Question I m wondering why there s nothing in other views regarding the impossibility of a Jesus Pilate conversation the pun of Barabbas name the fact that Romans had no custom re releasing a condemned prisoner during Passover etc Mostly because much of those are covered in other articles The Barabbas issue is covered in the Barabbas article as are many of the issues secondary to that incident which you bring up here Oh nevermind Read the whole thread Because there are no views about those things that are actually credible I don t know i m just guessing Or perhaps the fact that they are less critical to the story Assuming Jesus didn t exist it doesn t matter whether or not someone else was released in his place He could still be executed It doesn t matter whether someone s name is a pun But it s pretty damn important to the story that Jesus existed Minor details are inconsequential See where I m going with that It s hard to explain I don t want to open a can of worms here so I ll just say I see the irony in a choice between Yeshua son of father bar abba and Yeshua Son of the Father 2nd Person in the Trinity The English language Wikipedia like most English language publications that are not aimed specifically at the skeptic community bends over backwards not to offend any religion partly out of politeness partly out of fear I wonder what the other language Wikipedia have to say about Jesus I think however the place to point out obvious errors in the Bible such as the ones you mention is in the article on that book of the Bible And of course one must be polite NPOV cite sources and all that good stuff Watching a person of a different religion defending their religion is as embarassing as watching a person of a different sexual orientation having sex A humourous analogy but there is truth in it That s almost scary Sounds rather Freudian to me Don t read too much into what I asked it was rhetorical They are things worth discussing Arch resolved part of the one question not to criticize but to make people think I ll have to go look at the other language articles at least those I can read to see how they treat this issue Anyway give the questions some thought Just a quick note once again all the quetions here are actually addressed in the Barabbas article Your kidding me right Rick If your not faint of heart type in Piss Jesus into the search box and see what pops up front and center But I warn you even though I haven t seen it it s nasty and quite offensive indeed No bending over backward in this encyclopedia I assume you mean Piss Christ not Piss Jesus even though I haven t seen it it s nasty and quite offensive indeed It s good to see that you are so reliant on faith in this as in so many other matters but in this case a little bit of actual research might not go amiss Go on I dare you to click on the blue words and be totally shocked by how beautiful and even spiritual this image is Ok so I got one word wrong I don t memorize the titles of every article I come across especially when I don t actually click on them when I know their disgusting I ve heard more than enough to know I do not want to click on that link so I won t it s simple My point was Wikipedia is not censored to respect Christianity there was quite a protest over it in both Wikipedia and in the real world yet it still remains front and center apparently The same goes for many other religions There is no cartel of Christian sensibility Unfortunently How in the name of Krishna Zeus Eloi or any other deity you could mention you could know that something is disgusting whatever that word means without looking a