Jews Killed Nobody … writes Gil Solomon
With antisemitism rampaging like a wildfire throughout the fertile grounds of Europe, be it Muslim initiated or otherwise, when a Holland-based Roman Catholic Church Association television station airs a video clip titled “Jews killed Jesus“, when a Sydney-based Anglican priest, in one of his sermons stated that “Jews killed Jesus” I say enough is enough.
Gil Solomon
The unbridled persecution of Jews throughout the centuries should have taught us that in order to legitimise the gospels, some believers in Christianity who claim to practice its tenets, need to perpetuate the deception of Jews as the eternal scapegoats. I find it unfortunate that I need to respond in the manner I do, but rest assured this dialogue needs to take place. A tidal wave of antisemitism is currently engulfing the world and the past docile, politically correct and ill-informed posture of world Jewry has been proven to be an abysmal failure.
To address the issue of antisemitism head on, I offer the following.
The Republic of Rome 2,000 years ago would never have tolerated anyone in its midst being proclaimed as the Messiah or King of the Jews. Simply put, under Roman law, calls for a monarchy within the Republic would have been a treasonable offence punishable by death.
It was not an issue for the Sanhedrin, as Christian theology would want us to believe.
The actions of the Roman Governor Pontius Pilate, as described in the New Testament, was a major contributing factor in the antisemitism we see today. Christianity teaches that at Passover there was a Roman custom whereby one prisoner scheduled for crucifixion would be pardoned. This same narrative goes on to say that when given the choice of whom to free, the Jewish mob cried out for Barabbas. Then followed the hand washing scene where Pilate freed Barabbas and exonerated himself for the death of the Christ (literally the “anointed one”) and so started the beginnings of antisemitism spread so successfully down the centuries to the present day. Unfortunately, according the writings of the noted Roman historian Josephus, there was never any Roman custom to pardon anyone scheduled for crucifixion. If this is so, then the possibility exists that the whole story is a myth fabricated by the early Church to blame someone (but not the Roman authorities) for the death of their Christ. Who better to blame than Jews?
I offer the following for the benefit of those Jews who find themselves engaged in theological debate, subjected to antisemitic vilification or Evangelical Christian attempts to convert them to Christianity. Additionally, never again do we need the spectacle as reported some years back where a guide at the Sydney Holocaust Museum was asked “Why don’t Jews just accept Jesus?” (implying the horror of the holocaust would never have taken place if Jews would only have forsaken the Torah for the New Testament). According to news reports, the guide’s only response was to stand there totally bewildered and unable to answer. Hopefully the following, if absorbed, will ensure this deplorable episode will never occur again.
The psalms were Jewish and written before the birth of Christianity. All references to “Lord” were to the Lord God of Israel. Christian clergy often quote the psalms and the average Christian thinks the references to “Lord” (e.g. Psalm 23 “The Lord is my shepherd”) refer to Jesus. No Christian clergy to my knowledge has ever seen fit to enlighten his flock. So the propaganda goes on and on from one generation to the other. Even the regularly quoted: “The meek shall inherit the earth” often quoted by Christians as a profound and original statement by their Saviour is nothing more than his quoting from the Psalms (Psalm 37 Verse 11).
The gospels state that Jesus said the profound “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. However, this is not original. It is a slight alteration of the Talmud’s words which states: “Do not do unto others as you would not want them to do unto you.”
Before entering into any religious dialogue, all Jews need to be aware of the following five inconsistencies related to the gospels.
- Jews gave the world through the Torah the concept of the Messiah and the Christian idea of divinity taking human form is considered idolatrous by the Torah.
- When the Messiah arrives there is supposed to be peace on earth. As there has been no peace for over 2,000 years, the early Christian Church developed the concept of the “Second Coming”. That is, Jesus will come again and fix what he didn’t do the first time, that is, bring peace. Unfortunately there is nothing in the biblical prophecy of the Torah that someone will turn up and fail but will have a second chance to come and get it right.
- Jews wherever possible bury their dead before Shabbat, so when Christ’s followers (all Jews at the time) appealed to the Romans to have him brought down for burial before sunset, the New Testament states that to make sure he was dead, “the centurion speared him in the side and out gushed blood & water”. The interesting word here is “gushed”. This word implies that the heart is pumping. If this is so, the individual is alive. If someone was in fact crucified during the day and brought down alive before sunset, it is more than likely he could have recovered sufficiently from this ordeal within 3 days in order to make an appearance. This in my mind should cast grave doubts in respect to the entire concept of the resurrection, which is a fundamental tenet of Christian doctrine.
