mark9950

Lets make that clear.

Jesus was killed because he broke a jewish law of blasphemy was convicted and sentenced to death for that transgression by the sanhedrin.

There was no human sacrifice for any sin whatsoever.Jesus commited a crime,got caught and paid the penalty for that transgression.

There is no slavation or going anywhere at death except 6 foot under.

mark9950

Excuse my error that is SALVATION NOT slavation.

Doctor X

Understood, but some will argue that not only did the Jewish authorities not have that authority, crucifixion was not the punishment for blasphemy--which sort of argues against the historicity of the passion narratives--the Roman also did not "let one go" as part of a Passover Prize!

I would agree with your argument against the death representing a sacrifice; however, symbolically--if you believe Levenson--it was not far from the mark. In otherwords, followers at some point could have felt justified in interpreting it in this way.

--J.D.

mark9950

Agreed,but are we 100% sure that he did not break any Roman Law also?Two governments, jewish and roman, two laws broken one jewish and one roman one death sentence under roman law?

Doctor X

Assuming that he existed and he got hung up, he probably had to break some Roman law in some fashion. I had a mentor who opined that Junior went to the Temple declaring he would destroy it--this started a riot--and the Romans got rid of him. He figured this accounted for traditions of him acting against the Temple.

However, the "anti-Temple" tradition may have been a way to separate Jews from a symbol of their tradition--"The Temple? Nyaah! It was a den of thieves 'n stuff!"

--J.D.

Javaman

He would have had to... and troublemaking was a crime. Blasphemy would have been punished apart from the Romans by stoning. The supposed crucifixion would have had to entail some transgression of Roman law.

Metacrock

Meta: So you admit the Jews Killed him and not the Romans?

Actually you are wrong. He was exicuted for sedition by Pilate, not for blasphemy. He was accussed of blasphemy, but it was put in Pilate's lap and they spun it as a sedition so rome could do it and the people wouldn't blame the Sanhedren.

mark9950

But,But pilate washed his hands of jesus.When pilate asked about jesus being king of the jews jesus said that "thou sayest"

Pilate never said anything to jesus about jesus overthrowing and becoming king of rome.

Vorkosigan

Great freudian slip, Mark -- Slavation! I'll have to remember that one.

Metacrock

Meta: The Pilate of the gospels is cagey. Maybe moreso than the real guy. But be that as it may, he washes his hands so as not to be blamed for the execution of someone supported by the majority of the people. But then they leave it up to the crowd to decide and the crowed is swaed by ringers for the anti-Jesus faction. so now he has an excuse to execute without any fear of uprising.

Is he really concerned that Jesus is blameless? Of course not! He wasn't that decent a person, neither in real life, nor the litterary figure we know in the gospels. His only concern was keeping down insurrection. This is obvious, or else why leave it to the crowd if you are abou the innocense of the man?

His execution having been demanded by the crowd (also Pilates true motive probably was to keep the Sanhedrin satisfied--so they let the crowd choose to trade for Barababas. Obviously that is not the action of a just man.

So they have to have an excuse, which is sedition, the only real excuse he needs or has. And this is evidenced by the method of death. Moroever, the Jews wouldn't put up a sign saying "King of the Jews."