Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.8K
- General Category 10.9K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 368
- Technical Topics 368
Jews are not to blame for death of Jesus?
To read this news:The Pope has exonerated Jewish people for the Crucifixion and death of Jesus.
In extracts released from his forthcoming book on Christ, Pope Benedict XVI has addressed one of the most controversial issues of Christianity by saying Jews bore no culpability.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1362185/Pope-Benedict-XVI-Jews-blame-death-Jesus.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12634176
I've read few years ago a passage by St John Chrysostome on Lent and the Holy Week, explaining reasons for the Church decision to celebrate the Feast of Resurrection a week later than the Jewish Crossover, in which he wrote 'the killer nation' speaking of the Jews people of the time, who before Pontius Pilatus were shouting asking him for the death sentence of Jesus Christ by crucifixion.
My questions are: what is the Orthodox opinion on this matter and what is the wisdom in Pope Benedict's analysis? Why did Christ suffering His Passion on the Cross ask the Father to forgive them if they were not guilty? Also aren't we all guilty anyway?
GBU
Comments
and you're right. Does it matter anyway? Its not like anyone forced Him to die against His will. And we're all responsible.
I don't really understand why bring this up right now anyways.
The response of the Catholics to HH's point was incredibly negative. One said they were shocked that the Pope of Alexandria would "learn towards Iran" (???) and called HH's opinion "pathetic".
Father, forgive the Catholics, too. Such a Church of heretical indifference to your Holy Word cannot show spiritual depth in its pronouncements. It simply doesn't produce it.
If Christ wanted people who represent him (Christians) to take revenge would He have forgiven the Jews and the Romans on the Cross?
Isn't our Church founded by the Jews our Apostles were they not Jews?
I think statements like these are made because Jews were persecuted throughout history.
My question is not about that but about denying Biblical and historical facts, with the resulting spread of doubts among multitudes about the correct interpretation of true Biblical verses.
Pharaoh714,
Judah's treason helped much in sending Christ to His death sentence. If he did not commit suicide and even if he repented, would you still state he was not guilty? If a murderer repents will this spare him the justice of the court's sentence?
St Paul confessed and publicly admitted his guiltiness of persecuting the Early Church.
GBU
24 When Pilate saw that he could not prevail at all, but rather that a tumult was rising, he took water and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, “I am innocent of the blood of this just Person. You see to it.”
25 And all the people answered and said, “His blood be on us and on our children.”
26 Then he released Barabbas to them; and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered Him to be crucified.
These verses show what was said by the Jews incriminating themselves. There is no way to state the events differently, just wanted to share this.
GBU
Yeah, if it weren't for the Jews, you and I wouldn't be Christian today, by the way.
I mean, if you want to blame a certain group of people for your salvation, which was the cross, it's your prerogative, of course. You think any other nation would have been any different? Take a look at any protest or mob, and you see how soft minded people can be. People are easy to join a crowd, but no one ever stands on their own.
The Egyptians enslaved the Jews. The Spaniards raped Latin America. The Muslims attacked New York City. When have generalizations helped anyone? What's the point? Get over it, already.
When the Jews said "His blood is on us and our children", they were basically saying that our children also agree with our condemnation of this man. Of course, if those children realized the error of their parents, as some did, then they are not guilty in the error of their fathers. However, so long as they have not repented then they are guilty.
What the Holy Spirit spoke of, no one can change. There are numerous verses that condemn the Jews of crucifying the Lord. Jesus Himself condemned them. Who are we to say otherwise.
If a Church teaches something different than what she received from Her master then she is not honest on what was left her.
Thanks.
What benefit is it to you (or whomever) that the jews and their children have the blood of Jesus on their hands? What does it imply or show, and what is the overall lesson we get from that being true?
The issue is not the Jews, it's about twisting the truth when speaking of a well known historical event that's even documented by Jewish historians.
If someone says the Ancient Egyptians never enslaved the people of Israel as God tells us in the Bible, would you still state he's telling you the truth, or rather that he is a plain liar? Would you listen to a news channel that's twisting the facts or tries to embellish them? Would you trust such a channel as a reliable source?
GBU
I should think this closes the issue for all Copts. And I agree with HH Pope Shenouda III. The Bible does say that. The Vatican is just being politically correct by lying (again; just like they do when they say that Muslims and Christians worship the same God). It is disgraceful, even if they don't all really believe it. Sad.
