Who killed Jesus?

[balshan]

Who do RCs believe killed Jesus? We have had one person in the thread Baptism is a rite, not salvation claim it is just the Jews. That pilate washed his hands and condemned Jesus to death but had no part in his death apparently. His support is this verse and I am assuming it is from the book of acts, the poster doesn't like to use proper biblical references when quoting scripture:

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Then you would be calling Peter a liar...Because Peter made that statement to all the house of Israel...

I mean Peter was addressing Jewish people at the time (if I have the right setting for this verse) but if addressing a group of Romans he could have said therefore let all the house of Rome know...

Now I have constantly pointed out that it is the sin of the world which killed Jesus, the Romans crucified him, God's plan was for him to die, Jesus offered Himself up but no this poster only blames one people group. Now I know I was taught that the Jewish people killed Jesus in school but have since read scripture and scripture is clear it is not just the Jewish people involved in the death of Jesus. In fact, they could not condemn a person to death.

Is this a RC belief or not.

 

[balshan]

Who do RCs believe killed Jesus? We have had one person in the thread Baptism is a rite, not salvation claim it is just the Jews. That pilate washed his hands and condemned Jesus to death but had no part in his death apparently. His support is this verse and I am assuming it is from the book of acts, the poster doesn't like to use proper biblical references when quoting scripture:

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Then you would be calling Peter a liar...Because Peter made that statement to all the house of Israel...

I mean Peter was addressing Jewish people at the time (if I have the right setting for this verse) but if addressing a group of Romans he could have said therefore let all the house of Rome know...

Now I have constantly pointed out that it is the sin of the world which killed Jesus, the Romans crucified him, God's plan was for him to die, Jesus offered Himself up but no this poster only blames one people group. Now I know I was taught that the Jewish people killed Jesus in school but have since read scripture and scripture is clear it is not just the Jewish people involved in the death of Jesus. In fact, they could not condemn a person to death.

Is this a RC belief or not.

I will take this lack of response to mean that it is still RC teaching.

 

[Septextura]

Luke 12
11 And Herod with his men of war set him at nought, and mocked him, and arrayed him in a gorgeous robe, and sent him again to Pilate.
12 And the same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together: for before they were at enmity between themselves.

John 19
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.
13 When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha.
14 And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!
15 But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar.
16 Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led him away.

Christ tells us both Rome and Israel are accomplices, but the greater sin falls on the Jewish leaders. And this tone of stricter judgment towards the Jews compared to the Gentiles is ubiquitous throughout the New Testament because they had the oracles of the true living God yet they were disloyal and wicked merchants of sin.

Luke 12
47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

But I'm curious why 21st century Christian Rome would want to identify with and defend 1st century Pagan Rome?

 

[balshan]

Christ tells us both Rome and Israel are accomplices, but the greater sin falls on the Jewish leaders. And this tone of stricter judgment towards the Jews compared to the Gentiles is ubiquitous throughout the New Testament because they had the oracles of the true living God yet they were disloyal and wicked merchants of sin.



But I'm curious why 21st century Christian Rome would want to identify with and defend 1st century Pagan Rome?

Well if we look at who deliver Him up it was Herod and he wasn't Jewish. His mother was a Samaritian. So if we go by who delivered him up as having the greater sin, it was Herod also not Jewish.

But if we discuss this topic it is the whole world that is to blame.

I'm curious as to why the blame throughout the centuries is not on Rome. They actually did the act and could have stopped it. They were the power.

But I want to know how RCs feel about who is responsible, as it seems that what I was taught at school is still taught and it is not correct.

 

[Septextura]

@balshan

That was Luke 23, oops.

8 And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad: for he was desirous to see him of a long season, because he had heard many things of him; and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him.
9 Then he questioned with him in many words; but he answered him nothing.
10 And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently accused him.
11 And Herod with his men of war set him at nought, and mocked him, and arrayed him in a gorgeous robe, and sent him again to Pilate.

Both the priests and Herod delivered Him up.

Luke 24:20
And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.

The Jews betrayed Him and the Romans killed Him.

 

[balshan]

@balshan

That was Luke 23, oops.


Both the priests and Herod delivered Him up.



The Jews betrayed Him and the Romans killed Him.

I gathered it was a typo.

I agree all were involved in His death and that was part of God's plan. My problem is when only one group is referred to as being involved as was the RC poster point of view. I really what to know what the RCC is teaching on this matter but apparently no one will speak up for or against this poster's view.

 

[Bonnie]

Who do RCs believe killed Jesus? We have had one person in the thread Baptism is a rite, not salvation claim it is just the Jews. That pilate washed his hands and condemned Jesus to death but had no part in his death apparently. His support is this verse and I am assuming it is from the book of acts, the poster doesn't like to use proper biblical references when quoting scripture:

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Then you would be calling Peter a liar...Because Peter made that statement to all the house of Israel...

I mean Peter was addressing Jewish people at the time (if I have the right setting for this verse) but if addressing a group of Romans he could have said therefore let all the house of Rome know...

Now I have constantly pointed out that it is the sin of the world which killed Jesus, the Romans crucified him, God's plan was for him to die, Jesus offered Himself up but no this poster only blames one people group. Now I know I was taught that the Jewish people killed Jesus in school but have since read scripture and scripture is clear it is not just the Jewish people involved in the death of Jesus. In fact, they could not condemn a person to death.

Is this a RC belief or not.

When we get right down to it....we ALL killed Jesus, because of our sins.

 

[mica]

I gathered it was a typo.

I agree all were involved in His death and that was part of God's plan. My problem is when only one group is referred to as being involved as was the RC poster point of view. I really what to know what the RCC is teaching on this matter but apparently no one will speak up for or against this poster's view.

They probably don't know.

 

[balshan]

T

When we get right down to it....we ALL killed Jesus, because our sins.

That is my point. I have previously posted those verses but it does not seem to matter.

 

[Mysterium Fidei]

The Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity was made flesh in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and dwelt among us. God became man to save mankind from the curse of sin, of which we are all guilty.

In the actual historical account of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, Pontius Pilate and the Roman soldiers were the instrument used to put Jesus to death, although Pilate did not want to do so.

The primary cause was that the Jews; Caiphas, the chief priests and their elders, conspired against Jesus that: "they might apprehend Jesus, and put him to death."

"And Pilate seeing that he prevailed nothing, but that rather a tumult was made; having taken water, washed his hands before the people, saying: I am innocent of the blood of this just man: look you to it.

And all the people answering, said: His blood be upon us, and upon our children." Thus the curse the Jews brought upon themselves.

Jesus Christ "came unto his own, and his own received him not."

 

[LifeIn]

Who do RCs believe killed Jesus?

This is not a simple question. I have read through the answers up to this point, and in one way or another they are all correct.

If we start with the most superficial understanding of the crucifixion, it was the Roman soldiers, acting on the command of Pontius Pilate who carried out the whipping and nailing and erecting of the cross and keeping watch until Jesus was dead. If we look further back into what motivated Pontius Pilate to issue that command, it was the fear of losing control of the "Pax Romana" that he was charged to maintain. Jesus represented a threat to Roman-enforced peace in this conquered land, or so he thought. If we look further back into why Pilate had that perception, it was because of the Jewish leaders who first arrested Jesus and tried him in the Sanhedrin, and then brought their concerns to Pilate and stirred up the crowds. If we consider why the Jewish leaders thought they needed to do this, it was because they saw Jesus as a threat to their religious authority, and perhaps also feared that if Jesus were to generate too much support and cause civil unrest, the Romans might clamp down harder on the Jewish people (like they would later do in 70 AD when they destroyed the temple). Of course they were mistaken about that since Jesus was not trying to establish that kind of a kingdom. But they were not mistaken about Jesus representing a threat to their religious authority. For whatever reason, they brought the matter to Pilate. But we can go back even further, as Bonnie has said and realize that the sacrifice of Jesus was foretold in scripture because sin was in the world and mankind was fallen. Only the sacrifice of God's son could reconcile man with God. And so it was ultimately all of our sins that set these events into motion. But the fact that the sacrifice was necessary for salvation does not absolve any of the other actors - Pontius Pilate, the Jewish leaders, Herod, the crowd - from their role either. As we hear about Judas, even though it was necessary that Jesus be handed over, "woe that that man by whom he is betrayed". That's why I say the everyone was right.

