Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

fog · Sep 14, 2003, 03:09 pm

Interestingly, we just discussed this in my "Banality of Evil" course.

In Rome, Catholics sought to gain credibility as a legal religion. (The Roman Empire was rather tolerant of religions, but required that one obtain permission first.) Catholics thus sought to try to shift the blame for killing Jesus onto the Jews -- if they said "The Romans killed our God!," it would not be a very effective way of gaining favor with the Romans. (Of course it makes absolutely no sense to blame it on the Jews, seeing as Jesus himself wa Jewish.) Biblical scriptures blamed the Jews, and it stuck, eventually being elevated.

It was really interesting to learn about this, actually -- I knew that the Jews were disliked around the time of the Holocaust in part because of their prosperity. But this, surprisingly, was also the case around Jesus' time. Combined with the "You killed our God!" claims of Catholics, they became rather unpopular as Christianity eventually grew.

(I feel compelled to note that I'm not one of the crazies who actually believes that that we should hate Jews for killing Jesus, just explaining history!)

RebelWithanAK · Sep 14, 2003, 05:26 pm

Well, the Jews also ran out Jesus' disciples, who were personas non gratas for stirring up trouble. There's a reason why Christos is his name...

Geoff332 · Sep 14, 2003, 06:51 pm

By "nobody", I assume you mean The US State Department, Amnesty International, and the UN. I've also heard it from Israel itself. Israel is an independant state, but they occupy and govern areas of land that were given to Palestine -- commonly referred to as the occupied territories. Most of this happened in the 1967 war and is a central part of the on-going conflict.

The hatred of the Jews has a long and noble history in Europe. Their perceived prosperity was one reason, but not the only one. They were seen as a fundementally different race, much the same way as blacks were.

Sep 14, 2003, 08:09 pm

By given, do you mean offered by Israel, and then declined by the Palestinians?

Geoff332 · Sep 14, 2003, 10:26 pm

No, I mean given by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 (1947) -- the same Resolution that gave Israel its land. Among other things, it included a partion plan with economic union -- which meant that the Jewish and Arab states would be independant and self-Governing. In particular, it provided for the establishment of Jewish and Arab states. Israel was formed as the Jewish state in 1949 and Palestine has yet to be formed as a state. Prior to this, the Israeli state did not exist and therefore had no land. They occupied the territory that was designated as the Arab (Palestinian) land in 1967 and has continued to anex and occupy land since then.

Sep 15, 2003, 06:12 am

Given, yes, but refused time and time again in favor of war. Though the UN resolution offered to create a soverign Palestinian state, they declined, and preferred to continue waging a battle against the Isarelis and Jews.

Geoff332 · Sep 15, 2003, 07:39 am

How about giving that opinion from a neutral site, ie one that is not overtly pro-Israel.

G. Adams · Sep 15, 2003, 07:32 pm

oh, me me me me, i'm neutral. If you would care to look at the map of the proposed palestinian state, the recently proposed one, you would agree that throwing it back into their faces was the right thing to do. Instead of one state, it is made up of multiple miniture states, or ghettos if you will. As well as this, there is no compensation for the homes destroyed by the Israelis, nor are the palestinian refugees who have left (been chased) out of Israel/Palestine allowed back with their old homes. So, instead of a scattered Jewish population forced into ghettos by the host nation as it has been for so long, the Israeli's are now doing it to the Palestinians.

RebelWithanAK · Sep 15, 2003, 08:47 pm

"Why you so glum, Indians - we gave you Georgia..." *whisper whisper whisper* "What, there's gold in Georgia? Indians, get out! You get Oklahoma; I don't think there's anything in Oklahoma..."

Somehow I can't help but make comparisons.

Sep 15, 2003, 10:03 pm

Quote:

For exactly the same reasons Christan's are not acting the same way as they were 500 years ago. Society has changed and the expression of religion in society has also changed. This doesn't mean that either the religion or the nature of the people of the religion have changed.

500 years ago christians werw all catholic and (no offence) that was WAY more off then we are today!

Geoff332 · Sep 15, 2003, 10:05 pm

Quote:

500 years ago christians werw all catholic and (no offence) that was WAY more off then we are today!

Except, of course, for the various orthodox churches.

Fallen Angel · Sep 21, 2003, 08:30 am

[quote=fog,09-14-2003 03:09 PM]
to try to shift the blame for killing Jesus onto the Jews -- if they said "The Romans killed our God!," it would not be a very effective way of gaining favor with the Romans. (Of course it makes absolutely no sense to blame it on the Jews, seeing as Jesus himself wa Jewish.) Biblical scriptures blamed the Jews, and it stuck, eventually being elevated.

