The accounts are unambiguous: Jesus of Nazareth was executed by crucifixion under the authority of Pontius Pilate.
Rome, the imperial power, routinely used crucifixion as an exemplary punishment for the condemned. That empire did not invent crucifixion, nor was it normally used for their citizens. Many were crucified, with little or no note made of the victims. An example: In 72 BCE (or, BC) the Roman Marcus Licinius Crassus had 6,000 survivors of a slave revolt crucified along the Italian roadside. No procedure would be recorded, nor the names of those summarily punished - they had offended Rome by deserting from their slavery and taking up arms against their masters. They had only the one entitlement. (britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/141893/Marcus-Licinius-Crassus)
The Jerusalem Jewish establishment had found Jesus guilty of 'blasphemy' and thus worthy of death under the Law of the LORD (as interpreted by them). However, they wanted sentence carried out by their Roman authority. It is frequently written that at the time the 'Jews' could not impose capital punishment, even given Roman respect for indigenous law. However, in contrast to the assertion of limited power, I note that in Jerusalem, not long after the death of Jesus, a man named Stephen was stoned to death for blasphemy! That was during the same Roman domination. Moreover, not all that much later there were attempts to execute Paul, in the presence of Romans, by assassination.
An inconsistency? Why then might the Jewish powers use Pilate to eliminate Jesus via a political charge? I conject that the establishment figures had their purpose clear. Jesus had followers and had enjoyed a measure of public acclaim (especially amongst the poorer sort). The leaders would have an eye on the 'mob' and possibly they had the desire to 'keep their hands clean' anyway, as they observed a time great religious solemnity for the LORD. Watching Jesus' execution by heathen Romans would be preferred, and safer.
There are historical points to notice (or not) and to ponder (or not). The NT insists there is an inner meaning to that act of capital punishment; a meaning far, far greater than the simple account of what could just be seen as an everyday occurrence. This will be clear in your reading from the texts.
Historically: The archaelogical record does include Pilate. No record is found of such a trial and death under Pilate. Hardly would a record be expected. Jesus was a nobody from nowhere and without wealth. Neither Rome nor Jerusalem had any reason to make anything of the event. There is no (occupied) grave to visit! A burial site was marked decades on. (I have my doubts.) Dr. Carl Rassmussen (holylandphotos.org) is confident of the identification of the much-fought-over location. (Of course the tourist can be shown... many things.)
In Judaea a little over 30 years after the crucifixion, militant Jews took up arms again and initially had bloody success against local Roman units and even a regional force. Despite the words of their prophet (Jeremiah 7), the militants apparently were reliant upon the LORD, whose one and only Temple (Herod's) had been completed about that time. (It was the final Jewish Temple.) Jerusalem, the site of the last battle, was breached by the Romans in 70 CE (or, AD). Whatever Titus (commander) wanted, the Temple was effectively obliterated, along with any Jews still alive there.
The destruction in Jerusalem was clearly a tragic event. Nonetheless, nothing that ultimately mattered was lost to the widening circles of followers of Jesus the Messiah, Risen Saviour for the world. The original believers knew that they had nothing invested in any earthly site, or in observances of new moons, festivals or sabbaths. The universal message had long gone out and was actively treasured independently in many locations, recorded or not. The account was safe and would in time be handed on to us.
Jesus had himself warned his people not to share in the fate of the city. 14 “But when you see the desolating sacrilege set up where it ought not to be (let the reader understand), then those in Judea must flee to the mountains; 15 the one on the housetop must not go down or enter the house to take anything away; 16 the one in the field must not turn back to get a coat." (Mark 13, NRSV)
Scripture quotations marked (NRSV) are from the New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright © 1989 National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Rome, the imperial power, routinely used crucifixion as an exemplary punishment for the condemned. That empire did not invent crucifixion, nor was it normally used for their citizens. Many were crucified, with little or no note made of the victims. An example: In 72 BCE (or, BC) the Roman Marcus Licinius Crassus had 6,000 survivors of a slave revolt crucified along the Italian roadside. No procedure would be recorded, nor the names of those summarily punished - they had offended Rome by deserting from their slavery and taking up arms against their masters. They had only the one entitlement. (britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/141893/Marcus-Licinius-Crassus)
The Jerusalem Jewish establishment had found Jesus guilty of 'blasphemy' and thus worthy of death under the Law of the LORD (as interpreted by them). However, they wanted sentence carried out by their Roman authority. It is frequently written that at the time the 'Jews' could not impose capital punishment, even given Roman respect for indigenous law. However, in contrast to the assertion of limited power, I note that in Jerusalem, not long after the death of Jesus, a man named Stephen was stoned to death for blasphemy! That was during the same Roman domination. Moreover, not all that much later there were attempts to execute Paul, in the presence of Romans, by assassination.
An inconsistency? Why then might the Jewish powers use Pilate to eliminate Jesus via a political charge? I conject that the establishment figures had their purpose clear. Jesus had followers and had enjoyed a measure of public acclaim (especially amongst the poorer sort). The leaders would have an eye on the 'mob' and possibly they had the desire to 'keep their hands clean' anyway, as they observed a time great religious solemnity for the LORD. Watching Jesus' execution by heathen Romans would be preferred, and safer.
There are historical points to notice (or not) and to ponder (or not). The NT insists there is an inner meaning to that act of capital punishment; a meaning far, far greater than the simple account of what could just be seen as an everyday occurrence. This will be clear in your reading from the texts.
Historically: The archaelogical record does include Pilate. No record is found of such a trial and death under Pilate. Hardly would a record be expected. Jesus was a nobody from nowhere and without wealth. Neither Rome nor Jerusalem had any reason to make anything of the event. There is no (occupied) grave to visit! A burial site was marked decades on. (I have my doubts.) Dr. Carl Rassmussen (holylandphotos.org) is confident of the identification of the much-fought-over location. (Of course the tourist can be shown... many things.)
In Judaea a little over 30 years after the crucifixion, militant Jews took up arms again and initially had bloody success against local Roman units and even a regional force. Despite the words of their prophet (Jeremiah 7), the militants apparently were reliant upon the LORD, whose one and only Temple (Herod's) had been completed about that time. (It was the final Jewish Temple.) Jerusalem, the site of the last battle, was breached by the Romans in 70 CE (or, AD). Whatever Titus (commander) wanted, the Temple was effectively obliterated, along with any Jews still alive there.
The destruction in Jerusalem was clearly a tragic event. Nonetheless, nothing that ultimately mattered was lost to the widening circles of followers of Jesus the Messiah, Risen Saviour for the world. The original believers knew that they had nothing invested in any earthly site, or in observances of new moons, festivals or sabbaths. The universal message had long gone out and was actively treasured independently in many locations, recorded or not. The account was safe and would in time be handed on to us.
Jesus had himself warned his people not to share in the fate of the city. 14 “But when you see the desolating sacrilege set up where it ought not to be (let the reader understand), then those in Judea must flee to the mountains; 15 the one on the housetop must not go down or enter the house to take anything away; 16 the one in the field must not turn back to get a coat." (Mark 13, NRSV)
Scripture quotations marked (NRSV) are from the New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright © 1989 National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
