It's not really clear. "Because the Jewish leadership asked them to" would seem to be the answer you get from the gospels. I think Pilate goes so far as to say that Jesus hasn't actually done anything worthy of crucifixion.
__________________ "Men curse the Communist Party, but eventually it may release them. If hell were endless, then God would be worse than our Secret Police."--Pastor Valentin
I have presented my arguments over and over again, but you don't have the knowledge to rebute, so your only thing is ''you are discriminating''
DISPROVE my claims on Islam, or STFU.
__________________
J'ai besoin de vivre
De vivre devant moi
Ceux qui m'aiment me suivent
Je sais toi tu restes là
J'ai besoin d'aimer
Je ne sais rien faire d’autre
J'ai besoin d'aimer
Et n'est pas ta faute C'est ma faute à toi...
The Jews and Romans were having a war, the Romans decided that if they kill the king of the Jews, the rest will follow. And what was Jesus claiming to be?
__________________ If you are reading this, my post is over and you've read too far.
Last edited by lord xyz on Jan 1st 2000 at 00:00 AM
Gender: Male Location: Drifting off around the bend
Both fit the term prophet, if both existed they were human. Without sin and without mistake are two separate concepts. Perfection may not absolutely negate the possibility of mistake. Christ did not tell his parents before leaving the family in his youth and discussing religion with the elders, this may have been a mistake, I am sure my wife and I would considering our sons to have made a mistake if they did similar.
Muhammad was a great man with noble aspirations, I would claim Christ was the same.
Muhammad began a powerful religion that is often misinterpreted by its followers, Christ did the same.
Muhammad was a loving individual, Christ was the same.
Muhammad was carried away in the spirit to view areas, Christ had the same occurrence, albeit Christ was taken by Satan whereas Muhammad was taken by an angel.
Muhammad was a persuasive individual, Christ was also.
Gender: Male Location: Drifting off around the bend
It is if the accusation that is having a denial requested may be considered treason. Christ, if he did not deny, was conceding that the Jew claims that he was the sovereign King of Israel and above the jurisdiction of Caesar were accurate.
Regardless of the meaning or intent of Christ's silence it satisfied Roman law regarding his crucifixion. It was easier to kill Jesus than it was to deal with a mob of Jewish fanatics. The Romans didn't care whether or not Christ died, killing him would calm the fanatics that were bothering them.
KMC Community Forums
Oct 21st, 2006 05:43 PM
