An Answer to Rabbi Tovia Singer’s Article – Who Killed Jesus?

Introduction

I thought it fitting that I should make a reply to Rabbi Tovia Singer’s article. Someone asked him a question, as you can see below, and Rabbi Singer proceeds to answer him. I have interspersed my comments within his article. My comments are in blue. And the Rabbi’s article is written in black. If the text is black, then those are the words that Rabbi Singer has written. If it is blue, then I have written them. The full article is located at the bottom of this page, without the comments in between them. Or if you prefer, you can read it directly here (although I cannot guarantee that it is the same one I have made comments to, for Rabbi Singer may update it): http://www.outreachjudaism.org/jesuskillers.html

Summary

In short I basically say:

1. that the New Testament and the bible is not anti-Semitic, nor does it promote hatred towards the Jews, nor does it vilify them, and

2. The Jews of that time killed Jesus: yes, as a historical fact with the help of Pilate. Was killing him a sin? Yes it was. But what’s done is done.

Dear Rabbi,

What can you answer to a "Christian" who claims that the Jews killed Jesus? I was too angry to think clearly of a good answer for that.

Thank you.

P.S. . . . It's hard to be a Jew in Hawaii sometimes!

Answer:

You shouldn't get so angry at that Christian who insisted that the Jews killed Jesus. Your outrage is being directed at the wrong source. Your accuser was simply taking his New Testament a little too seriously. The Christian scriptures are quite clear about the subject of who is responsible for Jesus' death. In I Thessalonians 2:14-16, Paul writes,

. . . even as they have of the Jews, who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men, forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always; for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost!

Moreover, not only are the Jews completely vilified in the New Testament for Jesus' execution, but the Romans are completely exonerated. This vilification is not only directed toward those Jews who supposedly plotted and caused Jesus' death. Rather, the Christian Bible makes it clear that this blame is extended to all future generations of Jews throughout all time.

In Matthew 27:22-25, Pontius Pilate is made out to appear as if he wants nothing to do with Jesus' crucifixion, and he symbolically washes his hands of the affair. In fact, the Gospels consistently portray Pilate as the one fighting with the Jews for Jesus' release. The Jews, on the other hand, continue to scream and call for Jesus' crucifixion until Pontius Pilate finally relents to their incessant demands and reluctantly hands Jesus over to be crucified. Before Jesus is crucified, however, one of the most devastating and catastrophic statements was placed in the mouths of the Jewish people by the author of the first Gospel. In response to Pilate's desperate pleas for Jesus' life, the Jews assure him that, "We take his blood upon ourselves and our children!"

Let the learned Rabbi state his reasons for why he thinks that John, the author of the eponymous Gospel, speaks presumptuously. For with a stroke of a pen, he dismisses that which he does not wish to acknowledge. In the same manner, I too can speak presumptuously, and could dismiss the law of Moses as being one of the greatest and most vile hoaxes ever committed in this history of this earth, by the most famous charlatan that there ever was, and could in a similar matter dissuade people who are wondering if there is any truth to the fantastic stories documented in the Torah. Let his state his reasons, rather than simply dismissing that which he does not wish to hear.

For most people largely agree that this man, Yeshua, (whom we consider also to be the Son of God) walked on the Earth, and most also agree that he was crucified. Most would also agree that according to Roman law, the Jews could not legally execute someone. And most would agree that Jesus did not proclaim a message of rebellion against Rome, for nowhere does he encourage his followers to take up arms and to fight with force to protect his Kingdom – but rather, on the contrary, when Peter lifts up his sword, Jesus rebukes him. Consequently, it is not a far inference to think that Pilate would have found Jesus be not-guilty, and that Pilate ,wanting to distance himself from this impious deed of releasing Jesus unto the Jews, symbolically washed his hands of Jesus’ blood in front of his audience. And of necessity, if one should execute someone, especially when considering the evidence that we have of Jesus’ activities being largely limited to speaking parables and encouraging people to live more righteous lives, they by default take upon themselves the blood of the person they are killing. It is a tautology that when one kills an innocent man, that he takes upon himself the blood of that innocent man.

Read Matthew 27:22-25 (below). These verses will provide some insight as to how the mind and soul of your acquaintance were poisoned by the words of the New Testament. Pilate said to them,

"What then shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?" They all [the Jews] said to him, "Let Him be crucified!" Then the governor said, "Why, what evil has He done?" But they cried out all the more, saying, "Let Him be crucified!" When Pilate saw that he could not prevail at all, but rather that a tumult was rising, he took water and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, "I am innocent of the blood of this just Person. You see to it." All the people answered and said, "His blood be on us and on our children."

Moreover, in the fourth Gospel, which is considered by many to be the most anti-Semitic of all, John has Jesus completely exonerating the Romans for the crucifixion while placing the complete blame for Jesus' death on the head of the Jews. In a conversation between Jesus and Pilate, Jesus assures the Roman procurator of Judea that he has no power of his own, and therefore "the one who delivered me to you [the Jews] bear the greatest iniquity" (John 19:11).

Vilification and Anti-Semitism in Christianity and the Bible

Rabbi Singer, I must address you on this point.

The writers of the New Testament did not vilify the Jews nor were they anti-Semitic as you slanderously and scurrilously accuse them of doing so, for they do none other than state the sins which the Jews were guilty of having committed, and state the words they yelled out to Pilate, and state and their impending punishment:

and they please not God, and are contrary to all men, forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always; for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost! (I Thessalonians 2:14-16)

I quote from the very scriptures which you yourself have quoted. Again, Paul, who wrote this letter is simply outlining that it was a sin for the Jews to prevent the gospel from being preached to even the gentiles, and for that, they would incur the wrath of God. He does not rant and rave and vilify them in the manner of Hitler, as you so scandalously accuse him of doing so. For your God, through Moses, similarly declares to his people his law, and the things that displease him, and he goes on further to outline the punishments that will befall his people should they disobey his word. Paul in his letter does no less.

But let me answer further his accusations:

1. Jesus was the “King of the Jews” and Christians would not curse their King.

There was a written notice above him, which read: THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS. (Luke 23:38)

And again:

So Pilate asked Jesus, "Are you the king of the Jews?"
"You have said so," Jesus replied.

So if the authors of the New Testament – or if anyone for that matter, curses a Jew, not only will they bring curses upon themselves:

I will bless those who bless you,
and whoever curses you I will curse (Genesis 12:3)

but they will also bring down those curses upon their own Lord and King, who was the first and foremost Jew, himself being the King of the Jews.

2. Let the learned Rabbi scour the gospels and all the scriptures and let him find a single verse which vilifies the Jewish people and the Jewish nation. For he speaks presumptuously, and he does so without providing any basis for his claims, and on the scripture that he does quote (much to his credit) viz. Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians, which he says vilifies the Jews - I have already shown that this is not the case. For the scripture he cites merely points out the error of some Jews, that is, the Jews who oppose the Gospel being preached to the Gentiles, and it outlines their punishment. Paul does not condemn the Jewish nation because of their Jewishness, but only speaks about a class of people, who happen to be Jews in this instance. What the learned Rabbi quotes, and accuses of being vilification, does not even come close to the type of vilification that one would find in “works” such as Mien Kampf – and this is the type of thing the learned Rabbi’s readers would have in mind if he did not preface his comments with some sort of caveat. But perhaps this is an innocent omission on his part? I think not, given his further statements and his omissions.

But let me go further, if that is the type of thing that the learned Rabbi construes as being vilification, let him realise what his own prophets say about the Jewish people in Jerusalem when they were acting in sin, and disobeying the laws of the most High God:

“Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite” (Ezekiel 16:25)

This is the same people, Israel, whom God says is his “first born son”. Yet in the above passage he disowns his son, and is rather saying that Israel is not his own son, but a bastard child of the pagan nations driven out of Canaan. And again, in other parts of the scripture, the Lord likens Israel and Judah to prostitutes, to wives who have gone astray. And again, the Lord God himself says the following about the Israelites:

⁹ "I have seen these people," the LORD said to Moses, "and they are a stiff-necked people. ¹⁰ Now leave me alone so that my anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them. Then I will make you into a great nation." (Exodus 32:9-10)

Here we see the Lord himself calling the Israelites “stiff necked”, and wanting to completely annihilate them. Doesn’t that sound just a tad anti-Semitic? Doesn’t it sound like something Hitler himself would say (especially the bit about destroying the Jews)? Then let the learned Rabbi quote the Old Testament, and accuse the prophets who wrote them of being guilty of vilifying the Jews, in the same manner in which he quotes the New Testament, and accuses our saints – who were Jews themselves of doing the same*. Let him apply his double standards, to the writing he himself finds agreeable.

*Yes, I hear you: not all were Jews, but you get the picture: it is a Jewish religion, with Jewish origins.

And in a like manner, let him say that the Jews persecuted and completely annihilated the many nations before them living in Canaan – let him also say that they were guilty of the most heinous genocide, for they spared neither women nor children. Moreover, let him also shout out in the streets that while his forefathers had no problem killing human babies, they also at the same time refused (on one occasion at least) to kill animals (read Samuel 1:15). For Rabbi Singer seems to be learned in the UN declarations of Human Rights, him clamouring eagerly to accuse our venerable saints of being guilty of racial vilification and anti-Semitism. Let him do the same with the fathers of his nation. And again, what is worse: racial vilification (not that our Saints committed such a crime), or the complete genocide and annihilation of an entire race of people? Yet he seems to dwell upon this supposed “vilification”, while being silent about the genocide his fathers’ committed upon entire races of people. Let this learned UN human rights commentator also commentate upon the deeds of his fathers, for he seems to be keen on commentating upon the written words of our saints.

4. And moreover, if the learned Rabbi had bothered to read the scriptures, he would know that they do not vilify the Jews nor are they anti-Semitic. But rather, we find repeatedly, that it is the Jews who are ones persecuting the Christians; the Jews are the ones trying to exterminate the Christian religion from the face of the world, and the Jews are the ones persecuting their own fellow Jews:

¹²Answering again, Pilate said to them, "Then what shall I do with Him whom you call the King of the Jews?"

¹³They shouted back, "Crucify Him!"

¹⁴But Pilate said to them, "Why, what evil has He done?" But they shouted all the more, "Crucify Him!" (Mark 15:12-14)

And again Jesus speaking to his followers, speaking about how their fellow Jews will betray them on account of their beliefs:

¹²"….they will lay hands on you and persecute you. They will deliver you to synagogues and prisons, and you will be brought before kings and governors, and all on account of my name….¹⁶You will be betrayed even by parents, brothers, relatives and friends, and they will put some of you to death. ¹⁷All men will hate you because of me. ¹⁸But not a hair of your head will perish. ¹⁹By standing firm you will gain life. (Luke 21:12)

And again, the apostle suffered at the hands of the Jews:

….they called the apostles in and had them flogged. Then they ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go.

⁴¹The apostles left the Sanhedrin, rejoicing because they had been counted worthy of suffering disgrace for the Name. ⁴²Day after day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they never stopped teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the Christ.^[b]

And read again, how the Jews stoned the innocent Stephen, and Paul, the foremost apostle to the Gentiles was there approving their conduct

⁸Now Stephen, a man full of God's grace and power, did great wonders and miraculous signs among the people. ⁹Opposition arose, however, from members of the Synagogue of the Freedmen (as it was called)—Jews of Cyrene and Alexandria as well as the provinces of Cilicia and Asia…they secretly persuaded some men to say, "We have heard Stephen speak words of blasphemy against Moses and against God." (Acts 6:8)

Stephen then gave them a speech, which was a condensed version of the history of their ancestors concluding with the following:

⁵¹"You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit! ⁵²Was there ever a prophet your fathers did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him— ⁵³you who have received the law that was put into effect through angels but have not obeyed it."

And read carefully what happens next when they stone Stephen:

⁵⁴When they heard this, they were furious and gnashed their teeth at him. ⁵⁵But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. ⁵⁶"Look," he said, "I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God."

⁵⁷At this they covered their ears and, yelling at the top of their voices, they all rushed at him, ⁵⁸dragged him out of the city and began to stone him. Meanwhile, the witnesses laid their clothes at the feet of a young man named Saul.

⁵⁹While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." ⁶⁰Then he fell on his knees and cried out, "Lord, do not hold this sin against them." When he had said this, he fell asleep. (Acts 7:54-60)

And again

On that day a great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. (Acts 8:1)

Etc. etc. Ad Nauseam

5. But now, let us show examples of how the apostles did not persecute the Jews. There being examples of such conduct does mean that the New Testament authors were not guilty of vilifying the Jews nor does it mean that they were anti-Semitic, but since Rabbi Singer is unable to adduce sufficient evidence to prove his point (were our scriptures anything like Mein Kampf, I am sure he would not hesitate to point out instances of anti-Semitism), this serves to further reinforce the point of how the authors, Paul especially, cared for the Jews, his own people.

As previously quoted, even unto the death, Stephen cares for his fellow Jewish persecutors who were stoning him:

⁶⁰Then he fell on his knees and cried out, "Lord, do not hold this sin against them." When he had said this, he fell asleep.

And again Paul, a Jew (remember, Paul, the same one whom Rabbi Singer quoted), demonstrates his love for his brothers:

¹I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit— ²I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. ³For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, ⁴the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. ⁵Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised!^[a] Amen. (Romans 9:1-12)

And if that wasn’t strong enough, Paul again reinforces this:

¹Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved. ²For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. ³Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness. ⁴Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes. (My emphasis).

And read the following - Peter is talking to the very same people, the same Jews whom the New Testament, according to the learned Rabbi, “vilifies,” the same people who killed Jesus, trying to get them to repent of their grievous sins. Is this done with a spirit of vindication? Is this done with a spirit of vilification or anti-Semitism? Read it for yourself if you don’t believe me. But rather, the grace of God and forgiveness is wide open for any one who would take it:

¹⁴Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: "Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say……………

……… ²²"Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. ²³This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men,^[d] put him to death by nailing him to the cross……..

…….. ³⁷When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, "Brothers, what shall we do?"

³⁸Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. ³⁹The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call."

⁴⁰With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, "Save yourselves from this corrupt generation." ⁴¹Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.

6. And moreover the entire Christian religion sprung up in Judea, in modern day Israel. The message of Yeshua the Christ, the Messiah, was preached by a Jew, for Yeshua himself was a Jew, to other Jews, and it was these Jews who carried his message, on pain of death and persecution, unto the ends of the world. And yet this learned Rabbi is accusing these Jews of preaching an anti-Semitic message – a message that would be detrimental to themselves! For I am yet to hear of a Jew being anti-Semitic to another Jew, and proclaiming such a message unto themselves, yet this is exactly what this learned Rabbi is implying. And again, I charge this learned Rabbi and his followers, who can produce anti-Semitic statements by the score in Mein Kampf, to do the same with the New Testament scriptures, and to prove in evidence their grand boasts of the scriptures being anti-Semitic. For it is not in the nature of a Jew to be anti-Semitic towards another Jew.

The Romans not Bearing any Guilt?

There now, most learned Rabbi, you have contradicted yourself. For you are either ignorant of the scriptures you are commenting upon - for you profess to be reasonably acquainted with them, otherwise I am sure that a man of your integrity would have would have prefaced your article with a caveat warning of your ignorance – either that or you must be found guilty of misconstruing the scriptures to suit your own purposes. For from the words Jesus says, our Lord and Saviour implies that Pilate is not completely exonerated, but is also guilty of sin. I shall discuss this point further, but before I do so, I must render to the reader the correct reading of John 19:11, for our Rabbi has spoken presumptuously, and with his lying tongue has falsely handled the scriptures. But before that discussion, let the reader ponder this question: if a man, in this case Pilate, should be an accessory to the murder of an innocent man, as Pilate himself declares, would Pilate not be guilty of committing a crime, would he not be guilty of committing some sort of sin?

The Dishonesty of Rabbi Singer

And now, a further and most distressing charge regarding the integrity of this learned Rabbi must be brought, for I did not think of him to be below this level; he must stand accused of tampering with the scriptures and quoting them as saying that which they do not actually say. For I have searched the length and breadth of the internet via Google, and I cannot find a single bible which contains the words which our Rabbi claims the bible to have said, that is, my searches did not bring me to a single bible which has these words: “bear the greatest iniquity”.

Let the discerning reader see the proof for him or herself, by clicking on the following link, which searches the entire internet for those words, in the exact phraseology that this Rabbi has quoted them, within quotation marks, and let him or her see themselves, the sly manner in which this professedly learned Rabbi seeks to deceive those who are ignorant: http://www.google.com.au/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&=&q=%22bear+the+greatest+iniquity%22&btnG=Google+Search&meta=lr%3D

You will notice that the result which Google displays is the article that this Rabbi himself wrote, or derivatives from what this Rabbi wrote, copy/pasted into other web pages. And it is for this very reason, that those search results were probably omitted from the larger search.

Let the Rabbi answer why he did not quote from a bible that is accepted by orthodox Christians, and why he chose to quote from a bible that the whole internet could not yield a positive search.

Now, let me produce for you, O most discerning reader, the true words rendered by the bible, from as many bibles as I could find, and let him read its true words. For they say, for the most part, the words “guilty of the greater sin” rather than saying “guilty of the greatest sin” as Rabbi Singer claims. For the difference in the two words ‘greater’ and ‘greatest’ make all the difference, for the former directly implicates Pilate into a crime, into a sin, rather than ‘completely exonerating him’ as this shameless peddler of error, our most learned Rabbi Singer, claims.

And I am aware that this learned and most honest and pious Rabbi, wanting to justify himself before men, may in the future change his page, to cover up his shameful act, and the error of his ways, let he be seen in bad light before men. Let the reader know, that I have the full version of Rabbi Singer’s article, word for word, copied and unedited below this version which I have interspersed with my comments.

The Correct Version of John 19:11

Let the reader click on the following link and choose from the umpteen versions of the bible that this Rabbi chose not to quote from, to see the correct reading of John 19:11: http://bible.cc/john/19-11.htm or alternatively http://net.bible.org/verse.php?book=Joh&chapter=19&verse=11 . Let the reader peruse through that list and identify the version of the bible that this Rabbi uses – if he can do this at all (and he cannot, for the Rabbi has spoken presumptuously). But clicking on that link is unnecessary, for I have provided the former for you in full below:

International Standard Version (©2008)
Jesus answered him, "You have no authority over me at all, except what was given to you from above. That's why the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin."

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
Jesus answered, "You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above; for this reason he who delivered Me to you has the greater sin."

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
Jesus answered Pilate, "You wouldn't have any authority over me if it hadn't been given to you from above. That's why the man who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin."

King James Bible
Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.

American King James Version
Jesus answered, You could have no power at all against me, except it were given you from above: therefore he that delivered me to you has the greater sin.

American Standard Version
Jesus answered him, Thou wouldest have no power against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath greater sin.

Bible in Basic English
Jesus gave this answer: You would have no power at all over me if it was not given to you by God; so that he who gave me up to you has the greater sin.

Douay-Rheims Bible
Jesus answered: Thou shouldst not have any power against me, unless it were given thee from above. Therefore, he that hath delivered me to thee, hath the greater sin.

Darby Bible Translation
Jesus answered, Thou hadst no authority whatever against me if it were not given to thee from above. On this account he that has delivered me up to thee has the greater sin.

English Revised Version
Jesus answered him, Thou wouldest have no power against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath greater sin.

Webster's Bible Translation
Jesus answered, Thou couldst have no power against me; except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me to thee hath the greater sin.

Weymouth New Testament
"You would have had no power whatever over me," replied Jesus, "had it not been granted you from above. On that account he who has delivered me up to you is more guilty than you are."

World English Bible
Jesus answered, "You would have no power at all against me, unless it were given to you from above. Therefore he who delivered me to you has greater sin."

Young's Literal Translation
Jesus answered, 'Thou wouldest have no authority against me, if it were not having been given thee from above; because of this, he who is delivering me up to thee hath greater sin.'

Pilate Sinned, and his Sin was Real

For while you state that John has Jesus “completely exonerating the Romans” you also state quote John 19:11 (and you do so incorrectly), but a correct reading would be: “That's why the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin" (John 19:11). Therefore, by implication Pilate is not completely innocent. Pilate also has some sin within him. Pilate is not completely exonerated, as the Rabbi falsely claims. And let the reader read the commentary that appears below the quoted verses, in the http://bible.cc/john/19-11.htm link. But I have again, provided it for you below:

People's New Testament

19:11……..“Poor, helpless Pilate was not so great a sinner as the Jews, who might have known better, who were filled with devilish hate, who were now forcing Pilate to the crime. The words of Christ are really words of compassion.”

In fact, nowhere in the New Testament are the Romans ever condemned for the crucifixion of Jesus*. Unfortunately, this cannot be said about the Jews. It is therefore not difficult to understand how Pontius Pilate could be venerated as a saint by many churches throughout North Africa. This is made clear in Acts 2:36 where the Jews alone are held accountable for the death of Jesus. Notice how the Roman culpability is never mentioned anywhere in this verse.

*You are incorrect in saying this, Rabbi, and moreover, you have proven yourself to be dishonest by quoting from a bible that, in this modern day and age, I cannot find over entire internet; and if it can indeed be found, then you have quoted from a bible that is not in common circulation amongst orthodox Christians. Moreover this precludes the possibility that you made an innocent mistake, but that you deliberately misconstrued the scriptures, despite you having placed them in quotation marks, with the deliberating and despicable intent of deceiving unwary readers.

What affiliation does Pilate have with a Jew? Does he care for a Jew? When Jesus speaks to Pilate, Pilate says the following:

³⁵"Am I a Jew?" Pilate replied. "It was your people and your chief priests who handed you over to me. What is it you have done?" (John 18:35)

I am presuming that his role was to maintain good order in Judea, to ensure that there was no rebellion against Rome. And it would not look too good with his Roman superiors if he was to release a man who claimed to be King (even though his kingdom was not of this world). So to look politically correct by his superiors, and to gain favour with the Jews, he ordered turned Jesus over to them, much against his will. Moreover should the soldiers bear any guilt? After all, they are obeying the orders of a superior and risk punishment for contradicting Pilate. Do they know who Jesus was? Do they care? The Roman soldiers are not even Jewish. To what extent should they be guilty of a sinful order given by Pilate.

But what about the Jews? They are crucifying their own King, their own Lord and Saviour, whom they saw with their own eyes perform greater miracles than Moses had done, for Jesus, as testified by the scriptures, made people rise from the dead, and made the lepers clean, and made the cripples walk. They saw God’s own glory in his Son first hand, and heard his marvelous parables and his great wisdom, but they were the ones clamouring for his death! And moreover, Moses is dead, but Jesus himself rose from the dead, as testified to by our scriptures. Who is guilty of the greater crime? The Jews or Pilate?

