An Ignominious End
Like his earlier works, Ehrman's How Jesus Became God casts doubt on much of the New Testament. For centuries, people have been brainwashed into thinking Jesus was taken down from the cross right after he died, and placed in a tomb, which on the third day was found empty. In fact, this narrative is fictional. The (likely) truth is much more grim.
It is noteworthy that the earliest christian writings, those of Paul, do not mention christ's putative undertaker, Joseph of Arimathea, or an empty tomb. (Nor do they mention "miracles.") All of these were invented by later gospel writers. So what really happened to the corpse?
Renowned scholar J. D. Crossan suggests Jesus was eaten by dogs. Ehrman says we can't be sure what happened, but scavenging by vultures or dogs was far more likely than a decent burial, for several reasons.
First, it was standard Roman practice to leave the condemned on the cross to be eaten by birds. Or, if the body had to be taken down soon after death, it was dumped and left for the dogs. Interestingly, the crucifixion occurred at a place called golgatha ("skull"). The name suggests it was littered with human remains. That would be further evidence against the gospel version, since bodies were evidently just left there. Ehrman pointed out that golgatha may have just looked like a skull. But for a place of execution to happen to look like a skull seems too much of a coincidence.
Another reason to doubt a decent burial occurred is the lack of influential people who were sympathetic to Jesus. His disciples had fled and he had no family in Jerusalem. Those in power, the Sanhedrin and the Romans, were unlikely to have shown any mercy. The Jewish authorities had been eager to have Jesus eliminated. It would've suited their purposes if the body of a rabble rouser was ravaged by canines or vultures. No doubt, the Romans felt exactly the same way. Jesus was executed for calling himself the King of the Jews. That was tantamount to rebellion, so the Romans had to mete out exemplary punishment. Crucifixion was only the first part of it. Historical evidence cited by Ehrman shows that Pilate, then prefect of Judaea, was unlikely to have made an exception for Jesus. Pilate was brutal and cared little for Jewish sensitivities. Jesus was almost certainly eaten by scavengers.
What a supreme irony--the person long exalted as the "son of god" ended up as dog food. His corpse was torn open and stripped of flesh, chewed and pooped on....the most disgusting and ignominious fate imaginable. If only more people knew the truth (or most probable outcome), they'd find better things to believe in.
It is noteworthy that the earliest christian writings, those of Paul, do not mention christ's putative undertaker, Joseph of Arimathea, or an empty tomb. (Nor do they mention "miracles.") All of these were invented by later gospel writers. So what really happened to the corpse?
Renowned scholar J. D. Crossan suggests Jesus was eaten by dogs. Ehrman says we can't be sure what happened, but scavenging by vultures or dogs was far more likely than a decent burial, for several reasons.
First, it was standard Roman practice to leave the condemned on the cross to be eaten by birds. Or, if the body had to be taken down soon after death, it was dumped and left for the dogs. Interestingly, the crucifixion occurred at a place called golgatha ("skull"). The name suggests it was littered with human remains. That would be further evidence against the gospel version, since bodies were evidently just left there. Ehrman pointed out that golgatha may have just looked like a skull. But for a place of execution to happen to look like a skull seems too much of a coincidence.
Another reason to doubt a decent burial occurred is the lack of influential people who were sympathetic to Jesus. His disciples had fled and he had no family in Jerusalem. Those in power, the Sanhedrin and the Romans, were unlikely to have shown any mercy. The Jewish authorities had been eager to have Jesus eliminated. It would've suited their purposes if the body of a rabble rouser was ravaged by canines or vultures. No doubt, the Romans felt exactly the same way. Jesus was executed for calling himself the King of the Jews. That was tantamount to rebellion, so the Romans had to mete out exemplary punishment. Crucifixion was only the first part of it. Historical evidence cited by Ehrman shows that Pilate, then prefect of Judaea, was unlikely to have made an exception for Jesus. Pilate was brutal and cared little for Jewish sensitivities. Jesus was almost certainly eaten by scavengers.
What a supreme irony--the person long exalted as the "son of god" ended up as dog food. His corpse was torn open and stripped of flesh, chewed and pooped on....the most disgusting and ignominious fate imaginable. If only more people knew the truth (or most probable outcome), they'd find better things to believe in.
posted by starman at 4:11 AM
4 Comments:
I read an article in Yahoo news about jihadists in Syria. It said that they crucified two individuals.
So maybe Assad isn't as bad as his enemies.
But back on topic, the early christians were so impressed by the resurrection they were prepared to make up almost anything, including "miracles," an empty tomb and fictitious undertaker, to help win converts. Something "real' (if only a postmortem visionary experience, as Ehrman suggests) must have happened, to get two(?) or more disciples to believe they had seen the risen christ. But while Paul had such an experience himself (presumably Peter too and James?), the "empty tomb" etc, which he didn't mention, appear to have been stories made up a decade or so later.
Just the other day, I was musing on what kind of "miracle" might impress modern, scientifically-minded people enough to warraant their paying any attention to a person like myself whose message they were more predisposed to ignore. I hit upon the notion of being "born again" but it would have to be quite different from the way it is used by Christians today. It might be fun to ponder that creatively!
But really the way I expect people to start listening to me is only when their rotten economic system collapses so they'll realize that they need to change it.
Always good to hear from you, Roger. :) Among the miracles we'll soon need is something like the transfiguration. Undoubtedly another phony story, but you and I have been waiting for better times for decades, without significant results, and we're not immortal. Unless we're miraculously rejuvanated, we're unlikely to see any revolution--either your kind or mine--in our lifetimes.
But back on topic. The notion of the tomb found empty on the third day is another invention. It is based on the story of jonah, swallowed by the whale for three days and then regurgitated, symbolizing restored life. There was probably no tomb at all and while some disciples undoubtedly had visions of jesus, they may have occurred weeks after the crucifixion not days.
Btw the disciples, some of whom eventually returned to Jerusalem, must've told Mary Magdalene and other women, who may have witnessed the truth--scavenging--to keep quiet, and adhere to a new narrative in which they figured prominently--going to the "tomb" and finding it empty.
Post a Comment
<< Home