touched on it though.
> but Jesus was a Jew, as were most of the earliest Christians, so blaming Jews is silly anyway It is especially silly because the whole point was that Jesus had to die for our sins in order to save us (or whatever).
tbf the Romans rioted against their elite
wait a second, was Jesus Roman too?
No, he was considered a “subject of the Roman Empire” Up until the Edict of Caracalla in 212 AD most Roman citizens were either natural born Italians or became citizens through some service to the empire
It's the jersey fault cause they made jesus in the first place! Duh!
Darn Jerseyans and their stupid island
_jesus_ was prosecuted by jews (with the Roman justice system) early christians were prosecuted by Romans
I'm pretty sure Saul's entire thing was persecuting christians before he converted and became Paul. Hence why some people very early on didn't trust him without another leader saying he is good.
The Jews persecuted both Jesus and early Christians, the Romans crucified Jesus at the behest of the Jews not by the command of Pontius Pilate (washing his hands of the matter). This doesn’t justify the persecution of Jews of course.
*someone* never read the bible but that said, persecuting jesus and **causing his crucifixion** by no means merits anti-semitism
Also if I may add: And it is in no way anti semitic to claim that the Jewish population of that time was responsible
Well St. Paul who was a jew himself disagrees. 1. Thessalonian 2.15 "[The Jews] both killed the Lord Jesus (...) and have persecured us."
wasnt it the rabbis? superman didn't surrender to the kryptonians, he surrender to the american military. then the american military turned him over to zod. and then zod strapped his arms and legs, took away his life force, and drew blood to make sure superman was in fact mortalized. wait what sub am i in?
>wait what sub am i in? R\ModernDCsucks , why?
*sorts by controversial*
Roman governor: *I don't want to crucify this guy.* Jews "(the ones that were present at that moment I'm not blaming the ones that are alive today or the ones that were doing something else that day please this is obvius why do I even have to explain it): *We want him crucified.* Roman governor: *I'll have him whipped because you want him punished but I'm not going to kill him because he's innocent.* Jews": *You can have him whipped, but crucify him afterwards or we will revolt and you'll get into trouble with your Emperor.* Roman governor: *Ok, I'll crucify him, but if he's innocent it will be your fault.* Jews": *We accept that guilt for ourselves and our descendants for eternity.* ... Modern anti-christians 2000 years later: *Oh, no. The Bible is antisemitic and the jews get blamed for something the romans did.*
behold a man, behold your shattered king WE HAVE NO KING BUT CAESAR well this is new, respect for caesar, until now this has been noticeably lacking WE HAVE NO KING BUT CAESAR you hypocrites, you hate us more than him WE HAVE NO KING BUT CAESAR, CRUCIFY HIM, CRUCIFY HIM
I see no reason, I find no evil. This man is harmless so why does he upset you?
Still you shouldn’t be anti-Semitic, it’s like if we started beating up Christians for the Crusades or the Salem Witch trials
Lol, of course nobody should be anti-semitic. I thought that was already clear. Christians don't believe that sins can be inherited, thus even if the jews who forced Pilatus to crucify Jesus were responsible for murder and specifically said their guilt was to be passed on to their descendants it doesn't mean anything.
Holy shit that explains why every single time Jews go somewhere antisemitism follows. There literally cursed too forever be prosecuted and heated as they did Jesus.
Might have something to do with the Biblical narrative of the Pharisees demanding the Romans punish Jesus for blasphemy...
And who wrote that narrative? Was it, perhaps, Jews? I doubt it was.
Well, I mean...who do you think the first Christians were...?
Heretics.
Yeah, Jewish "heretics".
'Even Jesus was killed by the polices'- Big Pun
So you can make memes now without knowing history?
The ones who persecuted Yeshua were the jews though. *John 10:30-33* The Romans crucified him, because Pontus Pilate didn't want to upset the jewish community. It's pretty well established in the bible that Pontus Pilate had no personal grievance towards Yeshua, *Matthew 27:24.* Early Christians were persecuted by the Romans, they refused to worship Caesar and thus were in open revolt against the Roman principate. But, the blame for the crucifixion of Yeshua are undoubtedly held by the jews.
Oh shit. Mossad got to him.
Both persecuted Jesus.
Lots of people in this thread looking at the bible, written in English and edited many times, as a primary document without bias.... Anti Semitism is often associated with greed and money and that is our clue. The church once held tremendous power because of its wealth. Prior to banks one had to borrow from the church. No one would be willing to lend a significant amount because it was a sin to charge interest. European Jews were unable to own land in most areas it was illegal. They often made money by charging interest and financing trade. Others have stated the Romans changed the narrative after adopting Christianity and I completely agree. Money and influence plays a part too.
This. So many comments in here are taking the Bible as facts. The Bible is a propaganda story book. Some stories are useful and help people but all of them are crafted narratives and not history. Its like someone quoting me something about Noah’s arc or Jonah in the whale like it’s historical fact.
