Who killed Jesus? Well, I haven't watched the video yet but I know this.... John 10:18 “No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.”
So good of your guest to put prophets in their place, call people names because they don’t agree with him, and advising them to humble themselves before responding. I just don’t understand why people would suggest following the Scriptures and the promptings of the spirit when they have this great scholar to listen to. It’s possible he would have been a great Pharisee.
I enjoyed this, and felt that this idea explains several scriptures in a way I can better understand. That is why he spoke to the Pharisees in Luke ch15 and he wasn’t speaking in an angry way, he was teaching them because they were willing to listen.
I have learned more about the Pharisees by observing Orthodox Jews today. Understanding their philosophy on ritual and its connection to the spirit of the Law has been fascinating and added to my understanding of Christ and the Gospels. While as a group they may not have been as opposed to Christ as the Herodians and the Sadducees the message that comes through is that the pharisees ultimately were not Christian and I don't think as a rule they were friends or allies of Christ; exceptions yes, but not the rule. Concerning the people turning on Christ in 3 days is not that hard to fathom either. He had one of His closest friends betray Him, Peter denied Him, the weakness of men can be seen quickly and the madness of crowds can debase men. I can see the pharisees having been friendly with Jesus as you described when they saw Him as a rabbi offering a viewpoint of how to keep the Law, but the Palm Sunday temple entry easily could have been the turn off to them. They could easily interpret that this "rabbi" was now attempting to grab power as a monarch (which would be in conflict with pharisaic goals as they wanted to be the political party in control)
Less than 2 minutes in and you lost me on "he (Jesus) hates them all." I don't know anyone from any Christian religion who would say Jesus hated anyone. Please clarify.
Obviously we aren’t talking about literal hate. I was talking about how many people articulate how Jesus felt about ALL other Jewish power structures. We could pick a synonym of “hate” if we want.
@@Blueskyredrocksthis is a very odd comment. Can you tell me what teaching of the prophets I’ve “distanced” myself from? Can you also identify the precise political belief I have related to the State of Israel, which I didn’t even mention?
I don't agree with all of his conclusions, but I found this idea intriguing, and he has certainly put more thought and research into it than I have so far. Definitely something to think about. As for Judas... you can't tell me that he betrayed Jesus in ignorance. Jesus Himself calls Judas "perdition" (John 17:12). Joseph Smith elaborated on what it takes to be a son of perdition, and it means that Judas did not sin in ignorance, but knew full well what he was doing. His actions led to the crucifixion, and he would crucify the Lord again if he got the chance. That's what perdition is.
That was a really good video, Greg. You and your guest did a good job of enlightening my thinking about the Pharisees, and the other cast of characters as Jesus was preparing himself and his apostles for his crucifixion. Thanks for doing this. Glad I found it.
Your guest was fascinating, and the limited time was a definite issue on this interview. Not your fault, of course but I feel like he would need hours to fully explain just about anything. I really enjoyed it.
Thanks for sharing this. It is very interesting, and I haven't heard this take on the Pharisees before. Regarding Judas, I have come to the conclusion in the past couple of years that Trevan's idea regarding him is correct: that Judas' betrayal was based on a mistaken idea of Jesus's mission as being a physical salvation of the Jewish nation rather than a spiritual salvation.
11 And again, they have brought swords, the hilts thereof have perished, and the blades thereof were cankered with rust; and there is no one in the land that is able to interpret the language or the engravings that are on the plates. Therefore I said unto thee: Canst thou translate? 12 And I say unto thee again: Knowest thou of any one that can translate? For I am desirous that these records should be translated into our language; for, perhaps, they will give us a knowledge of a remnant of the people who have been destroyed, from whence these records came; or, perhaps, they will give us a knowledge of this very people who have been destroyed; and I am desirous to know the cause of their destruction. 13 Now Ammon said unto him: I can assuredly tell thee, O king, of a man that can translate the records; for he has wherewith that he can look, and translate all records that are of ancient date; and it is a gift from God. And the things are called interpreters, and no man can look in them except he be commanded, lest he should look for that he ought not and he should perish. And whosoever is commanded to look in them, the same is called seer. 14 And behold, the king of the people who are in the land of Zarahemla is the man that is commanded to do these things, and who has this high gift from God. 15 And the king said that a seer is greater than a prophet. 16 And Ammon said that a seer is a revelator and a prophet also; and a gift which is greater can no man have, except he should possess the power of God, which no man can; yet a man may have great power given him from God. 17 But a seer can know of things which are past, and also of things which are to come, and by them shall all things be revealed, or, rather, shall secret things be made manifest, and hidden things shall come to light, and things which are not known shall be made known by them, and also things shall be made known by them which otherwise could not be known. 18 Thus God has provided a means that man, through faith, might work mighty miracles; therefore he becometh a great benefit to his fellow beings.
