Journal: Westminster Theological Journal
Volume: WTJ 05:2 (May 1943)
Article: Who Crucified Jesus?
Author: Ned B. Stonehouse

WTJ 5:2 (May 1943) p. 137

Who Crucified Jesus?

N. B. Stonehouse

THE title of this article coincides with that of a recently published book which answers the question in a fashion so arresting and novel and withal so far-reaching in its implications for the understanding of the gospels that the reader is compelled to face the question for himself.1 While the question superficially considered may appear to concern only a peripheral historical detail, further reflection will disclose that no one can make any affirmation about Jesus Christ, and least of all one that relates to his death, without taking a position, explicitly or implicitly, on the decisive issue of faith or unbelief. Consequently, whether we come to agree or to disagree with the thesis of this book, it serves the highly useful purpose of stimulating us to observe with greater alertness what the records actually say on this momentous subject.

Professor Zeitlin must be credited, we believe, with a rare achievement. For here is a book devoted to a phase of antiquarian research which turns out to be a tract for the times. Our interest is aroused by the fact that a noted Jewish authority on Rabbinics writes on the ever-fascinating theme of the crucifixion and we know in advance that his treatment can hardly be stereotyped. We soon discover, moreover, that in spite of all that has been written on the subject he comes forward with a brand new thesis concerning the condemnation of Jesus which absolves the Jewish people from implication in this event which has come to be weighted down with tragic meaning for hosts of the sons of Jacob. To add to its appeal the author effectively challenges the reader to observe that “history is the teacher of life” (to use the phrase which he borrows from Cicero), which means in this instance that the study of the struggles between

WTJ 5:2 (May 1943) p. 138

absolutist and tyrannical powers and the representatives of decency and piety will provide sound insights for the solution of our problems as we today pass through catastrophic and world-shaking experiences. In a time when Chaucer and Latin are held by some political leaders to be a waste of time, and Josephus and Hebrew would probably receive even less complimentary characterization, it is refreshing to read a defense of the study of history. In particular Dr. Zeitlin appeals to history to fashion an impressive appeal for the elimination of anti-Semitism as unworthy of the democratic spirit and as based upon an unhistorical judgment of the responsibility of the Jews for the death of Jesus.

The thesis of the book, negatively stated, is that the Jews did not crucify Jesus, that in fact this accusation against the Jews “is a tragic libel evilly wrou...