Who really killed Jesus?


prisonchaplain
 Share

Recommended Posts

Anti-Semites often insist that it is the Jews who killed Jesus.  Historically, Jews endured vicious acts by self-proclaimed Christians, because of the accusation.  A close look at one key gospel passage reveals an incredible irony:

 

Matthew 27:24-26:  24 When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in fron of the crowd.  "I am innocent of this man's blood," he said.  "It is your responsibility!"  25 All the people answered, "Let his blood be on us and on our children!" 26 Then he released Barrabbas to them.  But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified. (New International Version)

 

So again, anti-Semites focus on 25, where the crowd, largely Jewish in composition, proclaims that they and their children will take the blame.  Some Christians retort that, no matter what, it was the Romans that crucified him.

 

Yet verse 26 holds the answer--and incredible one.  The one who says he's innocent of Christ's blood.  The one who feigns objectivity.  The one who would blame the crowd.  It is Pilate who hands Jesus over to be crucified.

 

Could it be that the most dangerous enemies of Jesus are not the Jihadists or the atheists?  Rather, it is the those who are cool with Jesus.  The ones who find him A-OK.  The ones who respect him, but will not follow him.  Why?  They are the closest to us--yet will turn on us when the opposition comes.

 

Truly the prophet John called it right, when he recorded Jesus telling the Laodicean Church that the lukewarm would be spewed out like vomit.

 

Let us not use this teaching to judge others, but rather to allow the Holy Spirit to audit our own souls.  Are we too objective, too relaxed, too casual and friendly with Jesus?  Will we falter on the day of opposition?  Lord grant me the wisdom and anointing the embrace true devotion to Jesus, and to reject the psuedo nuetrality so beloved by our post-modern culture.

Edited by prisonchaplain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our Savior was illegally arrested and illegally tried by conspiring forces. While I agree that He gave himself up to His tormentors, it was the Jews (leaders of the church) who pushed for his execution and in their hypocrisy pawned the actual deed off to the Romans. I find it interesting what Christ personally told Pilate:

 

 

10 Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?

 11 Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I entirely agree that Jesus died for my sins.  He gave his life for me...willingly.  Nevertheless, it does not miss the point to ask questions about how the players resemble me?

 

1.  The Jews were the people of God.  Yet, most of them missed the Messiah.  I am part of God's church, yet how might I "miss Jesus?"

 

2.  The Romans were the power-holders.  As an American, my nation holds great power.  Nevertheless, Rome got used to execute Jesus.  How might my nation be used for purposes against Jesus?  When might I have to pause and say that my gifts, talents, position, and power are not helping the kingdom at all?

 

3.  And, as in my OP, Pilate was neutral.  I might have to ask myself if it's time to commit--to take a stand--to risk rejection by the mob, in order to side with Jesus.

 

The main point is the main point.  Jesus chose to die for us.  Still, there is much to be learned by studying what happens around that main point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I wrote a paper about this last year for a class. My professor at the time was Urban von Wahlde who is considered a leading American scholar on John and the Johannine community. So when I look at the question of "Who killed Jesus" especially with allegations of "It was 'the Jews'", I tend to look at it through the lens of the Gospel of John.

 

The Gospel of John went through three editorial stages by three separate authors in the Johannine community. The first edition refers to the Jewish leaders as the “Pharisees” and “Scribes” however, in the second edition the author uses the term “the Jews” in order to describe the Jewish religious leaders, not the Jewish people as a whole. The Gospel writer (of the second edition) uses the Greek word Ioudaios.

 

So when the Gospel of John refers to the Jews (Ioudaios) who opposed Christ, it is referring to the religious leaders, not the entire Jewish community. While the Gospel of John talks about the plot of the Jews to kill Christ, it is a very small and specific group the author is referring to. It is the religious leaders responsible.

 

Now, looking at the passage from Matthew, and I’m much less familiar with the Matthean tradition so I may be reading this wrong, the first two verses of chapter 27 reads: “When morning came, the chief priests and the elders of the people conferred together against Jesus in order to bring about his death. They bound him, led him away, and handed him over to Pilate the governor.” (NRSV)

 

The “they” that bound him and led him to Pilate were the chief priests (arciereis) and elders (presbuteroi). Now, in verse 25 that you quoted, it says that “all the people” called for Barabbas. Now, this is where my lack of knowledge of the Matthean tradition puts me at a disadvantage. In John, Ioudaios (the Jews) could to us bring about images of a large group of people, but in reality to the Johannine tradition and author it was just the religious leaders. In Matthew, the Greek says, pas ho laos translated “all the people”. We could take it to mean a large group of the Jewish community, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be that. It could be all the people who were present, and since there is no evidence provided by the author of Matthew that a large following went with the chief priests and elders to Pilate, all the people who were there could well be just the chief priests and elders, the religious leaders of John’s Gospel.