Letter vs spirit of the law. Not supposed to work on Sunday. Our Missionaries needed someone to fix a ladies car on Sunday. My hubby did it. It was considered service. Maybe it's more about the heart. Where is your heart?
This is a unique take. I thought everyone pushed back against Jesus the same way the religious establishment pushed back against the Prophet Joseph Smith Jr.
I think it is hard to say. I will say that I find it difficult to believe that the Jews hailing Jesus coming in to Jerusalem on the donkey were also the ones crying for His crucifixion. I don't buy that for a second.
I like this point of view . The longwinded discussions are some people s cultural styles still in existance today and also often pointed at incorrectly . More studying ahead. I think God likes these styles of encouraging viewpoints
The Pharisees fancied themselves the guardians of the Law of Moses. There basic philosophy was to "build a hedge about the law". Unfortunately, they were not prophets, nor were they lead by a prophet. The effect of there activity was to obscure the law with proscriptions and outward performances that were complicated and burdensome. They tried to stand in the place of God rather than bringing people to Him. Jesus Christ was and is our exemplar. He lived the second of the great commandments as he lived all of His Father's law. Therefore, even though he may have despised what the pharisees did as a group, he would be happy to teach any member of that group that was sufficiently humble to hear him and receive his teachings. This is perfectly consistent with his mission.
Great discussion! There's so much we can learn from how Jesus interacts with the Pharisees about the law. It so easy to get hyper focused on the letter of the law (prayer, study, tattoos, dress, mannerisms, etc.) and lose sight of what the Lord actually cares about.
Pretty certain Jesus didnt hate anyone. And he actually overlapped with a lot lf Pharisee teachings. The Sadducees were jerks to Him tho, seeing as they conspired with the Romans to have him crucified.
There is much speculation based on circumstantial evidence or absence of evidence in Hatch’s arguments. And then when there are passages that directly are more critical of Pharisees, he dismisses them out of hand. I think this is a perfect example of an academic getting too cute with their reasoning.
Before opining based on a few minutes of a discussion, you actually have to be humble and read the entire second half of the book. If you accept Matthew 23 (hypocrite) chapter, then you must throw out Luke and Josephus. I pour on and on for over a hundred pages on Matthews gospel.
So, Matthew wrote his testimony under the inspiration of his own anger and not the Holy Ghost? Professors like this man are mingling their own philosophies with the Scriptures. He says things like, "It doesn't make sense to me." Follow the prophets and the Holy Ghost, not the opinions of scholars.
Talmage doesn’t give a great explanation. The sources he used are 19th century sources and we hasn’t even discovered the Dead Sea Scrolls and other major archaeological discoveries. Talmage needs to be read with caution when trying to deal with academic questions.
@@NicolLegakiswe are talking about the historical Pharisees and the trial of Jesus. These are academic questions that we are dealing with. My training is in Jewish origins and early Jewish history. So, I don’t understand your issue with discussing academic questions. The prophets have specific told some of us at BYU that they welcome the academic study of the Bible, BoM, and Church history. Jesus the Christ was written in 1911. It’s a flawed book. It doesn’t claim to be revealed doctrine.
The Pharisees were not his friend, at least the leaders were not. You may be trying to sell a new book...the Apostle Paul before his conversion was a self proclaimed Pharisee who persecuted the Church unto death...so while interesting I do not think they were Jesus friend.
@@CwicShowcertainly plausible, but , the necessity of reading the book has surely been stressed in the comments as a prerequisite to understanding, eh? it’s enough to make one speculate if perhaps the ADL or the like sponsored this book, given the fierce offenses waged against numerous scriptures which clearly state & define just whom the guilty party was? the voluminous amount of Catholic scholarship done on this topic has to be weighed as well, if one is attempting an objective study
You can’t possibly look at all the evidence in the Gospel of Luke and Josephus, and most of Mark and conclude that Pharisees were enemies of Jesus. This WIDELY known among scholars of the ancient world.
