Pilate would have never killed Jesus

[Guest]

The NT story about Pilate and the cruxification of Jesus has so many problems with the text and story.

1- first if Pilate would have allowed an insurrectionist, a murderer of Rome, free , Pilate would have been executed.

2- Pilate did not like the Jews, this is very well documented in hostory, why would he go out of his way and surrender to what the jews wanted. The NT clearly says that pilate didn;t want to do it, but the crowds wanted him dead. This doesn't fit with what history says of Pilate.

3-There is recorded event or custom of allowing a person go on passover in either Roman or Jewish writings. This is the only event of this type to occur

4- The gospel of Matthew says in chapter 28 that a guard was posted to the tomb and a Roman seal was placed on the tomb, In the next chapter, the aythor of Matthew says that the Jews made up a story that they paid the guards with a large sun of money and told them to say they fell asleep and the discples stole the body. This story would never fly, the guards would have been executed and why would they even try to help the Jews, they didn;t like the Jews. The gospel says that when the governer hears the story he will be satisified, but that's a lie, the guards would be dead.

5-When cruxicifing people the Romans never gave them tomb's or allowed them a decent burial, they were left for the vultures to clean up. The gospels say that 2 thieves were hung next to Jesus, but Rome would not have cruxified thieves, In the Roman Empire, historians say, crucifixion was applied to the lower classes, mainly slaves and foreigners. It also was used in response to any actions that were seen as threatening to the empire, such as political agitation, piracy and slave revolts. These would be considered capital offenses.

6-The Romans are the nice people in the gospels and the Jews are the enemies, but yet history again says that the Romans were ruthless, but the jews lived righteous lives.

7-throughout the gospels we hear that the jews feared the crowds and multitudes that followed Jesus. During the alleged cruxifxion we have the cheif preists talking everyone into saying crucify Jesus, what happened to all those multitudes that loved Jesus. The story takes a weird turn where for no reason the crowds are all anti-jesus know, but through all the gospels wanted to follow jesus and have them be there teacher.

8- when pilate asked what should I do with the one whom is called king of the jews, the cheif preists allegedly yelled we have no king, but ceasar. This is blasphemy for any Jew, this idea is just revolting to any jew to say this.

9-The whole trail by night, the jews had strict laws and there was to be no meeting at nighttime for trails. This doesn;t fit into what Jews did and how they did it, they were very meticouls and followed the rules they had. I have a hard time believing they would break there own rules.

 

[Solo]

Hey David,
I am still waiting on you to answer the posts to your last contradictory statement in http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopi ... ht=#221531 where I proved your perception wrong.

Please answer that I am correct and you were wrong.
Thanks,
Solo

 

[Guest]

Just skip the answer again because christainity can't answer these objections, so just pose a question to my question. This seems to be the usual tactic in these christian websites

 

[Orthodox Christian]

Let me see if I get this right: You want us to disprove your unproved assertions below.You take the conclusion of a redactive source and present it as a "problem" for Christianity. I would refer to these as challenges.
Of course, there are very few people who are equipped to answer those challenges, steeped as they are in arcane details.

Since you seem to enjoy stumping for the Jews, which is fine, let's make this a quid pro quo:
I might suggest that there are abundant challenges to the notion that the Jews were ever even in Egypt. There is clear evidence that the Jews inherited much of their mythology and even the name of God (Yahweh) from Sumerian and Chaldean sources.

It's not like these arguments were not deeply and exhaustivley carried out in the first 4 centuries of the Christian era.

See my responses in red.

The NT story about Pilate and the cruxification of Jesus has so many problems with the text and story.

1- first if Pilate would have allowed an insurrectionist, a murderer of Rome, free , Pilate would have been executed.
Lord knows that politicians don't know how to work around the system. :roll:

2- Pilate did not like the Jews, this is very well documented in hostory, why would he go out of his way and surrender to what the jews wanted. The NT clearly says that pilate didn;t want to do it, but the crowds wanted him dead. This doesn't fit with what history says of Pilate.
Why would Pilate want to placate the mob? Geesh, I don't know, Romans were never known for that. :roll:

3-There is recorded event or custom of allowing a person go on passover in either Roman or Jewish writings. This is the only event of this type to occur
And of course, this story was circulated widely in those days, but they myriads of people believed an obvious falsehood anyway. :roll:


4- The gospel of Matthew says in chapter 28 that a guard was posted to the tomb and a Roman seal was placed on the tomb, In the next chapter, the aythor of Matthew says that the Jews made up a story that they paid the guards with a large sun of money and told them to say they fell asleep and the discples stole the body. This story would never fly, the guards would have been executed and why would they even try to help the Jews, they didn;t like the Jews. The gospel says that when the governer hears the story he will be satisified, but that's a lie, the guards would be dead.
Lord knows that cover-ups designed to save the skin of those in charge, coupled with bribes, was a practice only developed in Chicago during the Daly administration. :roll:

5-When cruxicifing people the Romans never gave them tomb's or allowed them a decent burial, they were left for the vultures to clean up. The gospels say that 2 thieves were hung next to Jesus, but Rome would not have cruxified thieves, In the Roman Empire, historians say, crucifixion was applied to the lower classes, mainly slaves and foreigners. It also was used in response to any actions that were seen as threatening to the empire, such as political agitation, piracy and slave revolts. These would be considered capital offenses.
From what I understand, there were multiplied thousands of crucifixions during the tenure of one Pontius Pilate. I suppose that we can be reasonably certain that he would have only ordered the execution of those who fell within the parameters you have provided. :roll:

6-The Romans are the nice people in the gospels and the Jews are the enemies, but yet history again says that the Romans were ruthless, but the jews lived righteous lives.
Those nice guys that plucked the beard of Jesus, plowed His back, and carried out His execution.
Nonetheless, this is the first point of merit in your post.
The Iohannine gospel is the one who uses the term 'The Jews' with impunity. One might be well advised to remember that it was a Jew writing the very comments of current concern. Assuredly, John was not referring, therefore, to all Jews- for Judaism as we know it did not yet exist- but rather to those in Ieoudeans in power. At the time of John's writing, there was not two communities, Jew and Gentile. There were essentially three faith communities:

• Hellenized Jews and Gentiles
  The party of James, the Jerusalem Jews
  Jews who did not see Christ as Messiah

John was (perhaps) at some odds with the latter party. Yahvneh had not yet occured, let alone Bar Kochba, so there was not yet a distinct Christian/Jew distinctive. Christianity was still considered a sect of Judaism.

7-throughout the gospels we hear that the jews feared the crowds and multitudes that followed Jesus. During the alleged cruxifxion we have the cheif preists talking everyone into saying crucify Jesus, what happened to all those multitudes that loved Jesus. The story takes a weird turn where for no reason the crowds are all anti-jesus know, but through all the gospels wanted to follow jesus and have them be there teacher.
Lord knows the mob is never fickle, and cannot be manipulated. :roll:

8- when pilate asked what should I do with the one whom is called king of the jews, the cheif preists allegedly yelled we have no king, but ceasar. This is blasphemy for any Jew, this idea is just revolting to any jew to say this.
You really have no idea what was happening in Jerusalem ca 4-6 AD, do you? Just like the Americans had Tories and Blue coats, the Jews had those who curried favor with Rome, and those who were zealots. They had religious Jews and non-religious Jews, just as they do today.

9-The whole trail by night, the jews had strict laws and there was to be no meeting at nighttime for trails. This doesn;t fit into what Jews did and how they did it, they were very meticouls and followed the rules they had. I have a hard time believing they would break there own rules.
Perhaps a person better versed in ancient Semitic protocol among the Sanhedrin could answer this question- it lies beyond my scope of knowledge.

So those are my answers. I found a number of your points to be too silly to answer sincerely. As for the last point, I reserve judgement.

 

[JM]

Acts 427 For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, 28 For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.

 

[Guest]

In other words the objections are too strong and christianity can;t defend itself without riducolus answers to get by.

As far as you saying these are assertions? Go do a study of everything I have mentioned and tell me what hisroty says, not a biased religios book like the NT, go look at other sources to see if they can back up the NT. once again I get the standard christian response, which is you have massive problems with your bible and always try to turn the charge around on what others are claiming is wrong. Its your book and stories, defend it.

 

[Guest]

Acts 427 For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, 28 For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.

according to the bible, pilate and herod found nothing wrong with Jesus and Pilate was asking over and over why crucify this man, he has done no wrong. That certainly doesn;t sound like a conspiracy.

 

[Orthodox Christian]

In other words the objections are too strong and christianity can;t defend itself without riducolus answers to get by.

As far as you saying these are assertions? Go do a study of everything I have mentioned and tell me what hisroty says, not a biased religios book like the NT, go look at other sources to see if they can back up the NT. once again I get the standard christian response, which is you have massive problems with your bible and always try to turn the charge around on what others are claiming is wrong. Its your book and stories, defend it.

Not only have I read history, David, I've taught it.
But allow me to make something clear:
When you make vague, generalistic assertions, without citing source, the reader is under no burden to disprove your assertions. In point of fact, in approaching a Christian with said objections, the burden is upon you to prove your point, not the other way around. If we were coming to DavidDavid.org, and assuring you that the Crucifixion is a historical fact, it would then be us who would have burden of proof.

So please, sincerely, drop the chip off your shoulder, and deliver real proof, as opposed to personal redaction and ridiculous, obviously flawed objections. If you chose not to, fine, be blessed, enjoy, but don't even try to cop an attitude like you proved anything or instructed anyone here.

PS
Is the NT biased? Of course it is- it's a faith document, not scientific literature. I know, I know, it is presented as proof by some. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to assume that its historical details were accurate, otherwise there would have been alot more argument about same in the 1st 3 centuries.
What one finds for arguments from the Jews in those early days is NOT denial that Jesus lived and was crucified: they argue that He was not, Messiah.

