The Jewish historian Josephus, the Roman historian Tacitus, and the Christian Apostles' Creed have very little in common. Except for this one thing: that, respectively, Jesus "had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilatus"; that "Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing amongst us, had condemned him to be crucified"; and that Jesus "suffered under Pontius Pilate [and] was crucified."
Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea and, appointed by the emperor Tiberius, he ruled from 26 to 36 C.E. He and the Jewish high priest Caiaphas collaborated not wisely but too well and they were both eventually removed from office by their Roman masters. Jesus' execution is as historically certain as any ancient event can ever be but what about all those very specific details that fill out the story? Are they fact or fiction and, if fiction, what is their purpose, intention, meaning?
Think about these examples and, in every case, notice how each one creates an echo or resonance with earlier biblical tradition. The most striking one is the death-cry of Jesus, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" in Mark 15:34 that recalls the opening verse, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" of Psalm 22:1. That recall is left implicit and, if you miss it, you miss it. It is neither proof nor argument but an invitation to thought and a lure for meditation.
Jesus' death-cry as psalm-echo draws attention to further echoes between details of the crucifixion and verses of that same Psalm 22. Here are three examples from Mark, the earliest of the four gospels. Notice that they are all implicit -- if you miss them, you miss them. They are there -- but quietly, like choral music in the background -- for those with ears to hear and hearts to understand.
A first example is the fate of Jesus' clothes. "They crucified him," says Mark 15:24, "and divided his clothes among them, casting lots to decide what each should take." That echoes the verse, "they divide my clothes among themselves, and for my clothing they cast lots" from Psalm 22:18.
A second example is that, alongside Jesus, "they crucified two bandits, one on his right and one on his left" in Mark 15:27. That echoes the psalm's lament that "a company of evildoers encircles me" in Psalm 22:16b.
A third example is these mocking challenges directed at Jesus: "Those who passed by derided him, shaking their heads and saying ... 'Save yourself, and come down from the cross!' ... 'He saved others; he cannot save himself.' ... 'Let the Messiah, the King of Israel, come down from the cross now, so that we may see and believe'" in Mark 15:29-32. In the background, hear once again, this taunt: "All who see me mock at me; they make mouths at me, they shake their heads; 'Commit your cause to the Lord; let him deliver -- let him rescue the one in whom he delights!'" from Psalm 22:7-8. But, once again, the echo is only implicit -- if you miss it, you miss it.
Furthermore, apart from that Psalm 22, there is a clear (but, once again, implicit) allusion to another psalm during the crucifixion of Jesus. Unlike those preceding examples, all four evangelists contain this striking -- and doubled -- reference. Here is an example from Matthew's gospel: "They offered him wine to drink, mixed with gall; but when he tasted it, he would not drink it ... At once one of them ran and got a sponge, filled it with sour wine, put it on a stick, and gave it to him to drink" (27:34,48) That reminds one of this half-verse, "for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink" from Psalm 69:21b.
Those are only a few examples but, from start to finish, in larger and smaller chunks of text, the last hours of Jesus resonate repeatedly with prayers and stories from the biblical tradition that preceded them. How is that "coincidence" to be explained?
My proposal is that multiple details about the death of Jesus were deliberately created but not just at random as mere narrative fill-up. They were created to describe Jesus' death amid a tissue of resonances and a volley of echoes from the biblical past. Further, it is especially from the biblical psalms of lament, from the prayers of the just and righteous suffering injustice and oppression, that those details have been taken. In other words, the evangelists have created communal and corporate rather than just individual and private sufferings for Jesus. Starting from the historical basis of imperial indicting, flogging, and crucifixion, those manifold details -- for example, the death-cry, the divided garments, the mockery, and the bitter drink -- were invented and added within the ongoing tradition about Jesus. But why?
Because of this. Jesus was not the first faithful Jew who died on a Roman cross outside Jerusalem -- nor would he be the last. In 4 B.C.E., Varus crucified two thousand Jews there, and in 70 C.E. Titus crucified five hundred a day -- for how many days? Those first followers of Jesus were Christian Jews," that is "Messianic Jews." They believed that Jesus was their awaited Messiah, their expected Christ. They did not think that Jesus' was just another Roman execution. But neither did they think that he died alone.
He died, for them, as the climax of all the suffering of Israel, as the consummation of all those prayers of lament in the psalms, as the fulfillment of all the faithful martyrs of the biblical tradition. The details of Jesus' death were not fact remembered and history recorded. They were prayer recollected and psalm historicized. But, then, if the suffering of others was imbedded in the crucifixion of Jesus, must not those others have been vindicated by God in his resurrection. if Jesus' death was a communal crucifixion, must there not have been also a communal resurrection?
Christian Piatt: Did Jesus Really Die for Our Sins?
Crucifixion of Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jesus Many Faces - Crucifixion | From Jesus To Christ | FRONTLINE ...
