andrewcriddle

There are real problems with the details of the Gospel accounts. However the fact that the trial before the Sanhedrin conflicts with the halacha in the Mishnah and later sources is not neccessarily a difficulty. It is unclear whether this halacha was actually in force before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE.

Andrew Criddle

TedM

Please explain. From my perspective what little we know of Pilate from secular sources shows that Pilate wanted to keep the peace, for fear of a bad report being sent to Rome.


Since I'm not a Christian the answer should be obvious. What would have been a better alternative Steve--kill a bunch of people because they were demanding that a potential political threat to Rome (a new King of the Jews) be crucified? How would that look to Rome?

Pilate wanted to keep his job.

aa5874

Where did you get that statistics from?? How many Scholars are there in the world???

Where is your data?? Where are your sources???

It is EVIDENCE that is needed not Scholars.

If the Bible story about the trial is false then tell us WHERE you got the truth??

Ok, outhouse. The disciples ran away and there were NO real witnesses so YOU TELL us what happened.

Please, your Imagination has gone wild.

aa5874

It is already known the Bible is NOT a credible source. The plausibility of the story has no real value once it did not happen.

Events of the trial of Jesus can be found in Hebrew Scripture and others were invented.

The books that mention the trial of Jesus are Myth Fables.

In effect, it was a Phantom that was put on trial in gMark, a Son of a Ghost was put on Trial in gMatthew and gLuke and God the Creator in gJohn.

People who want to argue that there was a Trial of Jesus must first locate credible sources of antiquity.

If the Trial of Jesus is fiction in the Bible then what really happened to the Phantom/Son of a Ghost/ God the Creator???

Chili

(For what it is worth). Of course there was a trial that took precedence over temple affairs that itself was soon to be shut down as shown by the 'temple ruckuss' that followed from the precinct, and Jesus never entered the temple again.

We are talking 'the end of Judaism' here to make religion, yes Judaism, a means to the end instead of a social club for sinners alike. At least it would be for Jesus who was the reborn Joseph, which is precisely what made him a Galilean (or Purgatorian as we would call him today), that is to last only 42 months and from there on to Israel he goes (note that Galilee was only a detour he needed to take).

Galilee is the place of purgation between Jew and Christian that is much like the cocoon stage to be encountered as upright Jew (with no -ism about it for sure). It is where Paul ran his race and Nietzsche's camel jockey shed all his bagage and rode a lion into the oasis he saw, and yes, 'the trial' is what converted the camel into a lion when Judas spilled his guts and Peter and Thomas became one (previously twins in opposites between faith and doubt) after Herod and Pilate became friends = faith finding understanding with no enmity seen = peace on earth for Joseph the paradoxical Jew who himself was torn between good and evil as man and as Jew.

The trial is crucial during Passover where the firstborn is saved, here now to Joseph who's Jesus was the transition stage between the old and the new. It was his duty to protect the Christ-child within as the firsborn to be set free on the other side of life that so becomes heaven on earth for the beholder of this ideal that only he saw, and for this, surely, the old sin nature needed to die so that liberty can be for Joseph-the-man who would no longer be hu-man as Jew.

And of course the Jews knew that, or at least those who attended the trial that took place only in the mind of Joseph knew that his sin nature (or human nature as we know it) was second to his prior nature as man, to which he was reborn and now needed to decide 'which way' to go: either remain torn between good and evil or die to his ego identity wherein only sin is known and subsequently 'be' the man he was created 'to be.'

To Joseph it came across as the drumbeat in "The Emperor Jones" by O'Neill that would not go away, and so yes, to convict Jesus to die was the best thing the Jews ever did, as they knew, and only they knew that he needed to die so the man could be raised without attachment to earth down below.

Better yet, the chief priest also knew that he needed to be vacant for at least 3 days, lest deep-seated incarnate evils not be set free and return to make him a spiritually empowered beast feeding from an endless source as god while still human (saved-sinner), and be a disgrace to Judaism at all (Matt.27:64).

In case you wonder and to add substance to this trial, the 'endless source' here is identified in Plato's Seventh Epistle, 341C where it "emerges in the soul on a sudden from much emergent dwelling and living with the matter itself," and is likened "as something set alight by a leaping fire and forthwith nourishing itself," . . . which here now takes me to Rev. 14:9-12 where failing to die would place him in midheaven (verse 6) instead of 'midst of heaven' still with one leg on earth and so fails to become what love (philo-sophy) is all about, Diotima would say.

outhouse

Ill buy that


I doubt he entered back in as well.

and a trial would have been lower ranking roman temple officials