the first paragraph you wrote completely describes me and my family. we are jews, and i have had my bar mitzvah, and my siblings will have thiers too. we celebrate all the holidays, i think, and we don't go to services much.(i sometimes go to get out of school) we don't practice sabbath either, it's stupid, and i really don't care much about the torah other than the general message of "God will be good to you if you are good" and "God loves jews, they're just so funny with thier weird words and stuff". i have had periods where i didn't believe in god, but am right now pretty sure god exists. i pray sometimes when i need something, (ex: if i want confidence to ask out a girl, or to help me get stuff back, like my xbox) but i usually don't get anything for the effort. I don't believe in hell or the devil, just because i don't see it happening or ever having happened. i don't believe in adam or eve, i believe in evolution. somehow, 2 people populating a planet doesn't make sense. plus, what if adam had erectile disfunction, or eve started crying from pain while they had sex, and she wouldn't have sex with him again. then nothing would've happened, and people wouldn't exist. basically, i believe in certain things in my religion, but not all of it. i also hate it when anti-semitists claim that "a jew killed jesus". first of all, i doubt the roman soldier who stabbed him with a spear while he hung on the cross was jewish, and if he was, then who cares? it's one jew. if one asian guy detonated a nuclear bomb in washington dc, would everybody suddenly hate asians? 1 person cannot describe a whole race or religion.
To answer your question, yes, people would look down on Asians and be skeptical if one set off a bomb in NYC. Look at 9/11. And I know you're going to say "That was a whole group of Muslims." First off, I'm not blaming Muslims in general. Al Qaida is a certain Muslim sect. And to answer your questions, when people blame the ancient Jews for killing Jesus, they're not pointing to one man. When they say this they are referring to the Jews who arrested, put on trial, and convicted Jesus (the High Priests and townspeople). But like I've said, I'm not a Jesus freak. I go to church about once a month. I'm only saying this because I've gotten some feedback that I'm a Jesus freak and need to go to Hell (I won't say who, but I've gotten it from multiple people).
Ummmmmm no offense but whats a Jesus freak? I simply said that you admit you believe so you don't go to hell. And in response I said that the man who believes is more worthy of heaven than the man who does good things small and great with the resolve that in the end they will receive nothing? Because that to me sounds ridiculous.
First off I don't know why people debate with you about god. If you believe he is supernatural then we can never change your mind. (I could start bringing out FSM and IPU, but I won't) So lets ignore that part of the post. On to the Atheists are Atheists because they were raised. Most Atheists become Atheists, and are not raised. I challange you to find an Atheist that was rasied Athiest. You are partially right though. Everyone is born without a conception of god. Not a disbelief is god, but no one is born believing in god.
Meow. Alrighty. Respectfully, question restatement, please? (I honestly think you have valuable insights. I'm just not grasping them at the moment yet.)
Ugh, I think I'm done. I'm just making enemies without trying to. Hope there aren't any hard feelings, message me if you think there are and we can work it out I suppose. And I wasnt' saying you sent me a message making fun of me, Sheograth. I said someone did, and it is no one that has actually posted in this thread, not that I've seen anyway.
hey smitty, i don't want to start a religious debate within a religious debate, but first of all, i wouldn't have said that. i don't look down on muslims as a whole. and, dumbass, the jews didn't put jesus on trial. watch the history channel or ngc for once in ur life. the romans were concerned about jesus' followers leading a rebellion, and so crucified and killed him. you obviously need to listen to someone other than your priest. perhaps actually check your info before putting it up
Spartan, the Romans did not put Jesus on trial. The Romans did not arrest Jesus. The Romans did not convict Jesus of blaspheymy. I think you need to pay attention to your history before you call people dumbasses. The Jewish High Priests sent men to arrest Jesus while he was in the Garden of Gethsemane. They arrested him and brought him to the high priest. He was convicted of blasphemy and sent to Pontius Pilate because the Jews were not allowed to sentence anyone to death, because it was against Roman Law. Pilate then gave into the crowd and sent him over to be crucified. This is not a matter of religious debate, this is a matter of history. Whether Jesus was God or not and whether God exists does not change what happened. So next time you want to call someone a dumbass, don't misquote the History channel or pay attention to whether or not is a historically correct source.
first off: where the hell did you get a stupid answer like that? that is completely false, and nearly every well learned person would be on my side with this. jesus was a jew stupid. then, whether it was true or not, probably not, the romans believed he and his followers could be a threat, or lead a rebellion. he began his own religion branched off of judaism, and the romans believed that he could use his newfound power over people to fight them. they couldn't let that happen, so they crucified and killed him. where did you get your info from? it's completely wrong. and if you say wikipedia, then you just screwed yourself in this argument.
I found this on a non-Christian site that explained the events of Jesus' trial. The Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, writing in the 80s or early 90s C.E., indicated that both Jewish leaders and the Roman prefect played roles in the crucifixion of Jesus: [SIZE=-1]About the same time there lived Jesus, a wise man for he was a performer of marvelous feats and a teacher of such men who received the truth with pleasure. He attracted many Jews and many Greeks. He was called the Christ. Pilate sentenced him to die on the cross, having been urged to do so by the noblest of our citizens; but those who loved him at the first did not give up their affection for him. And the tribe of the Christians, who are named after him, have not disappeared to this day.[/SIZE]Josephus would have no reason to attribute a non-existent role to "the noblest of our citizens," so it is probably safe to assume that Jewish leaders did encourage Pilate to crucify Jesus. As that says, and as I said, it was both the Romans and the Jews. Yes, the Romans did make the final call, as I also said, but the Jews were the ones who warranted the arrest and brought him to Pontius Pilate.
Wait huh? I have been reading the recent ones, and I think this one dude was saying that Jesus was not tried in a Roman court. And the other dude was like noooooo your lying. Is't it a FACT the Jesus was turned in by Judas and tried in the Roman court? Then Ceaser "washed his hands" and it was up to Piliot?
Here is what happened (more or less): Judas betrays Jesus. Jesus goes before the Pharisees (high priests). They give him to Pilate, who is unsure of what to do with him. Pilate hands Jesus to someone else, who gives him back to Pilate. Pilate asks the crowds who to release: Barabas the criminal, or Jesus. They pick Jesus; since Pilate doesn't want a riot, he goes with the crowds. However, he really doesn't want to do this, so he washes his hands to absolve himself of the blame. Smitty's last post is right; both the high priests and the Romans had a hand in Jesus' death. EDIT: I'm just saying the version that I know about.
That story is fictionalized. Firstly, if Pontius Pilate did hand Jesus' fate over to someone just to have it returned would have been to someone of lower "rank" than him. He wouldn't have handled all of the crucifixions or cases. I don't think Pilate would have realized the importance of the man and sent him off to a lower (probably a Jew) so he could handle the more high profile cases. The lower would have known more about Jesus and perhaps didn't want to put his death on his hands so he sent him right back. Secondly, Pilate would not have offered Barabas and Jesus up to the mob, let alone release a know murderer. It is much more likely that both were sent to die on the cross. Thirdly, this story has been twisted and translated back and forth so many times it probably wouldn't recognize itself. I think this story was fictionalized to make it appear that Jesus was a lot more famous than he actually was, or a little less run-of-the-mill.
i think that this really doesn't matter, and that you are right, it probably has changed so many times that no one knows what is real or not. let's just end this right now and agree that we could all be wrong, and that no one has the true story.
This is what I've learned throughout my schooling and from history professors alike. Eon had it mostly right. Jesus was betrayed by Judas. The Pharisees arrested him and he was brought before the Sanhedrin. Since it was against Roman law for the Jews to kill someone, he was sent to Pontius Pilate. Pilate did not want to deal with such a petty crime, so he sent him to the man in charge of Galilee, Harod Antipus (I think that's the Herod, there were like 5 of them). It would help if you knew how the Romans ruled over the Jews at that time, but that's a whole nother story. Anyway, Herod did not find anything wrong with Jesus and sent him back to Pilate. This, Nitrous, is where you were wrong. It was the custom at the time that around the Jewish feast of Passover, which is when this whole story was taking place, the Romans released one of the Jewish prisoners back to them. Barabas,who was also a Jew, was held for murder. Pilate asked the Jewish crowd if they wanted Barabas or Jesus, and they chose Barabas. Pilate then "washed his hands" of Jesus' blood in order to take away the guilt. Jesus was sent off to be scourged and crucified.
Since we dont' have rep... nicely done SMitty ..nicely done... I was going to make those points as well...
Well thank you. I'm pretty sure that is a matter of historical fact, as I've said before, and not religious fact.
I stand corrected, smitty. Excellent work. It's what I get for being sloppy. Oh yeah? Like those points on carbon-dating?
i'm not even going to continue arguing the same points versus the same points with this guy. it's pointless and a waste of my time.