- Jews are commanded to eat only Kosher. That is, the blood is drained from slaughtered animals and forbidden. It is a mind boggling stretch of the imagination that an orthodox Jew could say to his followers: “Drink this wine which represents my blood”. This would have been an abomination.
- The New Testament states that one of the last words of The Christ on the cross was: “Father, why has thou forsaken me?” This does not sound like the words the Messiah of all mankind would make. Additionally, as Catholicism believes in the trinity (Father, Son & Holy Ghost – all wrapped up into one) who are the comments being directed at?
In conclusion, until those who preach and practice Christianity come to grips with the reality that there are those in their midst who maintain and support the lies and persecution that has been perpetrated throughout centuries, culminating in the false accusation of deicide, the scourge of antisemitism has no hope of ever being extinguished.
Author Gil Solomon is a retired finance manager who takes an intense interest in current affairs impacting on the Jewish community.
You’re right, Otto. Absolutely. Surely Netanyahu at the time (2011) didn’t have to be part of that public-political arena by thanking the Pope profusely for his statement and appearing grateful? A dignified silence might have said a lot.
Yet, the Church ( that is the Vatican) thrives on and demands a public spectacle of protocols of honours not matter how sincere because she knows that she’s been feeding the same stuff for millennia to urbs and orbis.
Netanyahu only obliged….
Here I think we need to expand a little.
Israel has been engaged in a vast PR exercise throughout and Netanyahu has been one of the best man for the job among the gallery of Israeli PM. One very powerful Pm of great memory was Golda Meir.
Israel has been reaching to all international quarters from governments to interest groups , religious entities etc. as a relatively new strategy in the hasbarah we have been talking and so often complaining for negligence. A number of traditional barriers have been eliminated, even images of the known Jewish profile slightly “adjusted” to the point of a Jewish national leader sending all kinds of “best wishes” on religious occasions completely distinct from ours etc. This “apostolic” new approach by the Jewish identity needs to carry messages in attitudes, fashions, “languages” of the local mode of comprehension.
We are faced with a massive anti Israeli presence in all major points of influence, whether directly or by proxy, one by the mere presence and size of muslim communities in the old Western World and in others, such as Russia, by the vested interests of the powers to be with the powerful islamic world. Certain important sections of the American body politic an communal orgs. contain “factions” less than amiable to the comprehensive interests of Israel, hence the oft “interventions” the PM of Israel needs to make on Capitol Hill not to mention pressure groups. There is, therefore , a need for ad hoc adjustments in the Israeli rhetoric in accordance with the profile of each “audience”.
Must repeat, Bibi is doing a fantastic job.
Dear Otto, Sorry about my imprecision there when speaking of the couple of Popes who absolved Jews of killing Jesus. I was on a bit of a rant. I was thinking in particular of Pope Benedict XVI, who I think visited Israel in 2011 and declared that Jews bore no collective guilt for the crucifixion of Jesus, then went on to blame it on the sins of mankind or words to that effect. So, all he’s done is remove guilt from succeeding generations. He also wrote this in a book published at the time. I wonder then why Netanyahu was so grateful for the statement?
I meant to include in my previous posting the fact that Jews should really acquaint themselves with more knowledge of the history of Christianity. I was staggered to read from Gil’s article that a guide at the Sydney Holocaust Museum was stymied for an answer to the question ‘Why don’t Jews just accept Jesus?’, the questioner associating that with forsaking the Torah for the New Testament. Even at the most basic level of Judaism and Christianity, that question should have been able to be answered with ease.
Dear Liat
let’s make a clear distinction between dogma, which in the case of the Church , stands unaltered and political choreography. Also, plays on semantics in the public-political forum must be seen as such and not mixed with serious considerations of theological issues.
The religion we are talking about holds that Jews are guilty and any so called qualifications cannot alter what they consider “gospel truth”.
Victor Herbert Plgott,
Gil Solomon’s discussion is not limited to a response to bigoted, ‘unenlightened’ Sydney Anglicans. It is a necessary reminder for anybody reading it of the unmitigated pathway of prejudice, vilification and blame the Christian Church has wrought, transparently and/or subtly, for over 2000 years against Jews and Judaism. That this provided fertile ground for despotic leaders, both in the church, monarchies and political spectra, as well as for common ordinary members of the public, in so many countries around the world to deport, disenfranchise and kill Jews over this period of time is the result. Culminating as it did in Hitler, the Nazis and the Holocaust.
That a couple of Popes have attempted to redress this by admitting the Jews were not responsible for the death of Jesus, and that many Christians today might not hold such views, cannot undo that damage. Just as the efforts of today’s Germany to confront and address the Holocaust, while a good thing and recognised as such, cannot undo the damage. We cannot undo what has been done and we dare not forget it.
