Originally Posted by Morganite
GF: What you will find is that Jesus criticises Jews who do not live up to their religion. He is probably not disinterested in Roman religions, but he does not direct his followers to attack them. He sticks closely to his mission of fulfilling the old law and establishing the law of the gospel of Christ.
Although Jesus did say he was sent to the house of Israel, he was also the first Christian missionary to the Gentiles. Like the Sabbath day, it was meant o be a blessing not a burden to mankind.
If we learn nothing from Jesus' encounter with the Samaritan woman we should learn that he was not intolerant to her faith, but encouraged her to set her life in order, which she did, and then became the second missionary to the Gentiles through her witness to her own villagers. That was the beginning of the Samaritan branch of the Christian Church.
What does that teach us? If nothing else, it shows us that hostility and intolerance is a poor missionary tool, and since Jesus did not use it, then we cannot use it and claim to be on his side or doing his will.
I cannot come to agreement with you as to what the Romans would have done if Jesus had criticised their gods. Romans were almost uniquely tolerant in matters of a religious nature, and with so many gods and temples among them they were used to some being favoured and some being. Romans did not look with disfavour on any religion, accepting that it was at least a matter for individual conscience.
Non-Sadduceean Palestinian Jews spoke loud and angrily against the Roman occupation, and the Zealots encouraged Jewish insurgents to make life hot for the Romans, but Rome did not quench or quell Judaism.
Since Publicans (tax gatherers) were an occupation rather than a rleigion, I will take it that you meant to write Pharisees.
M:)