You can't possibly say Paul was a friend of Jesus before his conversion? Or maybe he was an exception? Of course if you just say those writers of the scriptures were mistaken or biased then I guess you can take any position you want. Jesus was not a reformer he came to restore the fullness of the Gospel and to fulfill the law of Moses. He was restoring the kingdom of God that had been lost by apostasy so If they had been his friend they would have been baptized. It is an interesting idea but I do not see the point you are making. I figure that God will judge their hearts in any case
Mormon 7:5 "Know ye that ye must come to the knowledge of your fathers, and repent of all your sins and iniquities, and believe in Jesus Christ, that he is the Son of God, and that he was slain by the Jews."
I certainly don’t know the answer to all of this, but I have a question. Who are “the Jews?” If the American Justice system gave the death penalty to some one important in their time and 2,000 years later in Israel you read a historic document that said, “the Americans killed him,” that could mean a variety of things. What do you think?
The Bible states who they were. The Holy Ghost is the teacher of all truth. Bottom line some Jewish people that lived during the time wanted Jesus dead and they made it happen. Jesus taught that The Jewish people stone and killed the Prophets that Heavenly sent to call them to repent. Man knowledge is foolishness unless he yields to the enticing of the Holy Ghost
in John 8:12-59 ……Christ provides much of the back story, to which Hatch offers a modern day level of “presentism”, that many would call “revisionist history”
@@1775peasantno, I was asked to talk about the Pharisees, and I also talked about the problem with blaming 2 million Jews in the Roman Empire for killing Jesus. Maybe be humble and read the book for an explanation about the Gospel of John rather give a snotty, disingenuous comment.
I don’t blame 2mil Jewish people for not Believing in Jesus Christ and killing him. But I know from The Scriptures some of Jews sought his Life and made sure that Happened. Side note I am of Jewish Descent.
Did y’all change the title of the video to avoid answering the question? Do we live in the twilight zone? Trying to make people more confused than they already are…. What is the point of coming up with some narrative about all this and call everyone wrong for reading the scriptures? No one knows what I think or believe and no one knows how much study and understanding I have experienced - so to assume that everyone is lost without this guys book and theories is pretty crazy. I can’t believe y’all won’t answer the question y’all asked to get us to watch this video - weirdness - think of the twilight intro lol
No one assumes that. He has a take and you have yours. I don't bring everyone on the show who you are going to agree with. I don't see the point of that. In terms of the question, "Who Killed Jesus?" I would say that, without anyone having a perfect answer, it is obvious from all four gospels, that the Chief Priests (Sadducees), Elders (Jewish rulers), and Scribes were the ones in charge of making the crucifixion of Jesus happen. The real question is just how many of the people followed them and I don't think anyone has the answer to that. I changed the name of the video because I was receiving some vile antisemitic comments in direct response to the question. I appreciate you watching and giving your input.
@@CwicShow I never said I didn’t agree with him, I saw from scriptures that Pharisees were interested and thoughtful of the things the Savior did and said. Which is why he is wrong about everyone thinking they were totally bad or hated. Your guest quickly gets mean with the commentators and avoided my question but jumped on someone else that left a scripture reference on another comment. It is precisely why no one should speculate in exalting one group over another, because there were a lot of different players from a lot of different groups. The bottom line is we all need the Savior’s atonement and both Jew and Gentile were involved. Thanks for responding Greg and I do enjoy your content 💛
@@katherineshiver9428how did I get mean? Greg also changed the title because we didn’t directly address the question. We were really talking about Pharisees and then the trial of Jesus. If you have a list of critiques or questions, I’d be glad to address them in an upcoming video, perhaps even with Cwic Media.
@@trevanhatch8717 it seems you care an extra lot about the topic and that is great, I don’t see the need to put others down and have issues with anyone that thinks the scriptures are true or give a good picture of things at the time of Christ. Calling someone’s comment “snotty” seems a little juvenile. You come out swinging by saying no one gets it about the Pharisees - like how daft everyone is thank goodness you are here to correct us. When actually most people just see the history and if we are trying to be Christlike we aren’t judging or blaming or hating anyone. We are all here to learn and so maybe get more comfortable and understanding of your audience and it won’t come off as you telling how it is and more of just learning and understanding together. Let others have their opinions without insulting. Idk. I’m just giving a little feedback and don’t want to fight or insult you. And the title was misleading and no one apologized so idk when do we take responsibility without excuse or apologize with reasons, either way own stuff like we care about others. Be well and wish you well! I’m just not interested in the topic like you and I think you are right about the Pharisees to an extent, the Savior’s Atonement had to happen. 💛 I am eternally grateful and love Him dearly.
