'Jews Killed Jesus' Billboard Causing Controversy

[mobuto]

'Jews Killed Jesus' Billboard Causing Controversy
Pastor Refuses To Remove Or Change Saying On Outdoor Marquee

DENVER -- A billboard unveiled on Ash Wednesday, the same day that a controversial movie depicting the last hours of Jesus Christ premiered, is sparking criticism from people of all faiths.

The large-size outdoor marquee, which sits on the property of the Lovingway United Pentecostal Church at Colorado and Mississippi, says, "Jews Killed The Lord Jesus" and the word "Settled!"

The Anti-Defamation League asked for the marquee to be changed because it is anti-Semitic, but the church only amended the billboard slightly by removing the word "settled" and attributing the line to biblical Scriptures.

That, however, is still not appeasing critics.

{snip}

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/2873395/detail.html

[niwi]

1. I know this seems like an obvious question...

But what in the hell is wrong with people?

[Atlant]

6. "I'd have to say, 'a lot'." (Nicholas Cage in "Con Air") (NT)

[bleedingheart]

2. Holy Moly...Fundamentalism at work...

what a stupid sign...makes me ashamed to be a Christian...

[Caution]

3. what the hell is wrong with these people?

Don't they have any clue what kind of damage something like that causes? Even if it were historically accurate (and frankly im not sold on jesus himself being a true historical figure), this kind of thing just hurts people today. Jews of today have nothing to do with Jews of 2000 years ago. What is the friggin point of even putting something like that up if not to promote anti-semitism?

[Fenris]

4. So Jesus was killed by his own people...

He was a Rabbi. He was a Jew. He was killed by Jewish fundies. THAT'S settled.

[villager]

12. actually killed by Romans...

...according to most accounts. That is, if a flesh-and-blood Jesus existed at all.

[Fenris]

16. When they say "killed" they should say "condemned"

The two terms are used interchangeably by the fundies. I probably should have said that. The Romans did carry out the execution.

[villager]

19. hmm... sort of like the different meanings of the word "virgin,"

...which gets us back to the whole concept of the Bible being a kind of a massive Rorschach test anyway.

[Fenris]

22. Excellent point

Literal interpretations are problematic. You see what you want.

[CaptainClark23]

36. LOL

speaking of Rorshach..

hurm.

[villager]

40. hurm, indeed!

;)

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

42. Wouldn't Mel be just PERFECT playing Rorschach? (nt)

[villager]

46. yeah, he could hold those "end is near!"

...signs in the scenes leading up to the revelation (!) of his secret identity!

[rednek_Liberal]

64. Is someone actually making a Watchmen Film ?

Oh how cool that would be.

[Forkboy]

71. Yep,it's being made

I even think they've casted some characters.

If you ask in the Lounge someone might know more.Or you could search,the news has got to be out there.

Hopefully it will be even half as good as the graphic novel was.

[TeeYiYi]

62. Well isn't that just a curiosity . . .

I was thinking the exact same thing BEFORE I got to post #19 which caused my brows to begin knitting themselves. Then I read your reply and it turned into a full out crochet job. :7

TYY

[DuctapeFatwa]

24. Rome was a large imperial power who maintained Jews in a sort of

colony situation. They were allowed to practice their religion, but were not allowed to make policies or extend their 'autonomy' to an extent that would conflict with Roman interests.

Anyone, Jew or not, who opposed Rome's policies was considered a terrorist, and Jews, like other colonized peoples before and since, were under strict orders to turn suspected terrorists over to the authorities.

Once a suspect is in custody and branded a terrorist, it is unlikely that many people will wish to associate themselves with him, less they suffer the same fate.

[Yavin4]

65. Like We Are In Iraq

Rome was a large imperial power who maintained Jews in a sort of colony situation. They were allowed to practice their religion, but were not allowed to make policies or extend their 'autonomy' to an extent that would conflict with Roman interests.

Isn't this what we're doing in Iraq? Does that make Saddam a present day Jesus?

[DuctapeFatwa]

84. Like the US is in many places, to one degree of another

including, interestingly, Israel.

[rocktivity]

41. SOME Roman SOLIDERS carried out the excecution

Blaming the entire Roman race for killing Christ makes about as much sense as blaming the entire Jewish one.

