Easter Myth #2: Pilate was a kindly ditherer, open to persuasion

Ten Easter Myths

Most leading historians, archaeologists and linguists don’t believe that the four official Christian Gospels can be relied upon as accurate records of historical fact. The Christmas stories, for instance, are known to be complete fabrications based on stories passed down from other traditions, edited to make them appear consistent with ancient Hebrew prophecies. The Easter stories too are highly dubious as factual accounts.

Easter is unquestionably the most important day of the Christian calendar. On Easter Day Christians believe their saviour Yeshua came back to life and was seen in corporeal form for several weeks before ascending on a cloud to ‘heaven’. This is the very basis of their religion.

They believe it because the gospels say it happened, or so they think. But most Christians aren’t aware of the inconsistencies in the scriptures. The Gospels are riddled with factual errors, contradictions and unsupported statements that challenge the very basis of the religion.

This series presents ten myths about the Easter stories drawing on Gospel sources and historical records from the period.

Myth #2:  Pilate was a kindly ditherer, open to persuasion

The Pontius Pilate of history was a ruthless tyrant, far from the weak and wavering man portrayed in the gospels. If Yeshua was believed to pose a threat to law and order his fate would have been quickly sealed.

Few scholars regard the gospel reports of Yeshua’s ‘trial’ as credible. The gospels say Yeshua had broken no law in Roman eyes and only when the chief priests convinced Pilate that he was a danger to public order was his fate sealed. But this is extremely unlikely. Roman Prefects could treat members of the subject nation as they wished. Pilate had a history of putting usurpers to death without trial without hesitation. It is doubtful that Pilate would have lost any sleep over it.

The author of ‘Matthew’ was so keen to absolve the Romans of their responsibility that he had Pilate’s wife advising him in to ‘have nothing to do with this innocent man for today I have suffered a great deal because of a dream about him.’[1]

But outside the gospel stories there is no record of Pilate ever showing mercy, and it would have been completely out of character to let Yeshua off the hook. Indeed, he was later recalled to Rome to face charges of misrule and committed suicide in disgrace!

Pilate’s reluctance in the gospels to crucify this noisy Jewish dissident contrasts so much with what is known about him from other sources that it seems certain that later editors ‘doctored’ the gospels to deflect blame away from Rome. Why would they do such a thing? Simple: the Christian leaders of the First and Second Centuries did not want to make enemies of the Romans.

In the decades that followed, the Romans took charge of the religion and put the finishing touches to the early Christian Scriptures. It would have been embarrassing to say the least that a senior Roman official had condemned the Saviour to death!

It was convenient to deflect the blame for his death to the Jews. The repercussions for Christian-Jewish relations were severe and lasted for nearly two thousand years, until Pope John Paul the Second made a wholesome apology to the Jewish people in 2000.[2]

©David Lawrence Preston, 10.2.2017

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter @David_L_Preston

Balboa Press, 2015

[1] Matthew 27:19. There is no mention of this in the other gospels.

[2] In 2000, Pope John Paul also apologised for the crusades, the massacre of French Protestants and the trial of Galileo.

The real Pilate was a ruthless tyrant, not a kindly ditherer

If you’ve seen Michael Palin’s portrayal of Pontius Pilate in Monty Python’s ‘Life of Brian’, you’ll recall the weak and wavering man with a stutter in awe of his friend Bigus Dickus. Does this in any way resemble reality?

No. Not at all.

The Pilate of history was a vicious and paranoid tyrant who had no hesitation in putting people to death without trial. Roman Prefects could treat members of the subject nation more or less as they wished. Outside the gospel stories there is no record of Pilate ever showing mercy, and it would have been completely out of character to let anyone off the hook. Anyone thought to pose a threat to law and order  would have been quickly and mercilessly dispatched.

Indeed, Pilate was later recalled to Rome to face charges of misrule. He went on to commit suicide in disgrace!

JC

The gospels say it was only when the chief priests convinced Pilate that Yeshua bar Yehosef was a danger to public order was he sent for crucifixion. The authors faced a dilemma – how could they explain why this notoriously vindictive man had to be persuaded to send Yeshua to his death even though he believed that he had no charge to answer?

‘Matthew’ was so keen to absolve the Romans of their responsibility that he has Pilate’s wife advising him in to ‘have nothing to do with this innocent man for today I have suffered a great deal because of a dream about him.’ There is no mention of this in the other gospels.