Danny Kidron says ‘It is a question of faith. Debate is mute.’ I agree with the fact that there are different beliefs and we must respect others beliefs. If belief stayed stationary at that point, I could do it. No matter how misguided I might think the beliefs of others. The problem is when it doesn’t stay still, when it imposes or misrepresents. Then, I think, debate is necessary.
The thing I don’t respect (and to a large degree that’s the writer in me, as well as the enormity of the situation) is the misappropriation and misuse of another’s ‘text’. Pauline Christianity has done just that and reviled the original – Judaism – as it took it for itself and added to it with the New Testament. Paul, aka Saul of Tarsus, is the biggest turncoat in history (personal, yet informed by study, opinion coming in here), not only turning against his own people and religion in a supposed epiphany on the way to Damascus, but also using his newly found religion as a political tool in an attempt to join the hi-jinks in Rome.
I wonder how many Christians know that there were three distinctive forms of early Christianity, each differing from the others in beliefs and practices:
1. The Jesus Movement – Jesus’ first Jewish followers under James in Jerusalem. Essentially a Torah-observant Jewish group that saw Jesus as the anticipated FULLY HUMAN Messiah or redeemer.
2. The Church of the Gentiles – the community of Gentile followers of Jesus, stemming from Mary the Magdalene (who was never a whore, by the way!!). This group paralleled the fully Jewish Jesus movement by preserving a more historical Jesus (rather than the mythical creature Paul was to invent). They did though introduce some non-Jewish ideas into the movement, such as elevation of Jesus from a human Messiah to some kind of divine being or ‘Son of God’, and likewise the elevation of Mary the Magdalene to some kind of ‘Bride of God’.
3. The Christ Movement – Paul’s congregations, based on Paul’s visions of the resurrected Christ, not the historical Jesus. This movement diminished the stature of Mary the Magdalene (that’s putting it mildly, as she goes from Bride of God to Whore).
[this specific information taken from ‘The Lost Gospel’, Simcha Jacobovici & Barrie Wilson, Pegasus Books, N.Y., 2014)
Christianity seemingly accepts the Old Testament (Torah) and yet has in reality usurped it for its own purposes, while using it to denigrate and negate Jews. This has been done, while at the same time by implication replacing the old with the new, however greedily embracing the Psalms in toto, which in reality can only be read and understood in their older Jewish context. The Ten Commandments, which are also accepted, become a problem due to the fact that G-d is only to be worshipped directly, not by way of an icon or a human being, such as Jesus was to become as the ‘Son of God’. (It is just possible that Jesus, as the Jew he was, might be turning in his grave right now at the ludicrous mis-use he has been put to.)
While I appreciate this is not a theological discussion as such, it needs to be borne in mind that if faith had indeed been kept to itself as far as Christianity is concerned and practised solely within its own confines, without seeking to damage others, we would not be having to have this discussion. I am afraid that Christians who might also object to the way their religion has been used, and yet feel absolved from that due to their different thoughts on the matter, will hopefully stand back a bit and understand this is not a personal attack on you.
Dear Liat
No Pope or any other church leader or follower has ever absolved the Jews for the death of their messiah. As I mentioned earlier, the only “concession” found in “Nostra Aetate” is that only some Jews in Jerusalem, principally their religious leaders, were RESPONSIBLE for his death. In essence, that still makes the Jews responsible generically. This is the very tenet of church antisemitism.
Following Vatican II, SOME Catholic regional churches, mainly in the USA and we have seen moves in Rome, have made some “progress” in some kind of “reprochment” with the Jewish community, and even that only accepted at certain levels, obviously and for good reason, you would not find Charedi amiable to this. Otherwise you are absolutely right in as far as the heavy responsibility the Church has not just for its past antisemitic atrocities, but for CREATING the phenomenon, antisemitism, which is still very alive these days. We do see/hear voices of atonement and genuine ouvertures of support for Jewish and Israeli causes from a number of christian places and that is a good sign, a welcome sign of understanding and even fighting against current, perpetuated unwanted realities.
Victor Pigott & Tenez le Droit
Your anxiety caused by Gil Solomon’s comments/opinion and zeal in defence of your beliefs is well understood as well as the fact that you have missed completely the core message our own Gil was attempting to convey.