It's sad, and it is altering Tradition for the sake of people who take offense to things which have nothing to do with them.
1. It was prophecy from the very beginning, so it was going to happen either way.
2. You could think about it like this: Judaism was the dominant religion in Jesus' time, just like it is Christianity now. If a random man comes up, does "miracles" and claims that he is God's 3rd coming, then of course, Christians would be enraged. Jews had their own ways of dealing with things, hence the crucifixion of Christ.
As Christians we are not here to take revenge on Jews for the Death of Christ... Christs death means our Salvation, If Christ wasn't Crucified would we be saved?
If Christ wanted people who represent him (Christians) to take revenge would He have forgiven the Jews and the Romans on the Cross?
Isn't our Church founded by the Jews our Apostles were they not Jews?
I think statements like these are made because Jews were persecuted throughout history.
They WERE jews. Once you convert to Christianity, you are no longer jewish.
The Jews who lived in Christ's time were the ones to blame for his crucifixion, as accounted for in the Gospels. This does not mean that Jews after the second century A.D. are to be continually blamed for the crucifixion.
The curse that the Jews of the first century placed on themselves for the blood of Christ, as mentioned in Matt. 27:25, states that the curse applied to those Jews present and their children. This means three things:
1) The Jews who cursed themselves were in Jerusalem. The Jews who were not involved in cursing themselves at the crucifixion scene are not to be blamed for the crucifixion. Those include all the Jews who were around Judah, Galilee, in the diaspora, etc.
2) The Jews who cursed themselves did not apply the curse to all generations of their families, so they didn't say: "on us and our children, and our children's children," or "our children's children to the seventh generation," or "our children to all generations," etc. as found in other forms of blessings and curses in the Old Testament. Therefore, the curse applied only to the Jews who were alive and present at the judgement of Christ, and their immediate children.
3) The curse was FULFILLED, as the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 A.D. It was fulfilled as they cursed themselves, "on our children" (70 A.D. is the time of the children of those people who were self-cursed).
Unfortunately, during the history of Christianity, especially in the West and in relation to political and economic enemies, the Bible has been mis-read (intentionally or unintentionally), so for a long time Christians have used the curse of Matt. 27:25 as justification to persecute the Jews in Europe. Since this was clearly as mis-reading of Scripture, and applying random proof-texts to justify error and hatred, the Catholic Church has recently come to terms with the correct interpretation of the Gospel's curse on the Jews, and so the Church apologized for persecuting the Jews in that context.
The apology was actually a much-needed apology and a great step forward for the Catholic Church. In my opinion, H.H. Pope Shenouda, in his criticism of the Catholic Church's apology to the Jews, disregarded the history of the Catholic Church and the Jews in Europe, and the mis-interpretation of the Gospel of Matthew's text by the Catholic Church in previous centuries. H.H. is only thinking in terms of current Arab/Israeli conflict, and this apology by the Catholic church has nothing to do with either a Zionist motivation nor communion with Jews.
Though i can't bring myself to say that what they did was not wrong. Can anyone help me argue against my argument?!
Agape,
The Jews who lived in Christ's time were the ones to blame for his crucifixion, as accounted for in the Gospels. This does not mean that Jews after the second century A.D. are to be continually blamed for the crucifixion.
The curse that the Jews of the first century placed on themselves for the blood of Christ, as mentioned in Matt. 27:25, states that the curse applied to those Jews present and their children. This means three things:
1) The Jews who cursed themselves were in Jerusalem. The Jews who were not involved in cursing themselves at the crucifixion scene are not to be blamed for the crucifixion. Those include all the Jews who were around Judah, Galilee, in the diaspora, etc.
2) The Jews who cursed themselves did not apply the curse to all generations of their families, so they didn't say: "on us and our children, and our children's children," or "our children's children to the seventh generation," or "our children to all generations," etc. as found in other forms of blessings and curses in the Old Testament. Therefore, the curse applied only to the Jews who were alive and present at the judgement of Christ, and their immediate children.
3) The curse was FULFILLED, as the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 A.D. It was fulfilled as they cursed themselves, "on our children" (70 A.D. is the time of the children of those people who were self-cursed).
