jjramsey

Yes, that applies during a riot, as andrewcriddle had stipulated:

andrewcriddle was primarily discussing the actions of a soldier that would make sense when a riot hadn't yet begun, and no order to attack has been given. Your would-be counterexample requires an apples-and-oranges comparison.

aa5874

Andrewcriddle is clearly wrong. Deadly force, in general, will always cause a crowd to disperse whether or not a riot has been started.

Solo

Sorry to have misled you.

Jiri

Solo

I think there is a significant difference between what the gospels narrate and Jesus ben Ananias. The Nazarene Jesus is said to have wandered into Jerusalem, ben Ananias was resident and known in the city for years. If there is a historical core to the gospel incident in the temple then the arrest by the temple guard and handing him over to the Romans makes sense historically. The Sanhedrin might have decided it made more sense to hand him over to the Romans as a rebel against Roman occupation than a blasphemer promoting himself as a representative of God's promised kingdom in Israel. It has been pointed out by many scholars of Judaism that the proto-Nazarene faith was within the broader Jewish mainstream before the first war. The Sanhedrin may have wanted to dispose of an unknown messianic agitator without paying too heavy political tax for it to the "respectable" messianic community in Jerusalem. Hence they "washed their hands" in handing him over to Pilate who executed him summarily. A plausible scenario, I think. What might have happened next, is that James the Just, who had his own quarrel with the Temple priests, decided that Jesus was a true prophet and witness to the last days and began promoting Jesus martyrdom in his church - the very thing that the Sanhedrin would not have wanted to happen.

Jiri

aa5874

There is no evidence external of apologetics to support the statement that the proto-Nazarene faith was within the broader Jewish mainstream before the first war.

This is all idle speculation.

It is already known and proven that the word NAZARENE is not at all in the (KJV) OT. There is no evidence, information, or tradition linking Jewish faith to a person from Nazareth.

The writers called Philo, a Jew of Alexandria and Josephus, a Pharisee who lived in Judaea, have written nothing whatsoever about any NAZARENE or any tradtion of faith in the crucifixion, resurrection, ascension of a man executed as a blasphemer and believed to be the Son of the God of the Jews who existed before the world was created, while the Jewsish Temple was still standing.

The Jesus stories about a NAZARENE appear to have post dated the writings of Josephus or at least the first war.

andrewcriddle

In the short term sufficient deadly force will disperse a crowd.
In the medium to long term the habitual resort to deadly force without major provocation is liable to provoke disorder rather than prevent it.

(There is an obvious exception where the deadly force is very very drastic. Making a desert and calling it peace is, however, a rather special case.)

Andrew Criddle

aa5874

Quelling a riot or a dispersing a crowd by deadly force is precisely a short term remedy.