Major errors in details on both sides of the argument(s) aside, what Gill has emphasised are unquestionable, historical facts as well as some dogmatic details, in my view, not correctly presented. None of what we have seen from Gill could possibly seen as offensive by Christians and here’s why:
NO ONE can deny that the Church whether low o high, is responsible for the promulgation and practice of the most vile acts of anti Jewish racism we “casually” call antisemitism. Reasons are easy to define, but the practice by the Church of pinning much of its dogma and spiritual legitimacy on the “deicidi Rea’, the killing of the “king” by the Jews, in undeniable. Vatican II has come with the most transparent bigoted duplicitous stance on the subject by stating in the famous ” Nostra Aetate” that the Jews of today are not guilty for what their forefathers have….DONE. So, the Jews of today are not hated for what they have done but for what our ancestors have committed. So, let’s not skirt the issue here !!!
If you feel offended by being reminded that, in the name of the Church’s dogma , a perpetuation of Holocausts has been committed starting from YOUR Messiah’s altars and carried onto the streets of your urbs and orbis, then so be it. It is the slightest punishment you deserve and my heart is not bleeding for it.
We, the perpetual Jews have nothing to appologise for being massacred in the name of YOUR escatological concepts, particularly in respect of the totally farcical christian concept of who killed who. Because, if you still maintain that a man was killed while that man was the son of the Almighty , as we all accept in our shared monotheism that Hashem decides one’s fate, then you have serious problems understanding not just our religion, but your very own !!! Wasn’t your messiah who cried to his “father” something to the extent of ” Father why hast you abandoned me !!”. In our beliefs we DO NOT hold that we would be above G-d !! What He has decided and done is not for man to object to or undo !! Thus, it seems that you have serious problems of the highest order; on one hand you have contradicted your own beliefs, on the other you have persecuted the wrong people . The “third hand” is that, if anything , YOU need to apologise to us and we may accept it !!!!
The point here is not whether Jesus died on the cross or not; was resurrected or not; is the Messiah or not; the trinity or not. That is about different beliefs and it calls for respect for other’s beliefs. It is a question of faith. Debate is mute.
The question is: Who was responsible for Jesus’ crusifixion?
The Romans conquered Judeah and ruled over the Jews who they subjugated.
To consider a Jew of the time, even a rabbi or a priest, telling the Romans what to do and the Romans acquiescing, is a stretch. Is a NO WAY! Besides, Jews have never killed or punished any claimed Meshiach, and there have been others even in our time.
So what happened?
Jesus is a rebel, a trouble making Jew, with a growing following, preaching that the sword is not the way, that love – not only of your neighbour but also of your enemy – is the way.
This challenges and completely undermines the Roman ideology – and that of the world of the time – that might is right. This is dangerous. Jesus is executed.
The Romans were clever conquerors. They embraced the gods of their vanquished into their pantheon to encourage them to be good citizens of the empire.
Some years after his execution, Jesus is considered by a growing following not only the messiah but also the son of God: God.
Rome , as it does, embraces Jesus into its pantheon but …. Rome executed Jesus. Executed “God”. How to reconcile this fact with the now embrace of Jesus?
Find a scapegoat!! Who? The usual suspect – the Joooooo.
It’s a theory based on observation, another mythology, another possibility.
So regardless of who was and is Jesus: who is responsible for his execution?
Not the Jews. Jews killed nobody.
I must agree with Mr. LeDroit in his comments about this article. While I understand that Mr. Solomon’s diatribe against Christianity is a reaction to the bigoted evangelical comments of a certain group of “unenlightened” Sydney Anglicans, with respect Mr. Solomon your comments are equally as unhelpful. The “Blood libel” and other antisemitic myths from the Middle Ages that unfortunately still circulate in certain parts of the contemporary world should not under any circumstances be associated with mainstream Christianity. Anti Semitic treatises such as the infamous “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” are nothing more than the ravings of racists, xenophobes and madmen. Please Mr. Solomon do not judge Christianity on the basis of the views of Sydney “Low Church” Anglicans as their views do not represent mainstream Christianity, let alone the majority of the Anglican Communion. I respectfully suggest Mr. Solomon you consult with either a Roman Catholic or High Church Anglican theologian to discover the true Christian viewpoint. In this time of world upheaval it is imperative that all people from different religious backgrounds learn to accept the others viewpoint, even if they disagree with it.
Victor,
I am certainly not of the view that all Christians believe the lies and propaganda that has been spread about Jews down the centuries, lies that lead to pogrom after pogrom, culminating in the holocaust.
However, instead of lecturing me on why I should meet up with Church officials to discover the “true Christian viewpoint”, maybe you should spend more time encouraging the world wide Christian leadership from the Pope down, to come out and categorically declare that the Church got it wrong for these past two thousand years and that Jews had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the death of your saviour.
