that there would be churches all over the world that still do it.
There's one not too far from my house, but I have no idea how many there are in the world. And, to be honest, what I know about Christianity in Japan wouldn't half fill a teacup. I guess we just have to be confuzzled together.
Also, can you expand on your statement that the people who drove in the stakes weren't the ones to get blamed for it?
Jesus was crucified under Roman law, by Romans, using a Roman form of execution. But for centuries, it's been the Jews who have been reviled as "Christ-killers." The Roman Catholic Church only dropped the deicide charge during Vatican II, not so very long ago. The blood libel -- the belief that Jews kill Christian children for their blood -- stems from this charge of deicide, and the blood libel was one of the myths that drove the persecution of Jews for centuries.
So when I see L here talking about as guilty as those who so many years ago drove stakes through the wrists and feet of an innocent man, I have to wonder who he's thinking about. The Romans, who actually did do the stake-driving, or the Jews, who didn't drive any stakes, but who were blamed for the stake-driving and murdered for it?
Sorry, I didn't mean to dump on you. I really did like the story. It's just . . . I don't know. Sarah Palin bringing up the blood libel in such an inappropriate way kind of had me thinking about it, especially because I had to explain it to a Chinese friend, so I think I'm maybe kind of oversensitized to the whole question of who killed Jesus and who should bear guilt for that.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2011-01-16 11:24 pm (UTC)There's one not too far from my house, but I have no idea how many there are in the world. And, to be honest, what I know about Christianity in Japan wouldn't half fill a teacup. I guess we just have to be confuzzled together.
Also, can you expand on your statement that the people who drove in the stakes weren't the ones to get blamed for it?
Jesus was crucified under Roman law, by Romans, using a Roman form of execution. But for centuries, it's been the Jews who have been reviled as "Christ-killers." The Roman Catholic Church only dropped the deicide charge during Vatican II, not so very long ago. The blood libel -- the belief that Jews kill Christian children for their blood -- stems from this charge of deicide, and the blood libel was one of the myths that drove the persecution of Jews for centuries.
So when I see L here talking about as guilty as those who so many years ago drove stakes through the wrists and feet of an innocent man, I have to wonder who he's thinking about. The Romans, who actually did do the stake-driving, or the Jews, who didn't drive any stakes, but who were blamed for the stake-driving and murdered for it?
Sorry, I didn't mean to dump on you. I really did like the story. It's just . . . I don't know. Sarah Palin bringing up the blood libel in such an inappropriate way kind of had me thinking about it, especially because I had to explain it to a Chinese friend, so I think I'm maybe kind of oversensitized to the whole question of who killed Jesus and who should bear guilt for that.