Freethought & Rationalism Archive

AndresDeLaHoz · 07-01-2003, 08:43 AM

yeah, what's the consensus on that?

agnawstick · 07-01-2003, 08:46 AM

It was roman hands that bound Jesus, nailed him to the cross, and crucified him. The events around 70 C.E. can not be ignored as the schism between the gentile church and the jewish christian church was fermenting. Many of the jewish followers of Jesus were killed in Jeruselem. To the victors go the spoils. The winners write the history books.

keyser_soze · 07-01-2003, 09:12 AM

Either the jews killed him, by stoning and then hanging on a tree, then later burying him....making the whole burial scene possible

or, the romans crucified him, but left him on the stake to rot...per protocol(making the funeral thing B.S.

The problem comes that the gospels were written a long time after, so most likely the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Most likely, the romans killed him for sedition, left him to rot, and later stories were created around him. If he even existed that is. Personally, I give him HJ...but not really based on any evidence, but rather a guess.

EstherRose · 07-01-2003, 12:03 PM

He was crucified and then entombed.

The romans didn't believe he was guilty so when Joseph of Aramithea asked for permission to take the body down, it was granted.

godfry n. glad · 07-01-2003, 12:14 PM

Wait...wait...

What evidences are there that the story (stories) as presented in the NT is (are) anything other than a mythological construct(s)?

Have any of you stopped to consider that _nobody_ executed this Jesus? That perhaps he never existed, as portrayed in any of the "gospels"? Or, that if a Jesus did exist, the narratives in the NT are embellishments and accretions?

Just curious.

godfry n. glad

Evangelion · 07-01-2003, 12:32 PM

It would appear that the OP presupposes the existence of Jesus for the sake of the question.

godfry n. glad · 07-01-2003, 12:37 PM

Ahh...

An unwarrented and unsupported a priori assumption.

Par for the course in NT studies.

godfry

Toto · 07-01-2003, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Evangelion
It would appear that the OP presupposes the existence of Jesus for the sake of the question.

That is, of course, the problem with the OP.

The OP asks about a consensus. The consensus of modern Christians seems to be that some Jews and some Romans were implicated in the execution of Jesus, and any attempt to extend this to blood guilt affecting any current adherents of the Jewish faith is very bad, very bad indeed, and they are truly sorry for everything the Christian church has done in the past 2000 or so years that might have implied otherwise.

Evangelion · 07-01-2003, 12:46 PM

Quote:

An unwarrented and unsupported a priori assumption.

Not necessarily. It's a hypothetical case. What's wrong with that?

Quote:

Par for the course in NT studies.

The OP was made by an atheist.

Evangelion · 07-01-2003, 12:47 PM

Quote:

That is, of course, the problem with the OP.

Why? A priori assumptions are perfectly legitimate in the context of a hypothetical.

Quote:

The OP asks about a consensus. The consensus of modern Christians seems to be that some Jews and some Romans were implicated in the execution of Jesus, and any attempt to extend this to blood guilt affecting any current adherents of the Jewish faith is very bad, very bad indeed, and they are truly sorry for everything the Christian church has done in the past 2000 or so years that might have implied otherwise.

What woud you prefer them to say?

07-01-2003, 08:43 AM	#1
AndresDeLaHoz Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Chicago Posts: 567	Was Jesus put to death by the jews? yeah, what's the consensus on that?

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

07-01-2003, 08:46 AM	#2
agnawstick Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: arcadia California Posts: 65	It was roman hands that bound Jesus, nailed him to the cross, and crucified him. The events around 70 C.E. can not be ignored as the schism between the gentile church and the jewish christian church was fermenting. Many of the jewish followers of Jesus were killed in Jeruselem. To the victors go the spoils. The winners write the history books.

07-01-2003, 09:12 AM	#3
keyser_soze Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: god's judge (pariah) Posts: 1,281	Either the jews killed him, by stoning and then hanging on a tree, then later burying him....making the whole burial scene possible or, the romans crucified him, but left him on the stake to rot...per protocol(making the funeral thing B.S. The problem comes that the gospels were written a long time after, so most likely the truth is somewhere in the middle. Most likely, the romans killed him for sedition, left him to rot, and later stories were created around him. If he even existed that is. Personally, I give him HJ...but not really based on any evidence, but rather a guess.

07-01-2003, 12:03 PM	#4
EstherRose Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Arizona Posts: 183	He was crucified and then entombed. The romans didn't believe he was guilty so when Joseph of Aramithea asked for permission to take the body down, it was granted.

07-01-2003, 12:14 PM	#5
godfry n. glad Banned Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: portland, oregon, usa Posts: 1,190	Wait...wait... What evidences are there that the story (stories) as presented in the NT is (are) anything other than a mythological construct(s)? Have any of you stopped to consider that _nobody_ executed this Jesus? That perhaps he never existed, as portrayed in any of the "gospels"? Or, that if a Jesus did exist, the narratives in the NT are embellishments and accretions? Just curious. godfry n. glad

07-01-2003, 12:32 PM	#6
Evangelion Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Walsall, UK Posts: 1,490	It would appear that the OP presupposes the existence of Jesus for the sake of the question.

07-01-2003, 12:37 PM	#7
godfry n. glad Banned Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: portland, oregon, usa Posts: 1,190	Ahh... An unwarrented and unsupported a priori assumption. Par for the course in NT studies. godfry

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.