After an accident or a tragedy of some sort, there is often an inquiry to determine the cause or the responsible party. The death of the messiah elicited this same question: Who killed Jesus? The church Fathers had their own answer—the Jews killed Jesus—and that, unfortunately, was the common if not official Christian position for centuries. Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ raised concern in the Jewish community that the film might revive this view. It is ridiculous, however, to make such a sweeping judgment against an entire nation...and in perpetuum. Religious leaders in Jerusalem were by no means united in their opinion of the Galilean rabbi. Some opposed him, but others supported him, and still others were neutral toward him. Furthermore, most Jews lived in the Diaspora and probably never even heard of Jesus until after his death, if at all. No, "the Jews" did not kill Jesus.
A more accurate assessment, one that is gaining popularity (again) in Christian circles, is that the Romans killed Jesus, specifically the local representatives of Rome in Jerusalem. No matter what the Jewish Sanhedrin ruled, only a Roman court had the authority to prosecute capital crimes. It was a Roman governor who sentenced Jesus and Roman troops who crucified Jesus.
Nevertheless, while this second explanation is more precise, it deals only with the legal and final cause of Jesus' death. A more measured and comprehensive analysis must include a multitude of contributing factors, from the first plot against him to the last blow of a soldier's hammer. Matthew, who describes events after Jesus' arrest and arraignment before the Sanhedrin, offers two additions in this mix of responsible parties: the religious authorities and a trusted disciple.
Matt 27:1 Early in the morning, all the chief priests and the elders of the people came to the decision to put Jesus to death. 2 They bound him, led him away and handed him over to Pilate, the governor. 3 When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders. 4 "I have sinned," he said, "for I have betrayed innocent blood." "What is that to us?" they replied. "That's your responsibility." 5 So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself. 6 The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money." 7 So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners. 8 That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day. 9 Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: "They took the thirty silver coins, the price set on him by the people of Israel, 10 and they used them to buy the potter's field, as the Lord commanded me."
We know what motivated these religious leaders to oppose Jesus and to seek his death. They considered him a threat to their authority among the people. The masses flocked to see him perform miracles and found his teaching compelling. Moreover, the number of his followers was increasing rapidly, a trend the Romans would eventually interpret as a prelude to open revolt. Indeed, Jesus' supporters might even attempt to make him king, which would bring the wrath of Rome's legions on the nation, severely reducing the power of these Jewish leaders, if it did not remove them from office completely. They wanted to preserve the status quo, and Jesus, directly or indirectly, was a threat to the stability of their position.
We are less certain about what motivated Judas, a close disciple of Jesus, to betray his master.
- Was it duty, a desire to obey the public order that anyone knowing of Jesus' whereabouts should report it to the authorities?
- Was it despair over the apparent failure of the triumphal entry to usher in the kingdom?
- Was it hope that Jesus' arrest would force him to proclaim publicly his messianic identity?
- Was it greed, the temptation of easy money?
Whatever the reason, Judas had a change of heart after Jesus' arrest.
What I find interesting and instructive is that neither side was ready to accept its complicity in what would ultimately lead to Jesus' death. Judas, "seized with remorse," wanted to assuage his conscience by returning the money, but the religious leaders would not let him off the hook: "What is that to us?" they replied. "That's your responsibility." Unable to undo his betrayal or to find relief, Judas "went away and hanged himself." The religious leaders, at that point in possession of "blood money," recognized that it was tainted and unfit for use in the temple. They had committed an unspeakable act, delivering one of their own to a gentile court for execution. Still, they attempted to put a positive spin on their treachery by using the funds for the poor. The disciple and the leaders were not willing to face what they had done, to say, "I" or "We killed Jesus," and then to deal with the implications of that admission. In fact, each party tried to pass responsibility to the other.
As we consider Jesus' death, we must not take the same attitude. Isaiah writes about the messiah that...
Isa 53:5 ...he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him.... 6b ...the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.
Were it not for our sin, yours and mine, Jesus would not have had to die. In answer, then, to the question—"Who killed Jesus?"—we must add our own names to the list. Ironically, it is only when we admit our complicity in Jesus' death that we receive the comfort of forgiveness his death accomplished.
For the Endnotes see the pdf here.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Relevant and civil comments are welcome. Whether there will be any response depends on whether Dr. Manuel notices them and has the time and inclination to respond or, if not, whether I feel competent to do so.
Jim Skaggs