Hi folks of all religions,
I am a standard C of E Christian and have respect for all faiths.
But many freinds of the Roman Catholic arena fumble over this question.
As Jesus is held as an icon in the RC faith, is it forgotten that the Romans killed him ?
A conflict of interests, perhaps ?
Bob.
2007-09-30 22:58:01 · 26 answers · asked by Bob the Boat 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The church of Rome at teh time of Jesus' death is not the same church of Roman of present day.
The church of Rome at the time of Jesus' death was a pagan church in which the emperor was a god. The present day church of Rome is a church that believes in the God of Abraham and that Jesus Christ is Lord and God.
It is also important to remember that the Jewish religious leaders at the time of Jesus were the ones who called for His death. The Romans merely carried out the wishes of the Pharises and Saducees.
2007-10-01 01:44:14 · answer #1 · answered by Sldgman 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Considering that the Romans under Emperor Constantine compiled and edited the New Testement around a table at Nicea in 325A.D. can we really be surprised that they decided to blame someone else (namely the Jews) for the murder of their God.
The story of the crucifiction is laden with inaccuracies, here are a few:
1. Only enemies of the Empire where crucified, not thieves or blasphemers or any other common criminal.
2. The tradition of freeing one condemned prisoner, as in the case of Barabas, had never happened before and hasn't happened since. Some tradition!!!
3. The Jewish elders could have stoned Jesus under their laws without having to approach Pilate.
4. In fact the Elders themselves could have been stoned to death if, as the new testament says, they met on the night of passover to determine Jesus' fate. A mortal sin in the eyes of the Jews at the time.
5. Crucifiction is an example punishment, you want others to see the crucified and realise what lies in store should they harbour thoughts against the Empire. The one thing they didn't do was take down the victims.
6. Lastly, when Jesus entered Jerusalem on a donkey with palm fronds waved before him, he was renacting what his ancestor David had done when he was arriving to be crowned. That Jesus was indeed David's rightful heir is confirmed by what the Romans nailed on his cross - King of the Jews. That is ultimately what they killed him for. Because rebellion is easy to foster with a figurehead or patriotic leader, not so easy without. In fact the uprising was delayed by nearly thirty years by the Roman execution of the King of occupied Palestine.
2007-09-30 23:31:24 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Romans who crucified Jesus were not the Roman Catholic Church - that was the Church founded by St Peter in Rome after the death of Jesus. Same word, different context. Not complicated stuff!
Here's one for you, though, Bob. Is the next head of the Church of England - supposedly the model of all faith and morality in that religion - Prince Charles, divorced adulterer and liar? I'm sure there are a few conflicts of interest there that your C of E bretheren would 'fumble' with!
2007-09-30 23:24:38 · answer #3 · answered by Mark A 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why should anyone have a a hard time with this?
Christ came to destroy Satan's power and dominion over mankind. It was necessary for Jesus to die, and he used both the Jews and the Romans, who were Satans' willing minions at that time, to outsmart and outmaneuver the forces of evil, in order to successfully accomplish his salvific mission.
The Catholic Church had already converted most of the known world for Christ, very early on.
St. Peter fearlessly set up shop in Rome, in the literal "heart" of the beast, only a few years after the death of Christ.
Roman soil is saturated with the blood of the early Catholic martyrs, and God never fails to acknowledge those who witness to his truth.
It was actually the protestants who originally "stuck" the word "Roman" onto the name of the world's only authentic non-denominational, fundamentalist, evangelical, universal, full-gospel church ... the Catholic Church.
But now, the continued existence and leadership of the "Roman" Catholic Church ... the church that saved the world after the fall of Rome, that spent the next thousand years rebuilding western civilization in the image of heaven ... and that had already saved billions of souls centuries before the first protestant ever thumped a bible ... is just another way that God demonstrates his power and might to an otherwise confused world.
The Roman empire is no more, but the "Roman" Catholic Church remains ... the pillar and ground of the truth.
2007-09-30 23:55:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Not necessarily, The Roman soldiers who were under the authority of the Roman official Pilot can not be considered any link to the Roman Church. The same argument could be used regarding Paul, (Saul) A Jew who saw the light (literally) and went by a different path. One the first was a military power. The second the church, was simple residents of Rome.
2007-09-30 23:20:56 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The word "Roman" as used in "Roman Catholic," has *nothing* at all to do with the Roman Empire of ancient time.
You're using the term out-of-context.
The term "Roman" is used as an acknowledgment of the central role the Diocese of Rome (/Holy See - Located in Rome, Italy) has within the entire Church.
2007-09-30 23:22:24 · answer #6 · answered by Infernal Disaster 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Are you talking about how the Romans killed him and yet the Catholic Church is centered in Rome? Well..... think about that for a second. The heart of the Catholic Church is in the heart of the kingdom of those who killed Christ. The Roman regime fell and the Vatican took over. Those who killed Christ fell, and those who worshiped Christ took over their very own capital. Thats quite significant. To take the religion all the way from the gates of Jerusalem all the way to the walls of Rome. Thats great.
2007-09-30 23:11:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Trying to make a connection between the Romans of Jesus's time and the Romans of the later time when Catholicism came about is akin to trying to blame the modern population of England for the actions of King Henry VIIIth.
.... Wait a sec... wasn't that the guy who diverged your religion? Fancy that!
2007-09-30 23:09:27 · answer #8 · answered by Lucid Interrogator 5 · 10⤊ 0⤋
Dude if you are a christian you really need to read your bible study it well, for it carries all the answers to life and speaks nothing but the truth.
All churches and stuffed up in some way yours included. they are run by people just like you imperfect. dont EVER let the one church is right and the others are wrong lie get in your head. If they belive the bible and follow it WITHOUT the adittion of other teachings then they are all good.
All the best in seeking the truth.
2007-09-30 23:15:23 · answer #9 · answered by Curious Partner 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
the 'roman catholic' refers to the fact that it was under the roman reign that Catholicism began to grow. It doesn't mean that the Romans killed him in order to worship him. And it was only one section of the roman society that reportedly wanted to kill him. Even Pontius Pilate, the Roman Senator who was meant to be sentencing him to death, washed his hands of the entire affair.
2007-09-30 23:10:57 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