Pontius Pilate releases Jesus

WI, Pilate seeing that Christ is innocent of what he is being charged with releases him (by smuggling him out of Jerusalem)?
 
Some things to understand about the passion narratives (especially St. John's Passion)

1) The dramatic trial scene is highly unlikely. If anything, Jesus would have been summarily executed after a brief kangaroo court.

2) The Sanhedrin would have had nothing to do with Jesus' execution. The temple authorities had absolutely no authority over capital punishment. The Johannine depiction of "The Jews" is a reflection of early Christian struggles to differentiate themselves from the greater Judean community in Jerusalem. John retrospectively applied this struggle to the Passion trial. His historically inaccurate depiction of "The Jews" as the prime anti-Jesus protagonists has unleashed some of the most vicious and potent hatreds the world has ever seen. All of these hatreds are rooted in historical falsehoods.

3) Pontius Pilate was a ruthless thug who repeatedly suppressed popular rebellions in Judaea and Jerusalem in particular. He also provoked the Judeans by placing a Roman statue right in the middle of the Second Temple. Pilate thought nothing of executing scores of rebels captured in rebellion. Jesus was probably no more than another rebel to be put down under Roman domination.

An ATL of Jesus' Passion according to the Gospel accounts is necessarily a-historical and predicated on a necessarily contrary-to-fact situation. That's not to say that a Bible-narrative based TL is not possible. However, it might be slightly ASB.
 
not to mention the Gospels were in fact written during the roman wars with the jews and the destruction of the temple.

i believe they were written this way to make conversion seem more friendly to romans and other gentiles. on a poetic note, one could say that when pilate "washed his hands" of jesus' blood, it is a way of saying that jesus christ's death was not the fault of the romans. however, this backfired and made it seem to be the fault of the jews, which it was not necessarily. i would say it was a mixed bag. a lot of people wanted him dead.
 

Skokie

Banned
Some things to understand about the passion narratives (especially St. John's Passion)

1) The dramatic trial scene is highly unlikely. If anything, Jesus would have been summarily executed after a brief kangaroo court.

2) The Sanhedrin would have had nothing to do with Jesus' execution. The temple authorities had absolutely no authority over capital punishment. The Johannine depiction of "The Jews" is a reflection of early Christian struggles to differentiate themselves from the greater Judean community in Jerusalem. John retrospectively applied this struggle to the Passion trial. His historically inaccurate depiction of "The Jews" as the prime anti-Jesus protagonists has unleashed some of the most vicious and potent hatreds the world has ever seen. All of these hatreds are rooted in historical falsehoods.

3) Pontius Pilate was a ruthless thug who repeatedly suppressed popular rebellions in Judaea and Jerusalem in particular. He also provoked the Judeans by placing a Roman statue right in the middle of the Second Temple. Pilate thought nothing of executing scores of rebels captured in rebellion. Jesus was probably no more than another rebel to be put down under Roman domination.

Bless you.

That, all that. Plus, Pilate would lose the respect of his men and find himself in an altogether sticky situation, probably involving daggers or pikes.
 
however, this backfired and made it seem to be the fault of the jews, which it was not necessarily. i would say it was a mixed bag. a lot of people wanted him dead.

Neither the Romans, Nor the Jews killed Jesus.

In a sense all Sinners (Basically Everyone....) are responsible for Jesus' death.
 
Or, you know, his own fault for being a loudmou- wait, this is getting dangerously close to Chat territory.

The whole premise is inviting it, really. The other Jesus-based thread was okay, because a historical Jesus is likely so his stillbirth is a more acceptable and usable POD.
However, things involving the direct Gospel narrative, like the trial and other dramatic elements, are much more open to speculation as to whether they happened or not. So they do not make good POD's. It's like starting an ATL involving the Trojan Horse- sure, the Trojan War happened, but specific details are less likely and thus are not suitable as alternate history points of divergence.
 
The narrative of Jesus' life as told in the Bible is highly questionable from a historical point of view, but assuming that he was a real historical figure he would probably have died anyway. As someone commanding authority amongst the Jews, when the Romans cracked down there would have been no escape.
 
Last edited:
Top