You have no problem finding evidence that Christians blame Jews for killing Jesus, because the Jews killed Jesus (and for that they will burn in Hell, where the flames never cease). How about evidence that early Jews rejected culpability in killing Jesus?
The Death of Jesus—Historical Certainties
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
You have no problem finding evidence that Christians blame Jews for killing Jesus, because the Jews killed Jesus (and for that they will burn in Hell, where the flames never cease). How about evidence that early Jews rejected culpability in killing Jesus?
Your anti-Semitism is noted. It seems to be ubiquitous in the Trump-loving rightwing.
Using the principles of historical scholarship, critical thinking, and human reason leads inevitably to the conclusion that Pontius Pilate ordered the execution of Jesus (as he had done many times before for perceived enemies of the Roman state), he would not have cared one whim about the religious or theological grievances some Jewish leaders may have had against Jesus, he was not a wimp who catered to the desires of Jewish leaders, the Roman soldiers carried out killed Jesus of Nazareth, and early Christian writers increasingly, progressively, and consistently tried to shift the blame away from the Romans and onto the Jews as time passed.
The Jewish leaders who may have wanted Jesus out of the way spoke for themselves, and themselves alone. They did not speak for Jewish people as a whole, they certainly do not speak for one hundred generations of Jewish people two thousand years later. Most importantly, only a virulent anti-Semite and militant Christian could possibly hold Jewish people in the 21st century accountable for historical acts that occurred two millenium ago.
If it took effort, I'd be proud of that fact. But, it just is, because Joos are villeins.
Yet, you can find zero historical evidence that the the Gospel accounts are false. As for your skeptical reasoning, if Pilate really weren't hesitate to execute people on bogus charges, he'd be totally corrupt and the Jews likely would have rebelled at his time, instead of decades later.
Jewish leaders? THE JEWS, not just the leaders. When the Bible says "the Jews" it means that vile spawn of Satan. When it says pharisees, sadducees, or scribes it means the jews, and not just the leaders. When it says Harad, it means the jewish leader. You might con the fucktards into thinking the word "jews" is code for "leaders", but they are stupid. If a God Damned Jew doesn't want to share the guilt of murdering Jesus, that Jew would repent of being a Jew.
"Anti-Semitism" is a complaint of ignorant antichrists.
I suggest counseling and medication, stat!
I will say this >>
You have been a good case study for how anti-Semitism is either becoming increasingly popular in the Trump-loving rightwing...or maybe it was there always and all along, and Trump has just made those anti-Semites comfortable expressing their bigotry in public.
I leave it to others to test my hypotheses.
Also, how many who claim to be Christians do not follow the teachings of Jesus. It’s why I ran from organized religion, so many phonies.
It is so true, and I totally get it.
I have met enough genuinely devout and ethical Christians to actually be repulsed by the phony Christians that tend to patrol obscure message boards.
My parents were the best example of true Christians, I don’t find people who share their values in church these days.
I can totally understand that.
I like the Jesus of the New Testament, but the phony Christians on message boards are a real insult to his message and his philosophy, in my opinion.
I attend Church only sporadically these days, and I appreciate it when I do, but I also believe there is much opportunity for spiritual growth and spiritual health outside churches or any formal religious institution.
Mason Melchizedek
Verified User
When people mix their politics with their religion,that's a problem.
You claim the Gospels (the accounts of Jesus) are frauds. Saying you like the Jesus of the New Testament (the one who damned Jews to Hell) while also saying the books are antisemitic frauds makes you a fraud. Most people who call themselves Christians know nothing about the Jesus of the New Testament. You probably do know more than most Christians about the Gospels, but you're a fraud.
Last edited:
Pure projection
That's a fcktard thing to say. I wonder if you could out fcktard yourself, like by saying philosophy and politics don't mix, or beverages and drinks don't mix. Those aren't good ideas, but you get the idea.
Mason Michaels
Verified User
You might be the dumbest motherfucker on the forum
Your mom has no complaints.
At least your mom doesn't care about my intelligence, or lack thereof. Or, did you mean Missy is the dumbest ... for saying that your beliefs shouldn't influence your politics?
Well Adolph, I happen to think the gospels are not innerrant and infallible and were never intended as strictly historical accounts. That is why, unlike you Adolph, I apply the principles of historical scholarship and critical reasoning. That way i can have more confidence than you about the actual events concerning the death of Jesus of Nazerath.
Mason Michaels
Verified User
I mean you shouldn't be allowed a plastic knife to cut the cheese
You also will not find a single quote from me saying that the Gospels of the New Testatment are utter frauds, Adloph.
The Gospels were written by people who lived many decades after the death of Jesus, and we cannot possible expect that accounts written decades after a historical event and by people who were not even eyewitness to constitute a inerrant, foolproof, and 100 percent history accurate account. The earliest canonical Gospel was probably around 60 AD, while John was probably in the last decade of the first century. The Gospels are based on an earlier oral tradition, and they cannot possibly be expected to be free of error, embellishment, or artistic license. The canonical Gospels themselves are not consistent with each other, and sometimes contradict each other - they cannot all be 100 percent true all at the same time if they are inconsistent with each other.
The bottom line here Blobb, is that you are a repulsive rightwing Anti-semite who uses the bible to promote a Nazi agenda. I am surprised you are so welcomes within the rightwing contingent here, rarely ever receiving the slightest admonishment from them.
Specifically, Joo, you claim the gospels are frauds, not merely the product of fallible men.
Fcktard, Joo, your confidence is in your own fcktard-imagination, and not the record of any recorded events.
You claim the Gospel's are frauds, lies to make Jews look bad. And, indeed, Jews look like the spawn of Satan in the Gospels. (And, indeed, to this days, Jews look like the spawn of Satan.)
Joo, you pull shit out of ass at worship it. Even if the final Gospels were written after 60 AD, that's still within the lifetime of witnesses. The Gospel of John is believed to have been written by the Apostle John. Am I to believe that he waited more than 30 years before he wrote about his own witness? The Gospel of Luke was written by a very educated man whose life began and ended within the lifetime of eyewitnesses. And, let's not forget all those God Damned spawn of Satan, the Jews, who were around to tell their versions of things, or to set the record straight, if the Christians were lying. Yeah, fcktard, those Jews who boasted of killing Jesus!
Now, Joo, you have nothing but shit to support your claim that the Gospels are antisemitic frauds. They're antisemitic truths.