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.