Freethought & Rationalism Archive

gregor · 02-26-2004, 12:34 PM

My sense is that Gibson went much further than the gospels allow (although I admit I obtained this information from a newspaper report, rather than first hand watching the film).

Gibson includes at least two separate scenes clearly not mentioned in the gospels (the separate beating Jesus before the lashing reported in the gospels and throwing jesus off a bridge) and one event that couldn't occur - carrying the verticle piece of the cross.

Cleopatra · 02-26-2004, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SLD
In another list serv I have argued that it is not Mel Gibson who is anti-semitic so much as it is the Gospels themselves.

Of course the Christians are now after me for saying something so religiously incorrect.

However, IIRC, the liberal interpretation of the Gospels as not anti-semitic is a fairly new one and that Christianity, through out its history has been gleefully interpreted in such anti-Semitism. But does anyone have any specific historical quotes, or articles to back this claim up?

SLD

Apart from the two evangelical passages there are the eight homilies of Saint John the Chrysostome who wrote them in the 4th ce A.D.

The Catholic Encyclopedia gives the exact reference :"Against the Jews" (II, 843-942), I have to look up my TLG system if I find where the CD rom is right now.Argh!

But Goldhagen quotes some passages, to get an idea I copy a couple of lines but it's better to trace the exact references.

Quote:

" When Christ-killers gather, the Cross is ridiculed, God blasphemed, the father un-aknowledged, the son insulted, the grace of the spirit rejected. If the Jewish rites are holy and venerable, our way of life must e wrong...

etc.

Of course if you search the speeches of episkopes, priests etc of the Middle Ages you will come up with many gems.

Toto · 02-26-2004, 01:44 PM

There is a book by Gerd L�demann on this subject.

The Unholy in Holy Scripture: The Dark Side of the Bible

(I would take the negative reviews with a grain of salt.)

Cleopatra · 02-26-2004, 01:55 PM

To be fair though I think that while talking about Christian antisemitism it is essential to point out why Jews were depicted like that in the Christian skripts.

A reference to the Greco-Roman target group that the Christian managers have set is necessary, in my opinion.

blt to go · 02-26-2004, 01:58 PM

Quote:

In another list serv I have argued that it is not Mel Gibson who is anti-semitic so much as it is the Gospels themselves.

I believe the previous posters have provided articles that demonstrate Christians themselves were (unfortunately) anti-semitic, and even perhaps from early on.

However, this quote intrigues me. You are claiming the Gospels (and from that I would interpret as Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) are anti-semitic.

Do you have any chapter or verse to support that claim?

SLD · 02-26-2004, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by blt to go
I believe the previous posters have provided articles that demonstrate Christians themselves were (unfortunately) anti-semitic, and even perhaps from early on.

However, this quote intrigues me. You are claiming the Gospels (and from that I would interpret as Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) are anti-semitic.

Do you have any chapter or verse to support that claim?

The point is not merely that Christians, from an early period were antisemitic, but that they justified their antisemitism from the New Testament. The Jews were Christ Killers. They are still called that by antisemites. I doubt you need much in the way of quotes from the Gospels to understand that they squarely lay the blame for Christ's death, not on the Romans who ruled Judea with an iron fist and who did not hesitate to crucify any who dared to cross them in the slightest. But in case you need Chapter and Verse, here they are in no particular order:

Quote:

MATTHEW:

[17] Therefore when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ?
[18] For he knew that for envy they had delivered him.
[19] When he was set down on the judgment seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that just man: for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him.
[20] But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus.
[21] The governor answered and said unto them, Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you? They said, Barabbas.
[22] Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified.
[23] And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified.
[24] When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.
[25] Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.

JOHN:

[1] Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him.
[2] And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and they put on him a purple robe,
[3] And said, Hail, King of the Jews! and they smote him with their hands.
[4] Pilate therefore went forth again, and saith unto them, Behold, I bring him forth to you, that ye may know that I find no fault in him.
[5] Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the man!
[6] When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him.
[7] The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.
[8] When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he was the more afraid;
[9] And went again into the judgment hall, and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer.
[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.
[12] And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar.

MARK:

[12] And Pilate answered and said again unto them, What will ye then that I shall do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews?
[13] And they cried out again, Crucify him.
[14] Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him.

LUKE:

[20] Pilate therefore, willing to release Jesus, spake again to them.
[21] But they cried, saying, Crucify him, crucify him.
[22] 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.
[23] And they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be crucified. And the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed.

From the earliest Christians these lines have been used to justify a hatred of Jews. Justin Martyr and Irenaeus of Lyon held that due to their responsibility for Deicide that Jews lost their status as God's chosen people and the Christians took it over. Origen stated: "The blood of Jesus falls not only on the Jews of that time, but on all generations of Jews up to the end of the world." Augustine furthered this concept, approving the slaughter and diaspora of the Jews as fulfullment of divine prophecy. Martin Luther of course wrote one of the most virulent anti-semitic tracts: "The Jews and Their Lies". Aquinas likewise saw Jews as evil for refusing to convert.

It is only a modern view by Christians and the Catholic Church that the Gospels do not justify anti-semitism. IMHO, it is a reaction to the Holocaust and a sense of guilt over the Church's silence in the face of the destruction of European Jewry. For the most part of the last two millenia Christians have gleefully interpreted the Gospels as Anti-Semitic.

