...then why did the Jews reject him? Could it be he DIDN'T fulfill the Messianic prophecies of a king who would arise and conquer the nations that oppressed Israel? Could it be he didn't fit the bill for being the messiah at all? Let's face it. Jesus was NOT a savior of anything. He even wound up getting himself executed for blasphemy. Seems he had a narcissistic delusion he was God's special son and went about preaching the near end of the world. Was Israel delivered from Roman rule? Hardly. And 2000 years later everything's the same.
Err no.
As the story goes..
He was killed by the Romans for stirring dissent amongst his followers and he had created or formed a leadership of sorts, one that went contrary to Roman rule and control. Jews did not reject him or kill him. The Romans did.
And crucifixion was reserved for those they wished to make an example of.
Jesus is said to have been executed, not lynched, and by the duly appointed governmental authority of Roman Judea. There was a hearing of some sort, and the official responsible for civil order and Roman peace and justice condemned Jesus. This means that Pilate found something so serious as to warrant the death penalty.
But this was also a particular kind of death penalty. The Romans had an assortment of means by which to carry out a judicial execution; some, such as beheading, were quicker and less painful than crucifixion. Death by crucifixion was reserved for particular crimes and particular classes. Those with proper Roman citizenship were supposed to be immune from crucifixion, although they might be executed by other means. Crucifixion was commonly regarded as not only frighteningly painful but also the most shameful of deaths. Essentially, it was reserved for those who were perceived as raising their hands against Roman rule or those who in some other way seemed to challenge the social order—for example, slaves who attacked their masters, and insurrectionists, such as the many Jews crucified by Roman Gen. Vespasian in the Jewish rebellion of 66-72.
So the most likely crime for which Jesus was crucified is reflected in the Gospels' account of the charge attached to Jesus' cross: "King of the Jews." That is, either Jesus himself claimed to be the Jewish royal messiah, or his followers put out this claim. That would do to get yourself crucified by the Romans.
Indeed, one criterion that ought to be applied more rigorously in modern scholarly proposals about the "historical Jesus" is what we might call the condition of "crucifiability": You ought to produce a picture of Jesus that accounts for him being crucified. Urging people to be kind to one another, or advocating a more flexible interpretation of Jewish law, or even condemning the Temple and its leadership—none of these crimes is likely to have led to crucifixion. For example, first-century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus tells of a man who prophesied against the Temple. Instead of condemning him, the governor decided that he was harmless, although somewhat deranged and annoying to the Temple priests. So, after being flogged, he was released.
The royal-messiah claim would also help explain why Jesus was executed but his followers were not. This wasn't a cell of plotters. Jesus himself was the issue. Furthermore, Pilate took some serious flak for being a bit too violent in his response to Jews and Samaritans who simply demonstrated vigorously against his policies. Pilate probably decided that publicly executing Jesus would snuff out the messianic enthusiasm of his followers without racking up more Jewish bodies than necessary.
And from
page two:
Of course, the Gospels also implicate Jewish religious authorities—specifically, the priestly leaders who managed the Jerusalem Temple under franchise from the Roman government. Many scholars, including E.P. Sanders in Jesus and Judaism, conclude that the Temple leaders were likely involved in Jesus coming to the attention of Pilate. After all, the high priest and his retinue held their posts by demonstrating continuing loyalty to Rome. If they judged that Jesus represented some threat to Roman rule, they were obliged to denounce him. Also, it is not so difficult to grant a certain likelihood to the Gospels' claim that the Temple authorities were at least partly motivated by a resentment of Jesus' criticism of their administration of the Temple, as may be reflected in the account of Jesus overturning the tables of the money-changers who operated in the premises under license from the high priest. But Jewish leaders didn't crucify Jesus. "Crucified under Pontius Pilate" points to where that responsibility lies, with the Roman administration.
As is often the case with religious dogma, it all eventually came down to politics.
Balerion said:
Who are you counting as "the Jews?" There were, at least according to the myth, several Jews who believed him. He was rejected by the establishment, not a people as a whole. And they rejected him because he demanded change that was not comfortable to him. I mean, do you think the Catholic Church would take kindly to someone suggesting they bulldoze the Vatican and turn it into a tent city? Even if he did happen to ride in on an ass, I can't imagine the Pope or his Peeps would listen.
Have you ever heard about
Jesus the Homeless?
It is a statue, of Jesus as a homeless person sleeping on a park bench. The identifying markers that set him aside as Jesus is the crucifixion marks on his feet. As a work of art, it is exceptionally well done and very very lifelike. It's reception, however, is the interesting part of just
how people see or imagine a biblical Jesus (poor)..
A new religious statue in the town of Davidson, N.C., is unlike anything you might see in church.
The statue depicts Jesus as a vagrant sleeping on a park bench. St. Alban's Episcopal Church installed the homeless Jesus statue on its property in the middle of an upscale neighborhood filled with well-kept townhomes.
Jesus is huddled under a blanket with his face and hands obscured; only the crucifixion wounds on his uncovered feet give him away.
The reaction was immediate. Some loved it; some didn't.
"One woman from the neighborhood actually called police the first time she drove by," says David Boraks, editor of DavidsonNews.net. "She thought it was an actual homeless person."
That's right. Somebody called the cops on Jesus.
"Another neighbor, who lives a couple of doors down from the church, wrote us a letter to the editor saying it creeps him out," Boraks added.
Some neighbors feel that it's an insulting depiction of the son of God, and that what appears to be a hobo curled up on a bench demeans the neighborhood.
The woman who called the police had a
very definite idea of Jesus..
"Jesus is not a vagrant, Jesus is not a helpless person who needs our help," Cindy Castano Swannack, who called police after seeing the statue, told WCNC. "We need someone who is capable of meeting our needs, not someone who is also needy."
Forgetting of course that their own religious text explains that Jesus was poor, a vagrant who lived on the charity of others because of his good deeds. To some people, Jesus will come back as a rich dude preaching against Obamacare and helping the poor.
