The sun., 1897-01-24

Essenian socisty. That sooiesy was his model
Of the kingdom of heaven upon earth; CON-
munity In which there was no right OF private
property. no marriage. no greed. violence. sem
susli,y. wrone-doing. brutality. nor smbition'
no misfortune, no vice. no Elm He contem-
plated, In the nrst plscc. = religious reforna-
ton In Judea. He sought to revive the Mosaic
legislation and TO abroGate the superpoeed rao-
binical ob.ervances. Mr.. Fluerel thinks that.
slowly. he may have realized that not y is~ oil
the pcntaieucbical laws, also, remnants OF pr"-
Mosaic ages, were superannuated. as already the
Talmud had regarded them. In tie second
place. he contemplated social reform. arodis-
tribution OF wealth on the pattern OF the Essen
ian community. He. further. may have con-
templated Innovations against the jewish
aristocracy, lay and prisstiy; and. lastly.
revolution against Rome and against the gods
of Rome. the reestsblishment OF prophetic
monotheism and ethics. the kingdom OF
heaven upon earth. Having thu. set himself
against tho hierarchs aud the rich. against
the Hebrew Phsrisees and saducecs. against
Rome's world dominion and the dominant
rolytheism, he eventually comprehended that
he had provoked all the powers OF the time.
social. political. and religious; that al suthori-
ties were against him. and that. therefore. the
crisis OF his life was At hand.
According to the author Of this work. who IL .
profound student of the Tslmud and Of Jewish
history. the current view of the trial OF Jesus
cannot be reconciied with the Mosaic Talmudio
code. The popular notions do not tally with
the provisions OF the Mosaic law. We are as
sursd that careful pcrusal Of those provisions
will afford conclusive proof that Jesus could not
Be tried. much less condemned. py . regular
jewish court or Sanhedrim: that his judicial
condemnation and execution cannot be laid at
the door OF the osaic-Rabbinicai jurispru-
dence; that, a. q matter OF fact. Jesus was not
tried by . regular court; that he was
tried. II at all. by what We should now
term . packed jury. made up Of the
creatures Of the high priest, the high clergy.
and the aristocracy. whom he had repeatedly
and vehemently denounced. and By whom In
turn he was rsmorseiessly prosecuted. Il is with
peculiar interest that we follow Mr.. Fluegels
review Of the Mosaic criminal jurisprudence,
90 far as II bears upon the case Of Jesus II 10
pointed out that the Mosaic law condemns unto
death any false prophet who would persuade
tho people to worship false gods. But Jesus
never did anything OF the kind. Even II he
claimed the role OF . Messiah. this was not
to idolatry. nor to the worship
Of false gods. for Messiah means the
anointed and appointed jewish leader. .
Davidio king. According TO Jewish mys-
tics. tho Messiah would be the con Of
God. as even David is termed By the psalmists;
but he would be not God. not coetsrnsl. not .
likeness nor partner of the Deity. He would
be, and remain. . creature. however exalted
and sublime. Several mon. before and after
Jesus, laid claim to the MessiAhship. but never
did . Jewish court e-imnsily punish them.
they were not condemned By the Jewish na-
tion; on the contrary. they were lamented. By
Rome. indeed. they were punished. but BY their
compatriots they were followed enthusiastic
caliy TO war and death. One Erekiah. . Messiah
claimant was executed By Herod. for which the
latter was accused of murder before the San
hedrim. and would have been put TO death
had he not found an opportunity 70 escape.
II.
Again. the popular conception Of the trial
and death OF Jesus deduced from the Gospel
narratives cannot be reconciled with the forms
Of procedure prescribed by the Taimudi Law.
Tho current view Of the tragedy 10 that. on the
svc OF the Passover. Jesus celebrated with his
disciples the customary family banquet He
then went up TO the mountain TO pray and pre-
pare himself fer the imminent supreme ordeal. |
Toward morning he was betrayed by adiscipls
arrested By servants Of the High Priest brought
10 the High Priests court. condemned by the |
assembled Judges. delivered over TO PLATE, the |
Roman procurator. who. after hesitAting and |
appealing for mercy to the mob. at last con- |
demned him. had him executed, and, In the !
evening. buried. all IN one day. This 10. at |
all events. the current view. though the :
Gospels are not perfectly coherent and definite !
upon the point. Mr.. Fluegel. while unwilling !
10 evfncs lack OF respect for any sacred record
points out that what 10 supposed to have oc- |
CURED was. under Talmudic law. illegal and |
impossible. According to Talmudic law. no one |
was punished for religious opinions otherwise |
than by rebuks; acts not opinions were crimi. |
nal; least criminal Of all were opinions Of such
An abstract nature as the Messiah claims in |
volve. Again, according to Talmudio law no |
could be condemned on his own testi- |
mony. nor on . holiday. nor could he be con. |
hemned on the same day on which he was nrst |
accused. IL WAS forbidden to question an ac- |
rused person for tho purpose OF slicitinr
from him Information concerning the charge |
brought against him, much less WAS IL |
allowable to use threats or blows to extort |
\ confession from him. Self-aecusation in |
any shape or form WAS prohibited In q
Jewish court Every crime must be proven BY |
two eyewitnesses of the deed. Moreover q
preliminary warning must have been given the
defendant by those very witnesses. and this
i'm cdiately before the commission Of the
Imputed crime Now. the Gospels show that
here were no such witnesses at all. or. at least
no harmontzing witnesses. but that the High
Priest asked Jesus whether he was the son Of
iod," and. receiving the answer Thou say.
sst" tho High Priest condemned him. Mr.. Flue-
GELS comment is that this was Roman method;
e was not Jewish law. Jesus could not be con.
iemned on varuo accusations based on popular
rumess and hea-say. without any other di-
'ect testimony but his own admission. Mr..
Fluegel asserts that according to Mosaic
RaboinicA law. the incrimination lsvellcd
against Jesus could have been capital only In
'aso the accused had declared himself, in spite
II warnirG. and before witnesses. not simply
he Messiah. but God himself. or identical with
Sod or an incarnation OF Him. But according
% the synoptio Gospels Jesus never claimed to
% God. nor even. according to John