dennis/innomen

Made an assertion to a christian that the Gospel was intentionally anti Semitic/Zionist, or, more accurately, just plain anti-Jew. I further stated that it was written almost a century after Christ was alive on earth. When it was written there was direction of growth intended toward Rome and away from Judea. This was done by shifting the burden of Christ's death from the romans to the Jews. I told him that it was preposterous for a Roman to make a statement like "this man's blood is not on my hands." Romans were not terribly concerned about having blood on their hands.

Of course the christian would not hear of any criticism of the gospel and really had no idea that it wasn't written during the time of Christ. He maintains that the Jews killed Christ. Despite the fact that it was all part of the prophesy.

Amos

Of course it was 100% anti-Jew because a new religion was being formed. The NT is a complete separation from Judaism and to some extent it criticizes the common practice of the Jews and not just of those days but of Judaism in general.

That the Jews killed Christ was the best thing they ever did and if I was a Jew I would be immensly proud of that. The "no blood on my hands" just means that the Jews were right because the aim of Judaism is the coming of the messiah and here he did come in the life of one particular Jew.

Note here. Just because it is inti Jewish does not mean that Jews should be persecuted for any reason. It is anti Jewish because Jews got lost and died in the promised land and so Jesus wanted to show the world how it was done right. Later, protestants became anti Catholic and reverted back to Jewish fundamentalism and once again die in the promised land.

[ April 16, 2002: Message edited by: Amos ]</p>

IvanK

Most modern scholarship agrees that Mark, the earliest Gospel we have, was written in Rome around 70 CE. SGF Brandon (in The Trial of Jesus of Nazareth) and others postulate that Mark, writing for a Roman Christian community, was at great pains to explain away the Crucifixion, crucifixion being an expressly Roman punishment for traitors and the seditious. The idea of worshiping a Savior who opposed Roman rule of the Jewish Holy Lands, as tantalizing hints in the Gospels* suggest Jesus did, was obviously distasteful to these loyal Romans. Hence the story of the two trials; the Sanhedrin turning Jesus over to Roman Procurator Pontius Pilate because they couldn't sentence anyone to death (nevermind the woman taken in adultery earlier in the Gospels who was about to be stoned to death -- the Jewish punishment for crimes including blasphemy); Pilate, with two Roman legions at his beck and call, being cowed by an unruly Jewish mob in his courtyard into sentencing to death a man he believed to be innocent and freeing a notorious and violent lawbreaker; etc.

And hence the popular epitaph "Christ killer," Luther's virulent anti-Semitism, etc.

* in the parable of the denaris, Jesus's listeners would have understood "the things of God" to be the Holy Land and its produce; why do Jesus and his disciples not have any denarii when they are in a Roman-ruled city and presumably buying things; etc.