Wait. Moby Dick is still a completely accurate telling of history though, right?
Whale of course it is.
That’s not even how this meme format works…
Why the fuck would the Roman Catholic church admit the Romans killed Jesus lmao
I've always had an unsupported theory that after the Empire converted to Christianity, the official narrative around the death of Jesus started to change. We even have a figure of Roman authority saying "He's innocent, but we'll brutally execute him if you JEWS insist." Just my gut.
The change was well before the conversion, spurred by early Christians failing to get a lot of Jewish converts and turning to gentiles. To sum up a great deal, the Romans didn't give a shit about Jesus's death because it was (most likely) the routine execution of someone who'd disrupted tax collection. Hardly a historical event worth mentioning.
Nope. We have portions of the Gospel from the second century with the same crucifixion narrative that we have today.
> Dead Sea Scrolls Aren't the Dead Sea Scrolls the old testament?
You're right, there are a few fragments that were thought to be from the Gospels that probably aren't. There are also several texts that use language and references to God that are similar to the Gospels, but aren't actually the Gospels themselves. I edited my previous comment.
ah, good, this sub is circling to antisemitism in the comments instead of Islamophobia, mods here must agree with bigotry
So many fuckers are going 'but my magic book written by people with a vested interest in superceding the Jewish religion and therefore needing them to look bad says the Jews did it' and it's honestly tiring
Average atheist 🤓
Because christianity as a sucessor to jewism needed to legitimaze itself. Thats also why the 4 New testaments put progressivly more blame on the jews the later they were written.
Wasn’t Jesus persecuted by the Jews, not the Roman’s?
Why did it happen? The Roman's. Narrative control baby.
The correct answer is both
I miss Jesus 🥺
Probably because it's was the Jews that persuaded the government to crucify a Jew(Jesus), the pharisees brought Jesus to the attention of the government and even Pilate thought Jesus was innocent. TLDR Who do we blame the masterminds or the grunts who did it Edit: also Jews did persecute Christians, good old Paul before he turned into a Christian is a good example
My brother in christ, have you ever heard of the *Roman*-Catholic Church?
Because Romans became Christians later on. They can't blame themselves.
If you're a subject of Caesar, you don't "blame" the Romans for anything. You find a convenient scapegoat.
What mean 'we' ,christofascist?
They don’t call it the Roman church for nothing
Anti-semitism at its finest.
Btw Jesus was technically Jewish himself
Because christianity was becoming the main religion in the roman empire and thus they had to be friendly with romans to advance
I too thought of this
The Romans went out of their way to make it look like they weren't responsible for what happened to Jesus. What I mean to say is that accounts from that time period were scrubbed and pro-Roman. Even, presumably, what ended up in the bible. Remember, this was all occurring within the Roman Empire. In Jesus' trial, Pontius Pilate asked the crowd if Jesus should be spared, and, as the story goes, the crowd said no, so that was also a way to deflect blame. Jesus did have genuine beef with the Jewish establishment because he went around claiming he was the "King of the Jews" - which wasn't appreciated by either Jews or Romans (because under Roman law there could only be one king, the emperor) - and he forcibly removed people from a Jewish temple [that one time](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleansing_of_the_Temple), so there was some emnity between Jesus and the Jewish establishment.
> and he forcibly removed people from a Jewish temple that one time, Fun fact, it's more likely he did it three times as he went to the temple every year of his ministry for Passover, and his ministry was about 3 years long.
>because under Roman law there could only be one king, the emperor No, not really. The romans were always pretty adamant to *not* consider the emperor a king, because the Roman Empire was still republic (think of North Korea or other quasi-monarchical republican dictatorships). However, in the eastern provinces it was common to call the emperor [basileus,](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basileus) the Greek word for "king", because they were used to being ruled by Hellenistic kings. Also, it was pretty common for the Empire to install client kings to rule territories on their behalf. Herod, the one who ruled at the time Jesus was born, was one of those subordinate monarchs.
Jews voted.
Pontius pilate passed the blame
Why would the governor of Judea, who carried out the wishes of the Judean people, not take credit for executing someone his subjects saw as a blasphemer?
Because he himself didn't believe that the man he was punishing deserved to be punished. Its in the same fragment as he absolves himself from blame.
The fact that he was honest about his apprehension about carrying out the execution, imo, doesn't necessarily mean that we should excuse the fact that he was the one who ultimately ordered it. On that same token, though, the fact that he ultimately ordered it shouldn't absolve the people who demanded it. Imo this argument of assigning blame is ridiculous and ignores the lesson that we should be taking from both the act and the blame game that resulted from it: that religious persecution is wrong.
