Pilate was also a Samnite. A New Man

It’s important to remember the gospels were composed to be spoken aloud in public places. Few people were able to read in the ancient world and fewer still could afford books. Preachers needed appealing narratives that would catch and hold the interest of casual passers by, as well as retain the attention of followers. It has been well documented in studying modern oral bards that the composition of their tales changes with virtually every recitation. This clearly occurred in the years before the Jesus sagas were first written down. Some indisputably authentic items remain, but as isolated fragments that no longer agree with the new beliefs, such as Jesus’ repeated predictions that Yahweh would return in his listeners’ lifetimes. Too well-remembered to be deleted, new interpretations were devised to explain them: a literal prophecy that Jesus stated was meant for Jews alone became metaphorical for all people, and a new religion emerged.

We see this in particular in the Pontius Pilate narratives. In the earliest, Jesus stands silent before him; but by the time John’s Gospel is composed they have a lively philosophical discourse. Matthew and Luke’s accounts likewise differ. Clearly, all cannot be correct – particularly since the four gospel authors agree Jesus’ followers fled on his arrest, leading us to wonder who witnessed the event.

Tales of Jewish evil grow exponentially in Christian lore after the First Judean Revolt, when Rome’s traditional tolerance of Judaism turns to the bitterest contempt. Jesus was executed by the Roman prefect for an offense committed against Rome, period. Crucifixion was an especially cruel and unusual punishment, reserved by Roman law only for non-citizens convicted of capital murder or insurrection. Writing decades after the event, John the Evangelist records an entirely reimagined episode. Pilate, with hundreds of armed men at his command, becomes virtually powerless before a vicious Jewish mob, baying for Jesus’ blood – just as John’s Roman audience would have remembered with rage and anguish the Jews of Jerusalem howling for the murders of their fathers and brothers in the recent uprising. To this day, the dramatic scene John brilliantly constructed still elicits deep passion.

For John, adding the Jews’ eager acceptance of the guilt of Jesus’ death on themselves and their children neatly solved the dilemma of explaining away Jesus’ execution by Rome to an audience of potential converts composed of loyal Roman citizens. Of course a respected Centurion is inserted in the tale as another hero for them, and a witness to the novel faith John is advocating; but in all probability that officer would have been disgusted with the lousy assignment he had drawn, in a province of arrogant fanatics who impiously denied the true gods while dreaming of being masters of the world.

Jesus on a cross. Easter must be coming around. Oh yeah, it’s Easter this Sunday!

Easter and Christmas, the two days of the year when Christians rediscover their religion. Sigh.

actually, Observatorius, the Jews not only crucified Christ, they happily re-crucify Him each and every day they continue to exist:

http://seductivejewess7.com/type-ii-bb38-nelli-sarah-magidsohn/

http://seductivejewess7.com/type-iii-l221-sharon-sarah-zukin/

http://seductivejewess7.com/type-i-n260-sarah-sarah-silverman/

http://seductivejewess7.com/type-i-f107-emily-sarah-ratajkowski/

http://seductivejewess7.com/type-i-y480-sophie-sarah-makovsky-alias-april-oneil/

etc.

Pilate wasn’t even a Roman. He was a Samnite.

These Samnites were New Men. This was a Newly Minted Citizen. Few Romans from the Patrician class or the Plebs Urbana class would have seen him as a fellow Roman.

Of course Jesus wasn’t even a Judean or what the English originally meant by Jew. He was a Galilean of dubious provenance. Few Jews would have seen the provincial character as one of their own. A Jew making his living with his hands and not his brains? Lol. Some kind of Bastard? Whelped from a templetart?

The construct of these two insiders and outsiders meeting speaks of a clever literary flourish from the get go.

Ecce Homo said the Homo Novus.

Judas could have tried to make amends after the execution. But what he did was commit suicide. Jesus would have forgiven the Jew if he’d tried to make amends for his betrayal.

It is important to separate tiny numbers of leaders/oligarchs from the 99.99% of the population.

• Did Pontius Pilate pass sentence? Yes.
    Does that mean “all Romans” are responsible? Clearly not.