:headbang:
rocknation

[On the Road]

17. Actually, According to EVERY Account

I don't know of ANY account in the New Testament or the apocrypha which depicts Jesus as being killed by the Jewish leaders. The Pharisees merely handed him over as a potential revolutionary under threat of Roman repression.

[damnyankee2601]

35. Not quite.

The Jewish leadership conspired to have Jesus executed by the Romans.

HOWEVER (and this is where the fundies miss the point) they conspired to get rid of Jesus not because they were Jewish, but because they were conservative fundamentalists who's power was threatened by Jesus' liberal preachings of love and tolerance.

[villager]

39. perhaps, but we'll never really know if Jesus actually existed...

...so your assertions need to be taken with a few grains of kosher salt.

However, the Jesus we have a description did fit into a long tradition -- two or more centuries old at that point -- of Jewish prophets claiming the ossified religious leadership was "missing the point" of what God really wanted.

Much as ossified religious insitutiions of all stripes have kept missing it ever since...

[Merlin]

44. For this we have only the evidence of gospels written 4 decades later...

by nameless Christians who never knew Jesus.

The critical issue is Matthew's gospel's story of the "Blood Curse" in which a Pharisee high priest supposedly exclaims to Pilate "Crucify Him! And let his blood be on us and our children!"

This is supposed to have condemned Jews of all generations hence.

Leaving aside the question of what authority a single individual has to condemn future generations, there is the serious question of the accuracy of this claim.

To begin with, Jesus trial would have been held in Greek, the international language of the day. The Romans and Jews spoke to each other exclusively in Greek. Not Roman. Not Aramaic. Greek. (Mel Gibson got it entirely wrong.) Only a tiny handful of elite could speak Greek. So who was it who heard this quote and passed it down to a person, writing under the name of Matthew, at least 40 years later? What in God's name leads anybody to believe this is literally accurate?

I'll tell you what. Religion. For once we humans leave the realm of the rational, all measure of insanity and mayhem is justifiable in the name of God. Witness the Catholic/Lutheran nation of Nazi Germany just 60 years ago.

This is only the beginning...

[damnyankee2601]

47. Here we go again.

I suggest a metaphorical reading of the Bible that speaks to current events, and all y'all want to do is use dogmatic detail to attack my belief system. You're as bad as the pinheads who put up the sign.

[Merlin]

97. You suggested nothing that hasn't been suggested....

a million times before. Your interpretation is not "metaphorical" at all, but in fact is quite literal. "Pharisee" is, after all, virtually a synonym for "fundamentalist hypocrite."

You simply replayed the standard take on these events. So let's not get too thin-skinned here if you don't mind.

My point, since you apparently resist having the patience to grasp it, is that the gospel writers' versions of these events--indeed the gospels themselves--are at best only very generally reliable. They certainly cannot be trusted to be an accurate, journalistic retelling.

[bubblesby2002]

48. Great post

And I agree. That is if things happened the way it is written in the Bible. And I for one am not sure that there is any truth there at all.

[damnyankee2601]

52. The specific historic truth is irrelevant.

But in this case well documented in both Jewish and Muslim history, as well as Roman.

Why is it that DUers feel such a strong need to debunk the factual accuracy of the Bible? Whould you do the same with the Upanishades or the Tibetan Book of the Dead? The Bible is meant to be read as metaphor, like any other holy text. Singling it out for factual critique is bigotry, plain and simple.

[damnyankee2601]

53. And sorry, but yes...

I am a little sore on this point.

The anti-Christian sentiment at DU is pretty strong and stinky.

Jesus was a liberal.

Deal with it.

[Solomon]

69. But Jesus wasn't a christian.

Couldn't have been. :smoke:

[lazarus]

88. Because

The Tibetan Book of the Dead isn't causing a lot of problems. Sadly, the Bible's interpretation by some extreme followers is. Here. Now.

If I was being discriminated against by Zoroastrians, I'd be worried about Zoroastrians. But I'm not. Thank Ahura-Mazda, the only god named after a car. :D

[H2O Man]

45. Very good!

There is a pattern throughout history for tribal people, being oppressed by an empire, to have an uncle tom class that sacrifices its own holy men. Malcolm X was murdered by blacks, who were paid by the empire. Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull were killed by Lakotas (Sioux) paid by the empire. Yet no one would think of changing these facts for a movie or book about Brother Malcolm or Crazy Horse or Sitting Bull. Jesus was a Jew, and if you do not understand this, and add his being a rabbi to his ministry (!) you really don't have a clue. Further, regarding the historic man Jesus, if you were to take the time to do the research, you would find that yes, he lived and died much as described. Just the Jewish historians of the day wrote in a beautiful, poetic style that the King James 17th century Englishmen didn't fully capture.

[Forkboy]

5. Thanks Mel

:eyes:

[Ruby Romaine]

28. no, I did it!

[polmaven]

49. Why are you covering up?

Every sane person KNOWS Clinton did it!!!!!

[Ruby Romaine]

59. ok, the Clenis did it!

[kayell]

7. They call themselves Lovingway??!!

* is such a uniter. This country has just pulled together in peace and understanding under his compassionate leadership. :puke:

[Gothic Sponge]

9. *sigh*

Scotty beam me up!

[Journeyman]

51. Back at 'em. . .

1 Thessalonians. . .


5:14
Now we exhort you, brethren, warn them that are unruly, comfort the feebleminded, support the weak, be patient toward all men.
5:15
See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men.

[Cassandra]

91. I've tried comforting the feebleminded...

but they keep putting those stupid signs up!

[a_random_joel]

8. Christians killed Martin Luther King!

The same kind of logical fallacy.

This is tiresome.

[Fovea]

34. Hunters killed Krishna

But I still own a bow.

I am sad that my sweetie has to see this for a class assignment.
She is going to hate this movie.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

10. Such a billboard would land someone's ass in jail in Brazil (nt)

[mobuto]

15. And that's a bad thing

Government shouldn't be in the position of telling people what they can and cannot say - even in this case, where what is said is extraordinarily hateful. The marketplace of ideas polices itself.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

32. Our free speech laws are kind of like the ones in some European countries

like, no Nazi propaganda etc. I think -- think -- a billboard like that one would run afoul of the law, but I'm not 100% certain.

On edit: my judgement about this situation is -- no judgment. I'm torn.

[xchrom]

50. i could not disagree more

some speech is meant to inflame folk to a violent reaction and or panic.
i know we like to talk about yelling fire in a movie house -- but a more recent example comes to mind for me -- timothy mcveigh.
mcveigh was tuned in and turned on by all the radical hate speech that flows from right wing radio{and even the likes of newt gingrich in those days} -- and make no mistake he heard and acted on what he heard.
inciting people to violence over racism, or abstract hate the government rhetoric should not be allowed. and that's reasonable.

[damnyankee2601]

57. Sorry dude, no way.

Silencing these jerkoffs makes them martyrs. They must be allowed to proclaim their ignorace loudly so that they may be easily identified and properly despised.

[Forkboy]

58. but some people are incited by mild things too

where do you draw the line? And more importantly,who get's to decide where that line is?

[Kelvin Mace]

11. I can never understand why

Fundies are such a hurry for Jesus to return. If He did, they would just crucify him again like they did last time.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org
Distrusting the Government Since 1984

[oneighty]

13. The plan is working.

End of Judeo/Christian love fest!

180

[el_gato]

31. my thoughts exactly 180

[sendero]

73. who?

Who orchestrated that plan?

[oneighty]

81. I do not have any idea!

Tinfoil hat time.

Someone opposed to the US support of Israel in the middle east? Causes wondering; just WHO might wish to do that? Perhaps you might help, offer an opinion.

180

[demnan]

14. Jesus was killed by the Romans

He lived in a colony controlled by the Romans and was killed by a government ruled by the Romans. Along the way a few Jewish people were threatened and did betray him.

The important thing is that we don't betray the teachings of Jesus Christ by shaking fingers at one another. Otherwise the story and sacrifice made are completely pointless.

[ithacan]

102. ummm, GOD killed Jesus!!

sort of.

Remember, the prophecies, Jesus asking "why have you forsaken me", etc.

For believers, it is ridiculous to "blame" anyone!! Every person involved was nothing other than an instrument of God's will!!

Jesus had to die, it was in the works. Medieval christian theology even saw the Jews not as guilty, but as the instrument of god in Jesus's death and resurrection...

Boy these guys really do miss the whole point of their own religion!

[denverbill]

18. Maybe this will remind Jews why they've voted for liberals all these years

Remember, it wasn't always Muslims that conservatives have hated.