(I feel compelled to note that I'm not one of the crazies who actually believes that that we should hate Jews for killing Jesus, just explaining history!)

I'm not aJew hating crazy either, in fact I admire their intelligence and staunchness as a race of people, but to throw a fly into your ointment, Pontius Pilate, Roman Govenor of Judea at the time washed his hands of Jesus death saying may his blood be on your heads.
The Jews replyed Yes! Yes! And on our childrens childrens heads!
This is in the Gospel.
They cursed themselves.

RebelWithanAK · Sep 21, 2003, 11:08 am

What, you mean the new testament, written several hundred years after the fact by Christians?

Fallen Angel · Sep 22, 2003, 12:57 am

Quote:

Originally posted by RebelWithanAK@09-21-2003 11:08 AM
What, you mean the new testament, written several hundred years after the fact by Christians?

The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written along with Letters from Peter and Paul and other Saints as Jude shortly after the times of the crucifixtion, they were transcibed by French and Italian monestarys through the first millenium

RebelWithanAK · Sep 22, 2003, 01:37 am

Oh, so they were written several hundreds of years after the fact by Christians. I stand corrected.

xm.bretton · Sep 22, 2003, 01:58 am

not several hundred years. the gospels are eye whitness accounts if you do your research. if you were correct, matthew would have had to lived a good few hundred years along with the other apostles that participated in writing gospels.

RebelWithanAK · Sep 22, 2003, 02:05 am

They were written in Latin. We only know from heresay that they were not written in 400 AD but transcribed from the time it happened.

xm.bretton · Sep 22, 2003, 02:22 am

hearsay? there are copies that date much farther back.

there are copies of the book of Isiah (dead sea scrolls) that date back into B.C.E.

carbon dating my friend.

refrence: http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/deadsea.scroll...ry/library.html

Fallen Angel · Sep 22, 2003, 02:27 am

I explained in my last post pretty clearly to AK that the new testament was mostly written shortly after Christs death and resurrection, was transcribed from Arimathic and Greek to latin which was believe it or not AK was used by the Romans before dark age Europe.

fedfem · Sep 22, 2003, 02:28 am

Quote:

Originally posted by xm.bretton@09-22-2003 01:58 AM
not several hundred years. the gospels are eye whitness accounts if you do your research. if you were correct, matthew would have had to lived a good few hundred years along with the other apostles that participated in writing gospels.

I have researched thoroughly and they are not eyewitness accounts. The Gospel of John is the only one that makes the claim and the account does not agree with the others. If you would like to be more specific I would love to debate your assertation. The oldest is a greek or Aramaic fragment and is from around 90ad, I believe, and is from John before it was labeled John. I will get my crosstalk notes organized while I await your research facts.

Sep 14, 2003, 05:26 pm	#22 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	Well, the Jews also ran out Jesus' disciples, who were personas non gratas for stirring up trouble. There's a reason why Christos is his name... . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Sep 15, 2003, 07:32 pm	#28 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,161	oh, me me me me, i'm neutral. If you would care to look at the map of the proposed palestinian state, the recently proposed one, you would agree that throwing it back into their faces was the right thing to do. Instead of one state, it is made up of multiple miniture states, or ghettos if you will. As well as this, there is no compensation for the homes destroyed by the Israelis, nor are the palestinian refugees who have left (been chased) out of Israel/Palestine allowed back with their old homes. So, instead of a scattered Jewish population forced into ghettos by the host nation as it has been for so long, the Israeli's are now doing it to the Palestinians. Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Sep 15, 2003, 08:47 pm	#29 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	"Why you so glum, Indians - we gave you Georgia..." whisper whisper whisper "What, there's gold in Georgia? Indians, get out! You get Oklahoma; I don't think there's anything in Oklahoma..." Somehow I can't help but make comparisons. . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Sep 21, 2003, 11:08 am	#33 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	What, you mean the new testament, written several hundred years after the fact by Christians? . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Sep 22, 2003, 01:37 am	#35 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	Oh, so they were written several hundreds of years after the fact by Christians. I stand corrected. . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Sep 14, 2003, 03:09 pm	#21 (permalink) (top)
fog Sedimentary Rock Posts: 6	Interestingly, we just discussed this in my "Banality of Evil" course. In Rome, Catholics sought to gain credibility as a legal religion. (The Roman Empire was rather tolerant of religions, but required that one obtain permission first.) Catholics thus sought to try to shift the blame for killing Jesus onto the Jews -- if they said "The Romans killed our God!," it would not be a very effective way of gaining favor with the Romans. (Of course it makes absolutely no sense to blame it on the Jews, seeing as Jesus himself wa Jewish.) Biblical scriptures blamed the Jews, and it stuck, eventually being elevated. It was really interesting to learn about this, actually -- I knew that the Jews were disliked around the time of the Holocaust in part because of their prosperity. But this, surprisingly, was also the case around Jesus' time. Combined with the "You killed our God!" claims of Catholics, they became rather unpopular as Christianity eventually grew. (I feel compelled to note that I'm not one of the crazies who actually believes that that we should hate Jews for killing Jesus, just explaining history!)

