Who was really to blame for Christ's death?

By MARY JANE HOLT
Contributintg Writer

Who was really to blame for Christ's death?

If there is one thing, and actually there is more than one thing, about the religion of Christianity that I have not ever understood over the years, it's the notion that the Jews are somehow "at fault" for killing Jesus.

Mel Gibson's upcoming film, "The Passion," has the various religious entities abuzz again, if not at arms. This time it may be worse than with all the hoopla about "The Last Temptation of Christ."

Yes, I went to see "The Last Temptation," and I will go to see "The Passion" when it is released. Most of my Christian friends looked down their noses at me for viewing the first film. I'm sure I will be applauded and accompanied when I view the upcoming one.

You see, I've never been able to put Jesus Christ in a box. Everything about His life attracts me. I want to know all I can. I always want to know how others perceive Him. I'm certainly not threatened if some creative film artist does not perceive Him as I do. And I seriously doubt that Christ is in any way threatened.

I've always been under the impression that the more attention brought to Him the better, no matter what the source. I figure Jesus is big enough to handle it. If He is not, then my faith is sorely displaced.

As to this notion that the Jews killed Jesus, well, that is simply malarkey. If anybody must be blamed, then it was I who killed him. All who fail to follow the simple rules of life as laid down by God the Father, killed the son of God, who came voluntarily to die for us all, in our place, in order to save us from punishments due and deserved.

True Christianity proposes that Christ's death, as a sacrifice for our sins and failures to measure up, covers up. Yeah, the blood he shed on the cross became a symbolic covering for our far less than perfect hearts, minds, souls, even the total essence of who, what and all that we are. Very much like the blood on the doorposts of the homes of the Jews back in their days of Egyptian bondage, if the mark of the blood covers us then we are safe.

Sounds too simple, doesn't it? That's why I stayed hung up for years. But it is simple.

If anything, Christians should thank the Jews. What if they had received Him? What if He had been recognized as Messiah 2000 years ago? What if He had set up His kingdom on earth then, simply as King of the Jews?

Maybe it's a little harsh to suggest that we thank those who actually physically were responsible for killing Christ. Maybe. Maybe not.

Folks, he came to die. That's what true Christianity teaches. He came to die. He was God in the flesh. He could have called all the powers of the heavens to his rescue. He did not. He came to die. Nobody killed him that day. He chose to give himself for the very ones who nailed the nails, and for you and me, as well.

It bugs me that we don't hear much about the blood these days. We hear pretty music and we listen to deeply inspirational and even motivational sermons. Lately, it seems more and more pastors and other religious leaders are into health awareness and stress management. And that's cool. That's really good.

But tell me what could possibly relieve one's stress more than to know that when we try as hard as we can to get it right, but fail, then it's okay, because we are covered in the blood.

I, for one, find that extraordinarily comforting and nothing does more to lower my stress level.

Oh, yeah, I will see Mel Gibson's "The Passion," although the latest buzz is that the name of the movie might be changed to something more appropriate. Go figure.

As I write this, it occurs to me that a newspaper may not be the most appropriate venue it which to write about Jesus Christ, especially His shed blood and the symbolism I see in that shedding. Yet, I ask you, when in all of history did any one man's life command such ongoing reporting of the news as the life of Christ did and does, even today?