Re: Why was Jesus killed (Jack)
- Ian Hutchesson wrote:
>hehe I do so like Hutchessonian rhetorical style.
> At 11.51 29/03/99 -0600, Jack Kilmon wrote:
> >Ian Hutchesson wrote:
> >> My best guess, given a few years back, to explain why neither the gospels
> >> nor Josephus knows anything other than the idea that they didn't believe in
> >> the resurrection and that their activity as a group is related only to the
> >> time of John Hyrcanus, is that as the rump of the priestly class they
> >> supported Aristobulus II and were decimated in the temple in 63 BCE. Some
> >> may have survived, but they were no longer a power. Herod deliberately
> >> chose people of low circumstances as high priests so as to maintain
> >> control, ie not likely to have been any of the remaining Sadducees, if
> >> there were any.
> >> What we are left with is the struggle between the Pharisees and Sadducees
> >> that we know manifested itself in the time of John Hyrcanus. It is the
> >> rancour that that caused that stayed with the Pharisees, who were the
> >> survivors of the fall of the temple.
> >If we consider Onias II the last legitimate Zadokite HP in Jerusalem
> >(I think his son was connsidered *the* legitimate HP in Leontopolis)
> >then these less than exemplary 28 HP's of the Herodian period may
> >have constituted the Sadducean party despite their tenuous pedigrees.
> Jack, your bullsh*tting me, right? You also look at the flyspecks and not
> the ceiling.
taybutheh d'maran yeshua masheecha am kulkon