Did Jerusalem fall as a result of God's revenge for the Crucifixion of Jesus?


#1

How long does God have to exact revenge for some heinous act of man before the clock “runs out?”

A late crucifixion date of A.D. 36 would place the delay at 34 years.

Reasonable for the death of his Son?

The Christians blamed the defeat of Herod Antipas’ army on Antipas’ previous beheading of John the Baptist. What would be a reasonable time lag- 1 month, 3 months, 8 months or longer?

Or does God have his own way of keeping time?


#2

He does.

But I don’t think we can blame the events of AD70 on divine “vengeance,” although God unlike us has that right.

Even from the NT alone, we can see that tension in Judaea had been building up and coming to a head throughout the adult life of our LORD. Ie, the conflict was coming.

ICXC NIKA.


#3

God doesn’t need time for vengeance since he is timeless. He can punished at any time or wait till Judgement Day. It would be the same to him. However, he permit things to happen according to his Will or Master plan whatever you call it. Remember the prince of the world is Satan. He can be pretty destructive. The fall of Jerusalem may have nothing to do with God’s vengeance at all, although he may know about it.


#4

God’s plan was for Jesus to die on the cross. That had to happen for the forgiveness of our sins. So, God didn’t destroy Jerusalem out of revenge.


#5

Steve, do you remember that thread about the Gospel of Peter? It’s really near worthless as a historical source, but like many apocryphal literature, it’s a record to certain segments of Christian thought.

And then they drew the nails out of the Lord’s hands and laid him on the earth; and the whole earth was shaken, and there came a great fear. Then the sun shone and it was found to be the ninth hour. And the Jews rejoiced and gave his body to Joseph that he might bury it, since he had seen what good things he did. Now taking the Lord, he washed and bound him with a linen shroud and brought him into his own burial place called ‘Joseph’s Garden’. Then the Jews and the elders and the priests, knowing what evil they had done to themselves, began to beat in mourning and say, “Woe to our sins! The judgment and the end of Jerusalem are at hand!”

Pay attention to the dialogue the author puts into the mouth of “the Jews and the elders and the priests:” they realized that ‘the judgment and the end of Jerusalem are at hand’ after they crucify Jesus (in the Gospel of Peter, the Jews - “the people” - are literally the ones who crucify Jesus; it so whitewashes the Romans that it’s not even Pilate who sentences Him to death, but Herod). Of course historically you had to wait four decades before the literal ‘end of Jerusalem’ actually came, but there was a tendency in early Christian thought to link the two events together.

This motif becomes more clearer in later apocryphal works, where it is made to appear that the destruction of Jerusalem occurred as a direct consequence of Jesus. In these retellings, accurate history is sacrificed for the sake of theology. (Historically of course, Jerusalem was destroyed and the Jews were expelled for quite different reasons.) In those works, the emperor Tiberius (an amalgamation of the historical Tiberius, Vespasian and Titus; sometimes Titus and/or Vespasian are reimagined as client kings subordinate to Tiberius, or some or all of them are co-rulers) becomes convinced that Jesus is God, converts to Christianity and then immediately orders Jerusalem destroyed and the Jews killed or exiled because of what he had heard they had done to Jesus. :shrug:

Also remember that other thread?

You’re all familiar with Jesus’ prayer on the cross, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do,” right? The funny thing is, in some manuscripts of Luke, including a number of early ones (such as Papyrus 75, ca. 175-225), this saying is absent. In fact, a few manuscripts, instead of saying “forgive them,” (aphes autois) says instead “yield to them” (synchōrēson autois).

Early Christians generally interpreted Jesus’ plea for forgiveness as referring to the Jews, but this interpretation put them at a conundrum: they also believed that that the siege of Jerusalem in AD 70 was, in a sense, a divine act of justice against the Jews for Jesus’ death. So the problem is, why would the Jews be punished if Jesus had already asked God to forgive them? Did God not then listen to Jesus’ prayer? If Jesus predicted that judgment will fall upon Jerusalem (cf. Luke 19:41-44; 23:29-31), why would He choose to avert that judgment?

That may explain the reason why this saying of Jesus was absent in some manuscripts and reworded in others: it’s likely because the implication that Jesus forgave the Jews would have been unthinkable, offensive even, to some Christians at that time in light of the strong anti-Jewish sentiments prevalent in many segments of early Christianity. So their solution to this is either explain away this hard saying, or just delete the passage from their copies of Scripture or reword it.

(For the interested, Nathan Eubank’s A Disconcerting Prayer: On the Originality of Luke 23:34a goes into more detailed information about the passage and arguments for its authenticity.)


#6

8 Harden not your hearts, as at Meribah, as on the day at Massah in the wilderness, 9 when your fathers tested me, and put me to the proof, though they had seen my work. 10 For forty years I loathed that generation and said, “They are a people who err in heart, and they do not regard my ways.” 11 Therefore I swore in my anger that they should not enter my rest.

      Psalm 95:8-11

#7

If God delays his judgement it’s to allow time for men to amend their ways and seek his Mercy.

I wonder if this is the wrath (Jerusalem’s destruction) St. John the Baptist was alluding to at the beginning of his ministry.
Luke 3: 7 He said therefore to the multitudes that went forth to be baptized by him: Ye offspring of vipers, who hath shewed you to flee from the wrath to come?


#8

Ever since Rome defeated the Jews, long before Jesus’ birth, and took over their lands, the Jews were itching to get them back and throw off the rule of the hated pagans. Jesus offered the way of peace and love to accomplish this goal–to convert the world to his Gospel. That eventually happened, but it took centuries, especially since his own people rejected him. They wanted a military leader, a king who would fight and defeat Rome–they got the King of Peace instead and rejected him–not just at his trial, but afterwards as their leaders persecuted the Christians. That led to Saul/Paul going as far as Damascus to arrest believers. God was giving the Jews time to accept Christ although they had rejected him–that was God’s mercy at work, due to Jesus’ plea for them from the cross.

The Jews weren’t destroyed out of vengence, for again, Jesus had begged God to forgive them. Rather, they were defeated because they would not lay down their arms and trust in the Messiah whom God had sent them. Whenever God makes predictions about coming doom, it is conditional. The Ninevites are an example of this. When Jonah preached their coming destruction, unless they repented, they repented and avoided that judgment. If the leaders of the Jews had repented their killing Jesus, and accepted him as Messiah I am sure that they would have been spared and that perhaps Rome would have been evangelized sooner and easier than it was. As it was, the destruction of Jerusalem caused the Jews, and the Christians, to be dispersed throughout the Roman world. While the influence of the Jews diminished, the Christians flourished, eventually leading to the conversion of Constantine and the freedom to preach the Gospel openly.


#9

His knowledge of the human experience past ,present and future is without any anger, He knows the results of our free will actions; whatever they may be.

God Bless:)


#10

Always interesting how early copies of the Canon might be slightly different. I am assuming the early church father;s in their wisdom took this all into account. After all, the Gospel of Peter is apochryphal. The fathers thought it was bunk.

Regarding the Jews, what can be easily deduced from Josephus, which Hagan does, is that they were, indeed, antagonistic to the Christians right up to the Jewish revolt. Not only were they behind Saul, and later the execution of James the Just and the Christian leadership in Jerusalem, but probably were the behind-the-scenes force in the persecutions of Nero documented by Tacitus.

As for the Romans, Pilate was a reluctant executioner, and there are several instances of the Roman military intervenening to protect the early Christians from the Jewish priests/ aristocrats.


#11

I have to be honest. I am thinking brude of vipers.


#12

Almost nobody really accepted GoP as canonical, but my point is, the virulent anti-Jewish sentiments expressed by the GoP’s author was not something unique to it: similar ideas were shared by some of the Fathers like Justin Martyr or Melito of Sardis (particularly Melito). They didn’t get it from GoP; instead the author of GoP simply repeated certain strands of thought popular among certain Christians at the time.


#13

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.