 

[Guest]

I believe the historic places and some events in the Nt are true, they are proven outside of the NT also. I will research for sources to the objections I made earlier.

 

[Guest]

here is a link to a non biased ebsite on recorded events of Pilate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilate

 

[Orthodox Christian]

here is a link to a non biased ebsite on recorded events of Pilate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilate

Yes, it's a non-biased source, redactive (secondary/revisionary).

What I don't see in the article is support for your assertions. For example,
points 1,3,4, 5 and 9 are not addressed at all.

Regarding point 2, we see Pilate relenting to the crowd in Josephus' account of when Pilate brought in the ensigns, and the Jews bared their necks rather than capitulate on graven images in the Holy City.

Of course, we know that there were icons in certain pre-Christian era synagogues, but that's another story. What is clear is the Pilate was not an 'immovable object.'

Regarding point 6, the article addresses the possibility that the Paulist Christians were courting favor with Rome, and thus made the Jews out to be the heavies in the story. Thusly, the theory goes, the Ebiontes would lose favor.

It's a shaky and essentially empty theory, but it makes interesting discussion. Problem is that it's hard to curry favor from a catacomb or from the arena.

Regarding point 7, you have a piece in this article that clearly illustrates how a crowd might be illustrated and controlled (again from Josephus, Jewish War, 2:175-177)

Regarding point 8, this is addressed in the article but not critically analyzed.


In sum, the article does little if anything to support your assertions, and in fact undermines several of them.

 

[Guest]

here is a link to a non biased ebsite on recorded events of Pilate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilate

Yes, it's a non-biased source, redactive (secondary/revisionary).

What I don't see in the article is support for your assertions. For example,
points 1,3,4, 5 and 9 are not addressed at all.

Regarding point 2, we see Pilate relenting to the crowd in Josephus' account of when Pilate brought in the ensigns, and the Jews bared their necks rather than capitulate on graven images in the Holy City.

Of course, we know that there were icons in certain pre-Christian era synagogues, but that's another story. What is clear is the Pilate was not an 'immovable object.'

Regarding point 6, the article addresses the possibility that the Paulist Christians were courting favor with Rome, and thus made the Jews out to be the heavies in the story. Thusly, the theory goes, the Ebiontes would lose favor.

It's a shaky and essentially empty theory, but it makes interesting discussion. Problem is that it's hard to curry favor from a catacomb or from the arena.

Regarding point 7, you have a piece in this article that clearly illustrates how a crowd might be illustrated and controlled (again from Josephus, Jewish War, 2:175-177)

Regarding point 8, this is addressed in the article but not critically analyzed.


In sum, the article does little if anything to support your assertions, and in fact undermines several of them.

1- first if Pilate would have allowed an insurrectionist, a murderer of Rome, free , Pilate would have been executed.

couldnt find anything that was a nom biased site, I found one biased site
http://www.drabruzzi.com/jesus_movement.htm


3-There is recorded event or custom of allowing a person go on passover in either Roman or Jewish writings. This is the only event of this type to occur

I cant find anything saying there is a tradition like this, no early writings by anyone, including Josephes. I think that speaks loudly that this tradition is not recorded anywhere in world history except for this 1 case.

4- The gospel of Matthew says in chapter 28 that a guard was posted to the tomb and a Roman seal was placed on the tomb, In the next chapter, the aythor of Matthew says that the Jews made up a story that they paid the guards with a large sun of money and told them to say they fell asleep and the discples stole the body. This story would never fly, the guards would have been executed and why would they even try to help the Jews, they didn;t like the Jews. The gospel says that when the governer hears the story he will be satisified, but that's a lie, the guards would be dead.

Read Matthew 27 and Matthew 28
you will see in 27:65, pilate says take a guard, go and make the tomb secure by putting a seal on the stone and posting the guard. In matthew 28:11, it says the guards reported to the cheif preists what had happened, the soldiers took the large sum of money.

roman soldiers would have been executed.
http://www.jcnot4me.com/Items/jc=zombie ... ldiers.htm
from christian writer josh mcdowell

5-When cruxicifing people the Romans never gave them tomb's or allowed them a decent burial, they were left for the vultures to clean up. The gospels say that 2 thieves were hung next to Jesus, but Rome would not have cruxified thieves, In the Roman Empire, historians say, crucifixion was applied to the lower classes, mainly slaves and foreigners. It also was used in response to any actions that were seen as threatening to the empire, such as political agitation, piracy and slave revolts. These would be considered capital offenses.

covers both parts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion


9-The whole trail by night, the jews had strict laws and there was to be no meeting at nighttime for trails. This doesn;t fit into what Jews did and how they did it, they were very meticouls and followed the rules they had. I have a hard time believing they would break there own rules.