Edited
The accounts are unambiguous: Jesus of Nazareth was executed by crucifixion under the authority of Pontius Pilate.Rome, the imperial power, routinely used crucifixion as an exemplary punishment for their condemned. That empire did not invent crucifixion, nor was it used for their citizens. Many were crucified, with little or no note made of the victims.
An example: In 72 BCE (or, BC) the Roman Marcus Licinius Crassus
had 6,000 survivors of a slave revolt crucified along the Italian
roadside. No procedure would be recorded, nor the
names of those summarily punished - they had offended Rome by
deserting from their slavery and taking up arms against their masters.
They had only the one entitlement. (britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/141893/Marcus-Licinius-Crassus)
The Jerusalem Jewish establishment had found Jesus guilty of 'blasphemy' and thus worthy of death under the Law of the LORD (as interpreted by them). However, they wanted sentence carried out by the Roman authority. From John we find that at the time the 'Jews' could not impose capital punishment, even given Roman respect for indigenous law.
In contrast to that admission of limited "official" power, I note that in Jerusalem, not long after the death of Jesus, a man named Stephen was (mob) stoned to death for blasphemy. That was during the same Roman rule. Moreover, not all that much later there were (mob) attempts to execute Paul, in the presence of Romans, by assassination. Stonings might happen "spontaneously", or even be orchestrated, in the name of their Law. (There were earlier stoning moves against Jesus.)
The Jerusalem Jewish establishment had found Jesus guilty of 'blasphemy' and thus worthy of death under the Law of the LORD (as interpreted by them). However, they wanted sentence carried out by the Roman authority. From John we find that at the time the 'Jews' could not impose capital punishment, even given Roman respect for indigenous law.
So Pilate came out to them and asked, “What charges are you bringing against this man?”
“If he were not a criminal,” they replied, “we would not have handed him over to you.”
Pilate said, “Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law.”
“But we have no right to execute anyone,” they objected (John 18:29-31, NIV).
Did Pilate understand well enough, and by his actions show his attitude to the subjugated Jewish elite, and their entire procedure? Do you think he was provoking them by saying, "do your pathetic worst"?
In contrast to that admission of limited "official" power, I note that in Jerusalem, not long after the death of Jesus, a man named Stephen was (mob) stoned to death for blasphemy. That was during the same Roman rule. Moreover, not all that much later there were (mob) attempts to execute Paul, in the presence of Romans, by assassination. Stonings might happen "spontaneously", or even be orchestrated, in the name of their Law. (There were earlier stoning moves against Jesus.)
The Jews[a] answered him (Pilate), “We have a law, and according to that law he ought to die because he has made himself the Son of God.” (John 19:7 ESV). They had no doubt!
An
inconsistency? Why then might the Jewish powers use Pilate via a political charge? I
conjecture that the establishment figures had their purpose clear. Jesus
had followers, and had enjoyed a measure of public acclaim (especially
amongst to poorer sort). The leaders would have an eye on the 'mob' and
possibly they had the desire to 'keep their hands clean' anyway, as they
observed a time great religious solemnity for the LORD. Watching Jesus'
blood shed by heathen Romans would be preferred.
There are historical points to notice (or not) and to ponder (or not). The NT insists there is an inner meaning to that act of capital punishment; a meaning far, far greater than the simple account of what could just be seen as an everyday occurrence. This will be clear in your reading from the texts.
Historically: The archaeological record does include Pilate. No record is found of such a trial and death under Pilate. Not that a record would reasonably be expected. Jesus was a nobody, from nowhere, and without wealth. Neither Rome nor Jerusalem had any reason to make anything of the event. There is no (occupied) grave to visit! A burial site was marked decades on. I have my doubts. Dr. Carl Rassmussen (holylandphotos.org) is confident of the identification of the much-fought-over location. (Of course the tourist can be shown... many things.)
In Judaea a little over 30 years after the crucifixion, militant Jews took up arms again and initially had bloody success against local Roman units and even a large regional force. Despite the words of their prophet (Jeremiah 7), the militants apparently were reliant upon the LORD, whose one and only Temple (Herod's) had finally been completed. (It was the final Jewish Temple.) Jerusalem, the site of the last battle, was eventually breached by the Romans in 70 CE (or, AD). Whatever Titus (commander) wanted, the Temple was effectively obliterated, along with any Jews still alive there.
The destruction in Jerusalem was clearly a tragic event. Nonetheless, nothing that ultimately mattered was lost to the widening circles of followers of Jesus the Messiah, Risen Saviour for the world. The original believers knew that they had nothing invested in any earthly site, or in observances of new moons, festivals or sabbaths. The universal message had long gone out and was actively treasured independently in many locations, recorded or not. The account was safe and would in time be handed on to us.
Jesus had himself warned his people not to share in the fate of the city. 14 “But when you see the desolating sacrilege set up where it ought not to be (let the reader understand), then those in Judea must flee to the mountains; 15 the one on the housetop must not go down or enter the house to take anything away; 16 the one in the field must not turn back to get a coat." (Mark 13, NRSV)
There are historical points to notice (or not) and to ponder (or not). The NT insists there is an inner meaning to that act of capital punishment; a meaning far, far greater than the simple account of what could just be seen as an everyday occurrence. This will be clear in your reading from the texts.
Historically: The archaeological record does include Pilate. No record is found of such a trial and death under Pilate. Not that a record would reasonably be expected. Jesus was a nobody, from nowhere, and without wealth. Neither Rome nor Jerusalem had any reason to make anything of the event. There is no (occupied) grave to visit! A burial site was marked decades on. I have my doubts. Dr. Carl Rassmussen (holylandphotos.org) is confident of the identification of the much-fought-over location. (Of course the tourist can be shown... many things.)
In Judaea a little over 30 years after the crucifixion, militant Jews took up arms again and initially had bloody success against local Roman units and even a large regional force. Despite the words of their prophet (Jeremiah 7), the militants apparently were reliant upon the LORD, whose one and only Temple (Herod's) had finally been completed. (It was the final Jewish Temple.) Jerusalem, the site of the last battle, was eventually breached by the Romans in 70 CE (or, AD). Whatever Titus (commander) wanted, the Temple was effectively obliterated, along with any Jews still alive there.
The destruction in Jerusalem was clearly a tragic event. Nonetheless, nothing that ultimately mattered was lost to the widening circles of followers of Jesus the Messiah, Risen Saviour for the world. The original believers knew that they had nothing invested in any earthly site, or in observances of new moons, festivals or sabbaths. The universal message had long gone out and was actively treasured independently in many locations, recorded or not. The account was safe and would in time be handed on to us.
Jesus had himself warned his people not to share in the fate of the city. 14 “But when you see the desolating sacrilege set up where it ought not to be (let the reader understand), then those in Judea must flee to the mountains; 15 the one on the housetop must not go down or enter the house to take anything away; 16 the one in the field must not turn back to get a coat." (Mark 13, NRSV)
ESV a. John 19:7 Greek Ioudaioi probably refers here to Jewish religious leaders, and others under their influence, in that time; also verses 12, 14, 31, 38
Scripture quotations marked (ESV) are from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (NIV) are taken from the Holy Bible, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.
Scripture quotations marked (NRSV) are from the New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright © 1989 National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Note: I retain the reference marking to footnotes [eg, a], but not the content. The footnotes may be found in the text, eg via Bible Gateway.
Scripture quotations courtesy BibleGateway.com
AL
08/08/24
