Romans refuse to execute Jesus
- Thread starter acgoldis
- Start date
Have you read Ann Wroe's "biography" of Pontius Pilate? It is an attempt to get down through the hagiography and legend to what might actually be a believable human- and looking at how he was subsequently mythologised.
A couple of things emerge about the governor of Roman Judea that have a bearing on this. Firstly, Pilate was not a very even tempered person; you don't get a cognomen that translates as Javelin for nothing. He was a hopelessly bad diplomat, and had fallen out with the local authorities before, who had gone over his head to Rome.
His toga was already on a shaky nail, therefore, when- avoiding diving into the religious- for sound legal- procedural reasons, the Roman provincial governor refuses to execute even a rabble- rousing hothead on such a dubious, procedurally illegitimate trial as the local authorities gave him.
In essence, the Sanhedrin blackmail Pilate with his past screwups and indiscretions, threatening to go over his head again and write to Tiberius telling him, as Josephus quotes it, that Pilate was no friend of Caesar's.
In other words, He ends up on the Cross or you do.
This was an offer, it turns out, that Pilate could not refuse; and it all played out as per. If Pilate had stood his ground- riot and revolt, at the very least. Probably snowballing into a full blown provincial revolt, relations between the Roman and Jewish authorities had broken down so badly.
A couple of things emerge about the governor of Roman Judea that have a bearing on this. Firstly, Pilate was not a very even tempered person; you don't get a cognomen that translates as Javelin for nothing. He was a hopelessly bad diplomat, and had fallen out with the local authorities before, who had gone over his head to Rome.
His toga was already on a shaky nail, therefore, when- avoiding diving into the religious- for sound legal- procedural reasons, the Roman provincial governor refuses to execute even a rabble- rousing hothead on such a dubious, procedurally illegitimate trial as the local authorities gave him.
In essence, the Sanhedrin blackmail Pilate with his past screwups and indiscretions, threatening to go over his head again and write to Tiberius telling him, as Josephus quotes it, that Pilate was no friend of Caesar's.
In other words, He ends up on the Cross or you do.
This was an offer, it turns out, that Pilate could not refuse; and it all played out as per. If Pilate had stood his ground- riot and revolt, at the very least. Probably snowballing into a full blown provincial revolt, relations between the Roman and Jewish authorities had broken down so badly.
Pilate job was to suppress dissent, and execute rabble-rousers, especially those who sprouted sedition, like claiming to be "King of the Jews" Pilate was so execution-happy that it got him recalled by Rome in the end! If Jesus really got an audience with him, it was probably brief, and the fact that he got a little plate with his crime above his head means Pilate found him guilty as f.
It is generally though that his "reluctance" to execute Jesus was added to the Bible later, to appease the Roman empire.
For Pilate to spare Jesus, you'd need some pretty huge PoD. Maybe Jesus converts Pilate at an earlier time or similar.
It is generally though that his "reluctance" to execute Jesus was added to the Bible later, to appease the Roman empire.
For Pilate to spare Jesus, you'd need some pretty huge PoD. Maybe Jesus converts Pilate at an earlier time or similar.
If Christ was not executed, here's my two pence on what would have happened.
1) 'Christianity' (or whatever it ended up being called) would have stayed as a reforming tendency within Judaism. It likely wouldn't have become a globe-spanning religion.
2) No major Christian faith likely butterflies Islam away.
3) Odds are that the Roman Empire remains a powerful state longer. Not because I think that Christianity caused it to fall, but think about this: no Christianity means no Islam. No Islam likely butterflies away the Arab invasions of Persia and the Eastern Empire. And I think an East-West split in Rome is still likely...
So what you'd probably have is an AH Byzantium that's pagan rather than Christian, one that manages to hold onto Syria and Egypt longer than OTL. The West probably still falls to barbarism, but this time it's probably Germanic paganism that's the dominant faith.