• Did a small number of chief priests and elders denounce Jesus? Yes.
    Does that mean “all Jews” are responsible? Clearly not.

Neither Jews nor Romans are responsible as an entire people. The focus should be placed on those individuals, such as Caiaphas, who were actually involved.

PEACE 😇

Oh Great! He was my mother’s paesan –Campania -Benevento region.

I really think one has to look at many things. Instead of arguing who put Jesus to death, maybe the question should be who orchestrated why Jesus was put to death. Obviously Pilate was the only authority who could order a crucifixion, but what was the bigger picture going on? Let’s go back to the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Pharasaic Judaism believed that the Messiah was be something of a warrior king -like a King David but much more blessed and successful. Not someone divine, but someone very especially blessed. Sadducees were the guys that ran the Temple, had to rub shoulders with the Romans and for the most part kept the ceremonies & sacrifices going but really didn’t believe anything. They basically were more concerned about their power and position. They were scared shitless about their power being taken from them. Pilate was scared shitless about having another riot on his hand, so he succumbed to the demands of the Temple elite – Annas, Caiphas & Co. How do you want to interpret “the Jews” is interesting. By the time the Babylonian Talmud was written, Jewish attitudes towards Christianity hardened. They weren’t some wacky little sect that claimed some Jewish teacher from Galilee was their God -they were the power that be. Babylonia itself, although more under Persian influence & rule had a large Christian population as well as a lot of Jews and Zoroastrians. So in a way, even though physically the number of Jews that really wanted Jesus crucified was small – the continuing narrative of Talmudic Judaism would infer that “hey baby, if we were there, we’d crucify his ass too.” So, it’s not like a criminal case where you can point to a direct culprit, but the mindset of Talmudic Judaism is guilty for perpetuating the desire for Jesus’ crucifixion.

The Jews appear to have happily stoned people to death for blasphemy. The Jews wanted this particular death to be off their books and carried out by an imperial stooge. St Stephen Protomartyr was stoned to death by the Sanhedrin itself a year or two after the crucifixion. Saul got to Watch and hold their cloaks as the top Jews rocked a heretic.

The point is that the people who pulled the strings pulled the strings. And still do.

Organised Jewry, the political machers, the string pullers and activists did in fact have the guy murdered using the stooge Samnite governor appointed by Rome, as their own personal “Biden”. If Jesus were not popular they’d have simply knifed him or stoned him as a heretic. They dodged the legal executor role. So you could say Jesus was perceived as a charismatic figure that had to brought down by deceit.

Easter and Christmas, the two days of the year when Christians rediscover their religion. Sigh.

Sigh?!?! The Christian calendar is designed this way, for the faithful to rediscover their religion twice every year. Your comment seems to imply some sort of judgment against Christians, when Jews should be joyful for what M. Hoffman has admitted:

We unconditionally repudiate the disgusting “Christ-killers” imprecation unjustly leveled at all or most Jews. Due to our own dreadful sins, every one of us is guilty of putting Jesus on that Cross of Calvary and being responsible for His death.

This is the teaching of the Church. You could acknowledge Hoffman for restating this truth, Jojo, instead of judging Christians

Organised Jewry, the political machers, the string pullers and activists

So, you agree that it was a tiny 0.1%. Mostly organized political activists and elites.

Not “The Jews” comprising 99.9%+ of the population. Most of these folks were simple farmers and tradesman of little interest and no influence to the likes of Caiaphas.

… as their own personal “Biden”. If Jesus were not popular they’d have simply knifed him or stoned him as a heretic. They dodged the legal executor role. So you could say Jesus was perceived as a charismatic figure that had to brought down by deceit.

There is little doubt that today’s Islamophile elites, including the Veggie-In-Chief would like to dispatch the charismatic Trump.

The U.S. legal system is pathetic. However, fortunately in this case, it is also slow. The SJW Globalists, who hate Judeo-Christians, are failing in their attempts to stop Trump’s 3rd consecutive victory.

PEACE 😇

No they were not tillers of the soil, hewers of the wood.