No reasonable Jew will claim that Christianity is evil and no Christian theologian is needed to substantiate that point.
Christianity is essentially a religion built on Judaism by Jews and spread by the Roman empire. Judaism is a religion which values life and is based on the love of one’s fellow man on repentance and foegiveness. It respects the works attributed to the creator especially other sentient beings. Judaism is concerned for justice and prizes truth. Christianity has adopted those values.
At the same time Jews are accused by an increasing number of people of deicide, against all evidence, historical of theological. One cannot ignore that part of the Christian addition to the Bible that has the Jews cursing themselves forever by saying that may the sin of killing Jesus be upon Jews forever. It is up to Christian theologians to reinterpret that to bring it into line with 21st century values.
One can not forget that accusations of deicide led to massacres by the Crusaders, to various expulsions, to the Chmielnicki massacres, to pogroms and of course the Holocaust. But one must remember that what occurred was not because Christianity is evil, but because there were far too many who called themselves Christians chose to deafen themselves to the JudeoChristian message.
As there is an increased number of people who are again choosing to ignore the JudeoChristian message of love and forgiveness, it is important for all people of good intent to deal honestly with history and theology and to work together to counter the forces that would lead to another Holocaust, another perversion of the message that the Jewish Jesus preached.
It’s astonishing that Mr Solomon would presume to critique Christianity when he clearly has not even a superficial understanding of Christian theology and the nature of the Trinity. His sneering tone and insulting dismissal of a faith founded on a resurrected Jesus, is offensive in the extreme.
As a practising Christian, I respect the faith, practices and traditions of Judaism, and acknowledge the millenia of Jewish history and tradition that preceded the founding of Christian belief, which itself has its foundation in the prophecies and law of the prophets.
It’s disappointing that Mr Solomon chooses to exercise the same bigotry that he accuses Christianity of. The timing of his epistle, in the holiest season of Christendom, is clearly designed to be as hurtful as possible to Christian readers, and makes a mockery of the talmudic exhortation “Do not do unto others as you would not want them to do unto you.”
Shalom.
Tenez Le Droit,
My last paragraph clearly says: “In conclusion, until those who preach and practice Christianity come to grips with the reality that there are those in their midst who maintain and support the lies and persecution that has been perpetrated throughout centuries, culminating in the false accusation of deicide, the scourge of anti-Semitism has no hope of ever being extinguished.”
I was at pains to emphasise that there are those in your midst who support anti-Semitism. I clearly am not of the view that the majority of Christians do so.
Two of my closest friends are Greek Orthodox.
It seems to me, an irreligious but fervent Jew, that Gil does indeed know quite a lot about Christianity. Dismissing his observations by stating that they are ignorant, without pointing out where he is in error, is simply a conversation stopper. Gil’s views might offend Christians, but only those who are uncertain of their faith and are unable to discuss and debate their beliefs. The point, of course, is that Gil would not have written his comments but for the not merely offensive and erroneous assertions that Jews killed Jesus, but for the history of murderousness that have historically accompanied those accusations.
I will add a few comments to Gil’s to support his arguments, and if I am in error, please let me know, rather than simply claim offence for a challenge to dogma.
Firstly, I would add to Gil’s point about the second coming: Christians cannot claim that Jesus was the fulfilment of the prophecy of the messianic era and then use the same prophecy to claim that there will be a second coming.
Secondly, Matthew states that the Sanhedrin declared that Jesus deserved to die. But under the Romans the Sanhedrin didn’t have the power to execute people and if it did, Jesus would have been stoned.
Thirdly, Jesus was crucified, their traditional way of executing people. Had Pilate not found Jesus guilt of a crime, he would have been freed. The story that Pilate “washed” his hands of Jesus’ execution is contradicted by the sign of INRI on the cross. INRI stands for Jesus Nazarenus Rex Judaeorum: Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews, meaning that Pilate ordered the execution on political grounds and the sign was an insult to his Jewish subjects. One should also bear in mind Pope Benedict’s observation that not all Jews can be blamed for Jesus’ death as not all Jews were present.
Fourthly, Christians are again blaming Jews for the death of Jesus. Since Christians believe that they are saved because god sent his son down to die for those who believe in him, blaming Jews for performing god’s will and thereby providing Christians salvation, is a theological contradiction to my mind.
Now I am prepared to be proven wrong, but not on the basis of dogma or dudgeon. Also, I would not want to shake the belief of anyone, or the comfort they enjoy in their salvation. Nor even in their quest to do good works for the sake of Jesus. But the resurgence of baseless Jew hatred does call for debate and for putting to rest ancient and ignorant prejudices.