Unspoken Histories: Analyzing Jesus’s Stoning and Crucifixion Through Ancient Myths

Alternative Narratives of a Human Christ: The Tree and The Cross

In the Famous Gospel Stories...

Jesus of Nazareth is the son of God who chose to take up his divine mission to save mankind by dying on the cross for all sins. This is a lovely sentiment, I must be going religiously obsessed again! Anyway, despite him being a mesmeric persona, he is shrouded by mythological and religious symbolism. Critical Scholars and literalist evangelicals continue to disagree on what parts of the New Testament are authentic or not. Verily, verily I say unto thee, the prevailing belief among scholars is that they don't really know what is one hundred percent historical. For instance, conservative scholar Craig L. Blomberg said, 'Strictly speaking, the gospels are anonymous.' According to Bart Ehrman, gospel writers chose anonymity to keep Jesus as the focus of their narratives, and I agree, but would like to add that every community would have established their own verbal recollections. I believe he was a historical, human man. 

The Mystery of Gospel Authorship

The Gospel of John is attributed to an unnamed witness and is dated around 80-100 CE. Mark is considered the oldest, expert roughly guess it was written between 65-75 CE, while Matthew and Luke are believed to have been compiled around 80-100 CE. E.P. Sanders points out that early followers of Jesus owned fragments of scripture that were updated over time. After the crucifixion, the apostles didn’t produce any grand biographical literature due to both limited literacy. 

The Evolution of Christian Doctrine

The New Testament has been interpreted countless times, which has spawned numerous denominations. Calvinists, for example, believe in predestination, while Catholics emphasize faith and baptism. Unitarians don't all view Jesus as the literal Son of God. Humanity has had its fair share of Christology, from the Viking chieftain Jesus in the poem called the Heliand, to the blue eyed right-wing American bible-belt Jesus. Theissen and Merz (1996) suggest aspects of the crucifixion were written much later, and others suspect the resurrection historically differs to how we might imagine it, here. 

Historical Accuracy

Most text is in Old Greek, a very difficult language to master. Dr. John Dominic Crossan noted inconsistencies with Paul's letters. Decisions of textual inclusion in Christian communities led to variations in early manuscripts. For instance, Papyrus 75 (200 AD) miss passages in the later Codex Sinaiticus (300 AD). This might suggest modern additions are not historical. 

Contradictions and Theological Issues

Carrier (2011) cast doubt on the historical accuracy of the crucifixion narratives, saying the phenomena are absent from contemporary Roman and Jewish accounts of crucifixions, which, he added, raises doubt on the entire events write-up. The Bible contains notable contradictions. Genesis 32:30 suggests seeing God face-to-face, while John 1:18 claims no one has seen God. These silly pedantic details simply highlight the conflict between historical fact and developing Christian theology. Johannine literature contains hellenic terminology and ideas, a far cry from the Jewish backdrop of historical Israel itself. 

The Harsh Reality of History 

If you look into Rome through a historical lens, a perspective informed by sources like Britannica, John Dominic Crossan or Bart Ehrman, we see Jewish protesters did not grind down Pontius Pilate. In fact, just as much as Rome itself, this old knight of the Samnites was an oppressor, which both historical and religious sources equally illustrate. Stick with me, I'm going somewhere here! Pilate's Jewish subjects hated him. A character to say the least, who over taxed them, and showed little if any respect for their culture and laws, as well as that, he provoked riots by pushing images of the emperor across their country. It was not uncommon for him to crucify people without a trial. In fact, this man stood trial himself, in Rome for cruelty! Britannica describes Pilate as respectfully removing the images, but only after he had threatened disgruntled Jewish citizens with death after they refused to halt their protests; they showed bravery, a quality he found admirable. Be that as it is, Rome never kept Kosher rules, nor adhered to the sabbath, which was disrespectful to Jews. Rome did not respect the native laws of Briton when violating Boudica, the Queen of the Iceni's two daughter's. Neither did it bend the knee to Israel when it built its own pagan monument inside their Jewish Temple! These things are significantly more offensive than leaving a treacherous sect leader to desecrate on a cross!

