Talk:Blood curse

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bible Low‑importance

	Bible portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anti-semitic

, which is a different anti-Semitic belief

Snipped text implied that calling Jews responsible for the death of Jesus, is anti-Semitic. This might be a widely held view, but it's not a "fact". Can someone cite an authority, like A. Foxman? Should be easy to source this one... --Uncle Ed 20:47, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

To say that Jews are collectively and specially responsible for Jesus' death (or for any other bad thing) is the very type of anti-Semitism. Is there truly anybody that disagrees with that? I admit that my original phrasing made it sound as if the verse itself is anti-Semitic, and of course that is POV (and even false IMO). That was just poor writing on my part, so I'm going to put in a different version. Let me know if it's acceptable to you; if not, then we can look for competing citations. ^_^ -- Toby Bartels 19:55, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

On second thought, we should still find citations for "some interpreters" and "Others", regardless of your agreement or disagreement with me. ^_^ -- Toby Bartels 20:10, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Techincally the verse only shows what the crowd allegedly said, not that they had the authority to spread such responsibility.

Religious people attacking a heretic in their midst is commonplace. The big mistake by Christian interpreters (or was it intentional and part of a campaign against Jewish people, I don't know) was the ridiculous idea that a group of religious people attacking a heretical member of their own group should be some kind of surprise or exception. Nobody really cares about the heretics in other people's religions, only in their own; OF COURSE only "the Jews" would call for Jesus' death, because no one else knew or cared that anything was happening. To anyone who wasn't Jewish, it was just another petty religious squabble. TooManyFingers (talk) 18:40, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abortion and the blood curse

I'm not sure this actually counts as a relevant example, but I noticed that a similar blood curse existed in the case of abortionists and abortions. [1] ADM (talk) 13:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is a completely different issue. History2007 (talk) 19:24, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Change name to Pilate washes his hands

-surely a far more familiar name? Johnbod (talk) 21:38, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pilate washing his hands is the verse before this. The Blood curse term is used for this verse, not the prior, per the first ref in the article. History2007 (talk) 19:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

His blood be upon us

It was the cry of the people among the Jews who were for Jesus Denzil john (talk) 03:25, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]