Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 11-03-2009, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

I chucked in the passion as possibly the only recoverable bit, but I think I go with story (turtles) all the way down on this.

The passion is too good to be true, it feels invented for the purposes of the story. So all the reasons, sedition, blasphemy become plot lines in a play to make it all look and feel authentic.

Well if a historical Jesus caused a mild disturbance at the Temple (which was also a military fortress), and Pilate executed troublemakers without trial, it doesn't take much to see how Jesus could have been executed "unfairly". The Passion is probably a reinterpretation of possibly historic events that shifts the blame from Rome (Pilate) to the Jews.

If there was a historical Jesus, the only thing that is probably historical is the crucifixion. And Pilate dished out crucifixions like Snicker's bars on Halloween.

But, a crucifixion of a Jew is certainly NOT the only possibility.

It is recorded in Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews 20.9 that James, a Jew, was stoned to death.

And even in the NT and Church writings, Stephen was stoned to death for saying almost the exact words as Jesus during his trial.

Even the supposed brother of Jesus was stoned to death according to Eusebius for uttering similar words as Jesus.

If there was an historical Jesus he may have been stoned to death for blasphemy.

As soon as Stephen claimed he saw the Son of man sitting on the right hand of God, he was virtually a dead man, the trial had abruptly ended, he would be stoned almost immediately.

This is Stephen in Acts.

Acts 7.54-57

Quote:

But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,

56and said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

57Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord, 58and cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul.

dog-on · 11-03-2009, 03:43 PM

I'm with Clive here, at least as far as the turtles go.

aa5874 · 11-03-2009, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

I chucked in the passion as possibly the only recoverable bit, but I think I go with story (turtles) all the way down on this.

The passion is too good to be true, it feels invented for the purposes of the story. So all the reasons, sedition, blasphemy become plot lines in a play to make it all look and feel authentic.

But, the more supposed details are given the more inauthentic the story becomes.

Pilate will release a man who may have even tried to or had intention to kill him or Herod and overthrow the goverment of the region. The prisoner to be released was a murderer and convicted of sedition, and Jesus was a model citizen who encouraged people to pay their taxes and did pay his share.

[Luke 23.22-25

Quote:

22 And he said unto them the third time, Why, what evil hath he done?

I have found no cause of death in him:

I will therefore chastise him, and let him go. 23 And they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be crucified. And the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed.

24 And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required. 25 And [b]he released unto them him that for sedition and murder was cast into prison, whom they had desired; but he delivered Jesus to their will.

The story is now more inauthentic, Pilate would appease the Jews by releasing a man who may have tried or had intentions of killing Pilate himself.

Amaleq13 · 11-03-2009, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

All that is needed is an existing belief that Jesus was crucified prior to Mark's story.

That would be it, for the most part.

You believe that Mark created the notion that Jesus was crucified but, in telling the story of that crucifixion, didn't intend for it to be understood that it was (unjustly) for sedition even though he has Pilate focus on that charge and has Jesus confess to it and be executed as though it was the reason?

The sign atop his cross didn't say "Blasphemer", you know. That's a bit more than a subtle hint as to why the guy was executed.

Do you have any ideas why Mark would include such details if that wasn't his intention?

Amaleq13 · 11-04-2009, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

All that is needed is an existing belief that Jesus was crucified prior to Mark's story.

Upon further reflection, even this isn't a necessary assumption. Even if we assume the author of Mark was the first to create the story, he chose crucifixion and recognized obvious the implications. The rest simply follows.

dog-on · 11-04-2009, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

All that is needed is an existing belief that Jesus was crucified prior to Mark's story.

Upon further reflection, even this isn't a necessary assumption. Even if we assume the author of Mark was the first to create the story, he chose crucifixion and recognized obvious the implications. The rest simply follows.

Except the story clearly states that Pilate knows that Jesus is innocent.

Clivedurdle · 11-04-2009, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Except the story clearly states that Pilate knows that Jesus is innocent.

But that is a predictable riff on what the whole story is about -

Quote:

The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God.[a]
2It is written in Isaiah the prophet:
"I will send my messenger ahead of you,
who will prepare your way"[b]—
3"a voice of one calling in the desert,
'Prepare the way for the Lord,

Of course the local representative of Rome has a philosophical discussion about truth and is put into a moral quandary. Brilliant story telling techniques!

dog-on · 11-04-2009, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Quote:

Except the story clearly states that Pilate knows that Jesus is innocent.

But that is a predictable riff on what the whole story is about -

Quote:

The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God.[a]
2It is written in Isaiah the prophet:
"I will send my messenger ahead of you,
who will prepare your way"[b]—
3"a voice of one calling in the desert,
'Prepare the way for the Lord,

Of course the local representative of Rome has a philosophical discussion about truth and is put into a moral quandary. Brilliant story telling techniques!

Probably brought the house down.

Amaleq13 · 11-04-2009, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Except the story clearly states that Pilate knows that Jesus is innocent.

So?

It also clearly states Jesus confessed to claiming to be "King of the Jews" and clearly states he was subsequently crucified with "King of the Jews" over his head.

Taking into account all of the above clear statements, one can only conclude that Pilate convicted Jesus of sedition despite somehow considering him innocent after hearing his confession.

The story clearly doesn't support your claim that Jesus was crucified for blasphemy. Your position on this simply makes no sense.

dog-on · 11-04-2009, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Except the story clearly states that Pilate knows that Jesus is innocent.

So?

It also clearly states Jesus confessed to claiming to be "King of the Jews" and clearly states he was subsequently crucified with "King of the Jews" over his head.

Taking into account all of the above clear statements, one can only conclude that Pilate convicted Jesus of sedition despite somehow considering him innocent after hearing his confession.

The story clearly doesn't support your claim that Jesus was crucified for blasphemy. Your position on this simply makes no sense.

It was the only crime that Jesus was actually found guilty of, according to the story.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-03-2009, 03:43 PM	#82
dog-on Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 3,397	I'm with Clive here, at least as far as the turtles go.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.