KILLING JESUS: WHO IS TO BLAME?

the high priest destroys his office, picture

TV personality Bill O'Reilly has so far co-authored five “Killing” books. I read the first three; I have not read his “Killing Jesus.” This is not a review or critique of his book. Rather, I have considered the implications for blame that are generally made with this subject. Historically, it can be said that blame is shifted among ethnics, political-religious parties, and governing powers.

Who is really to blame for killing Jesus? The Jewish people have been blamed and as a nation have suffered for it. The Roman Catholic position of late has been that the Jews are “exonerated.” From this we can conclude that the Jewish people have before been blamed for killing Jesus as if God had blamed them and God's earthly stand-in can now acquit them. In truth, the gospel records indicate that the nation had plenty of folk interested in following Jesus (Matthew 16:13,14). “The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, ...behold, the world is gone after him” (John 12:19). “If we let him thus alone, all [men] will believe on him” (John 11:48). Consider the multitudes that followed Him wherever He went; and consider the many that welcomed Him to Jerusalem for His triumphal entry. In the face of such evidence, how can one reasonably blame a nation?

But one might say, "But the mob accused themselves and their children (Matthew 27:15) and Peter later accused the Pentecostal multitude who were in Jerusalem two months later" (Acts 2). They were all Jews. As for the Pentecost accusation, surely Peter uses the second person plural "you" in a figurative sense to indicate that those wicked judges and the accompanying mob influenced by them were representing the nation; for Peter says "in the midst of (among) you" (Acts 2:22). This is the same as saying we Americans, the U.S., invaded Iraq, or we are now abandoning our allies. The leaders represent the nation. As for "passing the buck" to our children, God's own Law does not impute sin except to the person who does it: "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son" (Ezekiel 18:20).

Could Judas be blamed? He did betray the night location of Jesus, but remember, he had second thoughts when he saw that Jesus did not resist nor perform a miraculous deliverance from the Temple authorities. He obviously was surprised to see Jesus taken away for he tried to return his betrayal money.

Some current religionists have written bad reports of the Pharisee Party. In truth, not all Pharisees were opposed to Jesus; e.g., Nicodemus (John 3:1; John 7:50). Joseph of Arimathea, member of the Sanhedrin, who furnished Jesus his tomb may have been a Pharisee.ⁱ Many Pharisees, including Saul of Tarsus, later became Christians (Acts 15:5). Although the Pharisees were active in condemning Jesus and wanting Him dead as early as at Capernaum and finally in Jerusalem (Mark 3:6; 11:18; John 11:47-53; 12:42), it is not certain that they were at that illegal night meeting of the Sanhedrin. Not all 71 members had to be present at the palace of the Sadducee high priest where the final death decision was made.ⁱⁱ “Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas” (Matthew 26:3).ⁱⁱⁱ Since it not only violated their rules of when to meet and where to meet, the Pharisees probably absented themselves from the house of Sadducees. The Pharisees are later said to appear to advise Pilate to seal the tomb (John 18:3).

The priests and the high priests (Annas and Caiaphas) were Sadducees. The high priest did prejudice the sitting judges by himself pronouncing the death sentence on Jesus (Matthew 26:25), but the Sanhedrin could not execute a death sentence in Jerusalem that year. “Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death” (John 18:31).^iv So in respecting their judicial status, the Sadducees could not be blamed for the actual killing of Jesus although Jesus told Pilate that they had sinned greater than he.

Since the Romans are the only ones left, would they then be the actual ones to be blamed for killing Jesus? Jesus predicted that by the Romans the non-Jewish nations (Gentiles) would have the final authority for the scourging and the execution. “He will be handed over to the Gentiles. They will mock him, insult him, spit on him, flog him and kill him” (Luke 18:32, NIV).

However, the basic premise of the blame game upon particular men for killing Jesus is false. The death of Jesus and who caused it are so dwelled upon by men that one forgets that He is not dead, but risen.

MANKIND IS TO BLAME. Jesus deflated Pilate's ego with “Thou couldest have no power [at all] against me, except it were given thee from above” (John 19:11). First of all, it was God's plan that Jesus die so that the world might be saved. To attribute His death strictly to the decision of men would be slighting the power of God. It was according to the plan of God from the foundation of the world to provide salvation for humans via the crucifixion of His Son (Ephesians 1:2ff; Hebrews 9:15). The love in John 3:16 is the central thought here.

Second, if Jesus died to save us from our sins, then the focus of blame should be upon each one of us. You and I. Jesus died because of our sins. None are exempt. "There is no one who does not sin." (1Kings 8:46). “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:” (Romans 3:23,24).

Third, if Christians fall away, they kill Jesus again. “If they shall fall away,... seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put [Him] to an open shame” (Hebrews 6:6). The verb is “to re-crucify” here. If such sins RE-crucifies Jesus, indeed our past sins were responsible for killing Jesus. We are to blame.

iiPerhaps as little as 21 out of the 71 were enough for a quorum.

iii http://www.barr-family.com/godsword/claim5.htm. An abbreviation of an article by Jack Barr who claimed that his research indicated that the high priests and chief priests at this particular time were Sadducees because the Romans did the appointments and they appointed their only supporters who were Sadducees to these ruling positions.

iv“Judgments in capital cases had ceased among them; nor did they try causes relating to life and death, the date of which they often make to be forty years before the destruction of the temple.” John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible. John 18:31.