tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post3541940978907006790..comments2024-03-19T00:26:30.753-07:00Comments on The Jesus Blog: Three Dominant Lines of Argument for Jesus' ExecutionAnthony Le Donnehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01282792648606976883noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-59135771502502656432014-01-04T14:31:36.279-08:002014-01-04T14:31:36.279-08:00Thanks for that clarification Tobias. We do agree!...Thanks for that clarification Tobias. We do agree!S. Brian Poundshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15932943452951699521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-46322979863292353922014-01-01T12:06:39.587-08:002014-01-01T12:06:39.587-08:00Thanks, Brian. What I meant to say was that while ...Thanks, Brian. What I meant to say was that while the conventional criteria (dissimilarity, multiple attestation etc.) are employed to assess the historicity of specific items in the gospel tradition, crucifiability seems to be a valid criterion for assessing the plausibility of scholarly reconstructions of Jesus. So I think I agree with you, it depends on what we mean by 'criterion' and especially what the criterion is intended to assess.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05239459674521795765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-49356758123553062772013-12-30T21:09:34.923-08:002013-12-30T21:09:34.923-08:00Tobias, thank you for your interest. My viva will ...Tobias, thank you for your interest. My viva will not be until summer 2014. I will contact you when it is available. Would you mind unpacking your statement concerning category confusion? A lot hinges upon what one means by the term 'criterion'.S. Brian Poundshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15932943452951699521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-9348141025225194452013-12-29T07:51:18.948-08:002013-12-29T07:51:18.948-08:00Brian, I am interested in your dissertation. Is it...Brian, I am interested in your dissertation. Is it completed and available?<br /><br />In my opinion, calling crucifiability (under whatever name) a 'criterion' and listing it alongside other criteria, as does e.g. Meier, represents a confusion of categories and invites flawed conclusions. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05239459674521795765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-11532870076625193062013-12-27T14:40:38.158-08:002013-12-27T14:40:38.158-08:00BTW, I agree on that particular point with Crossan...BTW, I agree on that particular point with Crossan. S. Brian Poundshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15932943452951699521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-80489473124179655722013-12-27T14:39:37.120-08:002013-12-27T14:39:37.120-08:00Hi Mike, my impression of Bermejo-Rubio's arti...Hi Mike, my impression of Bermejo-Rubio's article that you cite is that it is largely a rehash of previous works (cf. S.G.F. Brandon). I also think it presents a false dichotomy: the apolitical/non-violent Jesus vs. the political/violent Jesus. Many scholars, especially within the past three decades, contextualize Jesus politically without seeing him as advocating or using violence.S. Brian Poundshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15932943452951699521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-84343590673020739552013-12-26T15:36:13.014-08:002013-12-26T15:36:13.014-08:00Thanks for your interest and feedback Larry!Thanks for your interest and feedback Larry!S. Brian Poundshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15932943452951699521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-52749871899764775582013-12-25T17:15:47.191-08:002013-12-25T17:15:47.191-08:00Brian, thanks. I agree that a messianic candidate ...Brian, thanks. I agree that a messianic candidate might (so to speak) announce his candidacy. But I think a certain reticence and modesty would not be unexpected. I look forward to hearing more about your thesis. You are examining a question of great interest to me.Larryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08976868079076669453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-18014491472414926432013-12-25T17:00:33.192-08:002013-12-25T17:00:33.192-08:00Ken, for your first story, are you referring to Jo...Ken, for your first story, are you referring to Josephus' Antiquities Book 18 Chapter 4? If so, this was the occasion for a battle between Pilate's forces and those of the unnamed Samaritan, and it's probably more accurate to conclude that the Samaritan was killed because he led armed people in battle against Pilate's troops.<br /><br />As for Theudas, he also appears to have led an unsuccessful revolt against Rome. Josephus reports that Theudas " persuaded a great part of the people to take their effects with them, and follow him to the river Jordan; for he told them he was a prophet, and that he would, by his own command, divide the river, and afford them an easy passage over it." (Antiquities Book 20 Chapter 5) Larryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08976868079076669453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-82135924709581687952013-12-25T16:30:15.309-08:002013-12-25T16:30:15.309-08:00Brian or Anthony, do you have any thoughts on Fern...Brian or Anthony, do you have any thoughts on Fernando Bermejo-Rubio article (http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/2013/ber378008.shtml) since it seems to be a more scholarly presentation of the violent insurrectionist thesis than Aslan? I agree with Anthony in situating Jesus in terms of non-violent resistance - it seems to me that the "Bib & Int" article elides the eschatological hope for a coming kingdom to overturn the current powers with the assumption that Jesus advocating taking up arms and his strongest point is a singly attested saying in a late Gospel about buying a sword (Lk 22:36) - but I was curious about your thoughts. I also always thought Crossan made a good case about how Jesus was crucified but not his followers as revealing that the Romans were not too worried about an armed insurrection, but I guess Bermejo-Rubio has a publication in the works arguing that Jesus was crucified alongside two of his rebel followers...Mike K.http://www.ntmark.