is incomprehensible taking into account the amount of academic criticism that followed the announcement of the use of the name by the people of the House of Judah – the very Jewish whose customs and traditions Jesus, including his name, could not be associated with. Neither can modern Christians really stick to the false premise that the Jews killed him. Their politicians at the time caused it but the people as always were probably too frightened to demonstrate against it. Jesus may well have been a well known, but controversial character of the times and even associated with the death of John. The Jews after all, are a race all of their own and their synagogues and customs are just as valid as any Islamic, Hindu or Christian and their places of worship or gathering should be represented wherever they choose provided of course, they do not conspire against the dominant evolving culture. This was what was happening at the time of Jesus.
Jesus would have anyway, failed to understand the concepts being aired today because he was a mystic and his kingdom was definitely not of this world. He was however, by right, it would seem, a scion of the House of Israel with possible part Judean bloodlines , but not a Jew either by manner or religious beliefs. It is worth noting that the remains of the family of the cave in Masada found recently, were linked with a document which appears to be the last words of the man who writes as “Jesus ben Iacoup” which properly translated means Jesus son of Israel. Had this man present at the last stand of Judas Bar Cobba, a Jew, been a Jew himself, he would have inscribed himself as Jesus Ben Judah, according to bible scholars. This man has been the focal point of controversy as to whether it was Jesus himself and