Who Killed Jesus? (Newsweek)

It is night, in a quiet, nearly deserted garden in Jerusalem. A figure is praying; his friends sleep a short distance away. We are in the last hours of the life of Jesus of Nazareth, in the spring of roughly the year 30, at the time of the Jewish feast of Passover. The country—first-century Judea, the early 21st's Israel—is part of the Roman Empire. The prefect, Pontius Pilate, is Caesar's ranking representative in the province, a place riven with fierce religious disputes. Jesus comes from Galilee, a kind of backwater; as a Jewish healer and teacher, he has attracted great notice in the years, months and days leading up to this hour.

His popularity seemed to be surging among at least some of the thousands of pilgrims gathered in the city for Passover. Crowds cheered him, proclaiming him the Messiah, which to first-century Jewish ears meant he was the "king of the Jews" who heralded the coming of the Kingdom of God, a time in which the yoke of Roman rule would be thrown off, ushering in an age of light for Israel. Hungry for liberation and deliverance, some of those in the teeming city were apparently flocking to Jesus, threatening to upset the delicate balance of power in Jerusalem.

No body really killed Jesus...he lives....no dead body no crime....:)

Jesus himself said....that "No one takes my life"..." I lay it down willingly" "the Father has told me this is his will and I do the will of my father" " I lay down my life...that I might take it up again"

Jesus also told us that at anytime during the events preceding his crucification...he could have asked His Father to send a legion of his Heavenly angels to defeat his enemies and His Father would do so...

The religious leaders of the day had the Romans crucify Jesus because Jesus flat out told them that
He is God.... and that He is Messiah.....and God the Son ...

They pretty much flipped out at that...

He was killed by the Jews for heresy and for blasphemy....at least this was the motivation they told themselves and others..Jesus however rightly judged their hearts..and called them children of their father the devil..they really killed Jesus because their hearts were hardened by greed "The love of money being the root of all evil...and the Jewish relgious leaders of the day were afraid of loosing their cushy gig...

The Roman ,Pilate, went along with the Jewish leaders for fear of that they might falsely report his inability to govern a desert kingdom such as Judea or had he refused to crucify Jesus (whom Pilate declared "An innocent man")and allowed Jesus to continue his teaching the Jewish leaders convinced Pilate the Jews would be persuaded to revolt against the Romans ...

Pilate wished for a better posting...if he governed well in Judea...and feared a bad report falling on Rome's ears The Jewish religious leaders feared that Jesus was about to put them out of business...that they would no longer be able to profit as middle men...between man and God....

Jesus told them this in so many words...Jesus told them that "No man can come to the Father but by me"...

The Pharisees were pretty much out of business unless they got rid of God the Son Had Jesus been merely mortal...they would have succeeded..instead they did the will of God the Father and God the Son...

For had they not falsely accused and persuaded Pilate to crucify God the Son...No one would be saved...

Both the Romans and the Jewish leaders and their followers did the will of God....for without their dirty work...no one would be saved...

One would almost be inclined to thank them...but condemning anyone of them for their deeds is foolish...it had to be...

It was both God the Father and God the Son's will that things happened the way the did...

Not to mention.. it was also prophesied in the old testament and happened just as it was foretold...

To the glory of God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Spirit

imo

Great posts; loved all of them. Here's another thought:

1Cr 2:6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:

1Cr 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, [even] the hidden [wisdom], which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

1Cr 2:8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known [it], they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1Cr/1Cr002.html#8

[In other words, they fell into God's snare, His plan for salvation of ALL mankind, planned from even before Gen. 3:15]

Look up 'princes' v. 8 [hit Blue 'C' to left of verse; see verses in which it is used]
Lexicon Results for archon (Strong's 758)
Greek for 758
1) a ruler, commander, chief, leader

Treasury of Scripture of Knowledge
http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/1Cr/2/8.html

There's plenty of blame to go around. The point is, it was the plan; He took the blame for all of us, rose from the dead and thus conquered death for all who would get on the same page. Hope everyone will this time.

Jesus Is God
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pentecostal/One-Ch4.htm

Just read the Newsweek article. It's worth checking out.

Some points:

- The author dismisses the reliability of the Gospels right away. To his credit, he states this pretty early on.
- However, Gibson gets unfairly criticized repeatedly for using the Gospels for the account of Jesus' Passion.
- The author relies on his interpretation of other sources to occasionally try to discredit the Gospel. For example, he claims that it's unlikely Pilate would have been somewhat unequivocal about crucifying Jesus. IMO, that's the author's opinion at best.
- He makes a claim near the end that the Catholic church is saying Jesus' mercy extends to unbelievers by citing some Catholic quote about the need for non-dicrimination, regardless of religious belief. I'm too lazy to check it out, but I bet that's taken way out of context.
- The whole idea that Gibson should be criticized for relying on the Gospels only is just terribly unfair. The whole point of Gibson effort was to be true to the Gospels. IMO, the anti-Semitic flap is just a backlash against authentic Christianity.
- Interestingly, the author seems to respect much of the Christian message, but without Jesus' exclusive claim of deity.
- The worst and weakest claim of the author was that Jesus probably did not claim to be divine. He says it wasn't that rare for Jews to claim to be the Messiah. I haven't heard that one before. It's just part of an overall 'historical' view of the author that the Gospels are unreliable.

Anyway, I suspect the author would have been even more anti-biblical, anti-fundamentalist Christian if the NewsWeek editors didn't hold him back.

The author doesn't blast the movie for its artistic value. By that lack of criticism, I suspect he enjoyed the movie in spite of himself. And I don't think he really wants to cast Gibson as anti-Semetic. The article goes into some depth of how and why Christians teach it doesn't make sense to blame only the Jews.

Again, it's an interesting read that I recommend to others.

-- Joe

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

	The Jews in the Roman World by Michael Grant another edition
	Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels by Michael Grant