early references to Jews as primary in the crucifixion of Jesus

[Steven Avery]

BCHF
The trial before Pilate reveals the essential pocket gospel preceding ALL the gospels
https://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=204379#p204379

The dogmatic claim 'Jews killed Jesus' is found in:

1. the Marcionite interpolation 1 Thess 2:14-16;
2. the epistle of Barnabas;
3. Celsus, whereas he doesn't even assume the presence of Pilate in some of the his sources.
   All the midrashical 'memories of the apostles' inherited by Justin, beyond if they are or not proto-gospels, insofar Justin places in Acta Pilati the name of Pilate, not in the same proto-gospels.
4. the pocket-gospel interpolated in the Ascension of Isaiah, where a 'king' (Herod) and 'Jerusalem' (the Jews) are mentioned as killers of Jesus
5. the Gospel of Peter, where Pilate is only a member of the jury, a mere observer.
6. the same "Herod" is a mere extension of the "Jews".

The latter point is particularly persuasive: the choice of the name Herod and Pilate is dictated by the obsession on the 'Jews', not the contrary (i.e. that the Jews are attacked to exonerate Herod and Pilate).

Also the evidence in Celsus is enough persuasive: Secret Alias wrote interesting remarks about it, at moment I can't find them.
Hence we should look to the gospels (at least the gospels preceding Justin) as ending originally with the mention of the "Jews", as a group, killing Jesus. Pilate was not even mentioned.

====================================================

AI
AI Overview



Early Christian literature, including the
Epistle of Barnabas, the Gospel of Peter, the Ascension of Isaiah, and the writings of Celsus and the Marcionites, reflect an intensifying polemic in the second century that shifted the blame for Jesus's death from the Roman authority (Pilate) to the Jewish people, often interpreting it through a theological lens rather than strict historical record.

• Epistle of Barnabas (c. 100-130 AD): This document is one of the earliest and most aggressive sources asserting that the Jews killed Jesus. Barnabas uniquely grounds this accusation in divine prophecy, arguing that it was God's will that the Jews were responsible for Jesus’s wounds. It strongly emphasizes that the Jews lost their covenant with God because of their actions.
• Gospel of Peter (2nd Century): This non-canonical text shifts nearly all responsibility to "Herod and the people," specifically exonerating Pilate. In a unique detail, it has the Jewish leaders and people realize their guilt immediately after the death of Jesus, distinguishing between the "recalcitrant leaders" and the Jewish people who regret the murder.
• Ascension of Isaiah (1st-2nd Century): This apocalyptic work portrays the crucifixion as a hidden, cosmic event where the "people of the beloved" (Israel) act under the influence of the "prince of this world" (Sammael/Satan) to crucify Jesus, aligning with the growing Christian trend of demonizing the Jewish role in the passion.
• Marcionite View (2nd Century): Marcion of Sinope argued that Jesus was not the Messiah of the Old Testament (whom he viewed as a vicious creator god, or demiurge). In this view, the Jews killed Jesus, but it was because they were acting as agents of their evil Creator god, rather than recognizing the true, loving God.
• Celsus (c. 175 AD): Celsus, a pagan critic of Christianity, recorded the Jewish argument that Jesus was a criminal justly punished for blasphemy and sedition. While he argues from a pagan, anti-Christian standpoint, his writings confirm that "Jews killed Jesus" was a common argument (sometimes used by Jews themselves to argue that Jesus failed to meet messianic expectations).

Contextual Shift:
These documents reflect a period (late 1st–2nd century) where the Christian movement was separating from Judaism and trying to prove to the Roman world that they were not a seditious, anti-Roman group. Consequently, these early Christian writers increasingly blamed Jewish leaders and people, acting as a foundation for later anti-Jewish sentiments.

 

[Steven Avery]

related same page

first in 2013

dewitness VS Earl Doherty (was: Historicity of Jesus...)
Re: Historicity of Jesus - the Talking Points
http://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=125#p125

dewitness » Sun Oct 06, 2013

Peter Kirby wrote:Some of the arguments have been telescoped by my initial outline. For example, obviously, Doherty's argument is extensive, detailed, and not (as commonly understood) negative but also based, positively, on the language of the texts as he interprets them. But the details are important, so, like MrMacSon has done, please help fill in some of the details of this outline, or add more points from your own study.

