Who killed Jesus?

As mentioned in the last post, many Christians through the ages have laid the guilt for Jesus’ crucifixion squarely at the feet of the Jews.  Passages like the following have been used to justify anti-semitic attitudes:

When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “It is your responsibility!”  All the people answered, “His blood is on us and on our children!” (Matt 27:24-25, NIV)

If my previous speculations about mob hysteria have any validity at all, then these are the words of people who literally don’t know what they’re saying.

It makes me think of the contemporary legal practice of polling the jury, in which the presiding judge asks each of the jurors individually if he or she agrees with the verdict that has already been delivered.  One can only guess what might have happened if Pilate had privately pulled aside each and every member of the crowd and asked, “What crime has Jesus committed that is deserving of death?” and “Are you personally willing to accept responsibility for the murder of this innocent man?”

We have to give Pilate credit for recognizing Jesus’ innocence.  He’s a savvy enough political operator to know that Jesus is the victim of jealousy.  He tries to effect Jesus’ release (his stance is more insistent in Luke 23:13-22), but to no avail.

None of this, however, makes Pilate innocent.  The decision is still his.  He gives in to the crowd for reasons of political expediency.  He’s less concerned with dispensing justice than with keeping things from boiling over; the last thing he wants is for the emperor to question his competence.

But doesn’t his hand-washing suggest a guilty conscience?  Perhaps.  But I would guess Pilate to be perfectly capable of turning his back on the whole matter as another troublesome day at the office.  Indeed, his hand-washing may have more to do with a little incident that only Matthew reports:

While Pilate was sitting on the judge’s seat, his wife sent him this message: “Don’t have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him.” (Matt 27:19, NIV)

It would have been unusual for Pilate’s wife to contact him in this way while he was engaged in important official business.  (Imagine a judge receiving a text from his wife when he’s about to pronounce sentence in a media-circus of a trial!)  The dream would have been an ill omen that Pilate would not likely have ignored, and the hand-washing may have been his attempt to appease whatever gods he feared offending.

More importantly overall, however, why would Christians be so concerned to apportion blame for something that was the will of the Father, as Jesus himself so clearly knew?  Yes, the people called bloodguilt upon their heads and upon the heads of their children (which we should probably take as referring more to the children in their household than all subsequent generations).  But it is the same blood of Christ that has cleansed us of sin and broken down the wall of hostility between Jew and Gentile (Eph 2:11-22).

Whatever the political and cultural twists and turns of the road leading to the cross, it is our own sin and hatred that made the cross necessary in the first place.

Who killed Jesus?  In a sense, we did.  And by an inexplicable act of grace, the sentence is life instead of death.

5 thoughts on “Bloodguilt

  1. “Who killed Jesus”?
    The ‘Holy’ Gospels & ‘New Testaments’ authors killed ‘Jesus’, -plain and simple & perhaps more importantly, they killed the Jewish masiach in the process, -spearheaded by the machinations of the antisemitic Saul of Tarsus and his cohorts, Mark & Luke (none of which ever knew ‘Jesus’ in person, -save Saul of Tarsus).
    The very creation of the ‘Holy’ Gospels themselves are a Greek & Roman re-writing of Jewish history, -beginning around 45 c. e. & culminated in canonization of the New Testaments in 325 c. e.
    No Jew, during Pontius Pilate’s reign, ever knew or saw, or even heard ‘Jesus Christ’, -many Jews did know, however, of ‘Jesus’ [who was called Barabbas] but, alas His actual name was removed & is omitted from the Latin & subsequent ‘translations’ thereafter, -leaving us later-day people with only ‘Barabbas’ instead.
    It wasn’t even ‘Jesus’ who was actually crucified, Jesus [Barabbas] was not crucified (only His role & reputation was, in a sense, ‘crucified’.
    In reality (but not written about) there was only one man named ‘Jesus’ and that was Jesus who was called Barabbas.
    So, who was the actual man that Pontius Pilate crucified?
    ‘Jesus Christ’ (a very cunning & clever invention of & by the schizophrenic, flunk-out Pharisaic student of Gamaliel & ‘temple thug’ (persecuting ‘Christians’, -at a time when there was no such thing as a ‘Christian’, -only zealot followers of ‘the descendant(s) of David’ (& there were many such ‘descendants’), -along with his cohorts Mark & Luke. The literal ‘Jesus Christ’ is a written composite of the one and only named ‘Jesus’ [Barabbas] (Bar = Son + Abba = Father i.e. the Father of us all or creator or ‘God’ if you will), -stripped of His true holiness & falsely portrayed as an imprisoned ‘insurrectionist’ (without proof or even creditable evidence) on the one hand and, the actual insurrectionist, -a representation of Judas the Galilean (who originally authored the insurrection in the first place). Further, the word “Christ”, technically speaking, actually is the ‘Risen One’ (according to Saul of Tarsus’ epiphany), an apparition or ghost.
    Saul of Tarsus IS ‘the Wolf in Sheep’s clothing’. Saul of Tarsus, the schizophrenic, the hater of ‘the descendants of David’ & ‘the Jewish masiach’, is actual creator & killer of ‘Jesus Christ’, -as well as the creator of ‘Christianity’…
    Any questions… instead of asking me, do Your own ‘homework’ (there is at least 3 or 4 days of research-work contained herein) & Think long & hard for Yourself & please put down the Kool-aide, -drinking the Kool-aide is not the way you want to meet your Maker. He gave you Life (see John 1-5)… Live it… -dare to examine your Own inventory… Love it, for now, it’s the only one you have.