And as to Pilate being venerated as a Saint? This is the first time I am hearing of this. But it illustrates the lengths to which this Rabbi is willing to go, to portray Christians and the Christian religion as being hateful towards the Jewish people. For he wishes to portray the church in a bad light, by saying that some people venerate Pilate as a Saint. He forgets that it was the Jews themselves who were the ones who preached Christianity to the ends of the world, and at the same time he wants to say that the message they preached was anti-Semitic.

If you stop and think about it, the whole accusation of the Jews killing Jesus is rather preposterous. On the one hand, the New Testament insists that it was the most wonderful thing for mankind to have an atonement through Jesus' death. On the other hand, the Jews are vilified by the same New Testament for killing him. If you take New Testament theology to its full logical conclusion, the Jews should have been praised in the New Testament for making this atonement possible, not condemned. Does all this make any sense? You [Jews] just can't win.

Accusation of Jews Killing Jesus?

1. Are we happy that Jesus died? Yes, because that’s the only way we can live. Should we praise someone because of their sins? No. Should we be happy that the Jews sinned? No, for no one should rejoice over another person’s sin. Should we berate the Jews who killed Jesus for doing so? No.

2. Secondly: why oh why, Rabbi, are you obsessed with this? Again: it is not rather an accusation that the Jews killed Jesus, but more so a statement of historical fact. Besides: who cares who killed Jesus? What does it matter? What’s done is done. Moreover: he’s come back to life, and all is forgotten. Go back and read what Peter said to his fellow Jews after the death of Christ, pleading with them to repent and believe in the good news. Don’t you realise that even Christians rejoice over the death of Jesus, for we rely on his blood? In fact, if we do not repent, but continue to act in sin, we are constantly crucifying him and we will suffer our due penalty for it. The important thing is that we do not continue to reject him. And don’t you realise that Jesus could have walked away from the Cross if he wanted to? But he wanted to glorify his father, which was why he stayed.

And to answer to the Rabbi’s second point I shall quote what Origen says on the matter, for he answeredthe Rabbi nearly two millennia before he was born. I shall quote it below, with modifications where necessary:

The Jew continues: "Did Jesus come into the world for this purpose, that we should not believe him, [and that we should crucify him and that we should make of him an atonement for sin]?" To which we immediately answer, that He did not come with the object of producing incredulity among the Jews; but knowing beforehand that such would be the result, He foretold it, and made use of their unbelief for the calling of the Gentiles. For through their sin salvation came to the Gentiles, respecting whom the Christ who speaks in the prophecies says, "A people whom I did not know became subject to Me: they were obedient to the hearing of My ear;" and, "I was found of them who sought Me not; I became manifest to those who inquired not after Me." It is certain, moreover, that the Jews were punished even in this present life, after treating Jesus in the manner in which they did. And let the Jews assert what they will when we charge them with guilt, and say, "Is not the providence and goodness of God most wonderfully displayed in your punishment, and in your being deprived of Jerusalem, and of the sanctuary, and of your splendid worship?" For whatever they may say in reply with respect to the providence of God, we shall be able more effectually to answer it by remarking, that the providence of God was wonderfully manifested in using the transgression of that people for the purpose of calling into the kingdom of God, through Jesus Christ, those from among the Gentiles who were strangers to the covenant and aliens to the promises. And these things were foretold by the prophets, who said that, on account of the transgressions of the Hebrew nation, God would make choice, not of a nation, but of individuals chosen from all lands; and, having selected the foolish things of the world, would cause an ignorant nation to become acquainted with the divine teaching, the kingdom of God being taken from the one and given to the other. And out of a larger number it is sufficient on the present occasion to adduce the prediction from the song in Deuteronomy regarding the calling of the Gentiles, which is as follows, being spoken in the person of the Lord "They have moved Me to jealousy with those who are not gods; they have provoked Me to anger with their idols: and I will move them to jealousy with those who are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation."