I find that Doherty's argument that Jesus was crucified in some kind of heaven or region of heaven to be hopelessly flawed and contrary to the evidence or the stories from antiquity about the Jesus character.

The story of Jesus is that he was crucified or delivered up to be crucified by the Jews under Pilate after a trial by the Sanhedrin when he was found guilty of death for Blasphemy.

It is imperative that it is understood that the Jesus cult writers argued that it was the Killing of Jesus by the Jews that caused the desolation of Jerusalem and the Fall of the Temple as prophesied in the book of Daniel.

It is true that Jesus of the Bible was purely mythological (sic) but there is no story and no tradition anywhere in antiquity that he was crucified in some kind of heaven and never believed to be on earth.

In fact, Jesus cult writers that mentioned the crucifixion of Jesus claimed that it happened on earth and was killed by the Jews.

1. Aristides' Apology

The Christians, then, trace the beginning of their religion from Jesus the Messiah; and he is named the Son of God Most High. And it is said that God came down from heaven, and from a Hebrew virgin assumed and clothed himself with flesh; and the Son of God lived in a daughter of man. This is taught in the gospel, as it is called.................... This Jesus, then, was born of the race of the Hebrews; and he had twelve disciples in order that the purpose of his incarnation might in time be accomplished. But he himself was pierced by the Jews, and he died and was buried; and they say that after three days he rose and ascended to heaven.

2. Justin's First Apology

Our teacher of these things is Jesus Christ, who also was born for this purpose, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judaea, in the times of Tiberius Caesar.

3. Justin's Dialogue with Trypho

Accordingly, these things have happened to you in fairness and justice, for you have slain the Just One, and His prophets before Him; and now you reject those who hope in Him, and in Him who sent Him--God the Almighty and Maker of all things--cursing in your synagogues those that believe on Christ.

4. Hippolytus' Against the Jews

7. But why, O prophet, tell us, and for what reason, was the temple made desolate? Was it on account of that ancient fabrication of the calf? Was it on account of the idolatry of the people? Was it for the blood of the prophets? Was it for the adultery and fornication of Israel? By no means, he says; for in all these transgressions they always found pardon open to them, and benignity; but it was because they killed the Son of their Benefactor...

5. Lactantius' How the Persecutors Died

In the latter days of the Emperor Tiberius, in the consulship of Ruberius Geminus and Fufius Geminus, and on the tenth of the kalends of April, as I find it written, Jesus Christ was crucified by the Jews.

=====

 

[Steven Avery]

John Christopher Edwards says it was an invention

PBF
John Christopher Edwards - papers on the Epistle of Barnabas
http://www.purebibleforum.com/index...wards-papers-on-the-epistle-of-barnabas.5866/

The Epistle of Barnabas and the Origins of the Accusation that the Jews Killed Jesus (2021)
John Christopher Edwards -
https://www.academia.edu/73966282/T..._of_the_Accusation_that_the_Jews_Killed_Jesus

ABSTRACT
Following a trend which becomes disturbingly common in later NT and Early Christian
literature, the Epistle of Barnabas affixes blame for killing Jesus on his opponents,
variously labelled ‘Israel’, ‘a synagogue of evil people’, or most frequently ‘them’. The
accusation that Israel, or Jews, are directly responsible for inflicting Jesus’ wounds
ostensibly began alongside the desire to remove culpability from Pilate, since the detail
that Jesus was crucified by a Roman official for political crimes would cause difficulties
for Christian evangelism in the Roman world. The desire to shield Roman officials is
easily observed in the canonical gospels. However, the author of Barnabas offers
another rationale. He asserts that Israel killed Jesus because God himself predictively
accused Israel of abusing and crucifying Jesus: ‘God says that the wounds of his flesh
came from them’ {Bain. 5.12b). This scripturally based accusation does not appear in
the canonical literature. It most likely originates in the late first or early second century,
and Barnabas is its earliest extant witness. Early Christians, who desired to adjust their
collective memories and shield Roman officials, ultimately found it necessary to establish
a scriptural foundation for the accusation that the Israel killed Jesus, to demonstrate that
‘God says that the wounds of his flesh came from them’.

....

Crucified: The Christian Invention of the Jewish Executioners of Jesus (2023)
http://books.google.com/books?id=d36rEAAAQBAJ