Sep 14, 2003, 06:51 pm	#23 (permalink) (top)
Geoff332 Igneous Magma Location: New Zealand Posts: 309	By "nobody", I assume you mean The US State Department, Amnesty International, and the UN. I've also heard it from Israel itself. Israel is an independant state, but they occupy and govern areas of land that were given to Palestine -- commonly referred to as the occupied territories. Most of this happened in the 1967 war and is a central part of the on-going conflict. The hatred of the Jews has a long and noble history in Europe. Their perceived prosperity was one reason, but not the only one. They were seen as a fundementally different race, much the same way as blacks were.

Sep 14, 2003, 08:09 pm	#24 (permalink) (top)
trigxine Guest Posts: n/a	By given, do you mean offered by Israel, and then declined by the Palestinians?

Sep 14, 2003, 10:26 pm	#25 (permalink) (top)
Geoff332 Igneous Magma Location: New Zealand Posts: 309	No, I mean given by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 (1947) -- the same Resolution that gave Israel its land. Among other things, it included a partion plan with economic union -- which meant that the Jewish and Arab states would be independant and self-Governing. In particular, it provided for the establishment of Jewish and Arab states. Israel was formed as the Jewish state in 1949 and Palestine has yet to be formed as a state. Prior to this, the Israeli state did not exist and therefore had no land. They occupied the territory that was designated as the Arab (Palestinian) land in 1967 and has continued to anex and occupy land since then.

Sep 15, 2003, 06:12 am	#26 (permalink) (top)
trigxine Guest Posts: n/a	Given, yes, but refused time and time again in favor of war. Though the UN resolution offered to create a soverign Palestinian state, they declined, and preferred to continue waging a battle against the Isarelis and Jews.

Sep 15, 2003, 07:39 am	#27 (permalink) (top)
Geoff332 Igneous Magma Location: New Zealand Posts: 309	How about giving that opinion from a neutral site, ie one that is not overtly pro-Israel.

Sep 21, 2003, 08:30 am	#32 (permalink) (top)
Fallen Angel Igneous Magma Location: Sydney,Australia. Posts: 333	[quote=fog,09-14-2003 03:09 PM] to try to shift the blame for killing Jesus onto the Jews -- if they said "The Romans killed our God!," it would not be a very effective way of gaining favor with the Romans. (Of course it makes absolutely no sense to blame it on the Jews, seeing as Jesus himself wa Jewish.) Biblical scriptures blamed the Jews, and it stuck, eventually being elevated. (I feel compelled to note that I'm not one of the crazies who actually believes that that we should hate Jews for killing Jesus, just explaining history!) I'm not aJew hating crazy either, in fact I admire their intelligence and staunchness as a race of people, but to throw a fly into your ointment, Pontius Pilate, Roman Govenor of Judea at the time washed his hands of Jesus death saying may his blood be on your heads. The Jews replyed Yes! Yes! And on our childrens childrens heads! This is in the Gospel. They cursed themselves.

Sep 22, 2003, 01:58 am	#36 (permalink) (top)
xm.bretton Molten Ash Location: Vancouver, BC Posts: 89	not several hundred years. the gospels are eye whitness accounts if you do your research. if you were correct, matthew would have had to lived a good few hundred years along with the other apostles that participated in writing gospels. xm.bretton xhalation.com

Sep 22, 2003, 02:05 am	#37 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	They were written in Latin. We only know from heresay that they were not written in 400 AD but transcribed from the time it happened. . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Sep 22, 2003, 02:22 am	#38 (permalink) (top)
xm.bretton Molten Ash Location: Vancouver, BC Posts: 89	hearsay? there are copies that date much farther back. there are copies of the book of Isiah (dead sea scrolls) that date back into B.C.E. carbon dating my friend. refrence: http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/deadsea.scroll...ry/library.html xm.bretton xhalation.com

Sep 22, 2003, 02:27 am	#39 (permalink) (top)
Fallen Angel Igneous Magma Location: Sydney,Australia. Posts: 333	I explained in my last post pretty clearly to AK that the new testament was mostly written shortly after Christs death and resurrection, was transcribed from Arimathic and Greek to latin which was believe it or not AK was used by the Romans before dark age Europe.