    "The portrayal of Jesus in the Gospels is not simply a neutral recording of what Jesus said and did. The Gospel writers shaped and interpreted Jesus' message in light of their own theological agendas..."

                                        Bart Ehrman 

A Less Known Jesus Story

Jesus would most likely have been crucified outside the temple, given the site's foul smell, and horror. It would have been festering with flies and the process of squirming decay. It might not have been easy to make-out the facial features from high up beyond inside the city walls, which realistically, lessened the unsightliness for the walled populace. Then again, crucifixion predated Rome, it is very ancient going back to Assyria. Jewish celebrants arriving for the passover would have seen Jesus on his cross as just another of the crucified; he wouldn't have been anything significant or out of the blue. 

In the gospels, we see sentiment against wealth. Jesus is described as telling potential followers to give all their money to the poor and to follow him if they want salvation. Joseph of Arimathea, on the other hand, was a 'wealthy follower,' who conveniently, paid for a tomb for Jesus! The story leads on to resurrection theology. Going on historical norms, Rome would have made an example of the Jewish King by leaving him is situ for anyone entering the city. Romans would have left Jesus much longer than six hours on the cross. 

A Rare Jesus Story... 

The New Testament stories are theological developments from real historical events. The contradiction and alteration of biblical text still always raise a question, but here is one of mine:

 

Could Pilate Have Historically Ordered The Jewish Authority To Punish Jesus?

This theory is not popular among most scholars or religious people who mostly support the Roman crucifixion. What is compelling is that the bible does not show Jesus committed a crime directly against Rome! He never explicitly spoke against it as an enemy. In all truth, experts say Rome had a practice of leaving complex domestic disputes such as cultural and religious law to the natives, who were the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem. According to this religious council, Jesus called himself 'King of the Jews' a messianic blasphemy from a prophetic perspective. I featured the Pantera tradition in my 'was Jesus a cult leader?' blog, here. Tabor (2006) questions the reliability of the crucifixion in the gospels. 

People Were So Easily Upset!

Against the prevailing view of most scholars, E.P. Sanders discovered the diverse beliefs of Second Temple Judaism, including legalistic and covenantal elements. He shed new light on Paul’s communication about grace holding much broader Jewish context, he was not brand new or separate from it. The Pantera tradition is aleays in question, seen as a mere polemic claiming Jesus was stoned to death on the eve of the passover, and that he was hung on a tree. Undeniably, this was still an ancient Jewish punishment for blasphemy, his actual charge! Bart Ehrman has blogged about this alongside James Tabor! To hang, stands was a euphemism for Roman crucifixion, but, hanging was a valid Jewish post mortem exhibition on 'the cursed tree,' arbori suspendere, which encompassed and summised the entire punishment process—it dishonoured the criminal. Killed and then exhibited. Like Roman crucifixion, it was done outside the city walls. Most importantly, always before dark. Leaving the dead outside throughout the night offended their God, and they deemed it to be unlawful. Stoning was vindicta publica, the general public would execute the accused. Amongst other things, Jesus was called sorcerer, and accused of leading the people astray and religious men insisted he was aligned with the devil. After he was stoned for blasphemy, he was hung up for all to see. 

'... the wise king of the Jews – they killed him and did not take thought. But God took thought for them, and their land was desolated because of them'.

              Mara Bar Serapion 1st century Pagan

If Pilate could not find a crime against Rome and washed his hands of the Jesus case, he must have tasked the Sanhedrin with executing him. It follows the judicial path. It makes perfect sense when we consider the speedy retreival and entombment of the body in the biblical accounts. Theological retrojection around the trial and Barabas, we see more a believable history, which resonates with E.P. Sanders and Theissen. Around 150 CE, in his first apology to the Roman Emperor Pius, Justyn Martyr wrote that Jews accused Christians of atheism and impiety. They also insinuated Jesus himself of being the first born of Satan and a deceiver (Dodds, and Reith, 2023). Those sentiments, as well as what we see in the New Testament align with Talmudic criticisms of Jesus. 

Saint Asaph Cathedral Skeleton

It says in deuteronomy 21:22–23: A man guilty of a capital offence is put to death and you hang him on a tree, you must not leave the body on the tree overnight. Be sure to bury it that same day, because anyone who is hung on a tree is a curse of God.

