see my comment
John Dominic Crossan, a noted historian, talks about this a lot. Also, it is a basic part of Roman history.

see my comment

During that time very few could write (including Jesus and his followers - tell that to the religious and watch them squirm) and things were passed down orally. It wasn't until 80 - 120 years later that things were put down into writing.

However, there were historians, Josephus was one famous one and one can find etchings and sculptured images of people on certain Roman fixtures. Images of a person thought to be a Jesus figure (leader) with a group of followers. Historians don't just go by writings but can glean information from a variety of sources.

My undergraduate degree is in European History (read church history) from the Univ. of Maryland European Div. I spent time in Rome and many other places. This has become one of my passions.

The term Christ was not invented around the time of Jesus,so I have read,so this whole scene is a fantasy.Burton Mack says the wole trial scene is a mythology to make Jesus into the accused man prohesised in the OT book of Wisdom.The trail sets the prophesy up nicely...a falsely accused man handed over to "foreign "powers,executed hung on a tree and exhonerated by God...sound familiar?

Also Jesus is always rather evasive,even in the gospels when asked about whether he is the son of god.In the early gnostic gospels like the Gospel of Thoams he makes no such claims

It seems funny to use a biblical quote to make a point on this site especially the term "our cause". The 4 main 'apostles' all had versions of things that differed from one another. One cannot go by any biblical sayings because they were created long after 'Jesus's death'. At one time some people got together and wrote down things they thought would create a movement. They came up with some ideas which have been revised and revised and re-re-vised over the millennia. They are all self-serving and suspect. Jesus did not try and start a new religion! Most independent scholars agree on that. He was first and foremost a Jew and just wanted to question Judaism. This was common then as today all faiths are constantly being revised and changed to meet the times.

The first and most important question one has to have when analyzing an idea is who or what benefits? It is known as the conflict of interest idea.

@JackPedigo I understand the biblical quote seemed out of context for the site, but so did the question. I was just pointing out that justice, somewhat a religious concept in itself, would not makes sense if we're looking at Jesus as a regular guy saying things in conflict with the church. As I understand it Jesus (the mythical or literal one) was a "nice" guy who hung out with weird people and shared ideas others didn't like. As you said he questioned Judaism which I would assume is closer to "our cause" than indoctrination into a new religion. Just wasn't agreeing with the original thread that Jesus deserved to pay for any percieved crimes of the time or that crucifixion is ever an applicable form of justice. Not sure what part of your comment was in disagreement with those points, but that's likely my fault for not being very clear in what I was trying to say.

@VinceRichardson Christ is not a name but a title. His name should be Jesus THE Christ (if it were his name then his parents would be Joseph and Mary Christ!

I don't get the blasphemy bit. The Romans had many groups with many religious beliefs. They probably could care less about blasphemy. What they did care about was affronts to their reign. They crucified thousands of Jews in 75 ACE because they were revolting against Roman rule. It's called treason.

@JackPedigo this is the first explanation of Jesus's actual crimes I've been given. Makes a lot more sense now. I can understand the position much better now. I still maintain he did not "get what he deserved" however. Only because I disagree with the crucifixion part. Obviously we see that clearer than bronze age empire's would, but I can't agree with it on moral principles.

@JackPedigo .The blasphemy,(if that is what did for the historical Jesus),would have been against the Jewish faith not the Romans,the Romans as you say would probably execute a Jew presented as a trouble maker not as a blasphemer....just on the safe side.I doubt Jesus was criticising the Romans,his only advice as per the gospel is to "pay what is due to Caesar"....taxes.So even the gospels don't have Jesus as antagonistic to the Romans.

The blasphemy charge does not stand up because it is a fabrication of the gospels to make Jesus look greater than he was.The gospels also have him sayig he had not come to cahnge Jewish laws.

We have no factual idea what the charges would have been to be honest. Like you also say Jesus was not challenging Judaism,but he may well have been challenging the reigning preisthood,the Pharisees,who were not all that well liked at that time. Jesus,possibly being from a very puritanical/righteous sect would have been outraged at their impeity,riches and exploitation....sounds a famliar cry of the purists throughout the ages to me.He was challenging their version of Judaism,which at passsover,with 1000s in town, in Jerusalem would be more than enough to get you executed.

@VinceRichardson I agree with you on the blasphemy charge. Everything I have studied goes against the Jews having him executed. It was touted as a way to subvert Jews by the newly emerging Christians. One can see that happening throughout history and even today. Besides Pilot was a cruel dictator and would never listen to some people asking for any kind of mercy (the idea of letting a hardened criminal go and executing Jesus is pure folly).

Again, in 75 ACE the land was filled with Jews hanging on crosses. The Romans saw them as subverters of their rule just like the evangelicals are desperately trying (and succeeding) to subvert our Constitution. From what I have studied Jesus was a follower of Diogenes from Sinop (I was stationed there and learned about this philosopher). Diogenes is considered the father of 'Cynic Philosophy' which states for one to get to know true life one must remove themselves from their culture (he said to know true life one must live in a barrel with the dogs - John the Baptist and Francis of Assisi were two models for this). The Romans saw this anti-culture movement that Jesus was espousing and thought it meant revolution. Read the book "The Stranger in the Woods". It is a fascinating, true story and there is a chapter devoted to hermitism and how the religious feel about it (they are fearful).