  2. Thank you, Roland. I can understand much better now why you found the previous post (and probably this one as well!) offensive. I appreciate your invitation to look into the matter myself; I am only vaguely familiar with the argument you’re making. I will say that I don’t really think of myself as drinking Kool-Aid, and for now, we may simply have to agree to disagree. I’m sure you’ll find a lot of what’s written on this blog to be just one or another flavor of Kool-Aid anyway. Peace be with you.

    1. Naamaste’ & Pax
      As far as I know, I am the only one making this argument, -it boggles my mind that so-called Phd. Biblical ‘Scholars’ have never written a single word about Jesus Barabbas in 2,000 yrs, -In and of itself, I find That to be more than astounding, -especially in the case of Flavius Josephus who wrote extensively about the insurrectionary or civial war among the Jews (theocracy v. secularism… the theocracy envisioned by the ‘descendants of David’ v. the secular Herods).
      ‘Kool-aid’ is a metaphor… for ‘a poisoned drink given by someone else’ (Jim Jones/Jonestown… massacred 914 of his devout ‘believers’ in 1978.)
      I have no problem with ‘disagreeing’ with anybody… not that I ‘choose’ to… I know full-well that it can’t be avoided… -in matters of seeking Truth, I avoid nothing… I welcome it (even if it is a bitter pill (another metaphor) & even if I discover my heretofore foolishness)… -my ‘beliefs’ are borne in practical science & experience (not in mere ‘reading’ or in ‘Books’ -no matter how ‘sacred’ or ‘holy’ or noble or lofty or even well intentioned.
      I have great hope for you Cameron Lee, you may disagree with me all you want, -I, on the other hand, aren’t disagreeing with you, -I simply(?) reject Christianity and all its propaganda, -I am providing you with an entirely different ‘biblical/historical’ scenario than what you know, understand or realize. (The ‘Holy’ Gospels aren’t ‘history’ in the scientific sense of that word, -they were written for the sole purpose of ‘instilling Faith’ only… (‘Let’s not the Facts get in the way of ‘the Good News’ story’… -which, btw) took centuries to create & be ‘agreed upon… -all those who ‘disagreed’ were declared heretics, -and, in many cases were burned at the stake or stoned to death.) You, Cameron, ‘disagree’ (mostly w/yourself) and yet you offer me nothing in refutation… -only that of the Same re-hash of the ancient ‘Holy’ Gospel crap… like thousands of millions of people before you. If You ‘disagree’, fine… Tell me what I have offered (provided) to you that is either incorrect or wrong… -it is Not enough that ‘you disagree with me (I have no problem with that)… I, on the other hand give to you the info points (historical context) upon which I ‘disagree’ (sorry, I don’t waste a lot of time siting every reference point… I expect that you have enough intelligence to figure out exactly what to ‘Google’.
      You have your ‘work’ cut out for you…
      God Bless.

Comments are closed.