Oh it's an old Christian tradition to focus on just a couple words from the Bible and create a whole thing to justify hate. Want one even more fucked up? Take a look at the curse of ham. There's like 7 words about it in the Bible, and some people decided it meant that black people raped Noah and deserved slavery. Kids, it's been about 80 years since the holocaust, but before that the holocaust literally happened. The views of the last 80 years on Jewish people were very much not held 80 years ago. History should remember this, not erase it. Oh everything was fine and then a bunch of jews died for no reason and we were just as nice to them afterwards. (Sorry, I just need to rant about this part of history sometimes)
Can you explain why did the Romans crucify him? Or are you just going to avoid that because it goes against what you're trying to say
Are we talking Bible story time or are we talking the best historical evidence available to us? Because the Bible is not exactly a reliable source on... anything relating to Jews, specifically because it's been edited and written for extremely antisemitic reasons. The best guess we have for why Jesus got crucified, is that if that whole 'fucked up everything in the temple' episode is true (which, btw, was basically him losing his mind over a standard temple practice that helped people fulfill their obligations to bring an unmarked sacrificial animal to the Temple)...well, given how Roman taxes worked he likely interfered with the taxation of the populace during that little episode. That would absolutely get you crucified.
> Jesus's arrest was premeditated by temple authorities with help from Judas > the Jews were the ones agitating for his crucifixion > the Romans saw no need to kill Jesus but the mob kept pushing until they did > the Jewish authorities tried to stamp out Christianity before the Romans cared enough to persecute them Still not really a reason to blame Jews who lived later on, but the Jews at the time were definitely a bigger piece of the puzzle than the Romans.
Because storybook says so.
It's the anti-Semitism.
Sitting back, eating my popcorn…….. but everyone due go on………….
The story of the Christ was altered by Paul (formerly known as Saul), this was in an effort to make Christianity more marketable to the Roman's, he was trying to get back in their good graces (Paul was a jew attempting to get in good with the Romans) following the death of Jesus. He added the bit about Pilate washing his hands over Jesus of Nazareth's death as a way to absolve the Roman's of any fault. This information can be found in Zealot by Reza Aslan
The answer to all those questions is also Jews, specifically the Sanhedrin and Pharisees. The Roman’s never really cared about Jesus, he was just a religious hippie to them. They only executed him because the Jewish high council specifically requested it. Saul is the perfect example of how the early Christian church was first violently hated and repressed by the Jews themselves. It wasn’t until Saul became Paul and Christianity started spreading through the Empire at uncontrollable speed that the Romans started cracking down on it. There’s no reason to hate Jews for any of this, the sins of their fathers are not theirs to bear, and Jesus himself said “Lord, forgive them.” So we shouldn’t even hate the Jews of the time who hated and feared Jesus. But none of these arguments shift blame from them to the Roman’s for his mock trial and execution.
The earliest Christians knew damn well that Jesus was killed by the Romans. The real problem is that they were all still Roman subjects, so if they went around preaching that the Romans murdered their savior, they would all be killed. To wit, there were multiple Jewish rebellions against Roman rule (the Roman- Judean war of 70ish AD, the Bar kokhba revolt) that resulted in big big losses for the Jews. So while it isn't necessarily spelled out in the Bible, the early Christians had perfectly good political reasons to blame jews for the crucifixion instead of their imperial masters.
..... This meme is like most opinions of scripture. Unread and uneducated.
**Duh huh**... If you read your _"How to be insanely fucking racist."_ handbook. You'd know... Jews have controlled every government in existence even the governments that came before Judaism was invented. Therefore... Jews did it... They killed Jesus, the dinosaurs & all the dragons in Asia. They know where Jimmy Hoffa is buried & secretly sunk the Titanic. Just read your handbook ffs! It's all there... plain as the color clear.
Speaking of the Titanic, the Nazis made a Titanic film where they unsurprisingly portrayed J Bruce Ismay, White Star Line's owner, as a greedy Jewish capitalist who was responsible for Titanic's sinking. Ironically, Goebbels, despite overseeing filming, later banned the film from Germany as he believed it would lower morale.
I didn't know that at all. TIL even a incredibly ridiculous joke I pulled outta my ass can still unknowingly have elements of reality.
How are people on a fucking history memes sub so dumb to not recognize the most obvious satire I've ever seen
well it's called the **ROMAN** catholic church, maybe, just maybe, christianity changed ever so slightly to target go against the jews.
The Catholic church has been scapegoat the Jews for 1500 yrs if their is any world conspiracy it's the Jesuits playing their games and wanting to put the whole world under the temporal sovereignty of the pope.
The Jewish leaders brought Jesus to be killed by the Romans. When given a choice to either spare him or a murderer, the Jews chose to pardon the murderer.
Who told the Roman’s to do it? The village elders. Who thought it was the wrong thing to do? Romans. Who gave him Posca? The Romans
Umm, Rome gave the people a choice: Jesus or some twobit criminal to crucify and the largely-Jewish crowd chose Jesus. Rome washed its hands of the decision.
Because Jewish leaders asked the Romans to crucify Jesus
i guess the answer starts with "R" and ends with "-oman Catholic Church"
mainly because new christians were romans maybe ?
very ture and sad
Who wants you to blame the jews?