Paul shaped Christian theology by referring to this law in Galatians 3:13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”

Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus whom you murdered by hanging on a tree.

Acts 10:39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree. 

It is striking that a sizable percentage of Christian scholars might hold conviction that their deity died in the way the theology describes. 

 

References

Blomberg, Craig L. "The Historical Reliability of the Gospels." IVP Academic, 2007.

Codex Sinaiticus. British Library, 300 AD

Editors of Encyclopedia Briticannica. "Pontius Pilate" Britannica 1st Jun 2024

Ehrman, Bart D. "How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee." HarperOne, 2014.

Dodds, M, and Reith, G "First And Second Apologies of Justyn Martyr" Dalcassian, 2023.

Sanders, E.P. "The Historical Figure of Jesus." Penguin Books, 1993.

Crossan, John Dominic. Lecture on "Paul and the Creation of Christian Theology."

Papyrus 75. Bodmer Library, 200 AD. 

Tabor, James D. (2006). The Jesus Dynasty: The Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity. HarperCollins. 

Theissen, Gerd, and Annette Merz. (1996). The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide. Fortress Press.

Decaying on a Roman Cross: Deterrent on Display?

Alternative Narratives of a Human Christ: Did Rome Leave Jesus on His Cross? 

Was this a historical possibility? 

The traditional Christian story of the crucifixion is deeply ingrained in our Western consciousness. Crucifixes hang from gold chains, beautify our skin and stand central on t-shirts. However, to be honest, I love to offer an alternative theory showcasing a historical, human Jesus, because these accounts mostly serve theological, and not historical purposes! We know Roman aristocracy considered early Christian's to be anti-state criminals. We can reasonably hypothesise, that if Jesus was crucified by Pilate for somehow committing crimes against Rome, he would have decomposed on his cross on display to dissuade others. That was the Roman way. 

Understanding Crucifixion in the Roman World

Crucifixion in the Roman world was a punishment reserved for those perceived as the lowest of society, and also, those who posed a threat to the social order, namely, Rome itself. After the Spartacus rebellion, for example, Crassus crucified 6000 slaves along the Appian Way to make a point (Appian, Civil Wars). The bodies were often left hanging for extended periods, emphasizing the dire consequences of being enemies of Rome. Exceptions to this practice, such as removal for burial, were rare and dependent on factors like family petitions or the social status of the condemned.

The Early Christian Movement and Roman Criminality

The early Christian movement was perceived as a significant threat to both the social order of Roman and the religious order of both the Jewish Pharisee and the Sadducee. As such, Christians were often brought to trial on charges of "hatred towards mankind," atheism, or other accusations of disrupting societal norms (Pliny's Letters to Trajan). The public nature of punishments, including crucifixion and stoning, served to deter potential followers and maintain the status quo.

Non-Christian Sources on Jesus and the Crucifixion

Non-Christian sources, such as Josephus, Tacitus, and Pliny the Younger, provide valuable external insights into the life and death of Jesus Christ. Tacitus, for instance, confirms the crucifixion of Jesus under Pontius Pilate (Annals, 15.44). However, the details of Jesus' burial are not mentioned in these sources, leaving room for speculation and alternative interpretations.

The Gospels as Theological, not Historical, Narratives. 

The Gospels were written to convey the theological significance of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, not to provide a historically accurate account. The accounts of Jesus' burial, therefore, should be understood in this context. For instance, the empty tomb narrative is pivotal to the resurrection story, a cornerstone of Christian faith, but lacks external corroboration. The inconsistencies across the Gospels further underscore their theological, rather than historical, motivations.

Synthesizing the Evidence: Jesus Left on the Cross?

When we synthesize the historical, non-Christian, and theological evidence, the possibility of Jesus Christ being left on the cross aligns with the consistent practice of Roman crucifixion. Its purpose of deterring the following Christians into sedition mighy have been considered a success by Roman aristocrats. 

Conclusion

I aimed to spark some thoughts about an alternative crucifixion of Jesus Christ. One that aligns more closely with Roman historical practices and non-Christian thinking. This theory underscores the importance of critical engagement with religious narratives and their historical contexts. Further research into this aspect of early Christianity and Roman history is recommended.

Hellenistic Resonances in Judaic Tradition: Reevaluating Jesus’ Philosophical Paradigm

Alternative Narratives of a Human Christ: The Socratic Saviour. 

Did Jesus enjoy the sages? 

To appreciate the potential Hellenistic influences of any historical, human Jesus, let's consider the following:

Alexander the Great introduced Greek culture making Israel a cultural synchronicity, it lasted well beyond his era! Around 160-170 BCE, Judas Maccabeus fought against Greek assimilation, succeeding and finally establishing his family dynasty called the Hasmoneans. Unfortunately, after internal conflict, it all ended. Roman conquest happened. Pompey Magnus in 63 BCE marched in and Greek and Roman culture persisted in the area, though often resisted.

During the Jesus years, cities like Tiberias and Sepphoris existed in Galilee. Sepphoris was adorned with Greek architecture and cultural influences, the ruins still exist. These were rural people with access to philosophical ideas. Stoicism, Aristotelianism, and Platonism would have informed Nazareth, Capernaum and Magdala, differing with the old Rabbinic ways. Even figures like Paul of Tarsus and the author of John’s Gospel integrated philosophical themes into their writings. 

Sepphoris 

John 8:32: Jesus’s teaching, 'Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free,' parallels Plato’s idea that philosophy liberates the soul (Phaedo 67d).

Matthew 6:34: Jesus's advice to not worry about tomorrow resonates with Seneca’s Stoic emphasis on focusing on the present (Letters from a Stoic).

The Talmudic portrayal of Jesus 500 CE stems from an older verbal 'Pantera' tradition, pre-dating Celsus 120-130 CE, who mentioned the polemics therein, in his writings against the Christians. The Talmud includes accusations of Jesus violating Jewish law, burning food on the Sabbath. Yes, it sounds petty, but there are more to these things than I can cover here. The offence of food burning, seems to imply that his prosecutors were framing him of practicing some kind of pagan ritual. In the bible the man was called a Samaritan. Orthodox Jews recognised these people as heretics—this snobbery is a common theme. Was this a Shia and Sunni Muslim kind of deal? It reminds me of Joseph Smith and his Christian enemies, but there were likely many Galilean Jews all of whom were considered to be 'led astray'. The offence of his burning food in public strikes me as a reference to how Greeks made their offerings to their gods, consuming it openly mocks the complaints against his self claimed divinity. It's plausable that Galilean spirituality clashed with the established Jewish religious order.

Philo of Alexandria said the soul is divine and virtuous people are 'sons of God,' reflecting Stoic ideas of the divine Logos and universal reason. They echo in early Christian thought, especially the Gnostics. 

The universalism and inner spirituality of Jesus, was at odds with strict ritual observance. We know Jesus was not welcomed at all by religious leaders because it contrasted with covenantal law going back to Abraham and Moses. The shift aligns with Hellenistic philosophy, which valued personal virtue and the universality of divine reason. 

Heraclitus: “The divine is the logos, present within all things, and accessible through inner reflection.” (Fragments, 50)

Jesus: "The kingdom of God is within you." (Luke 17:21)

Plato: “He who loves the truth and is gentle in spirit is the true philosopher, akin to the divine.” (Republic, 514a)

Jesus: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God." (Matthew 5:9)

Tiberias Galilee

People who lived within synchronised Jewish communities achieved new ideas surrounding moral and intellectual enlightenment. They could consider one another as 'sons of God' under such paradigms. When God, Eloah or Elohim could be interchangeable with Platonic and Stoic ideals. This synthesis of divine qualities may have shaped the Jesus movement driving theological discourse with the rigid Rabbinic Orthodoxy of the time. 

The Greek translation of Hebrew Scriptures (the Septuagint) also introduced subtle philosophical perspectives into Jewish discourse. Many pious Torah consuming Galileans inherited generations of Zeus, Hermes and Socrates, and all that comes with it! A synthesis of the philosophical and theological took form, poles apart from the prevailing Jewish norms of the Sanhedrin in Roman occupied Jerusalem. 

Epistemic Merit: Practical Intelligence vs. Intellectual Abstraction in Modern Thought

What's the Difference Between and Intellect and General All-Round Common Sense? 

Intellect vs. Practical Common Sense...

Let's try and nail this one down for good, shall we? The difference between an intellectual character and an individual with practical skills, comes down to the nature and application of their respective talents. To be called intellectual, an individual is usually noted to entertain numerous academic ideas, possibly philosophical, theological or political material which is usually evidence based. They might form their own theories or opinions and search for underpinning abstract thought connecting ideas. Yes, critical thinking, analysis, and synthesis of information all factor into the their discipline for seeking truth. Why? Well, the intellect is usually associated with academic pursuits, and the intellectual might also be familiar with research and scholarly material and methodology. It fits.

The Non-Intellectual Person Who is Good at Doing Stuff...

You have to credit those faithful learners who developed a set of proficient skills! They exhibit both knowledge and intelligence when performing specific jobs. They solve problems, or create products; the adjective word 'intellectual' does not apply to these roles in the same manner. In many ways, a taskmaster or DIY expert they have different skillsets most of which command respect. That is the dividing line. 

The Self-Educated Intellectual Is Awesome! 

Now hold on! It's paramount to put it out there, that these . . . well, 'intellectuals' are not exclusively the highest of the high! No, you don't have to be an eyebrow posturing youtube debater with a posh degree! Forget pompous professors in tweed jackets! Have you ever argued politics online or down the pub? Tried to digest a little of your countries history or wrestled with the finer details of the mind? Bosh! That's your intellectual flame. Don't forget, you can be a cleaner or a carer and also an insightful intellectual. 

Intelligence can Pack a Punch! 

Just look at our worlds best athletes! This class of intelligence is made up of both spatial awareness, muscle memory and strategy; consider athletic genius involved in sports excellence, such as spatial awareness, split second decision-making under intense pressure, athletes must adapt to the game, they also have to retain physical coordination which requires intelligence especially with regards to sport when an ability to read the game and react is expected. Look at Mike Tyson as an example of boxing genius! The same goes for that one mechanic who can fix any engine with his eyes closed. Impressive people. You see the intelligence if you casually watch the skilled barista whipping up latte art and delighting customers, despite the chaos of the busy coffee shop! Intelligent people are not always intellectual. Intellectuals can have many areas weakness. 

Our Intelligence Zig-Zags! 

After learning about intellectualism recently, I was pleased and stopped buying into that old fallacy that intellectual people are the smartest. You see, intelligence zig-zags, and it's as diverse as the entire pop vinyl collection. Bright sparks, intellectual or not, often struggle with some basic tasks: Einstein was notably absent minded and forgetful, he struggled with his shoelaces and personal relationships. Isaac Newton often neglected himself and could not cook. A compelling intellectual type character might hold that superiority complex and somewhat distanced in their own thoughts juggling ideas and arguments. I think that's a fair point to conclude on, we all have strengths and weaknesses! Don't under value your own spark! 

Theocratic Echoes: Social Theological Influence in Right-Wing Political Circles

Muscular Christianity: Saviour or Spoiler for Europe?

Bob Soco is a YouTuber active at Speakers Corner

Speaker's Corner is situated in Hyde Park, London. It has long been a place for open debate and free expression. Here we can expect to find Bob Soco, who seems like a nice man. However, some may find him distasteful when he shouts in debates and uses sneaky sophism. Butting in and demanding evidence is comical before the brief moment of wordless bible page turning. It is an unusual gathering to watch. He really is a compelling character who could fit beautifully into a novel. Everyone should see the dialogue heat up; respect and self-restraint are called-for in that place, it can seem like it's balancing on a knife edge! 

