Glen Beck really doesn't like Jewish people, apparently

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
The Romans killed Jesus at the behest of the Jews. Long story short, Jewish priests viewed Jesus as a threat (probably because the greedy badtards were pissed off that he was ruining their businesses by not charging for his miracles, amirite?) and so petitioned to the Romans to take him out. Pontius Pilate, the Roman judge, put Jesus on trial and ultimately found that he'd done nothing wrong, but had him killed anyway because the Jews were bitching hardcore and the Romans feared the whiny backlash that would come with releasing Jesus.

So yah, the Romans did it but it's the Jews who made it happen. I mean, if you believe all that Biblical stuff. -shrug-

So it wasn't the Jews, it was the Romans!!!

Anyways, I always thought what mainly damned the Jews in the eyes of Christians (that is those that aren't just mindless sheep) was that the Jews chose Barabbas over Jesus to be saved, though I believe that's a mistranslation anyways.

That was pretty ****ed up too, I think.

Though mostly I think it's because Christian dogma states that being charitable and immaterial is the way to be, yet Jews are greedy bastards. 313

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
That was pretty ****ed up too, I think.

Though mostly I think it's because Christian dogma states that being charitable and immaterial is the way to be, yet Jews are greedy bastards. 313

That is actually based on the customs inspired by the bible, that you can not lend with interest to your kind (that is Christians). Therefore only Jews could be money lenders.

shut up

Ok

You're so submissive!

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
You're so submissive!

What I've wondered is this: didn't Jesus sacrifice himself for humanity's sins? He knew he would be betrayed, that they'd come after him; he could've hid or left. Instead, he chose to stay and have events play out. Seems to me that Jesus was responsible for his own death, and blaming others -- while a rallying cry for the anti-Semetic -- negates the very selflessness of his act.

It doesn't negate it at all, though I'd imagine that that is a can of worms regarding free will vs. fate. I agree that the Jew hate is unnecessary in that instance though. It seems silly to hold ill will toward the Jews, considering Jesus in his death throes asked God himself to forgive them and everyone else who was involved in his death. If God can not stay pissed at the Jews, at his son's request, it's a little strange that people can.

Then again, God goes on random, vengeful, planet wide murder-sprees, and by the next day is in a good mood. Dude's got emotional issues.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
... considering Jesus in his death throes asked God himself to forgive them and everyone else who was involved in his death

Actually, if I recall correctly, what Jesus did in his death throes was blaspheme against God mmm

mmm

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
mmm

Accused him of abandoning him to be specific.

Originally posted by Mindship
What I've wondered is this: didn't Jesus sacrifice himself for humanity's sins? He knew he would be betrayed, that they'd come after him; he could've hid or left. Instead, he chose to stay and have events play out. Seems to me that Jesus was responsible for his own death, and blaming others -- while a rallying cry for the anti-Semetic -- negates the very selflessness of his act.

He did do that to be selfish and to save us.and the Jews were the ones that wanted to put him to death but the Romans carried on the plan so they are both at faults.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
He did do that to be selfish and to save us.and the Jews were the ones that wanted to put him to death but the Romans carried on the plan so they are both at faults.

Basically, Jesus protested what he saw as leaders of his faith straying from the path, so to speak, just as many, eg, Christians today disaprove of how the Pope and the Church conduct their business. And the Romans did the actual physical deed. But still, if Jesus chose to face a fate he knew was coming, then ultimately the final responsibility for his death rests with him. If not, then there was no real sacrifice, and his death becomes pointless in the Christian sense.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
It doesn't negate it at all, though I'd imagine that that is a can of worms regarding free will vs. fate. I agree that the Jew hate is unnecessary in that instance though. It seems silly to hold ill will toward the Jews, considering Jesus in his death throes asked God himself to forgive them and everyone else who was involved in his death. If God can not stay pissed at the Jews, at his son's request, it's a little strange that people can.

Then again, God goes on random, vengeful, planet wide murder-sprees, and by the next day is in a good mood. Dude's got emotional issues.

I liked this response on the yootube page:

"They are intelligent, i.e. the natural enemy of his target market."

Hasn't this historically been the conservative economic stimulus? Blame the Jews, take our property, then expel and slaughter us?

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Hasn't this historically been the conservative economic stimulus? Blame the Jews, take our property, then expel and slaughter us?

na, a lot of the pogroms of yesteryear were actually against the wishes of conservative authorities, because many invited Jews to live in their land for a variety of pragmatic reasons.

iirc, this strict anti-semetism is a product of the early 20th century (especially the protocols after WW1, and Ford)

Originally posted by inimalist
na, a lot of the pogroms of yesteryear were actually against the wishes of conservative authorities, because many invited Jews to live in their land for a variety of pragmatic reasons.

iirc, this strict anti-semetism is a product of the early 20th century (especially the protocols after WW1, and Ford)

yes, my point is that conservative monarchies would often invite Jewish communities to their land. one of the biggest reasons being that they were one of the first international citizens and thus, the Jewish community could move money and help other sort of international things. these ties between Jews and the local rulers is thought to have started a lot of the conspiracies about Jews really controlling world events.

thus, the conservative authorities weren't always as willing to seize their property for wealth as citizens were. this trend continues up until, really, the mid-late 1800s, iirc of course