The problem with this is that Jesus is not a name you found in the mid-east 2000 years ago.
I wish that HISTORIANS would stop using saying such as.....this is where Jesus walked...this is where Mary gave birth..... REAL HISTORIANS use phrases like ....this is where it is said that Jesus walked,,,,,,,,,,,this is allegedly where Mary gave birth... this is according to the bible where Jesus fell,,,,,,,there is a difference...the second is hearsay and the first is what the religious would like to believe to be true........
naysayers spoke of reason and evidence but I became a master of non sequiturs and evasiveness and repetition and behold I did loose my footing on reality.....
Shouldn't this "communal" attitude be sympathetic to the poor and disadvantaged rather than demanding tax breaks for the top 1% at the expense of the elderly and poor?
Well, it's very easy to explain. It's a fictional account. You can say anything you like in a story. Repetition of a theme is a common literary device.
It should be cruci-FICTION because it is all myth and superstition.
Having said this, I would encourage believers to pray for us non-believers 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. That way there will be no time left to make laws that impose their superstition on society that are anti-women, anti-gay, anti-science, anti-healthcare, anti-pensions, anti-social security, anti-same sex marriage, anti-choice, anti-contraception, anti-condoms, anti-education, ...
Rather than spending your one valuable life in prayer, I suggest you read the Bible cover to cover, study the history of your religion, and cast off the blinders of faith.
in the bible there are two opposing groups, those that overcame and those that didn't, overcoming is at the hand of God not by ones own abilities, so you have worshippers of Baal who feel they have the market cornered on the God thing, and God raises up Prophets (who can prophecy i.e. speak and understand the hidden mysteries) and since Prophets are not dependent on priestcraft, they are opposed by the Baal system.
during Jesus time they were called Scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees, and nobody comes to the Father (God) except through them, or else
now they are called Christians, or anti-christ as Jesus would say, and folks like Rob Bell, taking apart Hell (priestcraft) and his ex-pastor friend from North Carolina are getting persecuted (I did not want to claim they are overcomers...its not for me to decide)
so, it continues out into the future, different names to the players on the team, but the same game
Sorry I have not responded to you sooner about your Mary M. article. Things have too beyond crazy in my world. I gave it a quick read this morning and will give it a second read later.
I think you pose an interesting idea about MM's relationship to the Yeshua's family.
I'm not sure I follow all the nicknames for Joseph. I will need to think about that some more
Have you read the gnostic Gospel of Mary?
I have read the Gospel of Mary as well as a number of sacred writings.
I didn't find it worthwhile, the dialogue between Mary and Peter did not seem right,
-Peter, James and John make up the intimate circle (Luke 8:51 & Matthew 17:1)
-John "the disciple whom Jesus loved" was entrusted with his mother at the cross (John 19:26,27)
-Peter is the rock (steadfastness) that Jesus builds his Church on and is given the keys of the kingdom to (Matthew 16:17-19)
-Peter and brother Andrew are in the fishing business with James and brother John (Mark 1:16-20 & Matthew 4:18-22 & Luke 5:8,9) and they are the first disciples.
-Jesus prays for Peter, so that when Jesus is gone, Peter "turns back Satan, and strengthens the brothers" (Luke 22:32)
-Mary Magdalene was most likely in the upper room at Pentecost, but it does not name her directly, Acts 1:14, "along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus", when the Holy Spirit comes, it is Peter who stands up, takes the lead and explains things.
-It is Peter and John who do the first healing of a beggar and are brought before the Sanhedrin, Peter's courage to speak out for Jesus strenghtens the rest
-Since the intimate James, the brother of John is killed (Acts12:2) it should be Peter or John that is the leader of the Church at Jerusalem, yet "James son of Alphaeus, the Lord's brother" becomes the leader.
The Pope today condemned stars such as Victoria and David Beckham for sporting crucifix as fashion accessories because they contradict "the spirit of the Gospel".
David Beckham has often worn a £20,000 Theo Fennell diamond crucifix.
The Vatican, which named Jennifer Aniston, Naomi Campbell and Catherine Zeta-Jones among the culprits, said: "Is it right to spend thousands on a sacred symbol of Christianity and then in a non-Christian manner forget those who suffer and die from hunger in the world?"
The pope is one to talk.
Been to the Vatican? The wealth on display there could probably make a big dent in world poverty. It is truly sickening. Maybe the Pope should look to the beam in his own eye.
Because the symbol of your death is getting so out of hand it has all but become a pre-requisite to being successful on something so trivial and meaningless as American Idol.
Not exactly. There is actually no "real" proof.
http://dmc.members.sonic.net/sentinel/naij3.html
http://www.y-jesus.com/bornid_5.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#Jesus_as_a_historical_person
( http://www.jungdallas.org/gospeljudas_abbr.pdf )
. . . and in biblical times - even up to the 1300's 12 yrs. or puberty was marriageable age.
No, but his dad did. The once anyhow.