Unfortunately, during the history of Christianity, especially in the West and in relation to political and economic enemies, the Bible has been mis-read (intentionally or unintentionally), so for a long time Christians have used the curse of Matt. 27:25 as justification to persecute the Jews in Europe. Since this was clearly as mis-reading of Scripture, and applying random proof-texts to justify error and hatred, the Catholic Church has recently come to terms with the correct interpretation of the Gospel's curse on the Jews, and so the Church apologized for persecuting the Jews in that context.
The apology was actually a much-needed apology and a great step forward for the Catholic Church. In my opinion, H.H. Pope Shenouda, in his criticism of the Catholic Church's apology to the Jews, disregarded the history of the Catholic Church and the Jews in Europe, and the mis-interpretation of the Gospel of Matthew's text by the Catholic Church in previous centuries. H.H. is only thinking in terms of current Arab/Israeli conflict, and this apology by the Catholic church has nothing to do with either a Zionist motivation nor communion with Jews.
So long as the Jews continue in their fathers' denial of our Lord, they will live under their fathers' curse.
How did you come to your interpretation of denial and everlasting curse from the self-curse of the Jews of Jerusalem quoted in Matt. 27:25?
imikhail, you always make strong statements, highlight them, bold them, change their font size, but making such forcefully affirmative statements without a rational justification of what you have in mind does not help support your argument, nor does it help anyone here to take you seriously.
How did you come to your interpretation of denial and everlasting curse from the self-curse of the Jews of Jerusalem quoted in Matt. 27:25?
Read Acts 2:
" "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know-- 23 Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; 24 whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it. "
St Peter was speaking to Jews who came from the diaspora to celebrate the Pentecost feast, they were not present at the time of crucifixion (at least the majority of them). Yet, St. Peter accused them of crucifying the Lord.
The Jews today still approve of their fathers' act of killing the Lord. So, they live in their fathers sin of crucifying the Lord.
The Lord still tells the Jews of today: "In fact, you bear witness that you approve the deeds of your fathers; for they indeed killed them, and you build their tombs."
ReturnOrthodoxy
[quote author=Biboboy link=topic=10890.msg149412#msg149412 date=1324521626]
imikhail, you always make strong statements, highlight them, bold them, change their font size, but making such forcefully affirmative statements without a rational justification of what you have in mind does not help support your argument, nor does it help anyone here to take you seriously.
How did you come to your interpretation of denial and everlasting curse from the self-curse of the Jews of Jerusalem quoted in Matt. 27:25?
Read Acts 2:
" "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know-- 23 Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; 24 whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it. "
St Peter was speaking to Jews who came from the diaspora to celebrate the Pentecost feast, they were not present at the time of crucifixion (at least the majority of them). Yet, St. Peter accused them of crucifying the Lord.
Read Acts 2 again, imikhail (emphasis in the text are mine):
"Now there were devout Jews from every nation under heaven living in Jerusalem" (Acts 2:5).
"But Peter, standing with the eleven, raised his voice and addressed them: ‘Men of Judea and all who live in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and listen to what I say'" (Acts 2:14).
As I stated in my post above, those who crucified the Lord are the Jews of Jerusalem of the first century. St. Peter re-affirms this in his first speech on Pentecost.
All the Jews who chose and still choose the Law over Grace and reject Jesus who was sent to them approve their fathers' crucifixion.
Our Lord still tells: " 48 In fact, you bear witness that you approve the deeds of your fathers; for they indeed killed them, and you build their tombs."
They rejected the Messiah based on their understanding of how the Messiah should be. They cannot fathom the idea that the Messiah could be crucified, and thus approve of their fathers' decision that it was correct.
Following, the Jews of today along with their fathers are responsible for the crucifixion. The statement "Let His blood be on us and on our children" is still in effect so long as those children behave in the same way as their fathers did.
Acts 2
36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
We could also say that only the high priest, Pilatus and just few leaders are really to blame, since the rest of the ppl are just following orders.. wrong: the Jews who refused their Messiah persecuted the Christians, i.e. the Church (Christ).
Acts 9:4
Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?”
ReturnOrthodoxy is right in that all humanity are sinners who need Christ's Salvation. To sum up, all humanity that reject the Faith would also directly share the Crucifixion guilt.. still not including the Jews (of course)?!
The Lord said that His ppl have rejected Him, so I think imikhail is right too.
GBU
Galatians 3
26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Being the Body of Christ the Church is now therefore Crucified with Him.
John 15
20 Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. If they kept My word, they will keep yours also.
Acts 9
16 For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.”
GBU