[mobuto]

23. Nobody needs to be reminded

American Jews don't vote Democratic because Conservatives are anti-Semites or because of Israel policy or anything like that, American Jews vote Democratic because they subscribe to a culture which values social justice and progressive policies very highly. Jews are simply more liberal than the population at large, and don't need to be scared by loonies out in Colorado into voting Democratic.

[denverbill]

37. Well, that's odd.

I keep reading stories about how many more Jews are going to vote for Bush this year than in 2000, primarily because of his support for Israel and his middle east policy generally.

Personally, I don't ascribe Jews to be any more liberal or conservative than any other group genetically. IMO, if they are liberal, it's because they know that any time you are a minority, you had damned well better live in a society that is open, free, and liberal. I'm sure that their religious history has taught them to beware of any country where Christian fundamentalism and xenophobic nationalism take hold.

Oddly, in the only country where Jews are the majority, the conservatives party is in power right now.

[mobuto]

43. More Jews will vote for Bush

Sure that's possible. Bush won a whopping 19% of the Jewish vote in 2000, and its just possible he might do a little better in 2004. But I seriously doubt it. Bush's policies - the Iraq war for instance- have been far less popular among Jews than among the voting population at large.

Personally, I don't ascribe Jews to be any more liberal or conservative than any other group genetically.

I don't ascribe any group to be liberal or conservative because of genetics. But American Jews have inherited a prevailing culture of social and political progresivism that even predates immigration to America. Are all Jews liberals? Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz certainly aren't. But the percentage is large enough that I think my rule stands.

Oddly, in the only country where Jews are the majority, the conservatives party is in power right now.

I don't think that's odd at all. Everybody is a function, to some extent, of their environment. Israel is a very different place to live than the United States. But I think you'll note if you look closely, that even Likud is on a lot of social issues more progressive than the Democratic Party is.

[denverbill]

55. If this article is correct, it's more than a few.

Matthew Brooks, the executive director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, has been riding high lately. Who can blame him? After toiling away as the leading spokesman of Jewish Republicans for more than a dozen years, he's finally starting to see signs that the tiny interest group might be growing.

When the American Jewish Committee released a poll last month showing that as many as 31 percent of American Jews would vote for President Bush if presidential elections were held today, Brooks could hardly contain his glee. In fact, he didn't seem to try at all.

"It now undeniable that there is a major shift taking place among Jewish voters," Brooks trumpeted in a press release commenting on the poll.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2095242/

I wasn't just pulling this out of thin air. I've been reading this consistantly over the past few months. Now, the article does note that it's too early to say if Shrub's policy towards Israel is enough to outweigh the history of progressive voting, but it also notes even a tiny swing among Florida's Jewish population could hand Bush the election again.

[leftynyc]

63. It's not just *'s policy with Israel that's in play here

I'm Jewish and come from a long line of liberals. We were all out in San Francisco last Feb for a Bar Mitzvah and were all planning on attending the anti-war march (over President's day weekend). As we were walking from our hotel, one of the first signs we saw was an Israeli flag with a swastica in place of the Star of David. Then we saw a young guy (early 20's) with a t-shirt comparing Sharon to Hitler. Now, I'm no Sharon fan but over the top is over the top. We all looked at eachother and decided we just didn't feel welcome and went back to the hotel. Even the least religious of us felt very uneasy in that atmosphere. Some people make no distinction between the policies of Israel and Jews (American or otherwise).

[denverbill]

66. Well, I personally very much doubt that those protesters were anti-semitic

Posters like those you mentioned are meant for shock-value.

IMO, there are SOME comparisons between Israel and Nazi-Germany and Sharon/Hitler that are valid.

Is Israel engaged in genocide? No.
Is Israel illegally taking land and replacing the native population with 'settlers'? Yes.

Is Sharon Hitler? No, not by a long shot.
Is Sharon practicing collective punishment (punishing an entire village for the guilt of a few)? Yes. Sharon has also allowed missiles to be fired into apartment buildings and at cars on crowded streets.


Palestinians in occupied territories are being every bit as repressed as Jews in the early Third Reich. They can't go to work, to school, they can't travel freely...

Now, I don't mean to turn this into a Israel/Palestinian thread. I'm just pointing out that those signs don't necessarily represent an 'anti-Jewish' bias. I wouldn't ever make or march with a sign like that, but I don't think that pointing out the similarities is that out of line, because I do it all the time.

