@fmf saidJesus was crucified by the Romans because the Jews insisted, even though Pilate said several times that he was a just man and could find no fault with him. No fault would mean that sedition was not an issue.
If you accept that the Romans crucified Jesus at all then you must accept that they did so for sedition.
@rajk999 saidStirring up the local populace and local compliant leaders and making claims about having power and authority that transcends that of the Roman Empire was surely sedition.
Jesus was crucified by the Romans because the Jews insisted, even though Pilate said several times that he was a just man and could find no fault with him. No fault would mean that sedition was not an issue.
@fmf saidYour opinion differs from Pilate's opinion.
Stirring up the local populace and local compliant leaders and making claims about having power and authority that transcends that of the Roman Empire was surely sedition.
If what you say is true, then Pilate would have found Jesus guilty, but he didn't.
@chaney3 saidThat may be the fledgeling Christians' version of it when they started writing their non-eyewitness accounts of it in their efforts to form some narrative about the execution three or four of five decades later, but if the Roman Empire saw fit to execute Jesus, then it would have been for sedition.
Your opinion differs from Pilate's opinion.
If what you say is true, then Pilate would have found Jesus guilty, but he didn't.
@fmf saidThe 'easier" story to have written is Pilate finding Jesus guilty of sedition.
That may be the fledgeling Christians' version of it when they started writing their non-eyewitness accounts of it in their efforts to form some narrative about the execution three or four of five decades later, but if the Roman Empire saw fit to execute Jesus, then it would have been for sedition.
What motivation did they have to change the story? A story that is basically unclear.
Note: you are now adding writers potentially lying when creating the Bible, which is a different topic altogether, yet intriguing.
@chaney3 saidI am sure that members of fundamentalist groups writing decades and decades after the events in question, and doing so based on group-forming breathless in-crowd hearsay, mostly did so in earnest.
you are now adding writers potentially lying when creating the Bible, which is a different topic altogether, yet intriguing.
@chaney3 saidDecades of 'chinese whispers' passed on by all manner of people and groups, and sub-groups, all in many respects in competition with each other; dozens of other supposedly 'eye witness accounts' rejected; nothing finalized until literally hundreds of years later, when corporate Christianity had finally finessed its fastidiously assembled text.
What motivation did they have to change the story?
I have no doubt that all manner of emotions and elements were in play: earnestness, hysteria, ambition, good-intentions, fervour, imagination, conjecture, melodrama, faulty memory, errors, omissions, assumptions, embellishments, fascination, zealotry, creativity and, yes, most likely deceit as well.
Countless people, over many, many years. What's the upshot of 'survival of the fittest' when accounts of magical things are competing for the hearts and minds of potential subscribers?
@fmf saidI understand your point, but the Bible is supposed to have been inspired by God, and written by men.
Decades of 'chinese whispers' passed on by all manner of people and groups, and sub-groups, all in many respects in competition with each other; dozens of other supposedly 'eye witness accounts' rejected; nothing finalized until literally hundreds of years later, when corporate Christianity had finally finessed its fastidiously assembled text.
I have no doubt that all manner o ...[text shortened]... st' when accounts of magical things are competing for the hearts and minds of potential subscribers?
That belief is likely the only reason that people can 'attempt' to believe any of it.
And again, it would have been easier to blame Rome and Pilate because that story makes sense.
@fmf saidJesus causing crowd uprising (sedition).
How so?
Roman soldiers arrest Him.
Pilate finds Him guilty.
Sentenced to death.
It's clear, and makes sense.
The narrative we have instead is Pilate finding Jesus not guilty of any crime, and quite puzzled why the Jews are so persistent in getting Jesus convicted.
(Of what crime)
@chaney3 said"Jesus was innocent but was executed anyway."
Jesus causing crowd uprising (sedition).
Roman soldiers arrest Him.
Pilate finds Him guilty.
Sentenced to death.
It's clear, and makes sense.
The narrative we have instead is Pilate finding Jesus not guilty of any crime, and quite puzzled why the Jews are so persistent in getting Jesus convicted.
(Of what crime)
It's the heady stuff of post-Hebrew Christian mythology.
Your supposedly "easier" version is feeble and mundane by comparison.