@@katherineshiver9428that’s just my personality to come out swinging when I see person and after person dismissing any argument without even read my argument and saying that I don’t follow prophets etc. Our community has FAR too many people whose first inclination is to defend the status quo, defend tradition, belittle scholars and call us wolves in sheep’s clothing etc etc. It gets really old, so I’ve become a little more aggressive with those types of people.
Tell me where the prophets said that 2 million Jews in the Roman Empire killed Jesus. Prophets speak on things present and future. They do not answer historical questions, generally. You also haven’t read my book to get all the nuances of the time period of Jesus.
@@trevanhatch8717, thank you for your scholarship. I am very interested in every bit of information and perspective surrounding Judas, what the Savior said about him, whether he is a Son of Perdition, etc. is there any way I could reach you or obtain your perspective on Judas?
Who killed Jesus? Well, I haven't watched the video yet but I know this.... John 10:18 “No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.”
It was not all the Jews but the Sadducee’s who orchestrated it.
So good of your guest to put prophets in their place, call people names because they don’t agree with him, and advising them to humble themselves before responding. I just don’t understand why people would suggest following the Scriptures and the promptings of the spirit when they have this great scholar to listen to. It’s possible he would have been a great Pharisee.
I enjoyed this, and felt that this idea explains several scriptures in a way I can better understand. That is why he spoke to the Pharisees in Luke ch15 and he wasn’t speaking in an angry way, he was teaching them because they were willing to listen.
I dont believe he hated all the groups
I have learned more about the Pharisees by observing Orthodox Jews today. Understanding their philosophy on ritual and its connection to the spirit of the Law has been fascinating and added to my understanding of Christ and the Gospels. While as a group they may not have been as opposed to Christ as the Herodians and the Sadducees the message that comes through is that the pharisees ultimately were not Christian and I don't think as a rule they were friends or allies of Christ; exceptions yes, but not the rule.
Concerning the people turning on Christ in 3 days is not that hard to fathom either. He had one of His closest friends betray Him, Peter denied Him, the weakness of men can be seen quickly and the madness of crowds can debase men.
I can see the pharisees having been friendly with Jesus as you described when they saw Him as a rabbi offering a viewpoint of how to keep the Law, but the Palm Sunday temple entry easily could have been the turn off to them. They could easily interpret that this "rabbi" was now attempting to grab power as a monarch (which would be in conflict with pharisaic goals as they wanted to be the political party in control)
Less than 2 minutes in and you lost me on "he (Jesus) hates them all."
I don't know anyone from any Christian religion who would say Jesus hated anyone. Please clarify.
I think the clarification you'll get is, Trevan is referring to their doctrines and wayward practices. Not the persons. :>)
Obviously we aren’t talking about literal hate. I was talking about how many people articulate how Jesus felt about ALL other Jewish power structures. We could pick a synonym of “hate” if we want.
@@Blueskyredrocksthis is a very odd comment. Can you tell me what teaching of the prophets I’ve “distanced” myself from? Can you also identify the precise political belief I have related to the State of Israel, which I didn’t even mention?
@@godsoffspring4195 obviously.
I don't agree with all of his conclusions, but I found this idea intriguing, and he has certainly put more thought and research into it than I have so far. Definitely something to think about.
As for Judas... you can't tell me that he betrayed Jesus in ignorance. Jesus Himself calls Judas "perdition" (John 17:12). Joseph Smith elaborated on what it takes to be a son of perdition, and it means that Judas did not sin in ignorance, but knew full well what he was doing. His actions led to the crucifixion, and he would crucify the Lord again if he got the chance. That's what perdition is.
That was a really good video, Greg. You and your guest did a good job of enlightening my thinking about the Pharisees, and the other cast of characters as Jesus was preparing himself and his apostles for his crucifixion. Thanks for doing this. Glad I found it.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Trevan needs his own channel. I love his stuff. Great research and ideas.
I do! It’s called “Strangers in Jerusalem”!
@@trevanhatch8717had no idea! I’m subscribing!
Your guest was fascinating, and the limited time was a definite issue on this interview. Not your fault, of course but I feel like he would need hours to fully explain just about anything. I really enjoyed it.
Glad to hear. Leaning this type of context adds a certain richness to reading the Gospels.
He lost me or I lost him in that explanation!😮 I may have to listenn to a few more times!
Yes it’s so packed with great info that I had to listen 3 times
I recently finished Stranger in Jerusalem by Brother Hatch!! I learned a lot. This interview is timely for me. Thank you!
Thanks for sharing this. It is very interesting, and I haven't heard this take on the Pharisees before. Regarding Judas, I have come to the conclusion in the past couple of years that Trevan's idea regarding him is correct: that Judas' betrayal was based on a mistaken idea of Jesus's mission as being a physical salvation of the Jewish nation rather than a spiritual salvation.
I loved this video! Purchasing his book!
11 And again, they have brought swords, the hilts thereof have perished, and the blades thereof were cankered with rust; and there is no one in the land that is able to interpret the language or the engravings that are on the plates. Therefore I said unto thee: Canst thou translate? 12 And I say unto thee again: Knowest thou of any one that can translate? For I am desirous that these records should be translated into our language; for, perhaps, they will give us a knowledge of a remnant of the people who have been destroyed, from whence these records came; or, perhaps, they will give us a knowledge of this very people who have been destroyed; and I am desirous to know the cause of their destruction. 13 Now Ammon said unto him: I can assuredly tell thee, O king, of a man that can translate the records; for he has wherewith that he can look, and translate all records that are of ancient date; and it is a gift from God. And the things are called interpreters, and no man can look in them except he be commanded, lest he should look for that he ought not and he should perish. And whosoever is commanded to look in them, the same is called seer. 14 And behold, the king of the people who are in the land of Zarahemla is the man that is commanded to do these things, and who has this high gift from God. 15 And the king said that a seer is greater than a prophet. 16 And Ammon said that a seer is a revelator and a prophet also; and a gift which is greater can no man have, except he should possess the power of God, which no man can; yet a man may have great power given him from God. 17 But a seer can know of things which are past, and also of things which are to come, and by them shall all things be revealed, or, rather, shall secret things be made manifest, and hidden things shall come to light, and things which are not known shall be made known by them, and also things shall be made known by them which otherwise could not be known. 18 Thus God has provided a means that man, through faith, might work mighty miracles; therefore he becometh a great benefit to his fellow beings.
Letter vs spirit of the law. Not supposed to work on Sunday. Our Missionaries needed someone to fix a ladies car on Sunday. My hubby did it. It was considered service. Maybe it's more about the heart. Where is your heart?
This is a unique take. I thought everyone pushed back against Jesus the same way the religious establishment pushed back against the Prophet Joseph Smith Jr.
I think it is hard to say. I will say that I find it difficult to believe that the Jews hailing Jesus coming in to Jerusalem on the donkey were also the ones crying for His crucifixion. I don't buy that for a second.
I like this point of view .
The longwinded discussions are some people s cultural styles still in existance today and
also often pointed at incorrectly . More studying ahead. I think God likes these styles of encouraging viewpoints
The Pharisees fancied themselves the guardians of the Law of Moses. There basic philosophy was to "build a hedge about the law". Unfortunately, they were not prophets, nor were they lead by a prophet. The effect of there activity was to obscure the law with proscriptions and outward performances that were complicated and burdensome. They tried to stand in the place of God rather than bringing people to Him. Jesus Christ was and is our exemplar. He lived the second of the great commandments as he lived all of His Father's law. Therefore, even though he may have despised what the pharisees did as a group, he would be happy to teach any member of that group that was sufficiently humble to hear him and receive his teachings. This is perfectly consistent with his mission.
Excellent historical presentation. Thanks!
Great discussion! There's so much we can learn from how Jesus interacts with the Pharisees about the law. It so easy to get hyper focused on the letter of the law (prayer, study, tattoos, dress, mannerisms, etc.) and lose sight of what the Lord actually cares about.
Pretty certain Jesus didnt hate anyone. And he actually overlapped with a lot lf Pharisee teachings. The Sadducees were jerks to Him tho, seeing as they conspired with the Romans to have him crucified.
There is much speculation based on circumstantial evidence or absence of evidence in Hatch’s arguments. And then when there are passages that directly are more critical of Pharisees, he dismisses them out of hand. I think this is a perfect example of an academic getting too cute with their reasoning.
