Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Rick Sumner · 08-10-2003, 10:59 PM

[QUOTE]In other words, how can any depiction (no matter how gross) of the death of Christ be essentially anti-Semitic? Not to me anyway. I consider it more anti-Roman than anything. Didn't the Romans invent crucifixion? Didn't Pontius Pilate have the final say?[QUOTE]

Pilate would have had the final say. Romans didn't invent crucifixion. I believe that was the Persians, but don't quote me on it. Herodotus certainly discusses it in Books I, II, and III of his History, in which he notes that Darius had some three-thousand Babylonians crucified.

Regards,
Rick

08-11-2003, 03:07 AM

Greetings,

here is a compilation of some early references to crucifixion :

http://members.iinet.net.au/~quentin...her-Cross.html

Iasion

godfry n. glad · 08-11-2003, 07:57 AM

No, no, no.... It's Colonel Mustard in the Library with a lead pipe.

trillian · 08-11-2003, 11:04 AM

I don't see why talking (or making a movie) about a historical "possibility" is sooo offensive to a jewish population today.

I mean, we can talk about who is responsible for the Inquisition, slavery, and the holocaust without Christians, southerners, and Germans getting all upset about it. People aren't responsible for the "sins of the father". Those people are dead long long ago and those actions do not apply to the people of today.

It may not have been the fault of the jews, but what does it really matter anyway?

Sad thing is, the neo-nazi punks will probably get some mileage out of a movie that places blame on the jews.

trillian

Diabolical Vengeance · 08-11-2003, 05:02 PM

I see a certain, slight, validity to the belief that jews are responsible, if you believe that jesus pissed off the jewish establishment (which he did) and they somehow conspired with the romans to crucify him then yes. however i see no logical reason for the romans to crucify a jewish heretic unless he was causing them problems, in which case what the problems jesus were causing to the romans are the impetuous for his execution, not some pissed off rahbbis. to the romans, the jews were just another people they had conquered and couldn't care less who was stirring up trouble so long as he wasn't causing them any grief. Another reason could be that he was betrated by judas who was jewish (like jesus) and therefore led him to this death. all this strikes me as bullocks however as jesus was imprisoned, judged and condemned b y romans, not jews.

and i should point out the only thing more hypocritically absurd than an antisemitc jew is an antisemitic christian. without judaism there wouldn't be christianity/catholicism (i'm not implying that wouldn't be a good thing

)

Vorkosigan · 08-12-2003, 08:12 PM

From Iason's site

Quote:

Inaros, the Libyan king, the sole author of the Egyptian revolt, was betrayed, taken, and crucified.

Possible historical parallel?

Peter Kirby · 08-12-2003, 08:31 PM

Maybe. How can we track down the full text? Always the first step in examining parallels.

best,
Peter Kirby

Jack · 08-18-2003, 11:45 PM

Who cares about Gibson's flm? The characters speak Aramaic and Latin with no subtitles. For the 15 people who pay to see the thing, it matters. For the rest of the world, it does not.

edited for spelling

Jack

08-10-2003, 10:59 PM	#11
Rick Sumner Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada Posts: 2,612	Re: Let's cut to the chase on Gibson's film. [QUOTE]In other words, how can any depiction (no matter how gross) of the death of Christ be essentially anti-Semitic? Not to me anyway. I consider it more anti-Roman than anything. Didn't the Romans invent crucifixion? Didn't Pontius Pilate have the final say?[QUOTE] Pilate would have had the final say. Romans didn't invent crucifixion. I believe that was the Persians, but don't quote me on it. Herodotus certainly discusses it in Books I, II, and III of his History, in which he notes that Darius had some three-thousand Babylonians crucified. Regards, Rick

08-11-2003, 03:07 AM	#12
Iasion Guest Posts: n/a	references to crucifixion Greetings, here is a compilation of some early references to crucifixion : http://members.iinet.net.au/~quentin...her-Cross.html Iasion

08-18-2003, 11:45 PM	#18
Jack Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Anaheim, CA, USA Posts: 126	Re: Let's cut to the chase on Gibson's film. Who cares about Gibson's flm? The characters speak Aramaic and Latin with no subtitles. For the 15 people who pay to see the thing, it matters. For the rest of the world, it does not. edited for spelling Jack

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-11-2003, 07:57 AM	#13
godfry n. glad Banned Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: portland, oregon, usa Posts: 1,190	No, no, no.... It's Colonel Mustard in the Library with a lead pipe.

08-11-2003, 11:04 AM	#14
trillian Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: OC Posts: 1,620	I don't see why talking (or making a movie) about a historical "possibility" is sooo offensive to a jewish population today. I mean, we can talk about who is responsible for the Inquisition, slavery, and the holocaust without Christians, southerners, and Germans getting all upset about it. People aren't responsible for the "sins of the father". Those people are dead long long ago and those actions do not apply to the people of today. It may not have been the fault of the jews, but what does it really matter anyway? Sad thing is, the neo-nazi punks will probably get some mileage out of a movie that places blame on the jews. trillian

08-11-2003, 05:02 PM	#15
Diabolical Vengeance Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: No longer Great Britain Posts: 447	I see a certain, slight, validity to the belief that jews are responsible, if you believe that jesus pissed off the jewish establishment (which he did) and they somehow conspired with the romans to crucify him then yes. however i see no logical reason for the romans to crucify a jewish heretic unless he was causing them problems, in which case what the problems jesus were causing to the romans are the impetuous for his execution, not some pissed off rahbbis. to the romans, the jews were just another people they had conquered and couldn't care less who was stirring up trouble so long as he wasn't causing them any grief. Another reason could be that he was betrated by judas who was jewish (like jesus) and therefore led him to this death. all this strikes me as bullocks however as jesus was imprisoned, judged and condemned b y romans, not jews. and i should point out the only thing more hypocritically absurd than an antisemitc jew is an antisemitic christian. without judaism there wouldn't be christianity/catholicism (i'm not implying that wouldn't be a good thing )

08-12-2003, 08:31 PM	#17
Peter Kirby Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor Posts: 4,035	Maybe. How can we track down the full text? Always the first step in examining parallels. best, Peter Kirby

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.