 

If I had more time on my hands, I’d try to find out the wording of the Marcan and Luke traditions, though I think they might agree with Matthew.

 

Now in all this I think it’s important to remember this: When Christ is being crucified in The Passion of the Christ, it is Mel Gibson’s hand that is hammering the nail. Why? Gibson wanted to symbolically show that he (and all of us) have a role in the crucifixion. That’s the important part we need to remember when discussing who crucified Christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to the op I don't think that the lukewarms are more a threat to themselves- they don't do enough to be effective tools for God, but at the same time they don't do enough wrong that God can be just in pulling out the whip and whipping them.

and I agree, it probably hands more power to those who strive against things godly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To both Andy and Blackmarch, if I were addressing the question of who has PRIMARY responsiblity, I would agree with Blackmarch, that it is I.  We.  Sinners, who access Christ's forgiveness.  He died for us.  I agree that neutrals may not foster or hatch anti-Christian pogroms.  On the other hand, they are the ones who, when pressured, will turn us over to those who would do such things.  Some of them reside in our wards/congregations.  Oh...and no, let's not go on witch hunts (or neutral ones)...my thoughts are meant for our Holy Spirit-directed self analysis--not as a means to judge/condemn others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

I entirely agree that Jesus died for my sins.  He gave his life for me...willingly.  Nevertheless, it does not miss the point to ask questions about how the players resemble me?

 

PC, I love this.  I wasn't quite clear where you were going with the first post (likely my own fault--I got distracted by my sorrow about what the Jewish people have suffered since that time).  This post made it all clear and relevant to me.  I think you make some really great points here--how do the players resemble me?  I love that.  I think this question could be well applied to other scripture stories as well.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not scriptural at all, but Khalil Gibran's "The Prophet" gives some wonderful insights into human nature.  One passage, "On Crime and Punishment" eloquently states:

 

Oftentimes have I heard you speak of one who commits a wrong as though he were not one of you, but a stranger unto you and an intruder upon your world.
But I say that even as the holy and the righteous cannot rise beyond the highest which is in each one of you,
So the wicked and the weak cannot fall lower than the lowest which is in you also.
And as a single leaf turns not yellow but with the silent knowledge of the whole tree,
So the wrong-doer cannot do wrong without the hidden will of you all.

 

We might consider the execution of Jesus as a confluence of individual and societal sins that created a momentum toward rejection of truth and vilification of an innocent one who challenged the status quo.  The momentum of Pilate's life was one that was formed from years of social climbing, internecine Roman political intrigues, greed, and lust for power.  When the time came for him to make the fateful decision, the die was already cast.  When the choice came between freeing an innocent man and having the Jews say "Thou art no friend of Caesar," it was too late for him to change.

 

Likewise, Annas and Caiaphas had lived their lives fending off messianic pretenders and movements, holding fast to the orthodoxy they were devoted to preserve.  A living prophet like John the Baptist and the Messianic claims of Jesus' followers ran contrary to their slavish devotion to scripture.  In the name of protecting and preserving the written word of God, they rejected the living Word of God. 

 

The revolutionaries and zealots had likewise set in motion violent events and they thirsted for revenge against Roman oppression.  They could not let it go when Jesus spoke of his peaceable kingdom.  All these things formed an avalanche-like motion downward that Satan used to turn them against Jesus.  Even though the Lord willingly sacrificed his life, it was the sins of the individuals and the lifelong surrender of their agency to Lucifer's influence that consummated the act of murder.

 

Similarly, we might ask "Who really killed Joseph Smith?"  Was it the mobbers?  Was it the apostates who hated Joseph?  Was it the self-righteous clergymen of other faiths who despised Mormonism?  Was it the hard-living frontiersmen and rabble who allowed themselves to be incited and prejudiced against the Prophet?  Was it because of Joseph's political views?  Was it because of the restoration of biblical polygamy?  Was it because Joseph defied the established orthodoxy of his time, as did Jesus?  In the end, it was all of these things.  The entire social and religious climate of the 19th century ran afoul of prophetic movements.  Two of those movements, Mormonism, and the Native American Ghost Dance movement ended up becoming the targets of state-authorized violence. 

 

It seems that, when society is steeped in sin, Satan uses that momentum towards darkness to try to snuff out the lights that appear in its midst. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share