From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO)
Subject: Re: What did Judas betray?
Organization: HFS, Inc., McLean VA
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 20:07:23 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.235359.14072@imagen.com> avi@hawk.imagen.com writes:
>
>1) The term "round number" is foreign to Hebrew, or the ancient Jewish culture.
>   When the Talmud says "70 years" them mean "70 years".

Taking your figures as valid, then if the Sanhedrin stopped judging capital
cases for 70 years, this means that at the time of Christ's death the
Sanhedrin was not supposed to be judging capital cases, right?

>2) The talmud is a MUCH more reliable source because despite the many years and
>   hardships, there is ONLY 1 version of it (the Jersualem/Babelonyan being
>   complementary). The New Testament however, has 4 different and often 
>   contradictory versions (the 4 gospels) of the same story of Jesus' life and
>   death.

Can we stop this "My book is better than your book" argument?

>3) The Sandhedrin had no special interest in Jesus, even in the New Testament it
>   is said that there were MANY False Messiahs before Jesus and NONE was
>   crucified ! Certainly, there were false Messiahs After Jesus, the most known of
>   which is Shabtai Zvi (300-400 years ago).  Neither was cruficied nor executed
>   in any way, even if their bad influence was MUCH more prominent among jews then
>   Jesus' ever was. (especially true with Shabtai Zvi) - So, why the exception
>   with Jesus ?

Because He was the real McCoy :) and the Sanhedrin knew that he
was a threat to their authority.  Remember, Jesus never claimed to
be a Messiah in the way the word was used at the time.  Most of
the conventional wisdom of the day held the Messiah to be an
earthly king who would once again lead Israel to greatness.  If
that had been Jesus's message i.e. make me king, and I will defeat
your enemies and make you great once again, then odds are that he
would have ended up like the other False messiahs, both before and
after, a forgotten inkblot on the pages of history.  Instead, the
Sanhedrin saw him as a real threat to their power, and wanted to
eliminate Him. 

>4) The Romans, however, had MORE than enough reason to crucify Jesus. Claiming
>   to be the "King Messiah" was a DIRECT CHALLENGE to the Roman Emperor and more
>   than enough reason to be crucified (remember, thieves were crucified, a sin  

No, since Jesus had made it clear time and time again that he was
not interested in an earthly kingship, the Romans would not see
him as a threat.  It is clear from reading the Gospels that Pilate
did not wish to execute Jesus at all.

>   much less dangerous to the Romans, than direct challenge and competetion)
>   The Romans were also the ONLY ones at the time, who had the authority to
>   execute anybody. It was only after the establishment of the Roman-Catholic
>   church, hundreds of years later, that the original story was changed and the
>   Sandhedrin was blamed.

Yes, that is my awareness that only the Romans had the
jurisdiction over capital cases.  That is the legal part of it.
The other part is that the Sanhedrin was able to use the Roman's
jurisdiction over capital cases to further their end, the
elimination of Jesus.  They frightened Pilate into having Jesus
executed by threatening to go over his head to Caesar.  I guess
in Pilate's eyes, one more man dead so that he might not look bad
back home was worth it.

>5) Haim HaCohen Levy, the president of Israel's Supreme Court and a world-renowned
>   legal authority, wrote a book about it (Sorry, Can't remember the title) where
>   he proved  the above, according to ALL the jewish laws and customs of the   
>   time, including the Roman Laws and historical facts.
>

Of course, one must take into account that people of any race,
gender, nationality or creed are fully capable of breaking their
own laws to further their aim.

If your intention on placing the blame squarely on the Romans is
to show the Gospels as being fundamentally false, then I must say
that I strongly disagree with you.  If it is only to place blame
off the Jewish people, then I agree with your goal since blame for
the death of Christ is shared universally, and one people should
not be made the scapegoat.  But I disagree with your method of
"rewriting" history or the Gospels to further your aim.

-- 
John G. Ata - Technical Consultant | Internet:  ata@hfsi.com
HFS, Inc.		  VA20     |     UUCP:  uunet!hfsi!ata
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601	   |    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
McLean, VA  22102	           |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic