>”The Jews killed Jesus.”
Um, no? Actually the Romans killed Jesus. Why don’t you persecute the descendants of Rome aka Italians, Spanish, Portuguese, Brits, French, Greeks, Turks, Germans, & Romanians, instead of Jews?

Didn’t Pontius Pilate in, Matthew 27:25, wash his hands in blood and said, “ Let Jesus' blood be on us Romans and on our Roman children!”??


The New Testament accounts state that Roman soldiers were responsible for the literal act of nailing Jesus to the cross. While the chief priests and elders of the people plotted to kill Jesus, it was Roman soldiers who carried out the execution. The book of Acts also mentions that under God's sovereignty, "both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel" were responsible for Jesus' death.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
Acts 4:27-28:
This passage states that both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, were responsible for Jesus' death.
Mark 15:24:
This passage explicitly describes the Roman soldiers as nailing Jesus to the cross.
Matthew 27:2-3:
This passage describes the chief priests and elders of the people delivering Jesus to Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor.
Luke 23:39:
This passage mentions that the Roman soldiers were responsible for carrying out the crucifixion.

Nope!

There were no Roman legions stationed in Judea at the time of Christs crucifixion. Legionaries from Italy would not be stationed in Judea until after the Second Jewish Revolt that happened a couple centuries after Christ died.

All the soldiers responsible for Christ’s crucifixion were local auxiliaries.

The only Romans from Rome proper, was Pontius Pilate who wanted to spare Christ and washed his hands of the situation, his wife who had a dream about Christ and wanted Pilate to show mercy, and a Centurion who asked for Christ and displayed faith greater than all of Israel.

It was the Jews who agitated for the death of Christ, and locals who carried out the execution.

>>17785752 (OP)
>Didn’t Pontius Pilate in, Matthew 27:25, wash his hands in blood and said, “ Let Jesus' blood be on us Romans and on our Roman children!”??
That's not what Matthew 27:25 says. Verse 25 tells us what the crowd shouted out, while verse 24 tells us what Pilate said. Try not to get the two confused as you seem to have done. See the two verses in context below:

"When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.
Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children." (Matthew 27:24-25)

>>17785760
>who wanted to spare Christ
That doesn’t align with what we know about Pilate based on historical sources.

>>17785908
>Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children."
And people are stupid enough to believe that actually happened.

>>17785990
From what we know of Pilate, he had disdain for the Jewish establishment and didn’t seem like the type of governor to bend over to be their lapdog executioner. He had his hand forced because he didn’t want another desert cult chimp out.

>>17785995
He seemed like the type that would crucify the odd person for standing out. Jesus caused a commotion during the Passover ceremony, which put him on the radar of the Romans. The only complicating factor was that the Romans might have not know what the Messiah was to Jews (something the historical Jesus likely styled himself as) so they needed local Jews to translate Messiah as “king”, which definitely marked him for execution.

>>17785752 (OP) This thread again? Holy fuck... you're unable to learn.

>>17786827
or being paid, or running an experiment.

>>17786840
>being paid,
It's like I said, the jidf works shifts and they keep this thread, along with others, up on the board