 

[mica]

This is not a simple question. I have read through the answers up to this point, and in one way or another they are all correct.

If we start with the most superficial understanding of the crucifixion, it was the Roman soldiers, acting on the command of Pontius Pilate who carried out the whipping and nailing and erecting of the cross and keeping watch until Jesus was dead. If we look further back into what motivated Pontius Pilate to issue that command, it was the fear of losing control of the "Pax Romana" that he was charged to maintain. Jesus represented a threat to Roman-enforced peace in this conquered land, or so he thought. If we look further back into why Pilate had that perception, it was because of the Jewish leaders who first arrested Jesus and tried him in the Sanhedrin, and then brought their concerns to Pilate and stirred up the crowds. If we consider why the Jewish leaders thought they needed to do this, it was because they saw Jesus as a threat to their religious authority, and perhaps also feared that if Jesus were to generate too much support and cause civil unrest, the Romans might clamp down harder on the Jewish people (like they would later do in 70 AD when they destroyed the temple). Of course they were mistaken about that since Jesus was not trying to establish that kind of a kingdom. But they were not mistaken about Jesus representing a threat to their religious authority. For whatever reason, they brought the matter to Pilate. But we can go back even further, as Bonnie has said and realize that the sacrifice of Jesus was foretold in scripture because sin was in the world and mankind was fallen. Only the sacrifice of God's son could reconcile man with God. And so it was ultimately all of our sins that set these events into motion. But the fact that the sacrifice was necessary for salvation does not absolve any of the other actors - Pontius Pilate, the Jewish leaders, Herod, the crowd - from their role either. As we hear about Judas, even though it was necessary that Jesus be handed over, "woe that that man by whom he is betrayed". That's why I say the everyone was right.

He does the same to the RCC.

 

[balshan]

This is not a simple question. I have read through the answers up to this point, and in one way or another they are all correct.

If we start with the most superficial understanding of the crucifixion, it was the Roman soldiers, acting on the command of Pontius Pilate who carried out the whipping and nailing and erecting of the cross and keeping watch until Jesus was dead. If we look further back into what motivated Pontius Pilate to issue that command, it was the fear of losing control of the "Pax Romana" that he was charged to maintain. Jesus represented a threat to Roman-enforced peace in this conquered land, or so he thought. If we look further back into why Pilate had that perception, it was because of the Jewish leaders who first arrested Jesus and tried him in the Sanhedrin, and then brought their concerns to Pilate and stirred up the crowds. If we consider why the Jewish leaders thought they needed to do this, it was because they saw Jesus as a threat to their religious authority, and perhaps also feared that if Jesus were to generate too much support and cause civil unrest, the Romans might clamp down harder on the Jewish people (like they would later do in 70 AD when they destroyed the temple). Of course they were mistaken about that since Jesus was not trying to establish that kind of a kingdom. But they were not mistaken about Jesus representing a threat to their religious authority. For whatever reason, they brought the matter to Pilate. But we can go back even further, as Bonnie has said and realize that the sacrifice of Jesus was foretold in scripture because sin was in the world and mankind was fallen. Only the sacrifice of God's son could reconcile man with God. And so it was ultimately all of our sins that set these events into motion. But the fact that the sacrifice was necessary for salvation does not absolve any of the other actors - Pontius Pilate, the Jewish leaders, Herod, the crowd - from their role either. As we hear about Judas, even though it was necessary that Jesus be handed over, "woe that that man by whom he is betrayed". That's why I say the everyone was right.

Yet we have what started this thread and that was that one RC kept saying it was the Jewish people who had the blame. I agree it is all of us, it is the Romans, it is Pilate, it is Herod, it is the Jewish leadership. It was God's plan and Jesus willing gave His life.

The area were Pilate condemned Jesus is very small and not that many people fit into it. You get a good idea from tapes by Ray Van der Laan of the area and the number of people involved.

So the RC who just harps on about the Jewish people being to blame is not following RC teaching? Which is what the main question was in the op.

 

[LifeIn]

Yet we have what started this thread and that was that one RC kept saying it was the Jewish people who had the blame.

If you want to make a thread about what one RC said, make a thread about what one RC said. But if you want to know what the RCC says, you have to be open to the possibility that it might be more than what one person said. It would be like someone saying that Christians think they should drink Kool Aid laced with cyanide because Jim Jones, who said he was a Christian, told his people to do that. It is also called a Straw Man fallacy.

I agree it is all of us, it is the Romans, it is Pilate, it is Herod, it is the Jewish leadership.

Good. That's what Catholics believe too.

 

[balshan]

If you want to make a thread about what one RC said, make a thread about what one RC said. But if you want to know what the RCC says, you have to be open to the possibility that it might be more than what one person said. It would be like someone saying that Christians think they should drink Kool Aid laced with cyanide because Jim Jones, who said he was a Christian, told his people to do that. It is also called a Straw Man fallacy.




Good. That's what Catholics believe too.

You obviously did not read the op properly. I used one poster as an example of what he said and asked the question what is the RC belief. You say it is not. You seem to have not read the op. Jim Jones was evil and yet you think you have made a valid point, like usual not reading the op properly means you didn't.

So you falsely accused me of a straw man which it was not, so once again you have misrepresented my post. No surprise it is normal RC tactics.

You by misrepresenting my post is doing what you claimed I did, it is an actual strawman fallacy.

Logical Fallacies: Understanding the Straw Man Argument

The straw person fallacy wrongly characterizes someone through selective use of their quotes and misrepresentation of their statements. How does it work?

www.thegreatcoursesdaily.com

 

[LifeIn]

You obviously did not read the op properly. I used one poster as an example of what he said and asked the question what does the RC belief. You say it is not. You seem to have not read the op.

So you falsely accused me of a straw man which it was not, so once again you have misrepresented my post. No surprise it is normal RC tactics,

I went back and looked again the OP, and the very first sentence was:

Who do RCs believe killed Jesus?

Seeing the letter 's' after "RC" I assumed you were referring to plural, i.e. RC's generally. Your next sentence mentioned a specific RC, which I took as an illustration of what RC's might believe. But I did not think you wanted to limit the discussion to what just that one person believed. If I was in error in assuming that, then I will just bow out and wait for that one RC to answer your question, since he/she is the only person who could possibly answer it.

 

[Mysterium Fidei]

You obviously did not read the op properly. I used one poster as an example of what he said and asked the question what is the RC belief. You say it is not. You seem to have not read the op. Jim Jones was evil and yet you think you have made a valid point, like usual not reading the op properly means you didn't.

So you falsely accused me of a straw man which it was not, so once again you have misrepresented my post. No surprise it is normal RC tactics,

You seem to want to make a determination or judgement about what all Catholics believe or about what the Church teaches based upon (supposedly) what 1 Catholic said.

 

[balshan]

I went back and looked again the OP, and the very first sentence was:

Who do RCs believe killed Jesus?

Seeing the letter 's' after "RC" I assumed you were referring to plural, i.e. RC's generally. Your next sentence mentioned a specific RC, which I took as an illustration of what RC's might believe. But I did not think you wanted to limit the discussion to what just that one person believed. If I was in error in assuming that, then I will just bow out and wait for that one RC to answer your question, since he/she is the only person who could possibly answer it.

Obviously, you cannot comprehend simple English.

 

[balshan]

You seem to want to make a determination or judgement about what all Catholics believe or about what the Church teaches based upon (supposedly) what 1 Catholic said.

I see RCs stick together. No I asked a question I did not determine or make a judgement on what all believed. I was asking what RCs believe or what is RC belief on the subject. I gave an example of one RC to see if that was the normal belief. I know we were taught that at school but I also thought thinking on the topic had matured over time.

Asking a question is trying to find out the truth. Maybe you don't use questions to determine the truth but most people do.

The misreading of my post by you two posters shows me why comprehending scripture could pose a problem for some.

 

[Mysterium Fidei]

I see RCs stick together. No I asked a question I did not determine or make a judgement on what all believed. I was asking what RCs believe or what is RC belief on the subject. I gave an example of one RC to see if that was the normal belief. I know we were taught that at school but I also thought thinking on the topic had matured over time.

Asking a question is trying to find out the truth. Maybe you don't use questions to determine the truth but most people do.

The misreading of my post by you two posters shows me why comprehending scripture could pose a problem for some.

Obviously you don't know how to make a point. I'm sure your comprehending of scripture is completely infallible.