Before opining based on a few minutes of a discussion, you actually have to be humble and read the entire second half of the book. If you accept Matthew 23 (hypocrite) chapter, then you must throw out Luke and Josephus. I pour on and on for over a hundred pages on Matthews gospel.
So, Matthew wrote his testimony under the inspiration of his own anger and not the Holy Ghost? Professors like this man are mingling their own philosophies with the Scriptures. He says things like, "It doesn't make sense to me." Follow the prophets and the Holy Ghost, not the opinions of scholars.
Show me where the “prophets” are early Jewish historians and Pharisee scholars. Because I don’t ever remember that being their stewardship.
This charlesgarten fellow is bitter for some reason.
There is no dying Messiah?? I’ve listened to this 3 times…what is the message here…fascinating…
No dying messiah? What do you mean?
Interesting, because Mormonism is a purity culture.
Talmage (Jesus the Christ) explains why Jesus waited until the 4th day to raise Lazarus!😮
Talmage doesn’t give a great explanation. The sources he used are 19th century sources and we hasn’t even discovered the Dead Sea Scrolls and other major archaeological discoveries. Talmage needs to be read with caution when trying to deal with academic questions.
Maybe we shouldn't be reading the Bible with academic questions 😉. And I wouldn't be so critical of Talmage.
@@NicolLegakiswe are talking about the historical Pharisees and the trial of Jesus. These are academic questions that we are dealing with. My training is in Jewish origins and early Jewish history. So, I don’t understand your issue with discussing academic questions. The prophets have specific told some of us at BYU that they welcome the academic study of the Bible, BoM, and Church history.
Jesus the Christ was written in 1911. It’s a flawed book. It doesn’t claim to be revealed doctrine.
The Pharisees were not his friend, at least the leaders were not. You may be trying to sell a new book...the Apostle Paul before his conversion was a self proclaimed Pharisee who persecuted the Church unto death...so while interesting I do not think they were Jesus friend.
Honestly making this episode has nothing to do with his book. He published the book four years ago.
@@CwicShowcertainly plausible, but , the necessity of reading the book has surely been stressed in the comments as a prerequisite to understanding, eh?
it’s enough to make one speculate if perhaps the ADL or the like sponsored this book, given the fierce offenses waged against numerous scriptures which clearly state & define just whom the guilty party was?
the voluminous amount of Catholic scholarship done on this topic has to be weighed as well, if one is attempting an objective study
You can’t possibly look at all the evidence in the Gospel of Luke and Josephus, and most of Mark and conclude that Pharisees were enemies of Jesus. This WIDELY known among scholars of the ancient world.
Wait... Zechariahs 13:6 tells us He was wounded in the house of his "friends." We know this. Right?
You can't possibly say Paul was a friend of Jesus before his conversion? Or maybe he was an exception? Of course if you just say those writers of the scriptures were mistaken or biased then I guess you can take any position you want. Jesus was not a reformer he came to restore the fullness of the Gospel and to fulfill the law of Moses. He was restoring the kingdom of God that had been lost by apostasy so If they had been his friend they would have been baptized. It is an interesting idea but I do not see the point you are making. I figure that God will judge their hearts in any case
Mormon 7:5
"Know ye that ye must come to the knowledge of your fathers, and repent of all your sins and iniquities, and believe in Jesus Christ, that he is the Son of God, and that he was slain by the Jews."
I certainly don’t know the answer to all of this, but I have a question.
Who are “the Jews?” If the American Justice system gave the death penalty to some one important in their time and 2,000 years later in Israel you read a historic document that said, “the Americans killed him,” that could mean a variety of things.
What do you think?
The Bible states who they were. The Holy Ghost is the teacher of all truth. Bottom line some Jewish people that lived during the time wanted Jesus dead and they made it happen. Jesus taught that The Jewish people stone and killed the Prophets that Heavenly sent to call them to repent. Man knowledge is foolishness unless he yields to the enticing of the Holy Ghost
Did I miss the answer……who killed Jesus?
in John 8:12-59 ……Christ provides much of the back story, to which Hatch offers a modern day level of “presentism”, that many would call “revisionist history”
@@1775peasantno, I was asked to talk about the Pharisees, and I also talked about the problem with blaming 2 million Jews in the Roman Empire for killing Jesus. Maybe be humble and read the book for an explanation about the Gospel of John rather give a snotty, disingenuous comment.
@@trevanhatch8717 that’s a great reply, clears up a lot concerns,,,,,thanks for that clarification Mr Hatch!
have an awesome day!
@@trevanhatch8717 I still don’t know who you think killed Jesus 😂
I don’t blame 2mil Jewish people for not Believing in Jesus Christ and killing him. But I know from The Scriptures some of Jews sought his Life and made sure that Happened. Side note I am of Jewish Descent.
Did y’all change the title of the video to avoid answering the question? Do we live in the twilight zone? Trying to make people more confused than they already are….
What is the point of coming up with some narrative about all this and call everyone wrong for reading the scriptures? No one knows what I think or believe and no one knows how much study and understanding I have experienced - so to assume that everyone is lost without this guys book and theories is pretty crazy.
I can’t believe y’all won’t answer the question y’all asked to get us to watch this video - weirdness - think of the twilight intro lol
No one assumes that. He has a take and you have yours. I don't bring everyone on the show who you are going to agree with. I don't see the point of that.
In terms of the question, "Who Killed Jesus?" I would say that, without anyone having a perfect answer, it is obvious from all four gospels, that the Chief Priests (Sadducees), Elders (Jewish rulers), and Scribes were the ones in charge of making the crucifixion of Jesus happen. The real question is just how many of the people followed them and I don't think anyone has the answer to that.
I changed the name of the video because I was receiving some vile antisemitic comments in direct response to the question.
I appreciate you watching and giving your input.
@@CwicShow I never said I didn’t agree with him, I saw from scriptures that Pharisees were interested and thoughtful of the things the Savior did and said. Which is why he is wrong about everyone thinking they were totally bad or hated. Your guest quickly gets mean with the commentators and avoided my question but jumped on someone else that left a scripture reference on another comment. It is precisely why no one should speculate in exalting one group over another, because there were a lot of different players from a lot of different groups. The bottom line is we all need the Savior’s atonement and both Jew and Gentile were involved.
Thanks for responding Greg and I do enjoy your content 💛
@@katherineshiver9428how did I get mean?
Greg also changed the title because we didn’t directly address the question. We were really talking about Pharisees and then the trial of Jesus. If you have a list of critiques or questions, I’d be glad to address them in an upcoming video, perhaps even with Cwic Media.
@@trevanhatch8717 it seems you care an extra lot about the topic and that is great, I don’t see the need to put others down and have issues with anyone that thinks the scriptures are true or give a good picture of things at the time of Christ. Calling someone’s comment “snotty” seems a little juvenile. You come out swinging by saying no one gets it about the Pharisees - like how daft everyone is thank goodness you are here to correct us.
When actually most people just see the history and if we are trying to be Christlike we aren’t judging or blaming or hating anyone. We are all here to learn and so maybe get more comfortable and understanding of your audience and it won’t come off as you telling how it is and more of just learning and understanding together. Let others have their opinions without insulting. Idk. I’m just giving a little feedback and don’t want to fight or insult you. And the title was misleading and no one apologized so idk when do we take responsibility without excuse or apologize with reasons, either way own stuff like we care about others. Be well and wish you well! I’m just not interested in the topic like you and I think you are right about the Pharisees to an extent, the Savior’s Atonement had to happen. 💛 I am eternally grateful and love Him dearly.
@@katherineshiver9428that’s just my personality to come out swinging when I see person and after person dismissing any argument without even read my argument and saying that I don’t follow prophets etc.
Our community has FAR too many people whose first inclination is to defend the status quo, defend tradition, belittle scholars and call us wolves in sheep’s clothing etc etc.
It gets really old, so I’ve become a little more aggressive with those types of people.
This brother is a scholar, not a prophet. He is thoroughly convinced of his opinions but I'm not convinced. I'll follow the prophets.
Tell me where the prophets said that 2 million Jews in the Roman Empire killed Jesus. Prophets speak on things present and future. They do not answer historical questions, generally. You also haven’t read my book to get all the nuances of the time period of Jesus.
Of course. But learning scholarly work is not bad. You just need to discern.
@@trevanhatch8717, thank you for your scholarship. I am very interested in every bit of information and perspective surrounding Judas, what the Savior said about him, whether he is a Son of Perdition, etc. is there any way I could reach you or obtain your perspective on Judas?