Pilate’s reluctance in the gospels to crucify this articulate Jewish irritant contrasts so much with what is known about him from historical sources that it seems certain that later editors ‘doctored’ the gospels to deflect blame away from Rome.

Indeed, few scholars regard the gospel reports of Yeshua’s ‘trial’ as having any credibility at all!

©David Lawrence Preston, 25.8.2016

Facebook and Twitter

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter

Front cover 201 things

Balboa Press, 2015

All reported speech in the New Testament is only an interpretation of what was actually said

Not many people realise that the entire New Testament was originally written in Greek – a language that Yeshua and his disciples barely knew (if at all). Their everyday tongue was Galilean Aramaic. They may have understood a smattering of Greek since Sepphoris, the capital of Galilee and just a stone’s throw from Nazareth, was on the main trade route from Greece to Asia Minor.

Most Jews also learned Hebrew so they could understand the scriptures, just as Muslims today learn Arabic to read the Qu’ran. Yeshua would also have needed Hebrew to communicate with the temple dignitaries in Jerusalem who would surely not have spoken Aramaic. We don’t know if he spoke Latin, the language of the Romans. Probably not, which poses an interesting question – how did he communicate with Pontius Pilate, the Roman Prefect, if indeed he really did (and there’s plenty of doubt)? Pilate may have spoken some Greek, but it’s unlikely they could have held a detailed conversation.

The implications are clear. Since the entire New Testament was written in a language foreign to Yeshua and the poor, illiterate Galileans with whom he associated, all reported speech in the gospels must be at least a third-hand translation of what was actually said. Or, more accurately, of the authors’ impressions of what was said or what the authors would have wanted him to say.

Aramaic, Hebrew and ancient Greek are said to be extremely difficult to translate into modern languages, but today’s expert linguists have a better knowledge of these languages and the people who spoke them than ever before so modern translations are considerably more accurate than their predecessors.

Scholars have thrown such additional light upon the original meaning of the scriptures that we cannot assume that a single paragraph of the Bible is understood in our day as it was intended at the time it was written.

Here’s the key. When reading any Bible passage we should ask ourselves, ‘What meaning did these events and sayings have for people living in that place at that time?’  Look for the meaning behind the words. That’s the challenge!

©David Lawrence Preston, 25.8.2016

Facebook and Twitter

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter @David_L_Preston

Front cover 201 things

Balboa Press, 2015

 

The gospels differ significantly over Yeshua’s trial

The gospels differ significantly over the details of Yeshua’s trial and committal:

  • In the First Gospel (‘Mark’), they took him to Caiaphas, the high priest’s, house where the Jewish governing council (Sanhedrin), had assembled. The Jewish leaders gave false and conflicting testimony; Yeshua remained silent. Then Caiaphas asked him if he was the Messiah. Previously he had refused to claim the title, but this time he answered, ‘I am.’ ‘Blasphemy!’ exclaimed the Jewish leaders, ‘The punishment is death.’ But the Jewish authorities had no power to execute a prisoner, only the Roman Prefect could do that, so Yeshua was sent to Pilate. ‘Mark’ claims that Pilate was unconvinced by the evidence and told the Sanhedrin to prosecute Yeshua themselves since blasphemy was not his concern. The Jewish leaders then accused Yeshua of claiming to be a king; this could be seen as sedition, a capital offence under Roman law. Still Pilate could find no reason to execute him. Finally he caved in, had him flogged and then sent for crucifixion. (Mark 14:53-15:15)
  • In ‘Luke’s’ Gospel, and only ‘Luke’s’, he was also sent to Herod Antipas, the ruler of Galilee, who questioned him but took no action and returned him to Pilate.
  • ‘Matthew’ added a further dramatic gesture – Pilate washed his hands to signify that he was innocent of Yeshua’s blood.
  • And typically the Fourth Gospel added several lengthy passages of preachy dialogue at all stages of the proceedings.

What are we to make of this? Is it enough to say it’s true if you believe it’s true? Is any of it true? Which parts? Or none? Only you can decide.

©David Lawrence Preston, 11.3.2016

Facebook and Twitter

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter @David_L_Preston

Front cover 201 things

Balboa/Hay House 2015

Informed ideas for discussion and debate.