Christ's Crucifixion

I'm not exactly sure how important or not this may be, or the theological implications, but I thought it was interesting history. My ancient Roman history isn't all that great and I just found this article that implies the reason Jesus was crucified was for his disciples carrying weapons.

http://www.newsweek.com/jesus-was-c...les-were-armed-bible-analysis-suggests-271436

“Just as you could be arrested in Rome for even having a dagger, if Jesus’s followers were armed, that would be reason enough to crucify him,” says Martin, whose analysis was published this month in the Journal for the Study of the New Testament.

Click to expand...

http://www.newsweek.com/jesus-was-c...les-were-armed-bible-analysis-suggests-271436

Just wondering people's thoughts on the article.

I think this comment from the Newsweek article itself sums up my original thoughts about it:


Martin also states:


Am I missing something here .. Martin just stated, the Romans wouldn't have tolerated an armed band of Jews roaming the city during Passover. But that is exactly what they did tolerate in this case, isn't it?

..... Judas, one of the twelve, came up accompanied by a crowd with swords and clubs, who were from the chief priests and the scribes and the elders. Mark 14:43​

Hi st worm2,

Well, my first question would be. Was it, or was it not common for someone to carry a knife with them in those days? After all, a knife or dagger type implement would probably be useful in many ways as a they went through their daily living. If it was illegal, as this author would suggest, and Jesus knew all things, would he have condoned their illegal actions? I don't believe we know with any surety that the basic premise of the author's position to be true.

Certainly the Scriptures never once mention such a problem. I'd be inclined to believe that this author is just another in a long list who claim to know the truth, but don't know the 'truth'. They sit around and consider ideas that come into their heads and then try to teach such ideas to others. Never once do the Scriptures give any indication that from the beginning of Jesus' ministry anyone ever discussed this idea that they saw the band of Jesus' followers as some armed and dangerous gang. Where would, some 2,000 years later, such an idea come from that this might be the cause of Jesus' arrest. Further, if the charge was for being armed and dangerous, then what law enforcement entity would only arrest the leader, who we have no proof that he was armed, yet let the armed and dangerous hangers on run free?

For me, it just doesn't hold up as some credible alternative explanation as to why Jesus would have been arrested.

God bless you.
IN Christ, Ted

An excellent example of a Bible event without understanding.

Mostly committed by those who are not born again in their attempt to explain what they have no knowledge or understanding of.

Double post

godenver1 said:

I'm not exactly sure how important or not this may be, or the theological implications, but I thought it was interesting history. My ancient Roman history isn't all that great and I just found this article that implies the reason Jesus was crucified was for his disciples carrying weapons.

http://www.newsweek.com/jesus-was-c...les-were-armed-bible-analysis-suggests-271436



http://www.newsweek.com/jesus-was-c...les-were-armed-bible-analysis-suggests-271436

Just wondering people's thoughts on the article.

Click to expand...

Jesus was unarmed. Peter has the sword - Peter was not crucified and there are no weapons charges at all brought against Christ according to the text of the NT. In fact the Roman judge declares "I find NO FAULT in him" .

And even asks the crowd "WHY what has he done wrong"??

The Romans themselves could not find fault in Christ -- that is not why they agreed to crucify him.

in Christ,

Bob

miamited said:

...my first question would be. Was it, or was it not common for someone to carry a knife with them in those days?

Click to expand...

From Luke we read:

35 He said to them, “When I sent you out without money belt and bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?” They said, “No, nothing.”
36 And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one.
37 “For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, ‘AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS’; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment.”
38 They said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough.” Luke 22:35–38​

Passages such as the one above do seem to indicate that possession of sword or dagger was commonplace in Jesus' day as we not only read Jesus' command to his disciples to buy a sword if they do not already have one, but we also see that at least two of His disciples were already carrying them. Most of my commentaries agree, and some of the commentators state the very opposite of Dr. Martin's premise, that carrying a small weapon for protection from animals and/or people was commonplace at that time and in those lands. You continue:

miamited said:

Certainly the Scriptures never once mention such a problem. I'd be inclined to believe that this author is just another in a long list who claim to know the truth, but don't know the 'truth'. They sit around and consider ideas that come into their heads and then try to teach such ideas to others. Never once do the Scriptures give any indication that from the beginning of Jesus' ministry anyone ever discussed this idea that they saw the band of Jesus' followers as some armed and dangerous gang. Where would, some 2,000 years later, such an idea come from that this might be the cause of Jesus' arrest. Further, if the charge was for being armed and dangerous, then what law enforcement entity would only arrest the leader, who we have no proof that he was armed, yet let the armed and dangerous hangers on run free?

Click to expand...

All very good points .. As one of the article's other critics said, you can drive a truck through some of the holes in Martin's theories .. It almost seems like this guy is looking to prove to us that the Bible would actually teach and support "gun control" legislation if it was written today . Nah, surely not ..

miamited said:

For me, it just doesn't hold up as some credible alternative explanation as to why Jesus would have been arrested.

Click to expand...

I could not agree more. But one thing it did do is make me take another look at the picture I used to have in my mind's eye of the disciples. I will admit that I never "pictured" them as wearing anything beyond a robe and sandals .. which clearly indicates I need to take more time when I study ..

BobRyan said:

Jesus was unarmed. Peter has the sword - Peter was not crucified and there are no weapons charges at all brought against Christ according to the text of the NT. In fact the Roman judge declares "I find NO FAULT in him" .

And even asks the crowd "WHY what has he done wrong"??

The Romans themselves could not find fault in Christ -- that is not why they agreed to crucify him.

in Christ,

Bob

Click to expand...

Exactly...