Pope Benedict: Jews didn't kill Jesus

2011-03-04 10:34
Philip Pullella
Jewish groups applauded the move. The Anti-Defamation League called it "an important and historic moment" and hoped that it would help complicated theology "translate down to the pews" to improve grass roots inter-religious dialogue.

The pope makes his complex theological and biblical evaluation in a section of the second volume of his book "Jesus of Nazareth," which will be published next week. The Vatican released brief excerpts on Wednesday.

The Roman Catholic Church officially repudiated the idea of collective Jewish guilt for Christ's death in a major document by the Second Vatican Council in 1965.

It was believed to be the first time a pope had made such a detailed dissection and close comparison of various New Testament accounts of Jesus's condemnation to death by the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate.

"Now we must ask: Who exactly were Jesus' accusers?" the pope asks, adding that the gospel of St John simply says it was "the Jews."

"But John's use of this expression does not in any way indicate -- as the modern reader might suppose -- the people of Israel in general, even less is it 'racist' in character," he writes.

"After all John himself was ethnically a Jew, as were Jesus and all his followers. The entire early Christian community was made up of Jews," he writes.

Benedict says the reference was to the "Temple aristocracy," who wanted Jesus condemned to death because he had declared himself king of the Jews and had violated Jewish religious law.

He concludes that the "real group of accusers" were the Temple authorities and not all Jews of the time.

"MAJOR STEP FORWARD"

Elan Steinberg, vice-president of the American Gathering of Holocaust Survivors and their Descendants, welcomed the pope's words.

"This is a major step forward. This is a personal repudiation of the theological underpinning of centuries of anti-Semitism," he told Reuters.

"This pope has categorically stated that the canard that Jews were Christ killers is a gross theological lie and this is most welcome in view of the setbacks that we have seen in the past few years."

The question of Jewish responsibility for Christ's death has haunted Christian-Jewish relations for nearly 2,000 years.

Benedict, elected in 2005, has had his share of problems in Christian-Jewish relations.

In 2009, he decided to advance wartime Pope Pius XII on the path toward sainthood by recognizing his "heroic virtues."

Many Jews accuse Pius, who reigned from 1939 to 1958, of having turned a blind eye to the Holocaust. The Vatican says he worked quietly behind the scenes because speaking out would have led to Nazi reprisals against Catholics and Jews in Europe.

Jews responded angrily last year when the pope said in another book that Pius was "one of the great righteous men and that he saved more Jews than anyone else."

Jews have asked that the process that could lead to making Pius a saint be frozen until after all the Vatican archives from the period are opened and studied.

Earlier in 2009, many Jews and others were outraged when Benedict lifted the excommunication of traditionalist Bishop Richard, who caused an international uproar by denying the full extent of the Holocaust and claiming that no Jews were killed in gas chambers.

Do you agree with what Pope Benedict says in his book? Share your thoughts.


Comments

  • Zeus - 2011-03-06 15:43

    The gods have deemed the publication as an attack on the Bible! Given the fact the the former head of Catholic docrtrine now indoctrnates a his world wide following,political and religious leaders is pure reason to support the German Claims of His popeness driving a totaletarian agenda of early centuries gone by. As a theologian prior to becoming pope and with the advantage of a congregation that in majority does not read the bible ( we are not sure if they are still encouraged to read or theologize) and that just accepts doctrine from the holy see makes us wonder if the popey doctrine is intended to totaliarize the Holy Bible as well. The Pope will deny that the Jewish leaders were envious of Christ(Not the jewish people).The Pope cant deny that phrophesy and Jewish denial in the Bible have happened. he would have to change the Bible to support any theology to the contrary. Mr. Pope...Your Bible and the rest of world is very,very clear..." For he knew that they had handed Him over because of envy" Matt. 27:18. Its in your Bible Mr. Pope! The chief priest and jewish elders were knowledgeable and exacting in the obeservance of the law. But their analysis of religious life was so microscopic that they had lost sight of the point of religion.The very same Christ you profess in your skewered theology..This Jesus brought fresh view of piety, and the people of Israel(including religious leaders)heard the good news of salvation through the cross. Instead of thanking Jesus they destroy Him! Z

      partie.ndlovu59 - 2011-03-07 14:43

      i agree with you Zeus...!

      Bloodbane - 2011-03-08 12:02

      what rubish... jewish heads of where puppets of roman. they where in their place to keep the piece. Jesus was challanging their rule and thus challanging the rule of roman. He was therefore killed by roman! crusifiction was a roman punishment used ONLY on people who defined roman rule.

      les wood - 2011-03-08 14:18

      Who cares about this nonsense and the purveyor of bigotry and dangerous dogma? Christianity is the belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie that is his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in all humanity because a rib-woman was convinced to eat from a magical tree by an infinitely sadistic being disguised as a talking snake with legs. It is all absolute bollocks.

      james4usa - 2011-03-08 17:10

      Why does the pr!ck not mention the Holy Talmud: Soferim 15 Even the best of non Jews should be killed. Zohar 39a. Kill a non Jew and go to heaven.Baba Mezia 114a Non Jews are not human. See "Real Zionist news"

  • alessandroz067 - 2011-03-07 15:38

    The pope was there when Jesus died?

  • preshengovender69 - 2011-03-07 16:25

    If he said it early we could of save 12 millions Jews

  • ben.ben.nel - 2011-03-08 08:46

    This is such good news, I am so relieved. I will sleep well tonight knowing this. Has the Pope phoned Mel and shared this good news with him? What would Mel do?

      SIR WILLIAM - 2011-03-08 13:12

      Ha ha, Mel would give the pope an Eishbein and and a pretty young boy....

      Tom - 2011-03-08 18:41

      Based on the Pope Benedict's claim.......can the Jewish people now claim reparations from the Catholic Church for the last 2000 years? And then exactly what or whom will determine exactly who is a Jew? Seeing that many Jews of today have no blood lineage dating back 2000 years and are basically the decendants of converts.......

  • di - 2011-03-08 09:07

    I am not the pope but I have read the Bible and it says quite plainly that Jesus gave Himself for the forgiveness of our sins. You don't even have to be a theology student to know that. The Jews did not kill Jesus. Jesus paid the price for what He did not owe for a debt we could not pay.

      GT - 2011-03-08 21:27

      Exactly, without the dying and rising, the whole story would be a little less impressive

      Thabz - 2011-03-22 16:32

      I agree.. I fail to understand all this hatred for Jews? Jesus was a Jew wasnt he? and he had to be crucified right, so the prophecy was fulfilled so why blame the people who made it happen.. maybe I'm just a confused soul..

  • Peter - 2011-03-08 09:18

    Ish 53:10 "It was the Lords Will to Crush him" (NIV) some translations say "It Pleased the Lord". When we get caught up in the fine details we miss the trees because of the Leaves. If the Jews Never Killed him where would use christians be, because without His death on a cross we would have NO salvation and would be dead in our sins. When you read the Law (Leviticis and Deuteronomy) you will see how the Lord was planning Jesus' trial and that they had an argument within their Law (The Law Jesus came to Fulfill) to have Him stoned but he needed to be hung on a tree that He would be a Curse for us. Those who have 2 habds on their salvation know Jesus had to die and to die on a Cross (or tree). THe Jewish leaders did not plan for Jesus to be killed during the feast (Mat 26:4) then Judas agrees to betray his Rabbi and then Piolet decided to have Jesus Crucifide the same day, so that Jesus dies at the time that the Passover Lambs are Slaughtered. God was and is in control. Just a contextual note that the term Jew referes to Judain as opposed to Gallilian, within the book of John and not the Jewish / Hebrew nation (this would be those from southeren Israel). Who ever was used to take my savior to the cross need to be thanked because without them I would still be in bondage. Gods was are not our ways. Praise Him who sits on the throne and who will judge the living and the dead.

  • Brandon96end - 2011-03-08 09:37

    Wow, awesome guy that time traveled and knows the facts.... how about you hand over some of the scrolls that didn't make it into the bible so we can separate fact from fiction old boy.

      Bloodbane - 2011-03-08 12:04

      bible is fiction anyway

  • Greg - 2011-03-08 11:07

    Who have given the authority to the pope? He is a man and cannot play God.

      L_Savage - 2011-03-08 12:59

      The pope is the democratically elected leader of the Catholic church. That gives him the authority to speak on behalf of the church and its 1.1 billion members. According to Catholic belief Jesus appointed Peter as the first pope and instructed him to speak on his behalf, effectively giving the popes what would today be termed as "power of proxy". I am not sure how you construe that the pope is trying to play God here, however I do think that pope is legitimately entitled to speak on behalf of God.

      Kevin in Brisbane - 2011-03-08 13:12

      L Savage: The Pope is legitimately entitled to speak on behalf of the Catholic Church and the Catholic Church ONLY. Scripture is the final authority and what the Pope says, is VERY different to what the Word of God says. In fact if you take alot of Catholic doctrine, you will see it is decidedly UN-SCRIPTURAL. Perhaps that's why the Pope encourages his masses to believe him and not think for themselves. If they started reading their Bibles they would see just what a con Catholic traditions are. Let's not forget the Vatican's track record here. The Vatican has done more to destroy Christianity in the last 1600 years than other institution.

      KS - 2011-03-08 13:33

      I agree Greg!!!

      L_Savage - 2011-03-08 16:55

      Kevin: I was answering Greg's question: "Who have given the authority to the pope?". My answer was, as I clearly stated, "According to Catholic belief". I am not sure what part of that is unclear. This is not a Catholicism vs rest of Christianity debate. The pope and 1.1 billion Catholics believe that he is the appointed representative (like a diplomat) of God on earth. Since religion is all about faith, as long as there is *genuine* belief (even from 1 person) that God has given someone the authority to speak on His behalf, then that person has the authority to do so. If you are paying attention, you will by now begin to realise that any religious leader can, legitimately, claim the authority to speak on behalf of God. This is the nature of religious belief. Now you are perfectly entitled to decide who or what to believe as being the "real" word of God, but that remains your opinion, and it in no affects the right of that person to claim to be speaking on Gods behalf. And until God Himself steps in to settle the matter, that is exactly how it shall remain. I am sick and tired of arrogant, self proclaimed bible experts who claim to have the *true* understanding of scripture. Each of us is quite at liberty to make our own judgements, and to try and convince others of our viewpoints through reasoning and debate. But please, cut the pretence that your flavour of Christianity is any more valid than another - at least not any objective level. Faith is by definition subjective.

      Tom - 2011-03-08 18:29

      So Pope Benedict is saying that the Roman Catholic Church and the Popes for 1900 years or so were wrong or mistaken?......if those Popes spoke for God like he is supposed to be doing so now during his tenure.......this does not make sense to me.......If we assume that the Popes speak or spoke for God, then can we now assume that God has now changed his mind? I am just asking....

      Karoobloed - 2011-03-08 20:17

      Greg I sincerely hope that you are not in one of those charismatic churches with a refurbished body builder or a second hand car salesman "acting" as a pastor "leading you to the truth" with sleight of hand "miracles" and mass hysteria while fleecing your pockets. Because then you really have no moral basis for throwing stones at the Pope. I am not a Catholic, but respect the Catholic Church for keeping Christianity going for almost 2,000 years, despite making major mistakes like all organizations administrated by humans, including sceptic ones. There are over a billion Catholics, making it by far the largest Christian organization on the planet, and a major world wide phenomenon whether one choose to believe or not.

      Greg - 2011-03-08 22:38

      @Karoobloed: I did not attack the pope all asked is who gave him the authority i.e. who guards the guards. I am not part of the type of church you suggest either. The pope is not God or Jesus and as far as I can see from research the bible does not give man the authority to be a representative of God or Jesus. If I'm wrong show me where.

      Karoobloed - 2011-03-09 00:43

      Thanks for clarifying. The current pope apparently has outstanding academic credentials and the leader of the World's largest Christian denomination. He thus has all the right in the world to guide his flock on interpretation of the Bible - that is what religious leaders are supposed to do. In this instance his guidance actually reaches out to another religion - in my books an admirable action - we have enough conflict in the world as it is.

  • Greg - 2011-03-08 11:08

    Who gave the pope the authority to even comment on this in the first place. The pope is a man he is not God.

      Bloodbane - 2011-03-08 12:04

      there is no god

      Greg - 2011-03-08 16:50

      @Bloodbane: Hey bud thats your opinion I did not try impose my opinion on you. But know that you have opened the discussion this is what I believe. " I would rather know Christ and Serve Him in this life and be saved from eternal hell fire when I die. If I have made a mistake and there is no Heaven when I die then so what at least I lived and made a stand for what I believe in and that is Jesus Christ the Son of God"

  • Gordon - 2011-03-08 11:11

    This pope must think he is God himself, he should slip on his Prada shoes go for a walk and have a long hard think about it

      L_Savage - 2011-03-08 17:04

      The Catholic church as a whole believes the pope was selected by God to be His representative on Earth. Sort of like God's diplomat to humanity. It is reasonable to assume that the pope shares this viewpoint. That is a far cry from believing that he is God Himself. Maybe it would be a good idea for you to try get an actual understanding of the Catholic faith before passing your ill formed judgements.

      oxygen - 2011-03-09 06:15

      And while mulling over himself I hope he walks through heaps of doggy poo.

      Gordon - 2011-03-10 10:30

      "It is reasonable to assume that the pope shares this viewpoint.", what is the pope omnipresent too?

  • God_Slave - 2011-03-08 11:44

    early Christians (Bezillidians) actually held Pontius Pilot as a Saint in their Church. They believe Pontius freed Jesus (the real Jesus). Remember most of the Jews and jewish leaders at the time did not see Jesus and only heard of him and therefore could never identify him unless told it was him. History reveals that Pilot didnt really want to crucify Jesus. As stated in the Bible, that during the time of the capture of Jesus there was another prisoner by the name of Barabbas. The Bible of today states that Pilot freed Barabbas after a vote between "Jesus" and Barabus. What the Bible doesn't state is that Barbabas's first name was also Jesus. And if you do a little research then you will know that in Aramaic (the language Jesus spoke) the word Barabbas is a term, so its wasn't his second name either. The word literally means "son of the Father" ("Bar" means "son of" and "abba" means "father) So what Pontius actualyl asked the people was if he should release Jesus (the king of the Jews) or if he should release Jesus the Son of the Father, and the people said Jesus the Son of the Father (the real Jesus). Therefore early Christians are in total contrast to Paul's (the founder of Christianity) Doctrine, where Paul says that Salvation can only be achieved through the blood of Jesus. Remember Paul was not a disciple nor did he even meet Jesus. yet Paul influenced majority of the Gospels (new test) and Barnabus's (who introduced Paul to the deciples) gospels were thrown out.

      Bloodbane - 2011-03-08 12:10

      that is crap.... anyone who has 1) studied up on roman histroy and 2) studied the bible know that pontious pilot was a ruthless dictator who would never ever ask a crowd of people what they wanted.... if there ever were two people braught before him he'd kill them both and then arrest anyone in the crowd that complaind....simple logic shows that since the early christians where actually jewish and trying to break away from jewish traditions they needed to blame jews and thus rewrote history their own way to say the romans tried to help and the jews are to blame.... never mind the fact that the first writing of these only happened 60 years after his death.... pity people are so blind by a cult following that they cant think for themselves and see the facts.

  • God_Slave - 2011-03-08 12:28

    Bloodbane, in your earlier post, you said there is no "god". You are right. There is no "god" but HE, the Self-Subsisting, Supporter of ALL. Just stating the facts regarding the Bezillidians and you cant argue facts, im sure Christians would NEVER have evil men (as you say) held as saints! Do some more research & you will see.

      Bloodbane - 2011-03-08 12:48

      ok sorry there is no God. christiaans have killed and slaughted in the name of God and by God's order so yes they can have an evil man as a saint. look at the bible and look at moses... he slaughtered men women and children in the name of God and his only punishment was for striking the stick on the rock instead of tapping it..... I suggest you do a little study and try choose text that offer all sides and not just the side you like to hear. by all accounts Pontius Pilot was a very cruel and vile man... most roman governers where. It was his job to ensure rome got it's tax from Jerusalem and to sqush any revolts. to do this he chose who would be priest and told them if they dont control the people he would use his soldiers to do it for him. in the revolt that happened (i bleive it was 60 yearss after this) the temple of solomon was destroyed and jerusalem was sacked. that is what rome did to those that did not obey. they did not "wash" their hands of issue's... that was pure propoganda and christians have fallen for it all these years.

      Kevin in Brisbane - 2011-03-08 13:19

      Bloodbane: A nice easy viewpoint you have there. Sits nicely in the craw, doesn't it? Real Christians have been getting killed. You mistake the Catholic Institution for a Christian church. Just like Muslims regard Americans, British, Germans, Australians and the French etc (ie The West) as Christians. By that reasoning, YOU TOO are regarded as a Christian by the Muslims.

      L_Savage - 2011-03-08 17:16

      "You mistake the Catholic Institution for a Christian church" My oh my Kevin, aren't we arrogant, condescending, bigoted and judgemental. A fine example of Christianity you are!

      Karoobloed - 2011-03-09 00:58

      Mr. Savage, am not a Catholic, but I appreciate your lone voice of reason as you stand up to all these bigots, most who apparently are non-Catholic Christians. Their odious narrow-mindededness reflects very poorly on Christianity at large.

      Kevin in Brisbane - 2011-03-09 01:53

      L Savage: I'm really sorry if I've offended you but have a good look at what brand of Christianity the Catholic Institution believe in and then judge for yourself whether it's Christianity or Catholicism. This is an organisation that has so twisted the words of the Bible and kept its followers in the dark by discouraging and preventing them from finding the truth. There CAN be salvation without the church, the Pope is NOT infallible, Mary is NOTHING and the list goes on and on. Catholic doctrine and the Bible are CONTRADICTORY. You don't have to be Bible punching, happy clappy, born again, pentacostal Christian to see the difference. The Vatican is a restrictive, power hungry institution that has for the last 1600 years systematically tried to destroy Christianity. Don't believe me? Just look at it's track record and call me liar. And just for the record ........ I'm not judging Catholics (people), only their institution and what it stands for.

      Karoobloed - 2011-03-09 07:24

      The Reformation only dates back to 1517 when Luther published The Ninety-Five Theses. That means the Catholic Church, with all its human imperfections, kept the flame of Christianity alive for approximately 1,400 years. Why on Earth would God Almighty have chosen the Catholic church to carry the Christian flame for so long, if Catholicism was a heretic branch of Christianity? I strongly believe that it is through the usual nit-picking and harsh judgment of others (including other Christian denominations) that the bigger message and truths of Christianity are entirely missed.

      Kevin in Brisbane - 2011-03-09 08:22

      Karoobloed: It was BECAUSE of the absolute power wielded by the Vatican that allowed them to spread "their" version of Christianity. Anyone who questioned them was branded an heretic and usually put to death in the most gruesome way imaginable. Catholicism flourished yes, but it's not called the dark ages for nothing. Despite Catholicism, Christianity survived and only since people got access to the Bible could ordinary folk start seeing for themselves just how perverted the Vatican's message was. Why does the Catholic Church discourage its members from reading the Bible? Because those that do, immediately see for themselves, just how wrong their Popes and Bishops are. Official Catholic doctrine is glaringly CONTRADICTORY to the Bible. I don't think it was God that chose the Catholic Church. It was the Catholic Church that CHOSE to twist God's word for power and profit.

      L_Savage - 2011-03-09 09:33

      Kevin: Enough with the hate mate. Your opinions are glaringly subjective. In 2000 years a lot of evil has been perpetrated by members of the Catholic Church including its leadership. But your approach is to toss out the baby with the bathwater. You ignore the huge amount of good that it has done as well. I find your take on scripture to be arrogant and narrow minded. The bible is anything but clear and consistent and how people choose to interpret it varies wildly, with a great many idiotic interpretations (some of which you demonstrate). You see contradictions in Catholic doctrine, but the bible itself is contradictory and the result is that every single Christian church preaches contradictory messages. And no, the Catholic church does not discourage its members from reading the bible. The opposite is in *fact* true. This is just one of the many "factual" errors in your little rants. It really sounds to me like you have been fed the same kind of propaganda about the Catholic church by your religious leaders as what you accuse the Catholic church of feeding their members. Clearly you know very little about the Catholic faith. You fail to see just how similar they are to the rest of Christianity (who are all trace back to Catholicism anyway). And you don't have a clue about why Catholics take a different view from other Christians on certain issues (eg Mary). If you don't even understand the religion, then I think that makes you ill qualified to be judge.

      Kevin in Brisbane - 2011-03-09 13:21

      Savage: There's no hate and I most certainly do not hate Catholics. The Bible has to be 100% correct or it's worthless. If it was only 95% correct then which 5% is incorrect? Christians around the world generally agree the the NKJ Version is the most accurate when compared with original Greek and Aramaic documents. Too many people have stated that the Bible itself is contradictory but every "contradiction", when taken in context and in relation to other parts of the Bible, is easily solved. The validity, proof and authority of the NKJ version stands up every time. Based on this argument, Catholicism and its message is found to be ungrounded, untrue and in some cases in direct opposition to the Bible. Many Catholics and plenty of its leaders have done tremendous humanitarian work but the institution has twisted the meaning of salvation and even the very words of Christ to benefit itself. If you took the time to study the Bible, you would easily see for yourself how easy it is to understand. There are far too many critics who learn about the Bible from atheist websites, blogs, and even churches ..... and then think they know everything.

  • God_Slave - 2011-03-08 13:18

    Bloodbane, you are still not seeing into what I am saying. There is a GOD. Throughout history Christians did kill & slaughter innocent people, destroyed holy temples, stole, you name it, they have done it. This all happened in the crusades. You say they killed in the name of God? That is blasphemous & yes they said it & did it no doubt. Tell me, how many versions of the bible are there? & how many times has it been infiltrated & filled with dishonesty? Can we truly say it is the REAL word of God? Why would God tell his prophets, who were without fault & blameless to kill people in His name? Does that even make sense? So they were all mislead. The pagans of the time changed many verses in the bible to confuse mankind, & that doesn't come from me, it comes from MANY CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY findings & history. Maybe if you studied so much History you'd also know that in 325 AD, the concept of trinity was placed into Christianity by Constantine, the emperor of that time, making Jesus divine when he is a prophet. The early Christians before 325AD believed Jesus a prophet,God took him up, like He took Elijah as well. So where is the REAL bible? Moses never sent out armies to kill innocent people, I don't know where you got that. Pilate, if pontius was a ruthless dictator who would have killed both, then why does the bible state that Barabus was freed the Pontius freed Barabas? So what you saying makes no sense. & if the people of that time loved blood, he'd grant it to them.

      Bloodbane - 2011-03-08 13:33

      interetsing that you say the bible cant be trusted yet use the bible to justifie your argument.... just quick history, from the bible, when moses escaped egypt he and his followrs wondered the desert for 60 years before reaching the promised land... in that time they faught can killed all in their path. there is no proof that Barabus even existed... there is proof of pontius pilot and all histoical proof show him as a tirant.... try this... do some research... you have internet use it to google him... and go through a few sites on him not just the frist one you come across... while your at it google moses and his time in the desert.

  • Gorilla - 2011-03-08 13:48

    Get over yourselves.

  • God_Slave - 2011-03-08 14:02

    Bloodbane, I am sorry, I don't use google. I use reputable historical books which document everything. A source that is not one-sided. I have given you my answer but you not seeing my point. Constantine had that interpolated into the bible. I speak under correction that there were a few wars but he never harmed a woman or child. Those were wars against him, not ones that he created. He also never destroyed any holy temples or commanded his army to. Other than that, he lead his people through the Nile. Kevin, you said that BB mistakes the Catholic Church as a christian church, you are right. Catholic means UNIVERSAL, The Holy Roman church was first known as Invictus Sol (Followers of the Blazing Sun) Kevin, I disagree with you saying the Muslims regard the WEST as CHRISTIAN. There are many Muslims & Jews living in those countries so it's wrong to generalize.

      Kevin in Brisbane - 2011-03-09 14:53

      Yeah I realise it's a generalisation, but many Muslims and Muslim countries DO INDEED regard the West as "Christians" simply because the majority at some stage in their history claimed to be Christian. Even we (Westerners) would think of countries like the USA, UK, Australia, Canada etc as Christian countries when in fact most of them are properly regarded as Secular or Post Christian at best. Come to think of it ... is there a single country on earth that can be labelled a "Christian" country in the same sense as you can say "Muslim' country.

  • Han Solo - 2011-03-08 14:15

    Hahaha This is PRICELESS! A pope from a bogus religion tells another bogus religion not to feel bad because they were responsible for killing someone who never existed. *snigger* I'm sorry but I'm finding this quite hilarious!!

      God_Slave - 2011-03-08 14:23

      Which religion do you belong to?

      Han Solo - 2011-03-08 14:34

      @ God_Slave. I don't, I'm a free man.

      Allo Allo - 2011-03-08 15:25

      Hello Han, You have no idea what it means to be "a free man". But thats a debate for another day. But live your life well, serve your brothers and love your neighbor. Your consience will bear witness to your soul. (thats from the bible and its good news for a bloke like you)

      Karoobloed - 2011-03-08 21:12

      Not very considered choice of words there Han old buddy. By using the term "bogus religion" you are implying that there are "valid religions", and you seem to be of the agnostic/atheist persuasion. Next time try "bogus beliefs systems". Just proving the point that whether you choose to believe or not is not a matter of IQ, but rather where one feels comfortable. And freedom is in the eye of the beholder - many Christians claim that Jesus set them free. As annoying as agnostics/sceptics find it, humans seems to be hard wire to believe in something. Many thus prefer to raise their kids in the cocoon of their culture's belief system (hopefully with a healthy dose of scepticism), to hopefully innoculate them against flipping out in addolescence with some weird New Age sect, or get scooped up by the predatory "religions" like Scientology.

      Han Solo - 2011-03-09 08:42

      Karoobloed, all religions are bogus. I find it fascinating when intelligent people choose to believe in any sort of faith-based religion. It’s an interesting dichotomy – on one hand a person is able to make everyday decisions based on logic and probability, using all available information to choose the best outcome. However, when talking religion, if that person finds themselves in a corner and realises they’re not going to win an argument with an atheist like myself, all logic and reasoning flies out the window and they’re able to fall back on a simply unchallengeable concept: faith. I detest the very existence of the word when used in any metaphysical context. It has somehow slithered its way into our dictionary and is used in ubiquity to explain something that cannot be explained with reason and logic. Intelligent conversations about religion are great, but there comes a point when the concept of faith is introduced, and as this is most certainly not a mutually accepted concept the conversation will always come to an abrupt halt, with both parties being no closer to any sort of vague agreement. Hence I don't argue with christians anymore. I just find it sad that they in-doctrine their beliefs on there children like you say. Children who should be able to choose what they want to believe. Not have threats of hell drilled into them. This is criminal.

      L_Savage - 2011-03-09 11:50

      Han: Faith is a choice. With time and experience one either has that faith reinforced or destroyed, pretty much depending on how you (choose to) interpret experiences. Its that simple. Faith is not something unique to religion. It applies to every aspect of one's life. You have faith that the air you breathe will keep you alive. You have faith that your heart will keep beating, that your parents love you, that your spouse will remain faithful. You have faith that what you perceive to be real is in fact real (ie that you are not the main star of the Truman show). Sometimes things happen to us that force us to re-evaluate our faiths. Sadly, in the case of religion, people often choose to allow faith to override sensibility. The result is people whose faith is delusional. But just because many religious fail to reconcile their faith with reality is hardly evidence that everything about their faith is flawed. Smart people generally recognise that religions are flawed. Foolish people who think they are smart believe that rules out any possibility of the existence of God.

      L_Savage - 2011-03-09 12:08

      "Intelligent conversations about religion are great...Hence I don't argue with christians anymore." I could explain to you using reason, logic and probability how I reconcile my belief in God with the realities of the world. However you are not required to reach the same conclusions as I have in order for us to reach a mutual understanding. There is a good reason sex, religion and politics are all taboo subjects. There are no objectively right or wrong answers. The best anyone can hope for is to reach an understanding of how/why someone sees the world the way they do, even you don't personally subscribe to their viewpoint. "I just find it sad that they in-doctrine their beliefs on there children" I would find it sad if parents didn't do this. Sorry mate, but I intend to pass my set of values onto my children. Apart from anything else, this is the natural order. Children learn first and foremost from the examples set by their parents, whom they naturally attempt to mimic. When they are grown up, they will hopefully share my value of independent critical thinking and with any luck they will be able to see that the values I have taught them are worthwhile. If not, I hope to one day learn how I could have improved my set of personal values from them. Just as it is vitally important for a parent to teach their kids to think for themselves, so too is it important for a parent to teach their kids what their own values are.

      Samuel - 2011-03-10 16:40

      So Han Solo you say it is just a coincidence that the earth revolves around the sun and around its own axe and that there is 4 seasons each year, every year...? I think not.

  • God_Slave - 2011-03-08 14:38

    Ok, Atheist or Agnostic?

      oxygen - 2011-03-09 09:05

      Why must there be a label?

  • rantoftheday - 2011-03-08 14:49

    - The Pope cannot speak on behalf of all Christians - I am sure Jesus is over it by now. Its kind of his job to forgive so who are we to judge? - The Pope and many of the contributors here are assuming that Christianity is the ONLY valid viewpoint.

  • james4usa - 2011-03-08 17:01

    Big problem In the Koran the Muslims rebuked the Jews because they were boasting that they killed the Son of God.

      Tom - 2011-03-08 17:59

      James4usa.....and your point is?

      Waleed Toefy - 2011-03-10 09:49

      Muslims dont believe Jesus was killed? Nor do they believe that he is the Son of GOD. They believe he was one of the greatest Prophets of GOD.. get your facts straight, or go read the Quran. There is a WHOLE CHAPTER DEDICATED TO PROPHET JESUS (aswell as an entire Chapter dedicated to his Mother). The Chapters were named in there honour aswell so you cant miss it

  • MnrFotograaf - 2011-03-08 18:23

    The Jews, cleary menas those who were of Jewish faith. This would include the Pharisees and all who followed them and the Talmud. In todays life, it will mean most socalled Jews who still follow those theachings and deny that Christ is the son of God and the only saviour of this world.

  • Tom - 2011-03-08 18:25

    So Pope Benedict is saying that the Roman Catholic Church and the Popes for 1900 years or so were wrong......if those Popes spoke for God like he is supposed to be doing so now during his tenure.......this does not make sense.......If we assume that the Popes speak or spoke for God, then can we now assume that God has now changed his mind? I am just asking....

  • Tom - 2011-03-08 18:36

    Have you heard about the theory that the Roman Emperor Constantine introduced the ''trinity'' idea / concept to Christianity......firstly to satisfy his own belief in the worship of more than one God and secondly he saw Christianity as the new wave taking hold on the people thus he adopted the faith to consolidate Rome's power. Apparently, it was only during his tenure that the concept of the Trinity came into effect as a fundemental part of Christianity.

      Waleed Toefy - 2011-03-10 09:52

      FACT: and just before he died, he rebuked the entire concept all together, but it remained

  • Jeff - 2011-03-08 21:45

    All clear then. So it's the Christians who killed Jebus.

      Karoobloed - 2011-03-09 00:48

      Jeff, you are misinterpreting what the Pope suggested. He suggested that it was wrong to hold all Jews responsible for what a few fanatics asked for.

      Karoobloed - 2011-03-09 07:02

      And yes, it is obvious that you were using sarcasm to make your point.

  • Ishaya - 2011-03-09 13:07

    I do not give a hood to what the Pope or any other fallable being says. Weither its the temple aristocracy or the jews as a race, the infallable word of God tells me ,.....It is the jews who killed Jesus, the Christ. Zech.12:10; Acts.2:22-24

  • Robot One - 2011-03-09 16:34

    Yes the pope(and his order) killed Jesus. Christianity didn't exist in the time of Jesus it came as a result of his life here on earth. But the pope and his order have clear records dating back 2000years.....why are they still in control???

  • oxygen - 2011-03-10 19:43

    Will that twat of a human please disappear forever.

  • Neo - 2011-03-11 08:17

    Is the Pope saying that the bible quotes John out of context? Sounds like a Malema excuse to me. Our Lord Jesus will deal with whoever sells him out (Judas), whether it's the pope or not.

  • pages:
  • 1