[mobuto]

70. The Republican Jewish Coalition

says that Jews will vote Repubican? Well, that's a surprise. Bush was doing better in the polls amongst Jews as he was doing well amongst the population at large. But Bush's approval has been falling rapidly. Instead of only getting 70% of the Jewish vote, I wouldn't be surprised if the Democratic nominee got 80% or even 85%.

Now, the article does note that it's too early to say if Shrub's policy towards Israel is enough to outweigh the history of progressive voting, but it also notes even a tiny swing among Florida's Jewish population could hand Bush the election again.

1. Israel is just one of many issues important to Jewish voters.

2. Kerry's Israel policy is virtually indistinguishable from Bush's.

[leftynyc]

87. I understand your position

Do you understand why we might not feel welcome at what was supposed to be an anti-war rally?

[denverbill]

90. I think you meant that for me, so I'll answer.

Yes, I understand you maybe being uncomfortable. And I don't know all the details of the situation either. If these were Arabs or Muslims or skinheads, your discomfort would be even more understandable. I do realize that there are people and groups who hate Jews and Israel and don't want it to exist. But I also realize that there are lots of liberals who would protect and defend Israel and Jews, but who hate and want to end Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.

The fact is, Israel was inextricably involved in the Iraq war. Our support for Israel has led to Arab/oil state hostility toward the US, which resulted in the crippling oil embargo in the 70's and OPEC. Ever since then our entire middle east policy has revolved around trying to placate Arab states enough that they will still sell us oil while still protecting Israel.

I don't think an anti-war rally is an appropriate place to attack Israeli policy, but I can understand, to a degree, how some people might think it was.

[revree]

20. PILATE WAS A JEW?

Wow, I am a minister with a background in religious history, and that's news to me!

Rome killed Jesus, no matter what Mel RIGHT WINGNUT Gibson says.

[Vogon_Glory]

21. Jesus of Nazareth Executed By the Roman Empire

Jesus of Nazareth was executed by soldiers of the Roman Empire operating under the authority of the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate.
Yet right-wing Xian zealots still insist that He was killed by the Jews.

Yet we never hear of the blood guilt of the Italians, do we.

:evilgrin:

[gulfcoastliberal]

25. Glad to See Mad Max's Movie

Is bringing people together in such a compassionate, thoughtful way - ruminating about the message of love, peace, compassion, and forgiveness that Jesus (supposedly) represented.

/sarcasm off

[arcane1]

26. "Jews fufilled God's plan by killing Jesus. Bless them!"

hey, if they're going to pin the whole thing on "the Jews", they should at least have the honesty to acknowledge that Jesus was SUPPOSED to be crucified. Somebody had to do it!


a :toast: to "the Jews" and Judas Iscariot. Without them, there would be no salvation through Jesus!

:yourock:

[reprobate]

78. I've said that for years. The handing of the bread to judas.....

...the handing of the bread to judas was not a condemnation, it was an assignment. Without judas to do what he is said to have done, the whole plot would have fallen apart and they'd have to do it all again at a future time. Kind of gives you a different take on the thing, doesn't it?

[arcane1]

82. yep, Judas should be known as "Saint Judas", technically

and when will somebody say it like it is:


GOD KILLED JESUS

[mac2]

27. For the last time...Christian clergy said, we all did.

Jesus died for our sins. The Romans, the Jews, the audience (of many religious or non-religious people) called for his death. It was preordained.

Who knows if he even existed? We don't know when he was born...when he died, etc. We know more about Caesar and Egyptian kings than Jesus.

Let's get off this subject and back to politics or is this the politics of the day...religion and hate?

[Loonman]

29. "Lovingway" United Pentecostal Church at Colorado and Mississippi

Yeah, that's real loving.

Fundie bastards.

[salin]

79. The Talibornigan... strike again. n/t

[curlyred]

30. Good Lord. What's next for Colorado?

We got the promise keepers, rape at CU, rape at the AFA, Marilyn Musgrave, Tom Tancedo.......golly, the list goes on and on.

are these the same numbnuts that set up a haunted house featuring the horrors of being socially liberal?

[Rex]

33. Are they inciting violence?

I'm sure Ashcroft is all giddy with the thoughts of another Spanish style inquisition.

[reprobate]

80. And no one expects the Spanish style inquisition.

[skippysmom]

38. I'm so glad Mel's movie isn't inciting any antiSemitism

</sarcasm>

[noonwitch]

99. One movie is not the problem, it's the 2000 year history of the church

This movie would not be an issue if the church(es) had not engaged in a systematic 2000 year pogrom against jews. Or if the church(es) had stood up to anti-semitism on a consistent basis.