SLD

Cleopatra · 02-27-2004, 01:29 AM

SLD

I do not disagree with you, afterall you presented facts and not your opinions but I just feel the need to remind the fair company of the historical context of the 4th ce A.D.

It was essential for the Christians to blame somebody and it was a matter of existence for Christianity to blame the Jews. A poster in JREF with whom I had the whole debate about antisemitism suggested that for the Romans the Jews were the Al Qaeda of their era... Although the example is ... ahem... strong and I totally reject such anachronisms it is not very far away from the truth.

Also the Romans found that Jews were "very loud" in demonstrating their religiosity. For the Romans the religious practice was a rather personal matter that took place in their houses (mostly), this is what the first Christians did and not because of fear at least in the first 2 centuries of Christianity.

And one last thing. The Christians wanted to sell their product to a Greek world. The Jews since the era of the Macabees have given their enemy a name: Greeks and Hellenization.

Even in our days, the extreme right in Israel (and sadly in the States too) uses the term "Hellenization" when it refers to those that wish a revision of Israel's policy. Hellenization = betrayal of the Jewish tradition.

Doctor X · 02-27-2004, 01:58 AM

I would second strongly Toto's recommendation.

The book is by a scholar who was a Protestant and a NT scholar in Germany. He has a number of books which popularize current NT scholarship. They made him controversial.

I found the book because Collins used it as a source for his discussion of the "ban" or herem--the sacrifice of a conquered people to your god. He appears a believer attempting to explain how to believe despite scholarship. I am not finished with it yet--he has a long chapter of Gospel antisemitism.

However, there is a book dedicated to him edited by Jacob Neusner and a debate on the resurrection--he wrote a book denying it much earlier--which describes him as an "atheist." Apparently, his books resulted in him losing his NT professorship and has caused a bit of a stir in academic circles.

Most interesting to see how a man's beliefs progress with study.

That more would do that.

--J.D.

Doctor X · 02-27-2004, 01:58 AM

["Poof!"--Ed.]

blt to go · 02-27-2004, 05:29 AM

Quote:

I doubt you need much in the way of quotes from the Gospels to understand that they squarely lay the blame for Christ's death, not on the Romans who ruled Judea with an iron fist and who did not hesitate to crucify any who dared to cross them in the slightest.

Thank you for the quotes.

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

02-26-2004, 12:34 PM	#11
gregor Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Texas Posts: 932	My sense is that Gibson went much further than the gospels allow (although I admit I obtained this information from a newspaper report, rather than first hand watching the film). Gibson includes at least two separate scenes clearly not mentioned in the gospels (the separate beating Jesus before the lashing reported in the gospels and throwing jesus off a bridge) and one event that couldn't occur - carrying the verticle piece of the cross.

02-26-2004, 01:44 PM	#13
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	There is a book by Gerd L�demann on this subject. The Unholy in Holy Scripture: The Dark Side of the Bible (I would take the negative reviews with a grain of salt.)

02-26-2004, 01:55 PM	#14
Cleopatra Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Europe. Posts: 48	To be fair though I think that while talking about Christian antisemitism it is essential to point out why Jews were depicted like that in the Christian skripts. A reference to the Greco-Roman target group that the Christian managers have set is necessary, in my opinion.

02-27-2004, 01:29 AM	#17
Cleopatra Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Europe. Posts: 48	SLD I do not disagree with you, afterall you presented facts and not your opinions but I just feel the need to remind the fair company of the historical context of the 4th ce A.D. It was essential for the Christians to blame somebody and it was a matter of existence for Christianity to blame the Jews. A poster in JREF with whom I had the whole debate about antisemitism suggested that for the Romans the Jews were the Al Qaeda of their era... Although the example is ... ahem... strong and I totally reject such anachronisms it is not very far away from the truth. Also the Romans found that Jews were "very loud" in demonstrating their religiosity. For the Romans the religious practice was a rather personal matter that took place in their houses (mostly), this is what the first Christians did and not because of fear at least in the first 2 centuries of Christianity. And one last thing. The Christians wanted to sell their product to a Greek world. The Jews since the era of the Macabees have given their enemy a name: Greeks and Hellenization. Even in our days, the extreme right in Israel (and sadly in the States too) uses the term "Hellenization" when it refers to those that wish a revision of Israel's policy. Hellenization = betrayal of the Jewish tradition.

02-27-2004, 01:58 AM	#18
Doctor X Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: USA Posts: 3,794	I would second strongly Toto's recommendation. The book is by a scholar who was a Protestant and a NT scholar in Germany. He has a number of books which popularize current NT scholarship. They made him controversial. I found the book because Collins used it as a source for his discussion of the "ban" or herem--the sacrifice of a conquered people to your god. He appears a believer attempting to explain how to believe despite scholarship. I am not finished with it yet--he has a long chapter of Gospel antisemitism. However, there is a book dedicated to him edited by Jacob Neusner and a debate on the resurrection--he wrote a book denying it much earlier--which describes him as an "atheist." Apparently, his books resulted in him losing his NT professorship and has caused a bit of a stir in academic circles. Most interesting to see how a man's beliefs progress with study. That more would do that. --J.D.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.