Media Bias

I hate to take the time to post this, but it seems worth pointing out. Last month ABC News did a story on Biblical belief and anti-semitism, basically trying to add some back story to the charge that Mel Gibsons’s The Passion of the Christ encouraged anti-semitism by suggesting that the Jews were responsible for Christ’s death.

They explored beliefs on literal interpretations of the Bible and found that 6 out of 10 Americans take Biblical accounts of creation, the flood, and the parting of the Red Sea as literal truth. Quite a high number.

Then they ask how many Americans think that Jews today are responsible for Christ’s death — 80% said no. Then they make the argument that literal beliefs are inconsistent because a literal belief would blame the Jews, “as some literal interpretations of the Bible suggest,” basing this on Matthew 27:25 (“His blood be on us, and on our children.”).

Basically it seems like ABC is trying to stoke the anti-semitism fires by claiming that if 60% of the population were consistent in their beliefs, we’d be blaming the Jews. I’d like to know who’s espousing these “some literal interpretations” ABC cites. It seems like pretty lousy journalism that they don’t mention what groups are promoting that view.

This whole anti-semitism thing drives me nuts. It’s not my fault blacks were slaves 200 years ago. Don’t hate me for it. So why would I hate the Jews for something that happened 2000 year ago? Never mind that we all shoulder the responsibility for Christ’s death. Never mind that without Christ’s death we’re kind of screwed — so why are we looking for someone to blame?

The fact that the media would encourage this lame argument with such lame reporting is discouraging.

4 thoughts on “Media Bias”

  1. I totally understand your frustration, I feel the same way. I think that non-Christians try to simplify the death of Christ and ignore the huge implications. We are all responsible for Christ’s death. It was all of our sins that put him there. So, the jews of that particular time/place (as well as the Romans…what about them???) took a more direct role. But it was my sin that put him there and led them to do it.

    I don’t think the media is capable of seeing that one.

    Well said, Kevin.

  2. Ugh, how about a literal reading of the Bible that realized Christ and all of his followers were freakin’ Jews, and that even then, not every Jew was for his death?

    The view they’re espousing is not literal, it’s darn blind and extremely bad reading of a text. If I graded a paper trying to argue for anti-semitism using the Bible, I’d give it an F for not looking at the actual book.

    As a counselor at camp told me once, Christ would have died to save me even if I was the only person on earth. But who would have killed him then? We are all sinful, all needing of Christ, and all of us can accept his grace.

    *sigh* If you ask me, it looks like someone at ABC is keen on throwing a darker light on The Passion and Christianity. Nothing new, I suppose, but most discouraging all the same.

  3. What really bugs me is that a literal interpretation of Matthew27:25 would be “us and our children.” So the Jews of first century Palestine and their immediate offspring. Period. That’s literal. How do you get 21st century Jews out of that?


  4. the Jews are representing all the believers but who live in sin. the romans are representing all the unbelievers. all those who sin bring a curse that is why jesus said ‘us and children. all those who live in sin are damned. that is why jesus had to die to save us from damnation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *