Six in 10 Take Bible Stories Literally, But Most Don't Blame Jews for Jesus' Death

60%

. I don't beleive in Jesus or a Bible, so I really have to wonder why there are so many people who believes that stories are literally true?

Analysis
By David Morris



Feb. 16— Most Americans believe some of the best-known Bible stories are literally true — but at the same time a vast majority rejects the Biblical suggestion that Jews bear collective responsibility for the death of Jesus.


Six in 10 in this ABCNEWS Primetime poll say the Biblical accounts of Moses parting the Red Sea, God creating the world in six days and Noah and the flood happened that way, word for word. Evangelical Protestants are even more apt to hold this view; about nine in 10 of them take these accounts literally.

Jesus’ Death

But fewer than one in 10 Americans say all Jews today are responsible for the death of Jesus, as some literal interpretations of the Bible suggest. Eight in 10 say otherwise, apparently adopting a looser interpretation of the Biblical quote, "His blood be on us, and on our children." (Matthew 27:25.)

The debate over the role of Jews in the death of Jesus has been rekindled by the Mel Gibson film, The Passion of the Christ, which Gibson discusses in an exclusive interview on the ABCNEWS program Primetime, airing Monday, Feb. 16, at 10 p.m. ET. Gibson's film is scheduled for Feb. 25 release.

At the center of the debate is the verse in Matthew, in which Jewish elders surrender Jesus to the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, and demand that he be executed. When Pilate says he doesn't want Christ's blood on his hands, the crowd responds, "His blood be on us, and on our children." A scene based on this exchange was removed from the film after complaints from Jewish groups, but some critics still contend that Gibson unfairly portrays Jews and their role in the death of Jesus.

While religious belief is a strong factor in a literal reading of the Bible, it plays far less of a role in views of collective responsibility for Christ's death. Ac**** the board, three-quarters of Americans or more — evangelical and non-evangelical Protestants, Catholics and others — reject the notion that all Jews today bear responsibility for the death of Jesus.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/primetime/US/views_of_bible_poll_040216.html

Click link if you would like to see charts

 

[PatPatriot]

To think that the left dosen't like this movie because it will somehow cause more hatred of Jews is laughable....but think its art when songs and movies are put out about Ho's,bitches and killing cops and in know way will effect 10 year olds is absurd...Its funny they think all white people are responsible black slavery and should pay reperations but get in a tizzy when the notion that the jews from 2000 years ago are responsible for Christ's death.

The problem is from this movie from what I heard that the movie is so powerful that even some atheiest that were involved in making the movie converted to Christianity...that is what the left is scared to death of.
Anytime that they are beaten to death on with an issue, they pull out the race card in some form or fashion.

 

[MrTanaka]

Well according to Christian theology, mankind is responsible for Christ's (or what he represents) death, not specifically the Jews.

There's no contradiction. The author here has a fundamental misunderstanding of Christianity. (As do a lot of so-called "Christians")

 

[blueedwards]

i haven't seen the movie yet (will see it as soon as it comes out) but i have a couple of thoughts:

1) mr. tananka is correct. christian theology clearly teaches that Jesus died for the sins of all mankind. the jewish leaders of the day, along with the roman government which occupied israel and palastine at the time were the instruments God used to carry out his plan of salvation for all man.

2) Jesus was jewish so, to say that christianity or this movie is anti-semitic doesn't make sense. this movie claims to be based on a historical account of the events, not a biased view. saying this movie is anti-semetic is like saying "schindler's list" is anti-german.

i do however understand the concern that some people raise about the possible backlash against jews because of this movie, NOT because the movie is anti-semetic but because of how ignorant people may react. throughout the centuries, jews have suffered much at the hands of people claiming to be christians.

how anyone can call themself a christian and hate jews is ridiculous. especially since Jesus needed to die to purchase man's redemption...if anything, we should thank the jews.

3) as i said, i have not yet seen this movie but i have read a lot about its making. from what i have read, it appears the mel gibson went to painstaking detail to get everything as close to being biblically accurate as possible. where the bible is silent on things (the clothing of the roman soldiers, what pilate's palace looked like, etc) he went to other historical sources to make the movie as realistic as possible. now, since the movie is based on the new testament account of the actual events, the real question is "is the new testament account reliable"? i have studied this question for a long time and have come to the conclusion that it is.

4) as far as the "left" hating this movie because it is anti-semetic...i tend to believe that is the stated reason on tv and the radio but the real reason is that most liberals (and many conservatives by the way) do not believe the biblical account of Jesus' death and ressurection is true and resent the implication that it is histocially accurate. their reasons for doing this are many i'm sure.

 

[captain#5]

And the pope is really a jew.


Am I going to see Adam and Eve tonight? I bring the apples.Were Adam and Eve jewish?

 

[blueedwards]

captain 5, mock if you will. let me ask you, have you ever really considered the possibility that the bible is historically accurate?

it's easy to poke fun. can you offer any lucid, thoughtful objections?

 

[PatPatriot]

I'm with you blue.Jesus wanted forgivness for his killers,and a true Christian would want the same...so the left is cluless as usual....It funny how hollywood and the left don't think the Texas Chainsaw massacre would be harmful or any of the other garbage they put out hurts anybody....what scares the hell out of them is the positive influence which is counter to their goals.

 

[MrTanaka]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Patriot:
I'm with you blue.Jesus wanted forgivness for his killers,and a true Christian would want the same...so the left is cluless as usual....It funny how hollywood and the left don't think the Texas Chainsaw massacre would be harmful or any of the other garbage they put out hurts anybody....what scares the hell out of them is the positive influence which is counter to their goals.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So as a Christian, would you forgive Osama Bin Laden?
(Not making a political statement either way, just asking.)

 

[blueedwards]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mr Tanaka:
So as a Christian, would you forgive Osama Bin Laden?
(Not making a political statement either way, just asking.)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

can't answer for patriot but, if you asked me this question, i would respond in the following manner:

as a christian, i am required to forgive everyone...even bin laden. doesn't mean he is not accountable for his actions. if he is ever caught, he should be punished to the full extent of the law. but, bin laden is not beyond redemption. christian theology teaches that God's grace is bigger than man's sin...if osama bin laden bowed a knee to Christ and sincerely repented and put his faith in Christ, he would be redeemed.

on a personal level, it does me absolutely no good to have bitterness toward bin laden or anyone. i must forgive and release this bitterness in order to avoid being eaten alive by hate and anger. if i lost a loved one in the 9/11 attacks, this would be a very hard thing to do. but, that would not mean i would not be required to do it.

 

[PatPatriot]

No...because Jesus said forgive them they know not what they are doing....Jesus forgave sinners and imperfection.
OBL's reality does not.OBL goals and intent are evil.
Yeah, yeah, yeah..you can pick it apart if you want but the distinction is there.

 

[PatPatriot]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> ...if osama bin laden bowed a knee to Christ and sincerely repented and put his faith in Christ, he would be redeemed.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Exactley...but he better be eating pork sanwiches at the pig roast at St Marys church fair wearin a muscle shirt with go Sox on it with shamrock tatoos for me to buy it.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> have you ever really considered the possibility that the bible is historically accurate?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Truth is that the Bible was written a long time after those things "happened". The story went by mouth to mouth from people to people, so a possibility that all stories in the Bible are not true is big.

 

[Massmilwaukee]

SOB OF THE MONTH
January 2003
(The Bible)

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other specific Biblical laws and how to follow them.

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness (Lev.15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense. If I come into contact with a woman who is menstruating and she doesn't tell me until afterwards, must I kill her immediately or can I just beat her?

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians? What's Trent Lott's position on this?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself? Also, is Sabbath on Saturday as Seventh Day Adventists (Christians, like us...or are they?) or is it on Sunday as Baptists and some other faiths agree? I am beset by not knowing who to kill and when to kill them...please clarify this for me.

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality (Lev. 18:22). I don't agree. I'm also confused about how homosexuality can be an abomination when Jonathan and David were married in the Bible (1 Samuel 18:1, 3 - 4). Also, Ruth's relationship with Naomi is suspect, (Ruth 1:16-17). Can you settle this? Is gay ok - or should I take a baseball bat to a West Hollywood heathen?

g) I know that it is an abomination for a man to wear a woman's clothes or a woman to wear a man's (Deut. 22:5), so does that mean that since my wife borrowed my boxers once, she's going to hell?

h) Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

i) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27 and even though 1st Cor. 11:4-6 says that it is a shame upon a man to have long hair. Also, my college buddy once shaved his ass on a bet - how should they die?

j) I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? Also, since it is strictly forbidden to "eat neither fat nor blood" in Lev. 3:17 & Lev. 19:26, does that mean that I must be a vegetarian and must I smite those who choose to eat meat?

k) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them (Lev.24:10-16)? Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws (Lev. 20:14)?

l) Believe it or not, an unbeliever sent me an email telling me that God is an ABORTIONIST? It says, "In Num. 5:11-31, God commands a husband to get an abortion for his wife if he suspects she has been impregnated by another man. A priest is to make her drink a potion and tell her, "If any man other than your husband has had intercourse with you, may the LORD make an example of you . . . by bringing upon you miscarriage and untimely birth." To deliberately cause a miscarriage is to perform an abortion, right? And who brings about this miscarriage? Who performs this abortion? It is the LORD who does so. God is an abortionist. In Ex. 21:22-25, God tells us what to do if a man who is fighting knocks against a pregnant woman. If the woman dies, the principle of "life for life" is invoked and the man responsible for her death must be killed. If she lives but has a miscarriage, then the death of the fetus is to be compensated for by the payment of a fine, as demanded by the woman's husband. Thus, God has revealed the status of the unborn fetus: it is not an independent, full-fledged human life, whose destruction amounts to murder. It is a thing owned by the woman's husband, a thing whose loss, like that of any other thing, may be compensated for with money." How can this be true? I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.

