Jesus' Crucifixion and the Death Penalty

[NotmebutHim]

Over the years, I've wanted to try to understand, from the point of view of human events, why Jesus was crucified.

Now, I am NOT making the argument that He should not have been crucified, because that would be a rejection of the Gospel. The Scriptures say that without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins. And also that Christ had to be the perfect sacrifice for us. In addition, He said Himself that He must be lifted up (when speaking to Nicodemus).

Now to the point of the death penalty, a few theories have been put forth regarding that:

1. The Romans had taken away ALL death penalty rights from the Jews, meaning that the only way to execute a Jew under Roman occupation would be to crucify that person. Which would explain why the Jews changed the charge against Jesus from blasphemy against God to sedition against Rome.

2. The Romans had allowed the Jews to retain death penalty rights, but they (Jews) wouldn't have been satisfied to have Jesus stoned; they wanted to see Him crucified.

3. The Jews had to ask the Romans for permission to carry out a death sentence; the Romans would then allow the Jews to execute someone according to Jewish law.

Then there is this passage in John: "[FONT=&quot]Then Pilate said to them, 'You take Him and judge Him according to your law.'[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Therefore the Jews said to him, 'It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death,' that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled which He spoke, signifying by what death He would die." - John 18:31-32. Was Pilate in this instance giving the Jews permission to execute Jesus according to Jewish law?

Then we get into the matter of whether Stephen was stoned to death legally or by mob action. What complicates that situation is that the coats of the executioners were laid at the feet of Saul of Tarsus. Would Saul, a devout Pharisee, allow Stephen to be executed without Roman permission?

Anyone have any insights on this?[/FONT]

 

[graceNpeace]

Pilate did not want to execute Jesus - he knew He was innocent remember!
If the Sanhedrin had punished Jesus they could not have lawfully executed Him.

The Sanhedrin manipulated the Roman authorities into executing Jesus - no doubt about it.
They succeeded by the very real threat of public disorder - remember the the crowds all baying for blood.
Public order was a BIG issue with the Romans.
Ever since they took over the Province of Palestine this had been an issue because of Jews complete intransigence with respect to several Roman laws and edicts.
There was, at that time, a low-level guerilla war against the Romans - remember the Zealots?
Remember the city was full of Jews from other provinces in the Empire who were there for the Passover.
The romans were always wary whenever these feasts and days of observance came around because the crowds and passions associated with the religious observances could easily degenerate into a riot.

Pilate was faced with a choice:
Execute Jesus and avoid a huge riot; or
Do the right thing and spare Jesus, but risk a riot and the huge loss of face associated with any Roman official who could not control what he under his authority.
He would dearly have loved to remain uninvolved in what he saw as a dispute between different sects of Judaism, but the threat of violence was something that he could not ignore.

Pilate was forced to accede to the demands of the Sanhedrin but attempted to lay blame on the Jews themselves by his public display of washing hands!

As for the murder of Stephen - and it was murder - this was mob action!
However, this took place with the Sanhedrin and the Chief Priest being direct witnesses to Stephens words and were complicit in his murder.
What makes you think that Saul of Tarsus would have cared at that point?
Remember, he was the one who went to the Sanhedrin and asked permission to go to Damascus and persecute those of the Way who had fled there!

 

[Adstar]

Over the years, I've wanted to try to understand, from the point of view of human events, why Jesus was crucified.

Now, I am NOT making the argument that He should not have been crucified, because that would be a rejection of the Gospel. The Scriptures say that without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins. And also that Christ had to be the perfect sacrifice for us. In addition, He said Himself that He must be lifted up (when speaking to Nicodemus).

Now to the point of the death penalty, a few theories have been put forth regarding that:

1. The Romans had taken away ALL death penalty rights from the Jews, meaning that the only way to execute a Jew under Roman occupation would be to crucify that person. Which would explain why the Jews changed the charge against Jesus from blasphemy against God to sedition against Rome.

2. The Romans had allowed the Jews to retain death penalty rights, but they (Jews) wouldn't have been satisfied to have Jesus stoned; they wanted to see Him crucified.

3. The Jews had to ask the Romans for permission to carry out a death sentence; the Romans would then allow the Jews to execute someone according to Jewish law.

Then there is this passage in John: "Then Pilate said to them, 'You take Him and judge Him according to your law.'Therefore the Jews said to him, 'It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death,' that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled which He spoke, signifying by what death He would die." - John 18:31-32. Was Pilate in this instance giving the Jews permission to execute Jesus according to Jewish law?

Then we get into the matter of whether Stephen was stoned to death legally or by mob action. What complicates that situation is that the coats of the executioners were laid at the feet of Saul of Tarsus. Would Saul, a devout Pharisee, allow Stephen to be executed without Roman permission?

Anyone have any insights on this?

The Jewish religious elites wanted Jesus killed, but where in fear of the comon Jewish people. Many of who believed Jesus was a prophet..

Luke 22: KJV
1 "Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover. {2} And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people."

So if you fear killing someone for blasphemy because you fear the comon peoples reaction then you then conspire to get someone else to kill Jesus.. You look at the Roman occupiers and you try to get them to execute Jesus. Therefore any possible blowback from the comon people would be directed against the Roman occupiers.. How do you force the roman govenor to execute Jesus? You say that Jesus was conspiring against Ceasar and that the failure to do so would put pilate under suspicion of being disloyal to Caesar.


John 19: KJV
12 "And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Cæsar’s friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Cæsar."

So they put Pilate on the spot.. Their trumped up charge was that Jesus was proclaiming himself to be a King of the Jews and that Caesar was their only King and if Pilate let Jesus go then the Jews could then claim that pilate himself was being rebellious against Caesar for not executing Jesus.. So Pilate now was dealing with a situation where He could be executed for treason against Caesar for letting Jesus go..

So Pilate was now in a no win situation.. He feared if He executed Jesus then he would have trouble from the comon people who looked upon Jesus as a prophet, and He feared getting into deep trouble with Caesar if he released Jesus who was accused of making himself a king in rebellion against Caesar..

But Pilate was released from this predicament by the mob who shouted for the death of Jesus when they said::


Matthew 27: KJV
24 "¶ When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. {25} Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. {26} ¶ Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified."

This was the release for Pilate.. Once the crowd took the responsibility of the death of Jesus upon themselves Pilate was then able to quickly release Barabbas and deliver Jesus to be executed knowing that any blowback from the people could be directed to those who said ""His blood be on us, and on our children""