Soul Invictus

Me too.

aa5874

The NT contains many inconsistencies, but at this moment I am trying to deal with the so-called death of Jesus as depicted in the Gospels.

The two main points negating his so-called death are:
1. none of the twelve saw Jesus dead in the tomb.
2. If records were kept, Jesus would not have been officially recorded as having died, since he was seen alive 2 days after his crucifixion.

Doug Shaver

It is undisputed that the Romans kept records. They kept lots and lots of records. Do you have any good reason to think that those records routinely included death certificates?

But there is another problem, too. Although it is known that the Romans kept lots of records, it is also known that virtually all of those records have been lost. And so, even if death certificates were issued as a matter of course, we can infer nothing from the fact that we don't have one for Jesus of Nazareth.

Now, whether or not there was ever a death certificate of the usual kind (whatever was usual in those days), if Pilate ordered Jesus' execution, it is likely that he made some kind of official record of that order, with a notation that it was duly carried out. Where he would have stored it, I have no idea, but it makes no difference. The document no longer exists, so far as anyone knows, but that doesn't mean it never did.

Doug Shaver

Considering the place and time, the crucifixion of a man who was perceived as a troublemaker is as credible as anything gets.

The overall story of Jesus' death is very credible, even if some of the incidental details are not. The bit about Pilate being persuaded against his better judgment by a Jewish mob, for instance, is absurd. But that doesn't make it improbable that the execution happened.

The part that is really not credible is the part of the story that takes place after Jesus died. But that, too, does not affect the credibility of the death itself.

Doug Shaver

Inadvertent double post.