Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

Why are Italians not hated for killing Jesus?

Jovian
Posts: 1,719
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2016 1:29:27 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
Jews have historically been blamed for having killed Jesus, when it actually was the Romans who did it. Although zero, then I really mean zero, blame has although been directed at the descendants of the Romans, the modern-day Italians.

The inheritance of guilt is of course always stupid, be it guilt on today's Europeans for what Europeans did in the colonial times, or this case with the Jews in the alleged killing of Jesus or whatever. However, it doesn't change the fact that this mentality still exists up to this date. And how illogical isn't it to blame the Jews for this? If only the blamer is at fault, then this would mean ludicrous things as:

1. A contract killer should never be blamed for killing someone. It is the one who paid the contract killer that should be blamed. The contract killer should go off the hook completely.

2. A son makes up a false story about his brother to the family's father. The family's father punishes the accused brother by incarcerating and also starivng the accused brother for one week. But the father should not be blamed at all for abusing children. It is the son who made the false claim who should receive all blame, for making up lies.

Logic, huh?

So, why have the old Romans or the modern-day Italians never ever been blamed for having killed Jesus?
Jovian
Posts: 1,719
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2016 2:58:03 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/9/2016 1:37:46 PM, bulproof wrote:
Cos the food is great.

Yes, but it's time for these people to boycott pizza and pasta now.
Rami
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 5:27:30 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/9/2016 1:29:27 PM, Jovian wrote:
Jews have historically been blamed for having killed Jesus, when it actually was the Romans who did it. Although zero, then I really mean zero, blame has although been directed at the descendants of the Romans, the modern-day Italians.

The inheritance of guilt is of course always stupid, be it guilt on today's Europeans for what Europeans did in the colonial times, or this case with the Jews in the alleged killing of Jesus or whatever. However, it doesn't change the fact that this mentality still exists up to this date. And how illogical isn't it to blame the Jews for this? If only the blamer is at fault, then this would mean ludicrous things as:

1. A contract killer should never be blamed for killing someone. It is the one who paid the contract killer that should be blamed. The contract killer should go off the hook completely.

2. A son makes up a false story about his brother to the family's father. The family's father punishes the accused brother by incarcerating and also starivng the accused brother for one week. But the father should not be blamed at all for abusing children. It is the son who made the false claim who should receive all blame, for making up lies.

Logic, huh?

So, why have the old Romans or the modern-day Italians never ever been blamed for having killed Jesus?

I always felt that it was cool that I could kill a god.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,236
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/28/2016 11:16:39 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/9/2016 1:29:27 PM, Jovian wrote:

So, why have the old Romans or the modern-day Italians never ever been blamed for having killed Jesus?

I dunno... Pontius Pilate made it into the creed. Seems like he is forever reviled...
Jovian
Posts: 1,719
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 7:37:06 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/28/2016 11:16:39 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 3/9/2016 1:29:27 PM, Jovian wrote:

So, why have the old Romans or the modern-day Italians never ever been blamed for having killed Jesus?

I dunno... Pontius Pilate made it into the creed. Seems like he is forever reviled...

Some people just want an excuse to bash Jews, I guess. Then they have the argument that "Well the old Israel had a juridical system which could crucify people on unverified grounds and the Jews knew about this and wilfully falsely blamed Jesus!". But then again, same logic would go for an abusive family. The child who falsely blamed his brother for something knew the father was able to incarcerate them for a week without any food. But the father shouldn't be blamed for being abusive, the SON should be blamed for making this happen.

And then there are white nationalists who use the crucifixion of Jesus to bash modern-day Jews, while they on the other hand defend today's Europeans from being blamed after the colonisations and slaveries. The latter one should of course be done since it's naturally impossible to inherit guilt, but some people are just so funny.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,236
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 7:51:56 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 7:37:06 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 3/28/2016 11:16:39 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 3/9/2016 1:29:27 PM, Jovian wrote:

So, why have the old Romans or the modern-day Italians never ever been blamed for having killed Jesus?

I dunno... Pontius Pilate made it into the creed. Seems like he is forever reviled...

Some people just want an excuse to bash Jews, I guess. Then they have the argument that "Well the old Israel had a juridical system which could crucify people on unverified grounds and the Jews knew about this and wilfully falsely blamed Jesus!". But then again, same logic would go for an abusive family. The child who falsely blamed his brother for something knew the father was able to incarcerate them for a week without any food. But the father shouldn't be blamed for being abusive, the SON should be blamed for making this happen.

And then there are white nationalists who use the crucifixion of Jesus to bash modern-day Jews, while they on the other hand defend today's Europeans from being blamed after the colonisations and slaveries. The latter one should of course be done since it's naturally impossible to inherit guilt, but some people are just so funny.

Some of it is attempted to be justified through Mathew 27:25:

And all the people said, "His blood shall be on us and on our children!"

However, I'm of the opinion that it is a result of the understood prohibition on usury that both Christians and Jews held to. This was interpreted as being able to charge no interest to fellow believers. Thus both sides reasoned that they could not charge interest to their own, but they could to the other. Now given that europe had a large imbalance in faith it meant that there were significantly more Christians than Jews. Hence Jewish bankers became much more wealthy than their Christian counterparts.

Given that the attitudes towards bankers doesn't seem to have changed in 1000 years and the fact that there were already religious tensions between the groups, one can see how easy it became to vilify rich Jewish bankers, and all Jews by extension.

That is my personal take on it.