Why aren't the Romans held responsible for the death of Jesus?

Question

The Romans were in control of the Holy Land when Jesus was killed. The Romans tormented the early Christians for years before Constantine. However, Christians who read and contemplate the stories of the Bible seems to give them a pass. In fact, popular culture seems to lay the blame at the Jewish community. Why?

Answer 1

few points, all worth of further analysys.
1 There s no historical evidence of the existence of a 'prophet' called Jesus Christ.
2 All the populations under the occupation of Romans, were considered 'Romans of abroad ' , but they were allowed to keep their way of life.There were alot of 'local' laws, and the roman 'governors would act more like a political supervisor than else.
3 After Constantine, for political reasons,the christian faith was' incorporated' as the main religion of the empire. And history is always written by the winners..no wonder that romans didnt blame on themselves.
4 The convenience of blaming on the Jews has many historical evidences.

Answer 2

The early Christian Church had a feud with the Jewsih people when they didn't go along with the whole "Jesus is God" idea and would refute them. Plus they were at the mercy of the Roman authorities and to protect themselves took great pains to distinguish themselves from the Jews and make it clear that they (the Christians) weren't the same as the hotheaded insurrectionists that provoked the recent war. So they absolved the Romans from blame for the crucifixion, even though crucifixion was a ROMAN form of execution (reserved for political criminals) and as a subject people, the Jews did not have the authority to carry out a death sentence.

Answer 3

Because the Jewish people have always been persecuted - and in many cases, prosecuted - for things they never did. For centuries they were a people without a separate nation of their own until the founding of Israel and that put them in the same category as gypsies. Granted, it was the Sanhedrin which passed judgment on Christ, and since they were Jews - although they were goaded by Pilate (you decide what to do with him, I want no part of it) - the Jewish people get the blame and are called such things as Christ killers when in fact, they should only be made to take half the blame. AND, it wasn't really the Jewish people, it was the higher-ups in the religion who made the decision about what to do because they saw him as a revolutionary and threat who was upsetting the status-quo.

Answer 4

Historical documents have NEVER been found outside of the bible that even mention Jesus - at least none that have not been shown to have been changed to include him.

Now follow this - the Romans kept records to the point of being anal retentive about it. I have seen original documents in museums that are a list of how many men worked on building a scaffold to repair part of an aqueduct - and they even included the number of nails that were used and which ones had to be re-forged after wards!

There are mentions of the name Jesus in Roman records, one was a merchant who traveled between Jerusalem and Alexandria and was taxed the wrong amount, another was a bandit who was stoned to death by angry farmers, a third was mention of the name was recorded by a Legionnaire in a letter home in 70CE when a woman asked for permission to recover the body of her son who was crushed when their house burned down during the Roman destruction of Jerusalem - And the forth record was when a Yeshua (the Roman way to spell the Hebrew name that was later Hellenize to "Jesus") was killed by soldiers for trying to lead an armed revolt against the garrison at one of the gates of Jerusalem... and THAT Yeshua was the son of Caiaphas the high priest!

With all that attention and all those records there is not ONE contemporary mention of this person who so enraged the people of the city that they went to the Roman Governor - not one mention of the events of the story of Jesus has ever been found that was not written at LEAST 80 years after they were supposed to have happened.

So to me, there is no wonder that the Romans are not held accountable. Its more the story of a group of people re-writing history to make Jews look bad and further justify bigotry.

Answer 5

Because the Jewish community were the people that decided they wanted Jesus to die. The Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, offered to pardon either Jesus, or a murderer, and they (The Jewish community, though it is more likely to be the Saducees) demanded the murderer get pardoned instead.

Answer 6

In short.

Because the Romans controlled the Holyland.

You dont bite the hand that feeds you.

In other words. If you have to blame someone, you DO NOT blame the empire that controls your home and has soldiers on every street corner and is constantly on guard against revolt (common in jeruselum).

You blame the next best group, the one that rejects what you believe in.

Its called politics

Answer 7

The Romans only facilitated the desires of the Jewish community.

Answer 8

I hold four responsible:
1. Judas: he betrayed his friend.
2. The Jewish leaders of the time: they demanded his murder.
3. The Roman representative Pilat: he did not stand in their way.
4. God, sent the boy down in the first place.
Betrayal, Envy, Indifference and Omnipotence, four good sources of bad.

Answer 9

Jesus was seen as a criminal and was punished by the Romans. Jesus was apparently betrayed by the Jews who some really didn't believe he was the Son.

Why would Romans be held responsible? They just executed him.

Answer 10

because that would make sene, and it would make it tougher for people to hate jews who rejected jesus.

in truth, jesus could not have been condemned to death by a jewish court for many reasons, and crucifiction would never have been tolerated by jewish leaders. 250,000 jews were crucified by the oppressive roman government, but the fictional gospels try to spin things the opposite way to support anti-jewish sentiment. is it coincidence that the romans are off the hook and the new church was based in...um...rome?