30 verses of Bible say " Jesus did not die on the Cross".
- Thread starter Ijaz Ahmad Ahmadi
- Start date
- Status
badger
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,245
- Reaction score
- 455
- Points
- 83
Pilate wasn't a 24hrs-a-day terror, but a junior ruler operating under the supervision of the Syrian Legate. He was human, and where people did things that amused or pleased him then he could be sympathetic, and he most certainly would have enjoyed the absolute rumpus that was caused in the Temple...because its running and whole area was beyond his remit, control and power.
Everyday I see pictures of total tyrants shaking hands with diplomats. But I don't think that they hold hands off stage.
badger
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,245
- Reaction score
- 455
- Points
- 83
I've got so many replies to answer, but I have just seen yours, above.
Straight face?
I can quote the sentences from the depositions in the gospels to support those two findings, as repeated below:-
1. Jesus was not a teacher or the people would have understood him better. He was no teacher.
2. Jesus was not campaigning for spiritual awareness of any kind..... he thought of spirits as REAL, and I don't think that Christians take much notice of spiritualism, ghosts, demons, spirits etc.
If you did not know about the verses which show these findings then please ask and I will be pleased to show you the scriptures.
badger
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,245
- Reaction score
- 455
- Points
- 83
Jesus had not acted against Pilate, the Roman occupiers, nor had been a threat to him, Jesus was a massively valuable person to Pilate in that he had upset people who Pilate was extremely irritated with..... for example, here was a perfect opportunity for Pilate to appeal to the Legate and Caesar over the complete lack of control from the priesthood as well as its outrageous greed and corruption. Jesus had become a political instrument for Pilate.
And I expect that he was under his wife's thumb.
badger
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,245
- Reaction score
- 455
- Points
- 83
But I don't think that is an ideal way to kill.
The way they killed crucificts quickly was to break their legs.
badger
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,245
- Reaction score
- 455
- Points
- 83
I watched this actually happen in a television program about a hospitals A&E dept.
A kid had been trick-cycling on his bmx bike and fallen, and fallen upon a rear foot-bar. Soon afterwards he was having trouble in breathing. A young doctor viewed an scan/xray and saw that his lung was filled with fluid/blood. He spoke to the camera, explained what he must do immediately and then and there he took an instrument and pushed it through ribs in to the boys lung, and red fluid gushed out, the kid slowly started to breath more easily. It was one of the most memorable hospital scenes that I ever saw.
badger
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,245
- Reaction score
- 455
- Points
- 83
That Jesus was taken down and got away, this gave Pilate the opportunity to decide what to do with him.
And I think that his wife's opinion was a strong influence. I any event Jesus travelled North soon afterwards, mostly everybody can agree on that.
badger
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,245
- Reaction score
- 455
- Points
- 83
When people chant speech without understanding it, this could be described as 'mumbo-jumbo'.
I do accept that she knew the mass. But I knew this woman and (although good at her job) she was unkind, ruthless, deceived if it would help her, boasted about lying on an insurance claim about a fictional diamond ring, etc etc etc.
My very first gauge of people is all about 'what they do'.
Yes, she knew the mass....
badger
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,245
- Reaction score
- 455
- Points
- 83
That's ok.......
But we must discuss what 'dogma' is, some time.
I won't ever quote a specialist unless they have knowledge which I cannot access myself.
My findings were mine, are mine....... so call me 'The Wild Deist' if you like, I quite like that, even....
I've just tried that on my wife....... called myself 'wild', and she just laughed and slapped me.
badger
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,245
- Reaction score
- 455
- Points
- 83
Ah ha! Aqueducts! Did the Romans ever build aqueducts!
Can you tell me more about Pilate's aqueducts? I should learn more about these.
Recent research of aqueduct construction by Romans shows that their labour was mostly by convicts and slaves......
And yes.... I know that a % of the Temple's taxation and other revenues went to Rome, that's why Rome was so involved with exact weight and silver content in the Temple coinage. But Pilate didn't control that.
To be clear, I use the word spiritual as concerned mostly with the unseen world, opposed to the physical and material world. I'm sure you can find out-of-context passages to prove Jesus Christ a worldly and material man, and I can find the passages to contradict them -- but honestly it's such a futile exercise it's not worth serious consideration, imo
Last edited:
In other words for the aqueducts to be of Roman construction, Pilate and his troops needed to lay the stones themselves -- with their own hands? I don't know where you're trying to go with this?
But Pilate would resent a wanabee revolutionary jeopardizing his main function as legate -- which was to keep things peaceful in order to ensure the smooth flow of tax money to Rome, imo
The temple intervention was not mentioned at Jesus's trial by Pilate or by the Jews, so perhaps it's wasn't such a main event at the time? A storm in a teacup?
Last edited:
To suffer death by suffocation hanging nailed from a cross with broken legs was quicker than a spear thrust?
Last edited:
Sitz im leben, old chum. You can't judge the past by contemporary standards.Not being guilty of killing a son of G-d?!
Not everyone is a barbarian, you know.
What you or I might think barbaric is standard practice then. I mean, we consider things barbaric that were commonplace fifty or a hundred years ago, let alone, 2,000. I mean flogging, crucifixion, etc ...
D'you mean in response to his own conscience? From what evidence we have, that's highly unlikely. Pilate was eventually recalled (36AD) for brutal and heavy-handed dealings with those beneath him. His track record hardly speaks of a man of conscience, and what's just one more troublesome Jew in the scheme of things.
Pilate's problem is Caiaphas wants Jesus dead, but won't do it himself – Caiaphas could have Jesus stoned for blasphemy. Something is off and Pilate wants nothing to do with it. Caiaphas threatens to complain to Rome if he does not take robust action, but Pilate suspects this is because Caiaphas can then point the finger at Rome. If Pilate does as Caiaphas wants, he makes a martyr of the man who seems to have considerable support, especially in the countryside.
So he manages to turn the tables – if Christ is to die, it's because the Jews want him dead, not Rome. His performance before the crowd satisfies the Sanhedrin and the people, puts the blame on their shoulders, and lets him and Rome off the hook – all in all, quite deft footwork on his part.
Pilate is not stupid –
Here's Jesus, a man who clearly can't, or won't, keep quiet, and seems to have walked quite knowingly into the trap his enemies have set for him. He makes no attempt to save himself (Jesus could have shown to trial for the charade it was). He seems bent on His own destruction.
So Pilate bargains his life and career on the silence of a man who seems to have a death-wish and will not keep quiet? He'd be mad to do so.
Who was absent for most of Pilate's reign. But have you evidence of his sympathies?
I think it was a 'you scratch my back' situation – Pilate kept Caiaphas in office his entire reign, which was not common, and as soon as Pilate was recalled, Caiphas was out.Everyday I see pictures of total tyrants shaking hands with diplomats. But I don't think that they hold hands off stage.
"New research (Dec 2021) suggests that the Roman prefect Pontius Pilate is the one that built the Biar Aqueduct, the most sophisticated ancient aqueduct of the Jerusalem area..." Haaretz
""He (Pilate) spent money from the sacred treasury in the construction of an aqueduct to bring water into Jerusalem (principally, his palace), intercepting the source of the stream at a distance of thirty-five kilometers. The Jews did not acquiesce in the operations that this involved; and tens of thousands of men assembled and cried out against him, bidding him relinquish his promotion of such designs. Some too even hurled insults and abuse of the sort that a throng will commonly engage in. He thereupon ordered a large number of soldiers to be dressed in Jewish garments, under which they carried clubs, and he sent them off this way and that, thus surrounding the Jews, whom he ordered to withdraw. When the Jews were in full torrent of abuse he gave his soldiers the prearranged signal. They, however, inflicted much harder blows than Pilate had ordered, punishing alike both those who were rioting and those who were not. But the Jews showed no faint-heartedness; and so, caught unarmed, as they were, by men delivering a prepared attack, many of them actually were slain on the spot, while some withdrew disabled by blows. Thus ended the uprising." (Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 18:60-62 and again in The Jewish War 2:175-177).
"Analysis of the samples indicates the aqueduct was likely built in the early first century C.E. and was refurbished in the second century after the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple. As such, the team suggests that the Bier Aqueduct could be the same aqueduct attributed to Pontius Pilate by the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus. According to Josephus, Pilate used money from the Temple’s treasury to build the aqueduct, which led to riots in the city (Antiquities 18.60–62). Despite several aqueducts feeding into the Temple area, the Bier fed into the upper city where the governor’s palace would have been located, thus perhaps explaining Josephus’s reference to the riots that broke out across the city." (emphasis mine. Biblical Archaeology Society)
G-d knows what exactly happened..
It is interesting to note that Pilate is mentioned by name in the Roman creed.
It's "not allowed" to believe anything else.
Pilate is mentioned in both the Apostles creed and the later Nicene creed under the words '(Jesus) suffered under Pontius Pilate'.
"I believe in God the Father almighty Creator of Heaven and earth; and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, Our Lord, Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified; died, and was buried ..."
https://www.catholic.org/prayers/prayer.php?p=220
Do you disagree that Jesus suffered under Pontius Pilate or do you prefer the substitution theory that Jesus stood by laughing while another was made (by God) to look like him and was beaten, scourged and crucified in his place? Under Pontius Pilate ...
Last edited:
What did Jesus actually say? Do you mean what Jesus said to Pilate?I'd prefer if the creed wasn't politicised at all, and stuck to what Jesus actually said.
- Status