Jews were already an Urbanized ghettoised elite in the Eastern Med. Indeed many were political activists shuttling loot between Roman and Persian based Jews.

YHWH has glorified Yeshua Christ, “His Servant Jesus, Whom ye delivered up, and denied Him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.” The charge is twofold: Pilate was desirous to let Him go; you would not, when he was willing. “But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you; and killed the Prince/AUTHOR of Life: Whom God has raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses. (Acts 3: 14-15.) You desired a robber instead of “The Prince of Life,” “Whom God has raised from the dead.” Acts 2:26
hallelu-YAH

“His blood be on us and on our children.”

Any questions?

Also…

Video Link

“Scapegoating” is not a word. Use real words.

I do not look at the Gospels as an historical document or a literal document. Apparently Jesus was a very popular preacher/rabbi (if you want to call him that) I really believe Jesus was an Essene (why wasn’t he married?) He’d argue with the Pharisees because they did have some common ground theologically, the Sadduccees -there was no common ground. These guys just wanted Jesus out of their way – remember the incident re: money changers in the Temple.

Caiaphas is reported to have said: “Don’t you realize that it is better for you to have one man die for the people, instead of having the whole nation destroyed?”

He’s right! Obviously, it would be better if one man – even an innocent – were to perish rather than for the entire USA to go down in flames. If your current President doesn’t agree, you need to replace him PDQ.

I suspect the Gospel writers were pointing out, en passant, what an unenviable life politicians led; having to make ugly life-or-death decisions like that. Contrariwise, how fortunate we Christians are – the Evangelists would have believed – that we are far removed from the corridors of power.

That pestilent habit of middle-eastern thought of phrasing assertions as questions.

It is a real thing though.

Video Link

The Scape Goat must be spotless.

“His blood be on us and on our children.”

Scripture is clear that the approbation of His death be laid upon the Jews. In Jeremiah ch 22, Scripture prophecies that if an innocent dies in Jerusalem–then that city will be extinguished:

1 Thus saith the Lord; Go thou, and go down to the house of the king of Juda, and thou shalt speak there this word, 2 and thou shalt say,

Hear the word of the Lord, O king of Juda, that sittest on the throne of David, thou, and thy house, and thy people, and they that go in at these gates: 3 thus saith the Lord; Execute ye judgment and justice, and rescue the spoiled out of the hand of him that wrongs him: and oppress not the stranger, and orphan, and widow, and sin not, and shed no innocent blood in this place. 4 For if ye will indeed perform this word, then shall there enter in by the gates ofthis house kings sitting upon the throne ofDavid, and riding on chariots and horses, they, and their servants, and their people. 5 But if ye will not perform these words, by myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, that this house shall be brought to desolation.

“””This””” house shall be brought to desolation. In 70 A.D., in fulfillment of Scripture, God put the Sword of the Lord into the Roman’s hands to execute Judgement on the Jews that killed Christ, every Jewish man, every Jewish woman, and every Jewish child–was slaughtered for punishment for killing an innocent man in Jerusalem. They broke the covenant.

We are ALL sinners but if Jesus was born a Spartan–He would still be alive today! No righteous gentile would have put Christ on the Cross! Pilate did not want to. Pilate was a sinner. He did not want to. None of us would have. As the Jewish tribe gave birth to the Messiah, it was their destiny to strike Him down–which benefited us all!

The Jews take pride in being “chosen”—They like to hang Hitler around EVERY German neck. You, Mr. Hoffman wants to take mercy on the Jew—but the Jew NEVER has any mercy on us–we are all Amalek. Every European to a Jew is a Hitler. In the Jewish eyes–we are ALL guilty of the Holocaust–so it is Right to return the favor—The Jews are Christ-killers. As we are All tagged with being Hitler—LET EVERY JEW be tagged as a Christ-killer. That is their ETERNAL Shame.

A Jew rediscovers his religion whenever he rebalances his investment portfolio. That’s not restricted to particular dates.

Regarding

Pilate urgently sought to save Christ’s life, calling him a just man, and being threatened by a mob as a result

Fiat justitia et ruant coeli

Let justice be done,
though the heavens may fall!

Quoted by William Watson in 1601, in his
‘Ten Quodlibetical Quotations Concerning Religion and State’

During the trial of Adolph Eichmann, which took place in Israel, it was pointed out that Eichmann had never killed one single Jew. The prosecutors stated that the person(s) responsible for putting an innocent man into the hands of the executioners was more guilty than those who did the actual killing. So, the Jews condemn themselves out of their own mouths. It was THE JEWS who handed Jesus Christ into the hands of the Romans and it is THE JEWS who are responsible for His death. THE JEWS have a long history of using others to do their dirty work for them. We see this today, so let’s forget the “Romans killed Jesus” nonsense. The Romans drove in the nails, but it was THE JEWS who lusted for His death. Even after His death THE JEWS insisted that the tomb be guarded!

So, did Pilate violate any law of Rome by crucifying Jesus?

That is the critical question for determining guilt.

A little learning is a dangerous thing.

Pilate, if he was a Samnite (there is no evidence but for him sharing a cognomen with a Samnite general for this assertion), would have been a third or fourth generation Roman citizen. Not the most Novus of Homos.

Nazareth was a noteworthy Jewish center amidst Galilee.

Ancient Judaeans were not like modern Jews. They wrought with their hands, like everybody else did, because they had to.

Carpenters were wealthy artisans. They were not like modern carpenters tacking up wallboard.

To the writers of the Gospels, Pilate was a Roman. Period. They didn’t know a Samnite from a hole in the ground.

Jesus was a subject of Rome, not a citizen. He had no rights under the law. Pilate could do with Him what he wanted. Remember, it was THE JEWS who delivered Jesus into the hands of the Romans. THE JEWS bear the guilt.

Not so.

Roman citizenship was sought after.

The internal class and clan divisions among classes of Romans would have been accessible information to literate foreigners.

Many soldiers in the Roman military were doing it to get citizenship too.

If no rights, then why have a trial?

More likely he’d never have had an audience with a Prefect.

Pilate was just a provincial governor. From his perspective, a mob of locals showed up at his doorstep one day with a captive man and demanded that he be executed for religious crimes. He wouldn’t have known the first thing about it until they showed up. Things weren’t like today where they had security cameras on every street corner and a centralized intelligence agency with a file on every subject. Additionally, he would not have the slightest clue about the intricacies of Judaism. This was an obscure tribal religion in those days, not the behemoth it is now on the back of Christianity. When they bring Jesus before him, he expresses puzzlement, and after interrogating him famously proclaims that he can find no fault with the man, asking them multiple times whether they really want him executed. It shows the power dynamic that only Roman officials were permitted to carry out capital punishment, but the local population still had the power to petition the Roman provincial administration for redress of grievances against their own.
Furthermore when Jesus says “Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do” he is clearly referring to the gentile functionaries carrying out his execution, as the jews know full well what they have done by rejecting him, something they continue to do to this day.
I find it rich to go to great lengths and make acrobatic arguments to absolve jews of the guilt of the death of Jesus when to this day they despise Jesus Christ and his followers. Isn’t that all the information you need to determine who is guilty of killing him right there?
Christian evangelic zionists have the biggest case of Stockholm Syndrome in history.

What’s the evidence that he was a Samnite?

Yours is a strawman argument. It was THE JEWS who delivered Jesus into the hands of the Romans. Pilate did not conduct a trial, he simply made observations. It was THE JEWS who held the trial (illegally in the middle of the night with no opportunity for a defense with witnesses, etc.) If Pilate held a trial why give the howling crowd a choice between Jesus and Barabbas? It was the mob who handed down the sentence. It was THE JEWS who said “Let His blood be on us and on our children”! I don’t come here to argue. Do you even read the Bible? I will pray for you.

The leaders of the pagan tradition of the elders and their jelousy, ” His blood be on us and on our children,” rendered an unutterable sentence against themselves and their children. Indeed, against the Prince/AUTHOR of life and peace/shalom. The world cannot expect anything different from the synanogue of satan than subversions by deceit and rage wrought by (disguised totalitarianism/collectivism repackaged) force. Every wicked jelous heart which subscribes to the pagan rabbinical talmudism do not want, to this second, their sacred coffer(s) polluted with the sedding of innocent blood as their evil conscience(s) accepts what the money coffer does not receive. Thus, with egregiously untold shades of deceit the synagogue of satan cover their abysmal darkness.
-Alejandro Grace Ararat

The name. Or at least that’s the basis of claim. It’s a Samnite name.

Also he was an Equite (a country squire) well outside the Patrician class. His route through the honorum was also cut short by the death of Tiberias where upon he vanishes from office after a 10 year stint at governor. Indicating he had no power outside of being a New Man and client of his patron Tiberias.

If he’s closely connected to Tiberias and does not show up in the other domestic city wide accounts of the era he was probably an army man in his youth. This was not a career that a patrician or a career choice of a wealthy pleb with citizenship might expect. He does not show up in the early days of Tiberius in any history. He was dismissed by the aristocratic Caligula who widely admired by the Senate patricians initially.

He reminds me of Henry VIII’s hangers on. Provincials and new men like Charles Brandon or Thomas Cromwell.

Hold on a moment you are moving the goal posts.

What is accounted for in the story is that there were trials. Putting the case before a small time governor indicates some kind of appeal to a higher authority in most cases.

The Jews decided not to just murder this character Jesus. Which they’d done to countless other of their own kind at the time.

Either the Jews had to transfer the responsibility because Jesus enjoyed charismatic popularity and a fishy death was bad politics or they may have figured the Romans could use his popularity in some way and didn’t want to off a potential Roman client without checking on the local spy chief’s opinion. Governors were basically running the police system. Who knows what kind of calculations the Sanhedrin were making at the time.

This is speculation of course.

Within the story though the Jews want him dead because he’s claiming to be a spiritual messiah instead of a sword wielding war leader.

The two days when a depressing number of Christians, but by no means anywhere near all of us, rediscover our religion. FIFY.

What was the shape of the cross on which Jesus of Nazareth (who may or not be the Christos) was crucified? The gospel writers and others who were not present at the crucifixion indicate that it was in the shape of a T or the Crux Commissa. But archeologists who examined the remains of Antigonus II Mattathius, the last Hasmonian king (executed by the Romans in 37 BCE) have determined that the cross was X shaped, The Crux Decussata.

Just why did the creators of Christianity choose the T shape and not the X shape or the Y shape as the symbol of their cult? I suspect that those symbols were too closely related to pagan runes.

Getting others to do the jews’ “dirty work” is a hallmark of judaism to this very day.
Observe israel’s conquests in both Ukraine and in other middle eastern countries, excepting Palestine proper.
Of course, there are foreign troops among the genocidal IOF murderers that we are not aware of and have not been disclosed by the donor countries.

I agree with you but I’m out of buttons.
Love your phrase “acrobatic arguments”! Alliteration at its finest.
Thank you. HdC

According to Shumley Boteach the Romans crucified the Zionist Christ on a Star of David. Lol.

One thing about Pontius Pilate’s bodyguard in Jerusalem…

They would have been locally raised Auxiliary troops. A mix of Jews, Samaritans etc. Even if Jews were technically exempt from compulsory service ambitious Jews with a good sword arm would have joined up to get themselves citizenship.

Herod’s cohorts would have also converted from Royal Army status to Imperial Auxiliary Cohorts as times changed.

The officers in a Jerusalem based Cohort were mostly a drinking and eating club for well to do men.

Absolutely true. God bless you for stating this plainly and forthrightly. Happy Easter!

Roman citizenship was sought after.

It is a sad comment on our present situation that this critical fact about the Western heritage has been forgotten or else is simply no longer taught. Saint Paul is known to have said, with justifiable pride, “Civis romanus sum.”

To assert that the Romans bear the lion’s share of responsibility is an atrocious fabrication pleasing to the corporate media and the Cryptocracy. … Historic Christianity, faithful to the Gospel narrative, had a very different view of Pontius Pilate.

