Was every Jew responsible for the crucifixion? - Page 3

pelathais · #21 08-18-2010, 06:21 PM

Jesus was a Jew. Was he "responsible" for His own crucifixion? In a way, I suppose, "yes." But not morally responsible as a member of a "generation of vipers." Was Jesus a "viper?"

Was Mary, in the garden on the morning of the Resurrection, a representative of a "generation of vipers?" Did she somehow hope to atone for the "role" she played in the crucifixion with the spices and aloes she bore?

Peter's denial of Jesus merely saved Peter from suffering a crucifixion himself right then and there (at least it put off his own crucifixion for a couple of decades). But even Peter's curses had no bearing on whether Jesus would be crucified or not. The same can be said of the other disciples who all forsook Him and fled. They weren't "responsible" for Christ's death - and they were all Jews.

Is that one problem with a fundamentalist approach to Preteristism? It seems that by forcing the events of 70 A.D. into the scope of "fulfilled eschatology" they end up having to paint First Century Israel in an overly harsh manner.

When Jesus said, "... this generation of vipers," did He really intend that "all Jews who are alive at this moment are 'vipers?'" Or, did He simply mean that there was a "brood" - a living spawn of "vipers" who were His intended target?

Was the Jewish child that Jesus picked up and placed on his knee and of whom He said, "Of such are the Kingdom of God," a viper? Was this child "responsible" for the crucifixion of Jesus Christ? If so, then "of such are the Kingdom of God."

pelathais · #22 08-18-2010, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mfblume

Pel agrees. We can let him remark, though, of course.

From http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/sho...9&postcount=64

The corporate blessings and responsibilities are something quite different from the individual responsibility.

Ezekiel 18.

I suppose that there is a sense in which we could say "all were responsible" - but to be rigorously honest we'd have to admit that our own sins make each one of us responsible as well.

Scott Hutchinson · #23 08-18-2010, 09:35 PM

In my opinion,no because while a vast majority of Jews rejected Christ,some believed on Him.It was the sin of fallen Adam's race that nailed Christ to the tree.

jfrog · #24 08-18-2010, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pelathais

Jesus was a Jew. Was he "responsible" for His own crucifixion? In a way, I suppose, "yes." But not morally responsible as a member of a "generation of vipers." Was Jesus a "viper?"

Was Mary, in the garden on the morning of the Resurrection, a representative of a "generation of vipers?" Did she somehow hope to atone for the "role" she played in the crucifixion with the spices and aloes she bore?

Peter's denial of Jesus merely saved Peter from suffering a crucifixion himself right then and there (at least it put off his own crucifixion for a couple of decades). But even Peter's curses had no bearing on whether Jesus would be crucified or not. The same can be said of the other disciples who all forsook Him and fled. They weren't "responsible" for Christ's death - and they were all Jews.

Is that one problem with a fundamentalist approach to Preteristism? It seems that by forcing the events of 70 A.D. into the scope of "fulfilled eschatology" they end up having to paint First Century Israel in an overly harsh manner.

When Jesus said, "... this generation of vipers," did He really intend that "all Jews who are alive at this moment are 'vipers?'" Or, did He simply mean that there was a "brood" - a living spawn of "vipers" who were His intended target?

Was the Jewish child that Jesus picked up and placed on his knee and of whom He said, "Of such are the Kingdom of God," a viper? Was this child "responsible" for the crucifixion of Jesus Christ? If so, then "of such are the Kingdom of God."

I agree.

I have a question though.

Acts 2:22-23
22Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
23Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

What do you make of Peter saying (I'm paraphrasing) that the men of Israel crucified Jesus? I know I take it to mean that Israel in a corporate sense was responsible but not that every individual of Israel was individually responsible.

jfrog · #25 08-18-2010, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pelathais

The corporate blessings and responsibilities are something quite different from the individual responsibility.

Ezekiel 18.

I suppose that there is a sense in which we could say "all were responsible" - but to be rigorously honest we'd have to admit that our own sins make each one of us responsible as well.

I don't really like the notion that we are even indirectly responsible for Christ's death. I think it's just a way of putting guilt on those that it don't belong. The guilt of sin is already enough without added guilt for something a person didn't actually do. That's my opinion anyways.

Pressing-On · #26 08-18-2010, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfrog

Come on blume you should delete this so you don't corrupt the poll voters minds before they vote.

Are you pulling a Nancy Pelosi? "We have to pass the bill in order to find out what's in it." LOL!

Of course mfblume is going to back up his vote with scripture! LOL!

jfrog · #27 08-18-2010, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Are you pulling a Nancy Pelosi? "We have to pass the bill in order to find out what's in it." LOL!

Of course mfblume is going to back up his vote with scripture! LOL!

He should have done it later

Pressing-On · #28 08-18-2010, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfrog

He should have done it later

LOL!

Michael · #29 08-19-2010, 01:50 AM

No, the bible says He laid down his life....Calvery was not for the sins of Israel, but for the sins of the world...

Michael · #30 08-19-2010, 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pelathais

Jesus was a Jew. Was he "responsible" for His own crucifixion? In a way, I suppose, "yes." But not morally responsible as a member of a "generation of vipers." Was Jesus a "viper?"

Was Mary, in the garden on the morning of the Resurrection, a representative of a "generation of vipers?" Did she somehow hope to atone for the "role" she played in the crucifixion with the spices and aloes she bore?

Peter's denial of Jesus merely saved Peter from suffering a crucifixion himself right then and there (at least it put off his own crucifixion for a couple of decades). But even Peter's curses had no bearing on whether Jesus would be crucified or not. The same can be said of the other disciples who all forsook Him and fled. They weren't "responsible" for Christ's death - and they were all Jews.

Is that one problem with a fundamentalist approach to Preteristism? It seems that by forcing the events of 70 A.D. into the scope of "fulfilled eschatology" they end up having to paint First Century Israel in an overly harsh manner.

When Jesus said, "... this generation of vipers," did He really intend that "all Jews who are alive at this moment are 'vipers?'" Or, did He simply mean that there was a "brood" - a living spawn of "vipers" who were His intended target?

Was the Jewish child that Jesus picked up and placed on his knee and of whom He said, "Of such are the Kingdom of God," a viper? Was this child "responsible" for the crucifixion of Jesus Christ? If so, then "of such are the Kingdom of God."