1) 'Christianity' (or whatever it ended up being called) would have stayed as a reforming tendency within Judaism. It likely wouldn't have become a globe-spanning religion.
2) No major Christian faith likely butterflies Islam away.
3) Odds are that the Roman Empire remains a powerful state longer. Not because I think that Christianity caused it to fall, but think about this: no Christianity means no Islam. No Islam likely butterflies away the Arab invasions of Persia and the Eastern Empire. And I think an East-West split in Rome is still likely...
So what you'd probably have is an AH Byzantium that's pagan rather than Christian, one that manages to hold onto Syria and Egypt longer than OTL. The West probably still falls to barbarism, but this time it's probably Germanic paganism that's the dominant faith.
I mostly agree with this, but I would think the barbarians would adopt whatever local religion(with significant admixture from Germanic heathenry). It's an interesting idea.
From a godless, atheist perspective (which I take until I'm afraid there's someone in the closet or backseat; then the Christian channel or country station gets turned on):
The execution of Jesus comes across like it was something that was totally not expected. I'm sure it's something they thought would be a possibility. You expect when you drive that getting into an accident or getting pulled over for speeding is a possibility, but you go about your day as if everything will be normal and your end goals will follow through. Same thing with Jesus. The idea being that Jesus would continue preaching, and that he'd lead his followers into an imminent heaven on earth. Jesus' preachings clearly show someone who is expecting the end of days to be at hand; not 1,000 years off or 2,000 years off.
When Jesus is executed, the vibe is very much that everything has gone wrong. It's not that it was destined. It's that he was executed, so oh no we have to backtrack, so now it was always the destiny that he would be crucified...and he rose from the grave, as witnessed by women...who under Jewish law could not be questioned in a court, and so their testimony couldn't be second guessed. Now the movement can continue. The Book of Matthew does that a lot where it crams things as "here's the prophecy of the messiah, and here's how Jesus' life fills that out" -- drawing the bulls-eye around an already fired arrow. It does that with the child born in Bethlehem, even though no Roman census matches up to that date and even if a census were taken, the Romans would never have people go back to their cities of birth because that's not how a census works.
So if Jesus is not executed, things continue along as they were expected to of a movement lead by Jesus, which spreads his teachings until he naturally dies. In which case, you'd likely also get something like "he ascended beyond the mortal world", because a person you follow as a walking entity of God beyond mortal can't die, so there needs to be an explanation (or excuse, depending on your persuasion). Or the theology could deviate from Catholic dogma of the OTL, into where Jesus is a mortal form while still the Son of God.
The execution of Jesus comes across like it was something that was totally not expected. I'm sure it's something they thought would be a possibility. You expect when you drive that getting into an accident or getting pulled over for speeding is a possibility, but you go about your day as if everything will be normal and your end goals will follow through. Same thing with Jesus. The idea being that Jesus would continue preaching, and that he'd lead his followers into an imminent heaven on earth. Jesus' preachings clearly show someone who is expecting the end of days to be at hand; not 1,000 years off or 2,000 years off.
When Jesus is executed, the vibe is very much that everything has gone wrong. It's not that it was destined. It's that he was executed, so oh no we have to backtrack, so now it was always the destiny that he would be crucified...and he rose from the grave, as witnessed by women...who under Jewish law could not be questioned in a court, and so their testimony couldn't be second guessed. Now the movement can continue. The Book of Matthew does that a lot where it crams things as "here's the prophecy of the messiah, and here's how Jesus' life fills that out" -- drawing the bulls-eye around an already fired arrow. It does that with the child born in Bethlehem, even though no Roman census matches up to that date and even if a census were taken, the Romans would never have people go back to their cities of birth because that's not how a census works.
So if Jesus is not executed, things continue along as they were expected to of a movement lead by Jesus, which spreads his teachings until he naturally dies. In which case, you'd likely also get something like "he ascended beyond the mortal world", because a person you follow as a walking entity of God beyond mortal can't die, so there needs to be an explanation (or excuse, depending on your persuasion). Or the theology could deviate from Catholic dogma of the OTL, into where Jesus is a mortal form while still the Son of God.
Cheers! And yours is an interesting idea - a combination between classical paganism and German beliefs would make for an interesting religion.
It'd be a neat topic for a TL, anyway...
Interesting, though my own godless reading of Christianity is that Christ was predominantly interested in reforming Judaism and the Jewish homeland - not with bringing worship of the One God to the rest of the world. And further, I'd believe that Christianity wouldn't have gone beyond a Jewish variant without Christ's death.
Napoleonrules
Banned
Wow, as Jew I find it humorous to always hear people state that "Jesus was a reformer", as if there is something fundamentally wrong with the Jewish religion that Jesus needed to fix. If you take away the later gentile additions to Jesus' message it is actually a Jewish fundamentalism anti-gentile message along the lines of the "Old" Testament (Tanakh) prophets. (When the Messiah comes, all gentile nations will bow down and serve Jews for example). It wasn't a peace, love, all nations are equal in the Lord's eye message; it was "become Jewish or be a slave at the end of times" message. Basically telling Jews to stop being subserviant to Romans and pagans. What everyone here is talking about is Pauline Christianity, and the anti-Jewish pro-gentile changes instituted by Paul against the wishes of Peter and Jesus' brother James. If Jesus isn't crucified, and therefore we can butterfly away Pauline changes to Jesus' message and Judaism becomes the religion that goes on to dominate the Roman Empire. Islam is more influenced by Judaism as it was a colony of Jews that Mohammad was aware of and spent time with, there weren't any significant Christian influences in his life; Islam will still develop just with a twist towards being more Jewish. Whether this causes more conflict or less with Judaism as time goes on who knows. But Judaism's influence on the collapse of a Roman Empire probably goes similar to any influence Christianity would have had. Judaism would be just as aggressive in assimiliation and conversation as OTL Christianity. In conclusion- history would be mostly following OTL with Judaism substituting for Christianity with little other changes.
Napoleonrules
Banned
Oh and bringing in evergreen trees indoors, decorating them, and putting presents around them would be a Jewish tradition at Hannukkah time; and Elijah would be delivering eggs at Passover.
I am just wondering, meaning no offence to the Jews or Christians or anybody else:
You see, for me, Christianity is very Jewish like it is. Seeing the Jewish guy crusified, his Jewish mother weeping, his Jewish friends panicking in a nice Jewish city. Reading all this Jewish folklore of Old Testament in Christian Churches.
You, as a Jew, do you feel the same about Christianity? It being Jewish, I mean...
WI there was a different governor from start? How would that play out for earlier events?
You think? OK, I'm not Jewish, but I have serious doubts about Judaism ever becoming anywhere near as popular as Christianity - isn't it legendarily hard for people to convert to? Like, it's one of the few religions that doesn't want converts? Plus, AFAIK, Jews of the era didn't have a problem with slavery, so it wouldn't have the same 'slave conversion vector' as Christianity did. So its likelihood of spreading is remote, to say the least - it wouldn't have the appeal of Christianity. I don't doubt the whole 'don't bow down to pagans' message, but that speaks more to ideas of just removing the Romans from the Holy Land rather than spreading.
I'm sorry, but I honestly think that without Christ's crucifixion, Abrahamic monotheism would remain a minority religion and paganism of various stripes would remain dominant.
Napoleonrules
Banned
The reason Judaism is against converts is BECAUSE of Christianity. Judaism was a fast growing religion in Rome and outnumbered any other single "cult" or "mystery" of the time. It was these converts to Judaism that left en masse to Christianity (and took their original pagan beliefs with them) that left a bad taste in the psyche of Judaism regarding converts and what they brought in (Jesus saying he was the son of G-d to them meant he was THE son of G-d because their original pagan religion had tons of that stuff and it was not rare or unusual; rather than understanding ALL Jews say they are the sons (and daughters) of G-d, it's read from our prayer book to this day!) and you begin to see the hardness to convert to Rabbinical Judaism (there are many forms of Judaism beyond the Rabbinical Judaism of Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform; such as the Karraites who don't have rabbis). In Roman times Jews made up 1/3 of the population of Alexandria which had 500,000 people total (making Jews about 167,000).