@VinceRichardson BTW a former long term partner was named MacRae and her family was from AppleCross Scotland on the West coast. We visited the town once and I remember how difficult the path of the cattle road was to drive. My favorite town was Inverness. The family castle was Eileen Donan which, at the time, was managed by Farquar Macrae. Fond memories.

@JackPedigo Thats interesting too I will look up the Diogenes link .I believe Jesus must have had some sect like indoctrination,enough to wrankle the Pharisees anyhow.Would love to know what Jesus actually did but sadly there is not enough evidence. My understanding is that he was teaching a Jewish spiritualism,akin to modern Kabbalah or could be your hermetism as well. .anyhow it was a self enlightenment that did not require Pharisee made laws. The Pharisees,like all ruling authorities would not have liked that.The gnostics teachings uphold this teaching of Jesus,.A man called Valentinus said he was a disciple of Thadeus who was a disciple pf Paul who was also teaching this "secret teaching".Elaine Pagels writes a very good book called The Gnostic Paul and puts the case quite convincingly for me.

Ironic thing is the Catholic church banned gnostic scipture in 4th century and made it heretical.So were Jesus teachings actually reviled by both the established Jewish and later Christian ruling elite?

John the Baptist is also a key figure in the Life of Jesus and also Christian mythology since he links the OT to the NT.We see this when you read Mark. This is the oldest scripture of the 4 narrative gospels,and it starts with John from the first line. Malachi is put as last scripture in the OT of the Bible(though not in the Torah)because it tells of a messiah to come.....the link is deliberate reorganisation of the order the scriptures appear to make a smooth flow.Prophesy then arrival of God chosen . Latterly Matthew is now put first in the NT because Christians prefer that gentler message to Marks stark warnings of apocalypse.It all presenting a story.

My great grandfather was from Aberdeen but moved to the NE England and we all still here.

@JackPedigo Just a further point that came up. The Romans would execute anyone seen as a potential trouble maker. The Pharisees would nbot have to work too hard handing such a character over to be eliminated. Every passover caused trouble when upstart rebels came to Jerusalem. The Temple Guard had the job of policing it all and if they lost control the Roman garrison based by the coast would come down and sort the job for them,which the Pharisees were terrified of...so any trouble was ruthlessly put down. Jesus likley went the way many others did at the time. As per the law only Romans could carry out executions so he would have been handed over as a common criminal no doubt

@VinceRichardson There is a historian named John Dominic Crossan (he is a priest but decided history is more important and he mentions he has to have 3 sources before determining if there is any validity to stories). I have 3 books: "Jesus, A Revolutionary Biography", "The Essential Jesus" and "Who Killed Jesus". He mentions Diogenes, Roman reliefs, cult clothing and a lot of interesting things. He had been interviewed many times on our National Public Radio.
I have a degree in European history from the Univ. of Maryland European division. This is essentially Christian history and I went to many places, including Rome, and we often got to be where history was made. The main instructor was a Chris Mooney from Dublin Ireland (a former Catholic). He worked in Rome in one of the catacombs and spoke, German, Italian, French, Spanish (the romance languages are very similar) and taught Latin and Greek at UCLA.

@JackPedigo .Well I ve read many accounts over the years,Burton Mack is excellent anthroplogist and atheist theologianat but is great at setting the history and showing who wrote the Gospels.Elaine Pagels is good on gnostic interpretation of the Nag Hammadi gnostic scriptures.

Plus I've read many history other books ,contemporary stuff like Josephus,and of course a little OT history.
You can kind of discern some logical story amongst all the sources,cross referencing is helpful for sure.Everyone seems to have a take on what happened. I have discovered a vein of truth about what happened but it is tantilisingly opaque too. Of course you have the views of the very early Unitarian churches and Arianism too that were also declared heretic, there were all sorts of beliefs about what happened and who Jesus was way back very early on.

@VinceRichardson One can spend their whole life (and some do) studying all the ins and outs of the Christian/Jewish religions. I personally feel I have enough knowledge for a good base and want to go on to other, more important, things.

Here is a link that might prove interesting to you. I might even put this out for the group.

[theatlantic.com]

@JackPedigo,
I have only spent about 10 years so far,but it has had a profound effect on me,I changed my view about a creator for one I now believe there must be one.

Article was good

This bit was very good for me.....

"“And opening his mouth he taught them, saying: ‘How blissful the destitute, abject in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of the heavens.’?” This is from the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus’s gently administered program for pulling down thrones, decapitating idols, and jamming eternity into the present tense. Hart opted for blissful over the traditional blessed, he writes, because the original Greek, makarios, “suggested a special intensity of delight and freedom from care that the more shopworn renderings no longer quite capture.” So now we hear it, and are shocked by it: not the ambiguous benediction of blessed, but the actual bliss, right now, of destitution, the emancipation of everything being stripped away. It comes at us like white light, this generosity of emptiness, and because we’re not angels, we shield our eyes."

This is what I see that Jesus was teaching,it was about personal enlightenment,once the body is awakened to its true state(that it is divine) all else becomes of no importance which t is a tremendous realisation and a relief to the beholder.Bhuddist and other spiritual religions say much the same thing.

@SocraticAddict The Romans were not concerned about "moral" principles or getting what one deserved. They wanted to stop any questioning of their authority and send a clear message. This has gone on throughout history and may happen in this country. The wannabe powers always go to extreme to get power. The "Christian fanatics" of this country could easily resort to the same tactics as Isis or the Taliban.