By who’s hand did Jesus die ? Italian Romans or Judaism

[PetraG]

Of course government is necessary. When it controls all facets of society like socialism then it has shown that it can facilitate mass murder of it’s citizens on a scale that is unmatched. There are easily identified reasons and patterns on why this is the case.

Oh, I thought you meant like the Trail of Tears or the biological warfare of Captain Pratt to exterminate the Mandans or the Mendocino “War,” things like that.

It does not take a socialist government controlling all aspects of society for a government to abuse its authority and oppress or even kill the citizens of another nation or even its own citizens. There is no guarantee that a nation that has some free citizens whose human rights are protected by the government cannot also have other citizens whose human rights are actively denied or taken away by the government. A government of free people is still capable of committing genocidal atrocities elsewhere. Government can be a tool for the many to victimize the few or for the few to victimize the many. Misuse of government to achieve unjust ends can take a lot of forms, that is my point.

Our Lord died as one who had been relegated by the governing authorities among the Jews into the category of “dispensable.”

So the chief priests and the Pharisees convened the Sanhedrin and said, “What are we going to do? This man is performing many signs. If we leave him alone, all will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our land and our nation.” But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing, nor do you consider that it is better for you that one man should die instead of the people, so that the whole nation may not perish.” He did not say this on his own, but since he was high priest for that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation, and not only for the nation, but also to gather into one the dispersed children of God. So from that day on they planned to kill him. John 11:47-53

 

[abucs]

It does not take a socialist government controlling all aspects of society for a government to abuse its authority and oppress or even kill the citizens of another nation or even its own citizens.

That’s a non sequitur. No one asserted otherwise. Only that it is best exemplified by socialist states on a massive scale directly because of the amount of power it holds in society.

We are getting off topic now.

 

[PetraG]

That’s a non sequitur. No one asserted otherwise. Only that it is best exemplified by socialist states on a massive scale directly because of the amount of power it holds in society.

We are getting off topic now.

Socialist and authoritarian are not the same thing. There are ditches on both sides of the road.

Yes, it is a bit off-topic, since Caesar did not direct the kangaroo court that had Jesus crucified. The prophets were killed before Our Lord without the Romans there to direct things. I have no idea why the socialists were even brought up. The Roman Empire was not socialist.

 

[abucs]

Socialist and authoritarian are not the same thing. There are ditches on both sides of the road.

Socialism and authoritarianism are the same thing in the context that you can’t have socialism without being authoritarian.

And regarding politics, it is not binary, so there are more than two ditches.

We are getting off topic.

 

[PetraG]

Socialism and authoritarianism are the same thing in the context that you can’t have socialism without being authoritarian.

And regarding politics, it is not binary, so their are more than two ditches.

We are getting off topic.

Well, it is off topic and yes, you can have socialism without being authoritarian. (Well, unless you think it takes an authoritarian government to collect taxes, lol…)

The Roman Empire was imperialist. They weren’t socialist. (Not that those are mutually-exclusive.) The interest the Romans had in executing Jesus had to do with maintaining their empire and nothing else. Let’s stick with the Roman government and their motivations, maybe? We don’t need to make every thread with the word “government” in it into a complaint-fest about socialism.

 

[abucs]

Well, it is off topic and yes, you can have socialism without being authoritarian. (Well, unless you think it takes an authoritarian government to collect taxes, lol…)

For the third time we are off topic.

You cannot forbid citizens from having private property and starting businesses without being authoritarian. Socialism by definition does both therefore it has to be authoritarian and that is why every time it is implemented it is authoritarian.

The Roman Empire was imperialist. They weren’t socialist. (Not that those are mutually-exclusive.) The interest the Romans had in executing Jesus had to do with maintaining their empire and nothing else.

No one said the Roman Empire was socialist. For the second time that is a non sequitur.

Yes the Romans were maintaining their empire, that is exactly what I said in my previous post about the tendencies of large governments to seek their own maintenance above justice.

 

[PetraG]

For the third time we are off topic.

Just. Stop. Please.

 

[GiftofMercy]

Mine.

The sins committed by my hand nailed Jesus to the cross.

Amen to this

 

[abucs]

I think that this is an interesting concept for the Christian religion which makes all men brothers in acknowledgement of their debt to a common Father and of course the undeserved forgiveness shown to them by that Father.

 

[Dan_Defender]

‘Jesus answered him: You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above; therefore he who delivered me to you has the greater sin.’ - John 19:11

Both the Roman Authorities and the Jewish Authorities played a part, but it is the Jewish high priest and his allies that are singled out by Jesus’ words.