Napoleonrules
Banned
Most Jews outside of reform Judaism see very little in common with Christianity. There's a big difference between a trinity and the concept of a single G-d with no room for prayers to angels, saints, or parts of a whole. Food restrictions. Judaism has no heaven in the Christian sense (dead Jews become one with the Lord, only angels live in heaven and they aren't dead humans with wings); Judaism has no hell; what happens at the end of Time is different; Judaism doesn't have a Devil or duality of good and evil (something Christianity picked up from Zoroastrianism); there's no Original Sin or actual concept of sin in general, the apple (or actually quince) was a stupid mistake and had permanent consequences for humanity but it wasn't a sin in the moral sense, more like a child eating a pie off the counter when mom said don't. Except the consequence is to be kicked out of the house
Multiple more examples of differences, all of which are pagan influences into Christianity from the fact that they had so many converts and had to adapt and coopt concepts from their major rivals, such as the Zoroastrian and Mazdaism.Aktarian, Pontius Pilate was possibly the least appropriate provincial governor possible for a place as distinctive and touchy as Judea- he did not suit them and they did not suit him. On the course of honour, where one is supposed to alternate between army and civil posts, Pilate's last job before going to Judea would have been as a senior military tribune- nominal second in command of a legion; alas, it is not known which one, or we would have a better idea who to blame.
His job was to prevent disorder, certainly, but he seems to have caused a fair bit of it himself, by over- reacting to various incidents. He certainly behaved like an army man, cracking down when he could. And going far enough to get himself into trouble on at least two prior occasions.
The ruins of his "Tiberiaeum" have been uncovered; the sort of man who builds a church, of sorts (very loose description) to the reigning Emperor as a living god- is that the sort of man who belongs in the Judea of the first century?
In fact, he may have been sent as a result of misreading the situation- thinking that a hard hand was needed. They got one all right, but with no dexterity, and little sense of touch.
A different governor could hardly have made the situation worse, and someone more urbane, with less of the sargeant-major in his makeup, could have done a better job of keeping Judea happy and tax-paying; but would probably also have made less of a fuss about executing a stray would- be messiah.
His job was to prevent disorder, certainly, but he seems to have caused a fair bit of it himself, by over- reacting to various incidents. He certainly behaved like an army man, cracking down when he could. And going far enough to get himself into trouble on at least two prior occasions.
The ruins of his "Tiberiaeum" have been uncovered; the sort of man who builds a church, of sorts (very loose description) to the reigning Emperor as a living god- is that the sort of man who belongs in the Judea of the first century?
In fact, he may have been sent as a result of misreading the situation- thinking that a hard hand was needed. They got one all right, but with no dexterity, and little sense of touch.
A different governor could hardly have made the situation worse, and someone more urbane, with less of the sargeant-major in his makeup, could have done a better job of keeping Judea happy and tax-paying; but would probably also have made less of a fuss about executing a stray would- be messiah.
usertron2020
Donor
1) I am surrounded by Philistines.
2) Unless God decides to have the Christian Faith grow faster by letting Jesus live. Forever.
3) Where's Samson when you really need him?
*pictures sight of white (4) plastic tree with blue ornaments and topped by a flashing blue lighted Star of David*
4) The artificial white trees were very popular in the 60s. The color representing "snow-covered".
Last edited:
Would that idea be theologically possible?
After the resurrection he just goes on living and preaching? Of course after a time you'd need reasons he never shows up in the local area.
You'd also need a reason Jesus isn't personally in charge of any church that forms.
That would be a most interesting idea.I think this deserves a thread of it's own.