Nadene Goldfoot
The myth that Jews collectively murdered Jesus, also referred to as “deicide,” has been used to justify violence against Jews for centuries. Historians as well as Christian leaders have agreed that the claim is baseless. (ADL)
"Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem during Roman occupation sometime around 30 CE.
And Pontius Pilate — then serving as the Roman prefect (or governor) of Judaea — both presided over the trial of Jesus and gave the order for his crucifixion."
Pontius Pilate was the fifth governor of the Roman province of Judaea, serving under Emperor Tiberius from 26/27 to 36/37 AD. He is best known for being the official who presided over the trial of Jesus and ultimately ordered his crucifixion.
This man who gave the order of crucifixion is revered by the Coptic and Ethiopian churches, even making him a saint, whereas Jews have been hated since Emperor Constantine's days.
How bizarre! Due to the Gospels' portrayal of Pilate as reluctant to execute Jesus, the Ethiopian Church believes that Pilate became a Christian and venerates him as both a martyr and a saint, a belief which is historically shared by the Coptic Church. The deed happened in Judaea to the Jews, who were the victims of the Roman Occupation.
Pilate's post of governor of Judaea was of relatively low prestige and nothing is known of how Pilate obtained the office. Josephus states that Pilate governed for 10 years (Antiquities of the Jews 18.4.2), and these are traditionally dated from 26 to 36/37, making him one of the two longest-serving governors of the province. Tiberius had retired to the island of Capri in 26,
As governor, Pilate had the right to appoint the Jewish High Priest and also officially controlled the vestiments of the High Priest in the Antonia Fortress. The High Priest had to be Jewish, and was the chief official in the Temple that stood till 70 CE. This was conferred on Aaron, brother of Moses and his descendants who held it until the reign of Herod when it became dependent on the will of the Jewish rulers and the Roman procurators. During the war with Rome of 66 CE, the post was filled by lot.
High Priest Joseph ben Caiaphas
Unlike his predecessor, Valerius Gratus, Pilate retained the same high priest, Joseph ben Caiaphas (c18-36 CE,) for his entire tenure. Caiaphas would be removed following Pilate's own removal from the governorship. This indicates that Caiaphas and the priests of the Sadducee sect were reliable allies to Pilate, (or under his thumb, as I see it). The New Testament represents him and his father-in-law, Annas, as chieefly responsible for the prosecution of Jesus and the arrest of the apostles. He was removed by the Syrian governor, Vitellius.
Moreover, Maier argues that Pilate could not have used the temple treasury to construct an aqueduct, as recorded by Josephus, without the cooperation of the priests (who were forced to be his yes-men). Similarly, Helen Bond argues that Pilate is depicted working closely with the Jewish authorities in the execution of Jesus. (Jews had no choice, they would be on the cross next if they disobeyed.) Jean-Pierre Lémonon argues that official cooperation with Pilate was limited to the Sadducees, noting that the Pharisees are absent from the gospel accounts of Jesus's arrest and trial.
According to Josephus in his The Jewish War (2.9.2) and Antiquities of the Jews (18.3.1), Pilate offended the Jews by moving imperial standards with the image of Caesar into Jerusalem. This resulted in a crowd of Jews surrounding Pilate's house in Caesarea for five days. Pilate then summoned them to an arena, where the Roman soldiers drew their swords. But the Jews showed so little fear of death, that Pilate relented and removed the standards. (Evidently he didn't want a whole Jerusalem uprising at that time.)
Bond argues that the fact that Josephus says that Pilate brought in the standards by night, shows that he knew that the images of the emperor would be offensive. She dates this incident to early in Pilate's tenure as governor.
In the New Testament, the Sanhedrin trial of Jesus refers to the trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrin (a Jewish judicial body) following his arrest in Jerusalem and prior to the trial before Pontius Pilate. They met on fixed occasions in the Lishkat La-Gazit (“Chamber of the Hewn Stones”) in the Jerusalem Temple and that was presided over by two officials (zugot, or “pair”), the nasi and the av bet din. It was a religious legislative body “whence the law [Halakha] goes out to all Israel.” Politically, it could appoint the king and the high priest, declare war, and expand the territory of Jerusalem and the Temple. Judicially, it could try a high priest, a false prophet, a rebellious elder, or an errant tribe. Religiously, it supervised certain rituals, including the Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) liturgy. The Great Sanhedrin also supervised the smaller, local sanhedrins and was the court of last resort.
As for, was it made up of all Sadducees? That could have been a political statement. Evidence shows: The composition of the Sanhedrin is also in much dispute, the controversy involving the participation of the two major parties of the day, the Sadducees and the Pharisees. Some say the Sanhedrin was made up of Sadducees; some, of Pharisees; others, of an alternation or mixture of the two groups. In the trials of Jesus, the Gospels of Mark and Luke speak of the assembly of the chief priests, elders, and scribes under the high priest, referring to “the whole council [synedrion]” or “their council,” and the Gospel According to John speaks of the chief priests and Pharisees convening the council. The Gospel accounts have been subjected to critical scrutiny and questioning because of the extreme theological and historical significance of the issue, but none of the theories evolved has won scholarly consensus. It is still uncertain, for example, whether the Sanhedrin had the power to hand down a death sentence in a case such as that of Jesus. The Book of Acts gives an account of the trials of Peter and John before “the council and all the senate” (apparently one and the same), pointing to a split between the Pharisaic and Sadducean members of the Sanhedrin.
The Sadducees disappeared from the Jewish scene before the end of the 4th century CE, which would bee in the 300s CE. Pharisees were the dominant Jewish beliefs.
It is an incident reported by all three Synoptic Gospels of the New Testament, while the Gospel of John refers to a preliminary inquiry before Annas, who is not listed in our Jewish Encyclopedia. Wikipedia tells me that Annas was appointed by the Roman legate, Quirinius, as the first High Priest of the newly formed Roman province of Judaea in CE 6 – just after the Romans had deposed Archelaus, Ethnarch of Judaea, thereby putting Judaea directly under Roman rule. Ananus (or Annas), son of Seth (6–15)
Yet while having been officially removed from office, Annas remained as one of the nation's most influential political and social individuals, aided greatly by the fact that his five sons and his son-in-lawThe gospel accounts vary on a number of details but are identical in essence.
Jesus is generally quiet, does not defend himself, rarely responds to the accusations, and is found guilty of: violating the Sabbath law (by healing on the Sabbath); threatening to destroy the Jewish Temple; practicing sorcery, exorcising people by the power of demons and; claiming to be the Messiah. He is then taken to Pontius Pilate, the governor of Roman Judaea, to be tried for claiming to be the King of the Jews.
The fact is that Jerusalem had been occupied by the brutal Romans who took over like the Gestapo, almost. They selected their henchmen who were Hellenized Jews who went along with this ruling political party. If they didn't do the job according to Roman desires, like the Mafia, the Jews would be rubbed out. Jews were being crucified left and right.
Would even a Hellenized Jew decide to crucify another Jew? Not on your life. Our Golden Rule, "Don't do to others that which you do not want done to you" came from Rabbi Hillel himself of the 1st century BCE, before Jesus's day. That comes from the Torah, which is our bible. Crucifixion was a Roman thing; not the Jews. Blame it on the Romans, not the Jews who were the victims. Actually, all the Jews, including Jesus, knew the penalty of trying to overthrow the Romans and that was crucifixion. Jesus put himself in this position, either him or the gospel writers. Another brilliant Jew was killed for trying to improve his society's position. He was not the first to wind up on the cross.
Resource:
The New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhedrin_trial_of_Jesus
Book, 1965,, The Passover Plot by Hugh J. Schonfield: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Passover_Plot
Movie: The Passover Plot, 1976
No comments:
Post a Comment