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-48581175647533927192013-12-25T06:54:52.906-08:002013-12-25T06:54:52.906-08:00Thanks for your response Ken. The Samaritan prophe...Thanks for your response Ken. The Samaritan prophet may have claimed to be the Taheb. Putting someone on a cross was a form of public deterrence. So getting crucified is a bit different than getting slain on the spot (as was probably the case with the Samaritan prophet; cf. Ant. 18.87). I wouldn't classify Theudas as a would-be-Messiah. He is sometimes referred to as a "sign prophet". Theudas was captured and beheaded according to Josephus, which could indicate a higher social class than one crucified, or perhaps just the whim of the Romans in this case (Ant. 20.98) . S. Brian Poundshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15932943452951699521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-90754010232430944592013-12-25T01:42:24.524-08:002013-12-25T01:42:24.524-08:00Jesus entered Jerusalem as a (sort of) king, an ac...Jesus entered Jerusalem as a (sort of) king, an act which could only be interpreted as a challenge to Caesar and his minions, and, as Brian said, is reported as saying things which imply kingship. I find it hard to imagine the church inventing the story of the triumphal entry; they wanted to convince people that Jesus was innocent of all charges, and here he is acting like a royal pretender. Then there's the charge on the titulus; again, something they'd be unlikely to invent. <br /><br />I don't see that as excluding the non-violent anti-imperialist, though. He apparently went off and chucked tables about in the Temple - another attack on the establishment - but a king can act as a royal reformer. He was concerned to give justice to the poor, but that's in line with the ideal king we see in Ps 72.Robert Brenchleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17006227551531676492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-10757658879210003582013-12-24T21:47:17.958-08:002013-12-24T21:47:17.958-08:00Thanks for another insightful comment Larry. I don...Thanks for another insightful comment Larry. I don't know how certain I would be that a would-be Messiah necessarily would not claim to be one. It is possible that those kingly claimants depicted by Josephus also claimed to be messiahs (cf. J.W. 2.57; 7.29, 36 ; Ant. 4.510; 17.273, 278, 280), but we have no way to know- especially in view of the fact that Josephus avoids apocalyptically charged language. These kingly claimants are narrated as being (either explicitly or implicitly) killed by the Romans, but I do not know of an explicit narration of one of these being killed by crucifixion. <br /><br />In contrast to the kingly claimants in Josephus, many of whom dress themselves as king (either placing a crown on the head or wearing purple), Jesus is much more subdued in the gospel narratives (even in the [Anti-]Triumphal Entry). Nevertheless, I do think that Jesus inspired a messianic conception within his disciples (following to a large extent E. P. Sanders' identification of Jesus as the “viceroy” of the kingdom of God): He appointed twelve disciples likely symbolizing the reconstitution of Israel, he declared who would be included in and excluded from the kingdom, he pronounced that the in-breaking of the kingdom was taking place in his own exorcisms, he described the kingdom as conferred to him by God, he pronounced that his disciples (and implicitly himself) would sit on thrones of judgment, and he described that in his own activity something greater than Jonah or King Solomon had arrived. In finale, I do think a number of factors led to Jesus being crucified, but in my view, a messianic acclamation is the sine qua non for a Jesus crucified as “King of the Jews”. S. Brian Poundshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15932943452951699521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-30580640176684123062013-12-24T20:00:23.985-08:002013-12-24T20:00:23.985-08:00"I'm curious. Is there evidence of Rome c..."I'm curious. Is there evidence of Rome crucifying Jews merely because they were messianic candidates (self-proclaimed or otherwise), in the absence of any acts of sedition?"<br /><br />According to Josephus, an unnamed Samaritan was executed for saying that he would uncover the Ark of the Covenant on the Samaritan temple mount and a would be Messiah named Theudas was killed and his followers scattered after he said he would part the Jordan river. Apparently, you could get killed just for threatening to perform a miracle.Ken Scalettahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17435469072796337716noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-52755934318067734642013-12-24T11:52:48.246-08:002013-12-24T11:52:48.246-08:00Brian, I've heard from some Jewish teachers th...Brian, I've heard from some Jewish teachers that one of the qualities of the Messiah is a reticence or reluctance to proclaim himself the Messiah. The proclamation is to be made by others (Akiva for Bar Kochba, and to a lesser extent, Nathan of Gaza for Sabbatai Tzvi). So, I don't place much stock in Jesus' "general reticence" as evidence that he didn't think he was the Messiah. "General reticence" is how a self-styled Messiah is supposed to act.<br /><br />I'm curious. Is there evidence of Rome crucifying Jews merely because they were messianic candidates (self-proclaimed or otherwise), in the absence of any acts of sedition? Might it be more accurate to say that no single aspect of Jesus' life rendered him crucifiable, but that certain aspects in combination (in particular, Jesus' messianic candidacy combined with his Temple cleansing) brought him to the cross?Larryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08976868079076669453noreply@blogger.com