2. Moreover here again does this Rabbi engage in hypocrisy. For if you read his article: “Who is God’s Suffering Servant? The Rabbinic interpretation of Isaiah 53” (see: http://www.outreachjudaism.org/sin.html) you will see that he interprets this passage, that Israel as a nation, is the suffering servant, who suffers “unimaginable suffering at the hands of its gentile oppressors”. So according to the scriptures, and according to Rabbi Singer’s interpretation, the gentiles are the ones going to cause untold suffering to the Jews (if they have not done so enough already). Let us grant Rabbi Singer that some suffering has already occurred. And let us grant him (God forbid – but remember, the scriptures cannot be broken) that some suffering will occur in the future, because he interprets that the “stunned kings of nations…will bear witness to the messianic age and the final vindication of the Jewish people following their long and bitter exile” – that things are still to come. The temporal significance really does not matter to make my point. Accordingly, let him apply the lose-lose argument to himself, because if you stop and think about it, the scriptures cannot be broken, nor can God be proven a liar. If you take the writings of Isaiah to its full logical conclusion (and note I speak as a fool here – to show the foolishness of the argument that the Rabbi makes) then the Jew-killers and the Hitlers and the Nazis and the Anti-Semites and the Jew-haters of this world should be praised for their works, for it is by their actions that God’s holy word through his prophets are proven true, and it is by their actions that they fulfill the words of the Lord. For without them and their actions, then God’s words would be proven a lie, and God would be proven a liar, and the scriptures would be broken. So Rabbi Singer, according to your argument you should (and I am talking like a fool here, to demonstrate the foolishness of your arguments) sing an alms of praise to Hitler, and not condemn him (again I am talking as a fool). Does all this make any sense? You (the anti-Semites) just can’t win. Again, I speak as a fool here – and I repeat myself so that no one can get the wrong idea about what I am trying to say. But at the same time, it is not my duty to judge anyone of what they do (even Hitler).

Do you now see the foolishness of the Rabbis arguments? Do you see how he wishes to deceive you? Just because God predicts these events, does not mean that the actions of those who undertake the sinful activities which God predicts, are justified. In the same way, just because God predicted that his Son would be killed, and that atonement would be possible, does not mean that the actions of the people who killed his son were righteous and should be praised. And most importantly, repentance is the primary theme of the New Testament, not this continual environment of vindication and accusation and hostility towards the Jews, which Rabbi Singer has in his mind that Christian do. Again, note what Peter, the apostle to the Israelites said to them about Jesus. Not only that, let the reader understand that Peter was crucified for continuing to preach to them.

And if the Rabbi replies: “but Isaiah spoke presumptuously and he was a false prophet”. Then I shall say to him: go and preach that in your local synagogue, so that your congregation may hear what you have to say on that matter, if you are brave enough.

With regard to your request for advice on how to answer the Christian who accuses the Jews of killing Jesus, remember that you are dealing with someone who is operating out of a venomous hate for God's chosen people*. He is probably not interested in understanding how preposterous this claim is. Instead, remind him that his Bible says that the Almighty will bless those who bless Israel, and curse those curse Israel (Genesis 12:3). What possible spiritual benefit can he ever hope to have under the condemnation of God?

*Rabbi you misconstrue our scriptures and deliberately mislead the ignorant, who come to you seeking advice. For apart from what I said above about Christians who curse Jews, I shall add to this what our Lord and Saviour said about those who hate:

²¹ "You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'You shall not murder, ^[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' ²² But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister ^[b] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, 'Raca, ^[c]' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. And anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell. (Matthew 5:21-22)

Read it again: it is a sin to even be angry someone! This is the Christian doctrine. I have quoted it there for you to read. It is a sin to even be angry. Yet you are in essence saying that the Christian religion and Christians in general are hateful towards the Jews – for that is the tenor of your message throughout your whole article. But to your credit, you do preface your comments about ‘Christian anti-Semitism’ with a pathetic caveat (readers, please see it below) to cover the Christians who may indeed come under it, perhaps to hide your predisposition against Christianity while still retaining your credibility (what’s left of it) with your Jewish audience.

Any Christian who promotes bloodshed and hatred against the Jews will be acting contrary to what Jesus preaches. Yet Rabbis like you, who profess to know something about the Christian scriptures, by the manner of your quoting it to prove your points, refuse to point it out (by way of direct omission), the true doctrine, but your rather look to the actions of some “Christians” (who professes to follow Jesus) and attribute their actions to the Christian doctrine itself, and to true Christians everywhere, subject of course to that pathetic caveat you have set out below.

It is important to bear in mind that although, as a result of this despicable charge of deicide, countless Christians have committed unspeakable atrocities against the Jewish people, many decent Christians condemn it. The reason for their condemnation, however, is often varied. While many of these Christians who denounce anti-Semitism operate out a genuine affection for the Jewish people, for others, however, their motives are not as pure. Unfortunately, many Christians who loudly declare their love for the Jewish people and condemn this charge of deicide have an ulterior motive: They do not want to be perceived by their potential Jewish converts to Christianity as being anti-Semitic or associated with Christendom and its long history of hate*.

Sincerely yours,

Rabbi Tovia Singer

And that concludes my answer to Rabbi Tovia Singer’s article. I may in due course update it, for it is with great speed, much like Desiderius Erasmus, that I proceed with to publish it. I hope in due course, to produce replies to other articles of interest, if I feel myself fit enough to do so.