[SPQR]

54. But if Jesus's death was God's

sacrifice to cleanse humanity of its sins, shouldn't those who helped him carry out this plan be praised, and not condemned? I mean, what if he'd been arrested, slapped on the wrist and sent on his way? No crucifixion, no resurrection, no Christianity and no one saved at all. So why the demonization of those who played pivotal roles in God's plan?

I've always found it odd that if Jesus' death was foreordained, and was God's method of saving the human race, that the man who started the whole ball rolling (Judas) is so reviled.

Am I the only one who's puzzled by this?

[veganwitch]

61. yeah! it was god's idea...

to create a child whose sole purpose was to attempt to enlighten people and die because of it.

[smirkymonkey]

89. No, it completely baffles me....

I think the fundies are missing the point entirely. Without the sacrifice of Jesus there would be no Christianity.

I think it's all just hate-mongering.

[Cassandra]

92. Personally...

I'm still waiting for a thank you.

[llmart]

56. Did anyone else hear NPR's film critic

diss Mel's movie big time? Called Mel a "sado-masochist. ha. Ha. I agree. I wouldn't waste my hard earned money on his version of things.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

85. Yup. He called it 'The Jesus Chainsaw Massacre.' Said it was pointless.

He said it was nothing but violence for violence sake and omitted everything notable about the example of Jesus' life.

[veganwitch]

60. jesus was a jew!!!

they killed their own! we do it everyday in the criminal justice system!

[eagler]

67. the United Pentecostals are shunned by almost every other

denomination.They call the Pope the anti-Christ and the Catholic church the Whore of Babylon.

[Terran]

68. What I don't get is WHY people even trip on this?

Someone HAD to kill Jesus. If he hadn't been killed, there would be no point to the story...no Sacrifice. No dying for the sins of the world. And, DUH, no Christian churches! A Christ that lives happily ever after is a man without a story.

[Az_lefty]

72. The Jews didn't kill Jesus...

he was killed because of original sin. IF he was of a different culture and tried by that culture, the result would have been the same. The whole thing was pre-ordained. This Pastor just doesn't get it.:shrug:

[Ripley]

74. Denver huh? Can we start bashing mountain state people now?

Because when somone posts a story about a religious billboard in the south it degenerates into "those redneck ignorant mo-fo states should be kicked out of America" thread.

Just wondering.

[sendero]

75. Something I just don't get...

...first I'm not a Christian. But there is a question about this whole controversy that bugs me.

I thought Jesus's death was pre-ordained, inevitable. Why would it matter who did it? Couldn't you just as easily say "god made Jews kill Jesus"?

I do not mean this to sound flippant, I'm just trying to understand why this even matters.

[Ripley]

76. I agree.

I am quite amazed at how many threads there are in GD these days about a hollywood star's pet movie. Sheesh, people this is like Entertainment Tonight. It's a movie.

But I agree with you that if God said Jesus had to die for our sins, why does it matter how he died? Should he have just choked on a falafel?

[Nihil]

96. You forgot the PR/Marketing meeting didn't you?

> ... if God said Jesus had to die for our sins, why does it matter
> how he died? Should he have just choked on a falafel?

Nope, had to be a cross or there's no logo, no product placement,
nothing folks - just a name and a few flyers.

If he'd come today he'd probably have died in a prison cell.
All hail the mighty brick wall. Stick a picture of a hob-nailed boot
on the back of your car. Not got the same simple branding has it?

Nihil

[Roon]

77. I drive by this church

They have the weirdest signs sometimes. I remember one in particular:
Have some free time on your hands? Get on your knees! They also had some other stuff that was similar. Sounds dirty to someone with a dirty mind.

[KamaAina]

83. I thought the fundies were trying to make nice to the Jews?

Y'know, even paying for some of 'em to emigrate to Israel 'n' stuff, so's there'll be more of 'em around to rebuiold the Temple 'n' then get killed so's the Messiah can come back? </sarcasm>

And now they've shown their true colors twice in one week (although Mel Gibson is not technically a fundie, he's the Catholic equivalent).

[drool_n_yank]

86. Please correct me if I'm wrong

I'm obviously not religious and no biblical scholar but isn't this just a case of the Haves killing the leader of the Have not's ? And why should it matter who all was one of the haves ? I think we all owe it to ourselves to go and revisit Thomas Paine's Age of Reason . Sorry if I offend anyone I don't have any allegiance in the matter and I don't see why it matters what faith the killers were ?

[Toucano]

93. It was a fucking suicide! n/t

[donco6]

94. Lovingway is our Fred Phelps

They're notorious for their signs.

[curse10]

95. I used to live right down the road from that church!

Retards!

[lefty_mcduff]

98. Not sure I understand...

According to the Fundies, wasn't Jesus *sent* to die for our sins? Wouldn't this mean that it was all part of God's plan? Therefore, weren't *whoever* that killed Jesus doing 'God's Will?'

Not being the religious sort, this is w-a-y over my head.

[Name removed]

100. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Dhalgren]

101. This is what happens when you base a religion

on the murder of an innocent person. It is essentially an anti-human basis for belief. The Jews right now are, and for centuries have been, the humans on the receiving end of the equation. But, it doesn't have to be Jews; sometimes its Catholics, sometimes Pagans, sometimes atheists. If the foundation of your religion is murder, then violence is institutional (whether it is amitted or not).

[RandomKoolzip]

103. NOBODY killed Jeebus because he never EXISTED in the first place.

SETTLED! (at least in my mind.)

This really is funny, as an atheist, watching the whole country get their collective panties in a buch over "who" "killed" some fictional character "who" may or may not have existed 2000 years ago. Sartre would be having a good chuckle right now if he were to observe this.....

[PATRICK]

104. Sorting out Palestine politics circa 30 AD

Educated guesses better than kneejerk prejudice but the roots of the prejudice have some roots in the mess.

The Temple authorities(read Chalabi and associates)on the lookout for potential messiahs(read Judas Maccabeus types of their recent history) were investigating Jesus while he was in Galilee. Instigations by them or the apolitical religion reformers the Pharisees led to Jesus nearly being stoned for blasphemy at various locations. Herod also puppet peacekeeper who had killed the Baptist when it got too personal was also on the lookout.

The Pharisees- the progenitors of modern Talmudic Judaism were more argumentative or sympathetic than inimical at least at first. In fact the Gospel(Matthew mostly) tends to color up their role in light of the Early Church's schism and fight with the Talmud writers after both Jerusalem had been destroyed and the Christians expelled under the Minim. Paul's hostile reception by the Jews was in fact more at the root of the problem than Jesus' original ministry. With the loss of Jerusalem, orthodoxy became more defensive and including the Gentiles as Paul swiftly turned to do, unlike the patient conservative first apostles, objectified the split. Then add a mad Emperor in need of a scapegoat and some Jews get their first licks in at turning in the illegal new religionists over the next few centuries. After the Empire became Christian let us say the worm turned with a longer tide of vengeance(for lack of a better word). Four centuries of Christian martyrs were more personal a cause than the single death of Jesus but the twist to anti-Semitism demanded a lot of hypocrisy.

In fact, the Church downplayed Rome's responsibility as a legal formality, tricked even into exercising their sole right to the death penalty. However, all along it was collaborationists or puppets like Herod who suppressed the old time religion lest it turn the people against them all as the Jews turned against the Greeks and all the wise civilized collaborators in a long bloody civil war. Which civil war ironically came to an end by allying with Rome the eventual new overlord. Seething underneath were the same fires that led to the last revolt, Essenes massacred, fighters committing suicide at Masada, Jerusalem and the temple destroyed by Trajan. Jesus as much as any wise poster here could read the handwriting on the Temple Wall and see what was coming.

Sensing some of his personal despondency at not cutting through the misperceptions and momentum and the oppression, I would think he became the first victim to salvage a remnant out of the ashes, and if you are a believer, considerably more. What is stunning is the brief time allowed for this confrontation with little retreat or consideration of a "gradual" progressive ministry while evading the authorities. There is absolutism here and perfection, but not much like the fundamentalists see it. As for criticism, it is parallel to criticizing MLK for going against the war and not protecting himself. As for God's will, it is mainly people who delight in thinking God wills death at all when both Judaism and Christianity in essence are just the opposite. Messing with death itself and messing with history(Jesus was also despondent at what later believers might become) seem the actions of a wrath we are not accustomed too and a scenario we would not have written- in our infinite wisdom.