Just so. As I have written elsewhere, the Apostles’ and Nicene creeds do not lay the moral responsibility for the Crucifixion on Pilate. They state that Jesus “suffered under Pontius Pilate” (passus sub Pontio Pilato, AC) and “under Pontius Pilate, He suffered and was buried” (sub Pontio Pilato passus et sepultus est, NC).* Both creeds, however, clearly exclude the Crucifixion from the things for which Pilate is held inarguably responsible. Given the creeds’ dogmatic nature, it cannot be argued that this is a mere oversight.
________
*He did indeed suffer at Pilate’s hands, since Pilate ordered the scourging at the pillar and the crowning with thorns in the hope that these cruelties would satiate the Jewish mob’s lust for blood.

I don’t mean to be argumentative, let alone offensive, in offering a few notes on remarks in your comment.

Pilate was just a provincial governor. From his perspective, a mob of locals showed up at his doorstep one day with a captive man and demanded that he be executed for religious crimes. He wouldn’t have known the first thing about it until they showed up.

Pilate was a governor—I believe he was a propraetor rather than a proconsul—of an unpacified province. Thus, “just” understates the character of his very sensitive position.

We know from Caesar and many other historians that one of the gravest responsibilities of such a Roman governor was to stay acutely aware of any and all mischief that was brewing in his province, since he would have had insufficient troop strength to deal with a major insurrection. Thus, it is plain that Pilate ought to have been made aware by his agents of Jesus’s existence, especially after the pointedly public spectacle of the raising of the four-day-dead Lazarus (Jn 11), which had occurred only days earlier. Although the Gospels say little about the specifics of the governor’s awareness, they certainly do not suggest that Pilate was ignorant of Him. Think, too, of the famous encounter with the centurion from probably two years prior (Lk 7). Is it likely that such an intelligent and responsible officer would fail to inform his superiors of the stir that Jesus was causing throughout Galilee and beyond?

… [Pilate] would not have [had] the slightest clue about the intricacies of Judaism.

On the contrary, the Gospels, Matthew’s especially (27:24), testify to Pilate’s awareness of critical aspects of Jewish lore and practice. His washing of his hands, by which he declared his refusal to approve the crowd’s call for Jesus’s execution and his innocence of His blood, precisely follows the mode of ritual cleansing prescribed in Deuteronomy 21:6–8, as every Jew in the courtyard would have recognized.

… when Jesus says “Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do,” He is clearly referring to the gentile functionaries carrying out his execution, as the Jews knew full well what they had done by rejecting him—something they continue to do to this day.

While this might justly be regarded as the simple, primary denotation of the quoted words, the universal Christian understanding has always been that the words also express Christ’s authoritative request to His Father that all who repent be forgiven. What is more, as it is almost inconceivable that even the most bloodthirsty Jews understood that the Man they were horribly executing was God Himself made flesh, “they know not what they do” can fairly be said to have very wide application.

The gospel writers and others who were not present at the crucifixion …

John was present at the Crucifixion. He writes that he stood beside Mary, the Blessed Mother. Matthew was not present, but the Eleven and the Blessed Mother were very, very frequently together after the Crucifixion and Resurrection. It would be farfetched to posit that so central an event would have gone undiscussed in detail among them.

Luke and his Gospel have since the earliest days of the Christian era been associated with Paul, whose traveling companion Luke was and whose contact with the Apostles and others who had had firsthand contact with Jesus was extensive. The accreditation of Mark as a disciple of Peter is of equal antiquity, although there is less in the way of surviving documentary support for it.

As for the shape of the cross used at the Crucifixion, the request of Andrew to be crucified on an X-shaped cross because of what he deemed his unworthiness to die via the same instrument as his Master is nonnegligible information.

So much clever writing and comments. The villains seem to include a superfluous traitor, religious authorities alternating as a mob, and those allowing or executing miscarriage of justice.

Could these “evildoers” have resisted the plan of the Almighty? If they had not existed, what would have happened to the plan for salvation?