Wishing you, Jew and Gentile alike, most gracious blessings, in the name of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ, son of the Most High God.

Here is the original article in full:

Who Killed Jesus?

	Question: Dear Rabbi, What can you answer to a "Christian" who claims that the Jews killed Jesus? I was too angry to think clearly of a good answer for that. Thank you. P.S. . . . It's hard to be a Jew in Hawaii sometimes! Answer: You shouldn't get so angry at that Christian who insisted that the Jews killed Jesus. Your outrage is being directed at the wrong source. Your accuser was simply taking his New Testament a little too seriously. The Christian scriptures are quite clear about the subject of who is responsible for Jesus' death. In I Thessalonians 2:14-16, Paul writes, . . . even as they have of the Jews, who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men, forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always; for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost! Moreover, not only are the Jews completely vilified in the New Testament for Jesus' execution, but the Romans are completely exonerated. This vilification is not only directed toward those Jews who supposedly plotted and caused Jesus' death. Rather, the Christian Bible makes it clear that this blame is extended to all future generations of Jews throughout all time. In Matthew 27:22-25, Pontius Pilate is made out to appear as if he wants nothing to do with Jesus' crucifixion, and he symbolically washes his hands of the affair. In fact, the Gospels consistently portray Pilate as the one fighting with the Jews for Jesus' release. The Jews, on the other hand, continue to scream and call for Jesus' crucifixion until Pontius Pilate finally relents to their incessant demands and reluctantly hands Jesus over to be crucified. Before Jesus is crucified, however, one of the most devastating and catastrophic statements was placed in the mouths of the Jewish people by the author of the first Gospel. In response to Pilate's desperate pleas for Jesus' life, the Jews assure him that, "We take his blood upon ourselves and our children!" Read Matthew 27:22-25 (below). These verses will provide some insight as to how the mind and soul of your acquaintance were poisoned by the words of the New Testament. Pilate said to them, "What then shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?" They all [the Jews] said to him, "Let Him be crucified!" Then the governor said, "Why, what evil has He done?" But they cried out all the more, saying, "Let Him be crucified!" When Pilate saw that he could not prevail at all, but rather that a tumult was rising, he took water and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, "I am innocent of the blood of this just Person. You see to it." All the people answered and said, "His blood be on us and on our children." Moreover, in the fourth Gospel, which is considered by many to be the most anti-Semitic of all, John has Jesus completely exonerating the Romans for the crucifixion while placing the complete blame for Jesus' death on the head of the Jews. In a conversation between Jesus and Pilate, Jesus assures the Roman procurator of Judea that he has no power of his own, and therefore "the one who delivered me to you [the Jews] bear the greatest iniquity" (John 19:11). In fact, nowhere in the New Testament are the Romans ever condemned for the crucifixion of Jesus. Unfortunately, this cannot be said about the Jews. It is therefore not difficult to understand how Pontius Pilate could be venerated as a saint by many churches throughout North Africa. This is made clear in Acts 2:36 where the Jews alone are held accountable for the death of Jesus. Notice how the Roman culpability is never mentioned anywhere in this verse. Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ. If you stop and think about it, the whole accusation of the Jews killing Jesus is rather preposterous. On the one hand, the New Testament insists that it was the most wonderful thing for mankind to have an atonement through Jesus' death. On the other hand, the Jews are vilified by the same New Testament for killing him. If you take New Testament theology to its full logical conclusion, the Jews should have been praised in the New Testament for making this atonement possible, not condemned. Does all this make any sense? You [Jews] just can't win. With regard to your request for advice on how to answer the Christian who accuses the Jews of killing Jesus, remember that you are dealing with someone who is operating out of a venomous hate for God's chosen people. He is probably not interested in understanding how preposterous this claim is. Instead, remind him that his Bible says that the Almighty will bless those who bless Israel, and curse those curse Israel (Genesis 12:3). What possible spiritual benefit can he ever hope to have under the condemnation of God? It is important to bear in mind that although, as a result of this despicable charge of deicide, countless Christians have committed unspeakable atrocities against the Jewish people, many decent Christians condemn it. The reason for their condemnation, however, is often varied. While many of these Christians who denounce anti-Semitism operate out a genuine affection for the Jewish people, for others, however, their motives are not as pure. Unfortunately, many Christians who loudly declare their love for the Jewish people and condemn this charge of deicide have an ulterior motive: They do not want to be perceived by their potential Jewish converts to Christianity as being anti-Semitic or associated with Christendom and its long history of hate. Sincerely yours, Rabbi Tovia Singer