Welcome Information Connoisseurs

Welcome Information Connoisseurs

Tuesday, April 16, 2019

Blaming the Romans and Pilate for Killing Jesus

Updated Holy Week, 2021

Scapegoating the Romans 
and Pontius Pilate for Killing Jesus

By Michael Hoffman

It’s customary around Easter for the media to publicize a Jesus-defaming news story. Nine years ago the New York Times propelled just such a libel, although it was initiated not during Lent, but one week before Yom Kippur, on September 18, 2012. It was headlined, A Faded Piece of Papyrus Refers to Jesus’ Wife."  

On April 10, 2014, as Good Friday approached, the Times repeated the sordid “Jesus-Had-a-Wife” drivel from a new angle, “Papyrus Referring to Jesus’ Wife Is More Likely Ancient.The story seemed (at least in our opinion) timed to insult Our Lord and His followers during the most sacred season of the year for the Christians, "Holy Week." This calumny, supported by “scientists,” was afterward shown to be a shoddy academic hoax. 

Almost every year near Good Friday, confusion is sown concerning the death of Jesus, usually put forth by a nationally syndicated, white liberal “Christian” columnist, or a sermon from a Protestant minister, or a priest of the modern “Catholic” Church. They proceed to focus culpability for Our Lord’s crucifixion almost exclusively on the Romans, and Pontius Pilate. 

According to this canard, the Jewish leaders of 33 A.D. were more sinned against than sinning.  

Among falsifiers on the Right, are two luminaries in the ersatz white “Conservative” firmament:

Former Fox News talk show host Bill O’Reilly promotes the manifestly ridiculous Romans-are-to-blame-for the-Crucifixion imposture in his book, The Last Days of Jesus

He's not alone. On Holy Thursday (April 17) 2014, Andrew P. Napolitano, better known as “Judge Napolitano,” a widely admired figure among “Conservatives," at the website of Lew Rockwell (LewRockwell.com), wrote a column in which he had the chutzpah to state: 

“On the first Good Friday, the Romans executed Jesus because they were persuaded that by claiming to be the Son of God, He might foment a revolution against them...they feared a revolution that would disrupt their worldly power, and so they condemned Him to death by crucifixion.”

Pharisaic Jews are not mentioned anywhere in Mr. Napolitano’s column about who is responsible for the Crucifixion of Jesus.

To assert that the Romans bear the lion’s share of responsibility is a contrived argument that serves to appease rabbinic and Zionist power on earth.

The fact that Jesus praised a Roman officer above everyone in Israel (Matthew 8:5-13), and that the Roman administrator Pilate urgently sought to save Christ’s life, calling him a just man, and being threatened by a mob of Jews as a result, is washed down the memory hole. 

Historic Christianity, faithful to the Gospel narrative, had a very different view of Pontius Pilate. Francis Turretin (1623-1687), was a distinguished professor of theology and the author of the magisterial three volume study, Institutes of Elenctic Theology (which was reprinted as recently as 1994). In vol. II, p. 489-490, Dr. Turretin wrote:

 “…the kingdom of Christ…is conducted in a spiritual manner, recognizes no other honors and resources than righteousness, holiness, peace of conscience, salvation and eternal life; no other arms than the Word and the Spirit; no other fortifications than the protection of God. Pilate had this understanding of it. 

“He (Pilate) clearly perceived that no prejudice could be created from it (the kingdom of Christ) against the empire of Caesar; otherwise he would not only have agreed with the accusation of the Jews charging Christ with rebellion against Caesar, but he would have been the first to think of taking Him out of the way. However, having dismissed this accusation of the Jews and (accepted) Christ’s own confession concerning His kingly office, he (Pilate) pronounces Him just and innocent, and desires Him to be cleared from condemnation (for he knew that for envy they had delivered Him, Matthew 27:18)…"

The disinformation that renders the Romans the main malefactors is also undercut by none other than the Babylonian Talmud itself, in Sanhedrin 43a, where it is stated that the Romans were favorable toward Jesus and did not want to execute him: 

“Rather it must be that the case against Jesus was different, because he had close connections with the non-Jewish authorities, and those authorities were interested in his acquittal.” 

— The Steinsaltz Talmud, volume 17, p. 159 

Random House, 1998


What is there to debate? We have God’s Word in 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15: “...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.”  We have this unambiguous statement. This Scripture passage was made by the Apostle Paul without qualifications of any kind.  

The same is true here:

“The God of Abraham, and the God of Issac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our Fathers hath glorified His Son Jesus, whom you indeed delivered and denied before the face of Pilate, he judging Him to be released.  But you denied the holy and just One, and asked a mankiller to be given unto you, but the author of life you killed ...”  Acts 3:13-15.

We can find no qualifications or shades of ambiguity in Matthew 27:25: “Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.” 

These are the Words of the New Testament about which the author of The Last Days of Jesus has nothing to say. 

Tough-guy O’Reilly told United Press International (UPI) on April 10, 2014: “...kids in public schools should learn about Christianity if they are American children. If they don’t like it, that’s too bad,’ he says.” 

Wow, what a mensch. One question: which Christ is O’Reilly presenting in his history, the Christ of the Gospel or the Christ of the falsifiers? 

The most authoritative rabbi in the western Judaic world is Moses Maimonides, “the Rambam.” He is venerated in the elite media and academia, though few of his gentile enthusiasts have bothered to discover what he actually taught.  We regret to report that Maimonides was an unabashed Christ-hater. We realize we are not to use those words; that they are politically incorrect and “offensive.” By the grace God, we have no fear of uttering truth however, and in the case of  Maimonides, this is the truth. In his magnum opus, the Mishneh Torah, Rabbi Maimonides wrote: “The Christians are idol worshippers” (Avodah Zara 9:4). 

“Idol worshippers” (true Christians) are subject to execution under the Noahide Laws promoted by every American President from Ronald Reagan forward, under the rubric of “Education Day USA.”

Rabbi Maimonides stated that Jesus was killed “by the court,” a reference to the rabbinic court: “Yeshu the Christian, who imagined himself the messiah and was killed by the court...” (Rabbi Moses Maimonides, Mishneh Torah: Laws of the King 11:4). 

Maimonides is echoing the halacha (rabbinic law) concerning the execution of Jesus as detailed in the Babylonian Talmud in Sanhderin 43A.

Nowhere does Moses Maimonides, the supreme halachic authority for western Judaics, blame the Romans, as do Popes Benedict XVI and Francis, as well as American conservatives and liberals.

There are literally thousands of “conservative” leaders like the popes of Rome, O’Reilly, Napolitano, Pence, Pompeo, and television and radio “evangelicals" who minimize the role of Orthodox Pharisaic Judaism in the killing of the Son of God, putting the onus on the Romans and Pilate, so as to curry favor with those who exert an inordinate influence on the corporate media

Because we are all sinners, it is true that in a sense, all of us are indeed guilty of Jesus’s crucifixion. But there is also the historical, Scriptural fact that the Pharisaic leaders of the Jews who were the progenitors of Orthodox Judaism and its holiest book, the Talmud of Babylon, were directly responsible for killing Him. Jesus said, “Sin must come, but woe to those through whom it comes” (Luke 17:1). 

Boldly teaching these proscribed truths is a necessary antidote to the prevailing errors of our time.   

Copyright©2021 by Michael Hoffman

Donations are solicited for the survival of our Truth Mission 

Michael’s books are available here and here, as well as at this link 



Unknown said...

The Codex Sinaiticus is very clear about who killed Jesus.
Matthew 27:49
In most translations this part is omitted and the "story flow" is damaged.
It was one of the Jewish priests who stabbed Him to death.
In this way, it was an acceptable sacrifice, for the Eternal, to the Torah.


Unfortunately, there are serious omissions on both sides of the argument regarding the crucifixion which, was an historical event, however as the missing parts of Habakkuk - recovered amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls confirm and the issuing of Eli! Eli! Lamasabachthani from the figure on the cross - make absolutely clear. That the one being crucified was as the Gospel of Barnabas makes clear that it was not Jesus, but the transmogrified "wicked Cohen" Judas asking "My God, My God! Why hast thou forsaken me?" For if he was the son of God, or a con-substantial part of a triune deity who had decided that one of its parts was prepared to sacrifice its self for man's narcissistic love of himself - then he/they would have suffered in silence. As the Qur'an records: "The Jews boast that they killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary. But neither did they kill him nor crucify him but a duplicate likeness of him". The good news about Good Friday is the fact that they crucified Judas their own man. As Jesus is recorded as saying in the Laughing Gospel whilst sitting with Peter: "And I watched and laughed as they nailed their man to their death". In other words Christians celebrate a CRUCIFICTION of Christ Jesus who was taken up to heaven by two angels who returned at Pentecost to explain to the disciples and his blessed mother what had really happened "for they truly thought it was him on the cross". He is scheduled to return following the destruction of Iraq and Syria and descend at the white tower in Damascus.

Robert Semrad said...

To me, a simpleton, apparently...I cannot fathom why, especially Catholics, are afraid to speak the truth as to who is actually the main player in the murder of Christ. What is even more alarming, is the fact that almost all Catholic priests (of today), not to mention Bishops, even Popes, are, on the surface, are intimidated into silence as to who really is responsible for killing their "Boss". I say "today", because when prelates were thoroughly Catholic they had no qualms, in fact they claim it with vigor, that the perfidious Jews made up the charges, perpetrated, instigated, and intimidated the Romans into handing down the worst form of execution the Romans had, at the time. It was these evil Jews who recommended the harsh penalty of crucifixion, when Pilate didn't even wish to have him scourged, yet did so to simply placate the Jews, hoping the brutal scourging would satiate the bloodthirst of the Jews, who proved they were the false Jews by their decision by rejecting their God. Anathema sit!

Historicus said...

The first problem that comes with mentioning Pontius Pilate is deciding which Gospel account of him to cite. In Mark, the earliest version, Jesus stands silent before him. In John, composed a half century later, they have a lively philosophical discourse. Luke’s and Matthew’s accounts also differ significantly. The Gospel of Pilate, a testimony eventually discarded by the church, praises him as none other than the first gentile convert to Christianity. Yet all sources agree that Jesus’ followers fled on his arrest, so one wonders who actually witnessed the events the Gospels narrate so inconsistently.

The Sanhedrin did not need Pilate’s permission to kill Jesus. If he had violated some religious taboo, they would have stoned him, as they did Stephen and others before and after him. Jesus was executed by the Roman prefect for an offense committed by him against Rome. Crucifixion was an especially cruel and unusual punishment, reserved by the laws of Rome only for non-citizens convicted of capital murder or judged guilty of insurrection.

Traditional Roman tolerance for Judaism vanished overnight when the Judean rebellion of 66 broke out. The rebels began by treacherously massacring three Roman garrisons after promising the men safe conduct out of the country. Accordingly, John reimagined the episode, transforming Pilate into a noble Roman hero, with the now universally reviled Jews becoming the villains of the piece. Pilate was even presented as virtually powerless over a vicious Jewish mob, baying for Jesus’ blood - just as John’s Roman audience would have remembered the Jews of Jerusalem howling for the murders of the unfortunate legionaries in the uprising.

Anonymous said...

Unknown is right with the codex sinaiticus. A part is omitted and the story flow because of that damaged.
It must have been a priest who did the killing, to make the sacrifice acceptable for God. It must be a slaughtering with blood flow, done by a priest, as is commanded in the Torah. The Romans didn't do the sacrifice. They were not entitled to do so.

Samuel Wright said...

Seem to me that as only the Priestly class of Jews where permitted to sacrifice animals in an acceptable way to God, and that as Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice, "The Lamb of God", that only his cleansed people, the Jews, could in fact carry out this task.

Unknown said...

gibbon says pilate had to take early retirement in switzerland so as not to get in trouble as a christian sympathiser

Anonymous said...

Edward Gibbon in also does not blame the Romans for the destruction of the temple. He wrote: "On the 10th of August A.D. 70, the temple of Jerusalem was destroyed by the hands of the Jews themselves, rather than by those of the Romans."
David M.

Unknown said...

Jesus sacrificed his all
And sits now to the right hand of the father as Long Jesus