Jesus killed (Tom)
- On Sun, 28 Mar 1999 09:50:39 -0800, jnp@... writes:
>Not in mine. (1996)
>> I trust you realize that the Talmud like the Gospels is a religious
>> document that MAY have been composed when the text alleges but
>> like the NT rests on little historical support.
>We absolutely agree.
>Tom continues, replying to my cite of Deut 13:
>> Here you really get into murky support. The KJV which I think is
>> the source of your support is a translation of an Hebrew text of
>> the 10th C CE and, by some researchers, was still in revision during
>> the rule of the Severan Emperors. [=85]
>> Hence, if these
>> texts are not supported by the Qumran material nor by being Septuagi=
>> readings pre-Philo certain, then they are to be taken as evidence
>> of the development of the wide gap that appeared later between
>> and Jews.
>I checked LXX -- Deut 13 is in it. Hence, a scriptural basis for the
>capital offense seems to have been in place.
>(I also checked my Wise-Abegg-Cook index of DSS and found that, of Deut
>1-33, most were there except a half-dozen --- including chap 13.)
>(Incidentally, I appreciate your point that any HB citation must first beWe gave Mahlon a hard time on this. I side with Ian in viewing
>run thru these filters before one assumes it was extant in 1st C.)
>> >gressions were capital offenses. Not only does Deut. 13 provide a
>> >motive, it *demands* death.
>> Can you see a Roman Governor paying attention to "Demands"?
>No, but my point was that the existence of such a demand in the Torah
>created a tough spot for faithful Jews. Comply or face divine displeasure.
>So, there would have been motive to appeal to civil authority
>collaboratively. This is the view that Mahlon Smith and Dom Crossan take.
most of this is later text rewriting. When the main structure
of an event is commonly known to those living, then biased views
can only be added that do not alter the chronology.
>> Check the Crosstalk archive for a review. Roman Citizens wereBob is a christian apologist who couldn't thake the heat.
>> NOT crucified. The evidence for its use against non-citizens is
>> mixed. Middle Eastern historical practice on the use of the
>> stake meant impalement. Greeks nailed up executed murderers and
>> left them for the crows. You should should view as suspect the
>> Gospels' mentions on leaving victims overnight as against Jewish
>> Law. The later texts may give it as a necessity but I'm scepti-
>> cal of any "evidence" it was so under Tiberius.
>I checked the archives -- a good suggestion -- and yesterday posted Mahlo=
>Also read an interesting review by Bob Schacht of Crossan's book on the
>crucifixion. Crossan thinks Pilate and Caiaphas shared the blame,
>essentially what Mahlon Smith said.
>According to an article by Otto Betz of Tubingen, in Oxford Companion to =Hey, get it straight - Titus wasn't crucifying Romans...If you
>Bible, Roman citizens could be crucified for high treason only. In the
>provinces it could be used for any unruly persons, all of whom were label=
>"robbers." (p 142) Josephus tells of mass crucifixions in Judea under
>several Roman prefects, in particular Titus during the siege of Jerusalem.
>The same occurred in the Jewish quarter of Alexandria (Philo). Scourging
>preceded the executions. (War 5.11.449-51) The victim had to carry the
>pantibulum or crossbeam. Other grisly details are confirmed by archaeolog=
go to classics sources you'll find little about crucifixions so when
you read it i]even in and Oxford text is't a bible one not a
>No mention except in Josephus (see below)
>> >The bottom line I suppose is that the Talmudic judgement against Jesus
>> >was very consistent with the NT portrayal of deep theological con-
>> >flict. Both sides agree, and Deut 13 demanded the perpetrator's
>> >termination, not as an option that Israel might refuse.
>> I can't see a Roman Governor giving two snaps of the finger for
>> Jewish sensibilities. The sources for those accounts are not
>> Roman unless I'm badly informed. So don't try that argument with
>> deconstructionists. Your conclusion represents what the texts
>> CAME TO SAY LATER about the matter, both Jewish and Christian
>Actually, Pilate had to tread lightly. He also backed down from conflict.
>Crossan in his HJ book discusses 7 cases of peasant protests in early Roman
>Palestine, three of which were against Pilate: (1) about iconic standards
> in Jerusalem (JW 2.169-174 =3D JA 18.55-59) in 1-17 CE;
>(2) about aniconic shields in Jerusalem in Philo, Embassy to Gaius 299-305 inagain a weak reed from a biased source - ask any gay...
>and (3) aboutlikewise
>using Temple funds for Jerusalem aqueduct, in JW 2.175-177 =3D JA 18.60-6=
>2. OnIt did under Nero and allowed Vespasian to be proclaimed Imperator
>such occasions Pilate faced a general strike throughout the region. Taxes
>were so onerous, many people would have preferred heroic death. Pilate knew
>that a misstep would kindle a war.
by his troops there. Josephus wrote to make the governors before
Vespasian look like idiots and craven. We have no Roman hisotrian
who served on V's staff as Arrian or Suetonius did for hadrian.