The Problem of Evil

Right and thats why the Jews wanted Jesus dealt with so nicely.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"

What are you talking about? Romans killed Jesus. Not Jews. Besides, what does that have to do with Jesus being a Jew?

Apparently you haven't heard all sides to this story, did I say the Jews killed Jesus, no I did not, what I said was how they wanted him handled, yes by the romans, the romans saw no reason to kill him, the Jews demanded it, not the Jewish population, but the High Jewish Counsel or whatever they were called.

I think thats was even represented in Gibson's Passion which is claimed to be the most accurate film representation, but its not the only source and this isn't a big secret, its a major source of anti-semitism, Jews don't believe Jesus to be more than a prophet, so when he claims to be the awaited Messiah, instead of being accepted as such he was seen and dealt with as a problem, a false prophet, why do you think he was strung up?

If romans were worried about christ and christianity then they wouldn't be too fond of Jews either, they are both based off of the laws of abraham and moses.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"

quote:

---

If romans were worried about christ and christianity then they wouldn't be too fond of Jews either, they are both based off of the laws of abraham and moses.

---

quote:

---

http://www.captaincynic.com/thread.php3/thrdid=32405-u-frmid=17-u-pa
ge=8
It makes perfect sense why Jesus taught peace, justice, and kindness, cturtle.
He was a Jew.

---

quote:

---

http://www.captaincynic.com/thread.php3/thrdid=32405-u-frmid=17-u-pa
ge=7
It appears that there are three possible co-equal authors of evil: God, nature, and man. Beyond these there should be no argument. If one's argument says that man is the sole author of evil, then that argument is rather presumptuous and pessimistic. It not only presumes to know the dynamics of all of humanity but that that dynamic is evil.

---

quote:

---

How could he have been proving a point to Job?
Why the hell would I want my family killed only to have what...a better family? That seems rather pointless, not to mention cruel, unusual, and traumatic.

---

quote:

---

That rather pointless, cruel, unusual, and traumatic event, a wasted effort by today's standard.

---

"Terrorist or tyrant, few may come to the Truth that both are poor choice."
[  Edited by cturtle at   ]

Anyhow, Pharisaic Jews view Jesus as one among many rabbis, and would not have had a problem with him since Pharisaic Judaism is quite liberal in philosophy. Saddusaic Judaism, on the other hand, is quite conservative, and the Saddusaic Jews who comprised the Sanhedrin had a fierce problem with Jesus since (1) they perceived that he threatened Saddusaic Judaism (2) they were politically closer to the temple priests than the Phariaic Jews since the Saddusaic Jews comprised the Sanhedrin, and (3) the Sanhedrin was a puppet of the Roman authorities since the temple priests were puppets of the Roman authorities. Jesus was killed over politics, not over religion. The fact that he was killed at all is still beside the point. Jesus was a Jew, not a Christian. Furthermore, Saul of Tarsus, who never met Jesus, taught a spinoff version of Judaism for everyone, which everyone now knows as Judeo-Christianity, which has deep Greco-Roman roots.

But what are you saying was the political motivation, are you saying Romans had a reason to kill Jesus? Because a way I've heard it explained is that they found no reason to do so unpon interview of Jesus.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"

Total conquest requires total subservience and the total annhialation of anyone who is perceived to threaten that subservience. This was the reign of Caesar Octavian Augustan, who would insure that his Pax Romana, his Roman Peace, would last for 200 years. The Pax Romana was not kept with the philosophical point, but with the point of the sword. If the Jewish poltical machine under Roman auspices targeted Jesus, then Jesus had no chance with the Roman prefect who would readily kill any Jew as he would a dog. Jesus was do different.

This does not address the accountings of Pontius Pilate's claimed dispute of reasoning for killing Jesus, and even offering, as tradition on a holiday, to allow Jesus' life to be spared, but a representative, not public opinion, was the deciding voice on the matter, Barabbas.

So in looking into a little more I see the point you make of Roman power and practice, but where did the Roman's get the notion that Jesus was a threat, apparently this was brought up by that small faction with the story of the marketplace, a crime.

Taking it seriously, as your statement corroborates, he then interviews Jesus and then the ensuing explanation I gave occurs.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"

To think that a Roman prefect, whose only job was to keep trouble makers like Jesus out of Judea, was lenient in any way is slightly naive. The prefect did not like going to Jerusalem during Passover, and was already prepared to route out potential trouble makers before he arrived. The Sanhedrin bringing Jesus before the prefect was enough for Jesus to die.

We have to not forget Jesus Died By the Hands of Man To Save man

Or to save Humans

Romach, look, first off I'm citing a posistion made supposedly by the bible.

Secondly, thinking anything is as cut and dry as you make it sound is naive, and again, I could simply make the point that sure he was pissed, because some whining Sanhedrin, I'm sure seen as little more than a sniveling minion, is getting all bent out of shape and ruining Pilots golf tour or something. So by your own logic he may be far more of an annoyance than Jesus, especially after meeting him, for all I know Pilot might have prefered a reason to kill the Sanhedrin, but didn't for political purposes.

I don't know if its because this is so speculative, because your points are sound and logical, but just not conclusive or definitive, not that mine are, that's just more of my point.

Stavo, guess the message didn't stick well enough.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"
[  Edited by Ironwood at   ]

I have never read the bible and only heard rumours about it. God sounds so vengeful from what I’ve heard. YOU WILL BE JUDGED. YOU WILL PAY FOR YOUR SINS. Jeez that’s intimidation. Is life all a test we have to pass? lets act on instinct? I know we’re given a brain but its full of other peoples ideas most of the time, by this I mean religion and ethics I didn’t make up what I was taught some other dude did. Shouldn’t we act on what we think is right instinctively? I think a lot of questions can be answered without religion or education.

"Great visions often start with small dreams"

You've actually made the best point of all, Lefty: no one can possibly know what happened then since no one was there that is here now to talk about what actually happened. It's a non-argument. The initial reason I brought it up was because I sensed that some were makeing anti-semitic snipes with religious quotes. And the scriptures from which they were quoting were written between one and two centuries after Jesus died.

quote:

---

The initial reason I brought it up was because I sensed that some were makeing anti-semitic snipes with religious quotes.

---

quote:

---

The fact that he was killed at all is still beside the point. Jesus was a Jew, not a Christian.
Furthermore, Saul of Tarsus, who never met Jesus, taught a spinoff version of Judaism for everyone, which everyone now knows as Judeo-Christianity, which has deep Greco-Roman roots.

---

"Terrorist or tyrant, few may come to the Truth that both are poor choice."