Anyway, thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging and also for the reassurance that the Bible is infallible.

 

[blueedwards]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Faceless:
Truth is that the Bible was written a long time after those things "happened". The story went by mouth to mouth from people to people, so a possibility that all stories in the Bible are not true is big.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

you sure about that?

 

[Oceans11]

I take it that this religious stuff is connected to Mels upcoming release.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/3481967.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/3484915.stm

The Passion of the Christ, written and directed by Mel Gibson, has aroused strong debate among religious groups ahead of its release in the US on 25 February.


The film tells the story of the final hours and crucifixion of Jesus Christ
It is a harrowing film which spares few details in its harrowing depiction of the suffering of Christ.

Hailed by some as an epic, to others it is one of the most offensive films ever made.

Jewish human rights advocates like the Rabbi Marvin Hier, head of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, say it leaves no-one in doubt as to who was responsible for Jesus' death.


-Its nice of the Jewish community to give it such massive free publicity through controversy, therby ensuring its commercial success.

BTW, I read somewhere that it was in Latin, with no subtitles.

----------------------------------------

I have one to add to Massmilwaukees list.

Judas saved mankind, not Jesus.
If he hadn't ratted on him, Jesus would have got away.

Which brings another point to mind.
If Jesus was so great, why didn't he just give himself up, therby saving Judas' life, as well as all mankind.

 

[blueedwards]

eek, i believe there are subtitles and i think the film is in greek or aramaic. gibson first wanted to do the film with no subtitles but was convinced that without english subtitles, the majority of the audience (not intimately familiar with the gospel account) would miss the main points of the movie.

when asked why the actors do not speak english in the movie, gibson said that he was going for the most accurate presentation possible and he felt the actors should speak the language of the day.

 

[blueedwards]

massmilwaukee, i agree that some of the rituals in the old testament seem strange to our culture. to the jews of the day (about 4,000 years ago) these were intrigal parts of their society's laws and worship. the quotes you referenced are from "leviticus" which is one of the first 5 books of the old testament. these books are often call the "tora" or "the law" by the jews.

interesting thing to note...today, neither jews nor christians practice these rituals, even though Jesus most likely did.

the christian believes that Christ fulfilled "the law" through his life, death and resurrection so these rituals are no longer necessary. i am not sure why the jews ceased to practice these things since most do not believe that Jesus was who he claimed to be.

 

In Finnish and somekind of translation after that. Taken from the Offical Lutheric Church site. http://www.evl.fi/english/index.html

http://www.evl.fi/sanasto/selitysR.htm

Vanhan testamentin kirjat ovat syntyneet noin 1200-100 e.Kr. Vanhan testamentin kaanon eli ohjeelliset kirjat koottiin noin 100 j.Kr. Uusi testamentti kanonisoitiin noin 150 j.Kr. Uuden testamentin vanhimmat kirjat ovat 50-luvulta (Paavalin kirjeet) ja nuorimmat 140-luvulta (2. Pietarin kirje).

Books of the Old Testament were made 1200-100 B.C and they were collected together about 100 A.D.

New Testamet was made 150 A.D. Oldest stories are from 50 A.D. and newest from 140 A.D

 

[PatPatriot]

So Judas could live in the guilt of his turncoat, rat fxck ways.(Patriot 11:55 am)


"Jesus
knew from the beginning who should betray him" (John 6:64). Nor can any answer
be satisfactorily given to the question as to the motives that led Judas to
betray his Master. "Of the motives that have been assigned we need not care to
fix on any one as that which simply led him on. Crime is, for the most part,
the result of a hundred motives rushing with bewildering fury through the mind
of the criminal."


Hey don't forget Jesus was a teacher too.

 

[blueedwards]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by eek:
Judas saved mankind, not Jesus.
If he hadn't ratted on him, Jesus would have got away.

Which brings another point to mind.
If Jesus was so great, why didn't he just give himself up, therby saving Judas' life, as well as all mankind.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

christian doctrine teaches that Jesus' death & resurrection makes redemption possible for all man, including judas. the bible records that judas took his own life which would indicate that he was overcome by guilt and likely did not receive the salvation available to him.