Soco Studio captures all the footage of Bob as he dismantles Islamic views from his right-wing Christian paradigm. The videos are edited before being uploaded onto YouTube. Bob 'the Builder' Soco has praised Tommy Robinson, and stands firmly patriotic, proud of his English heritage—fair play. It is almost like a continuation of those old Atheism vs. Theism debates common during Christopher Hitchins days. Instead, however, Bob Soco brings Christianity vs. Islam, also he'll oppose the liberal media and secularism. Of course, his debates are selectively uploaded, cherry-picked for the target audience. I doubt Bob Soco would upload videos like this one below, where he is outplayed:

Response to Bob Soco's Blog here: Why Europe Needs a Muscular Christianity

Embellishing his blog, Bob Soco has an excellent image of what appears to be a modern-styled Templar Knight with a firearm. Perhaps, just for respect, we should not assume this is the actual image he had in mind when he literally refers to 'Muscular Christianity'. 

As I write this, the UK has protested and counter-protested and many criminals rioted. The hundreds of people who have peacefully expressed legitimate concerns about mass immigration, knife crime and Islamism are tarred with the same far-right brush brandished by the British government, leftists and mainstream media. Sadly, grandmothers and grandfathers, moderates and neutrals have all been recorded by social media content creators, one in particular filmed himself being dragged into the same police vans! Now, go back to Soco, who, before all of this, called Islam an evil religion; think of all those non-violent moderates, blameless of any crime and sat in the back of a police riot van on the evening of the Westminster protest. Bob's prosecution and labelling of an entire religion as 'evil' is not just overly simplistic, but ignorant of the complexity, cultures, and nuances within any faith! Historical atrocities of Christianity clearly exist, such as the Crusades to the Spanish Inquisition. The church castrated choir boys and targeted children for unspeakable crimes—no single religion holds a monopoly on moral virtue! Simplistic religious comparisons or judgments are often inaccurate and unfair. Bob, why do you not see that despite all of our faults and virtues, people bring their own ideas and interpretations to their religions? There has to be a better way? 

"You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."

                                    in the Bible somewhere

In his blog, Bob Soco says Europe will need Muscular Christianity, especially due to its low birth rates. I don't know what this kind of Christianity entails precisely, but it is supposed to defend us against his perceived threat coming from his baneful 'elites' who support Islam. It is not implausible. His blog accuses the immigration policies of liberal politicians and secularism for Europe's decline, while pointing at that old Jewish-focused conspiracy theory blaming Jews for distraction and manipulation. Bob offers no meaty evidence. It is a dry read and confusing in places, but his overuse of 'elites' and 'super elites' are the familiar conspiracy theory buzzwords we've all heard before! 

This interesting character points to the fact that immigration is high, a risk, he said, that will change European culture. This is a valid concern and vital for political discussion and not a beefy theocratic counter religion. Such monotheism could not be expected to pressurise Europeans into breeding more! It cannot force Islamic youth to use contraception! These are harsh ideas for peace time Europe, it shows why Church and State need to be separate. 

Western secularism is a principle that emerged from the enlightenment, and it guides the Western world, shaping British culture. It has promoted scientific fact, while also granting a multi-faith country. It also supported Catholicism in the 17th century, as well as the other major faiths today. It is not anti-theistic, many western secularists have a religion. That being said, such principles could still restrict religious practices that are perceived to be harmful to anyone, and end public funding for such activities; it can influence the regulation of immigration wisely. Some of these elected secular politicians have not listened to the people when they should have. This does not mean western secularism is the enemy. 

As we have seen, Bob 'the Builder' Soco genuinely portrays Islam as a kind of clashing civilization holding dangerous values. Indeed, we can say, similar sentiments may have once been held by his own Saxon ancestors when their holy sites were vandalised by Emperor Charlemagne. This Christian Holy Roman muscle did what Bob is accusing the Islamic folk of doing in his videos; they butchered people—pagan Germanic people. These people died because they did not care to convert to his Jesus religion. Not all Christians/Muslims are violent, yet both religions have profound histories in conquest. If you accept varying degrees of anti-social behaviour do exist across our vast spectrum of religiosity, you'll see that when Christians demonising Islam it is simply committing another antisocial act in itself! Don't ignore that both the Quran and the Bible have passages that can be interpreted as extreme! There is moral religious inconsistency. 

Primarily, we aren't Christian, Islamic, Hindu, Sikh or Buddhist, but human. These labels are another layer, clothing for the soul, but yet, often weaponised. There's quite a radical feel to Bob's blog and his YouTube channel—things must have been heating up for some time in London. I hope it improves soon.