At the beginning of the AD, Judah finds itself a Roman province, and in the absence of strong Jewish rulers, fanatical classes and various ideological groups flourished, including John the Baptist and his group
In this list I will refer to a very interesting episode: the Christian Jesus and the priesthood. In the previous chapter we dealt with the history of the priesthood and its evolution throughout the reign of King Herod and his successors until the year 6 AD, when Judah became a province (although still the sub-province adjacent to the "table" of the Syrian province). From this era onwards, Judea lost its quasi-sovereignty, except for a short period later (the days of King Agrippa, Herod's grandson) and was controlled by the Roman commissioners.
This period was marked by severe crises that befell Judah, both as an integral part of the Roman Empire, and for reasons that were unique to it, when the reasons for the growth of various ideological groups, partly mystical and sectarian-zealous, took shape, considering a very natural phenomenon (against a difficult overall situation) of a desire to change the situation and even in universal and cosmic dimensions. On the one hand, a fanatical ideological class is growing, which Joseph ben Matthieu called the "fourth philosophy", and which was led by Judah the Galilean. This called for the kingdom of God to be placed on the earth and the implication of this is the end of the Roman rule in the region. At the same time, prophets and gnostics appeared, who were followed by crowds, with various experimental and miraculous promises.
In this atmosphere grows John the Baptist (who, according to the Gospel of Lucas, was born through miraculous divine involvement, and is from a famous priestly family - Mishmar Abia) and his disciple-follower, Jesus of Nazareth. This group, shockingly pacifist and with high moral codes, was frowned upon in the eyes of the Romans (who feared a rebellious outbreak under certain circumstances), in the eyes of the temple priests (who received harsh criticism from Jesus and his disciples), in the eyes of the Sanhedrin (who feared the strengthening of forces not from "the school") and in the eyes of the Jewish aristocracy, She also received sharp, sort of "socialist" criticism from the Jesuit group.
In the Gospel of Lucas, it is told about the 12-year-old Jesus who came with his parents to Jerusalem, entered the temple in hiding and studied there with the best teachers and educators, those who noticed his great wisdom and intelligence. Behind this legendary story is hidden the claim regarding the fear of the leaders, including the priests, of the threat expected of them from the talented boy.
In short and to the point, the Jesuit phenomenon caused a reactive problematic among senior currents in the region, and this
Even though Yohanan from this and Jesus from this did not seek to create a new religion, but to present more valuable and moral solutions than that of the priestly and Sanhedrin interpretation at the time.
The head of John the Baptist was beheaded by order of Herod Antipas, son of Herod the King, as an expression of the leadership's disapproval of the new, quasi-monastic phenomenon.
In the Gospel of Matthew (XNUMX) it is told about Jesus who with his disciples and believers approached Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives and he was riding on the city of Ben Hamor "and the multitude of the people who went before him and after him called out saying: Hosanna to the son of David in the name of Jehovah, Hosanna in the highest," that is, they presented him as the King of the Messiah and at least As a prophet, what was clear was that he would provoke a harsh reaction from the leadership.
The Gospel text continues as follows: "And Jesus will come to the temple of God and drive out from there all the sellers and buyers in the temple and will overturn the tables of the money changers and the colonies of the dove sellers. And he said to them: It is written that my house shall be called a house of prayer, and you put it in the cave of Peritz" (Is. 13-12). Jesus therefore seeks to purify the temple from the atmosphere of filth, the greed for money and the burglaries that pervaded it, which is implied even earlier in the writings of Joseph ben Matthew.
The chief priests and the elders of the people attacked Jesus and his disciples with what authority does he do all this? And Jesus answers them in the same way - by what authority and authority do they act and defile the temple.
Indeed, "And the chief priests and the scribes and the elders of the people came together to the court of the high priest named Cephas, and took counsel together to seize Jesus by stealth and kill him. And they said, "But not on a holiday, lest there be an uproar among the people" (Matthew 5:3-2; Mark 14:XNUMX). In the meantime, Yehudah the man of Keriot consulted with the chief priests "and said: What will you give me if we deliver us into your hands? And they will weigh him thirty pieces of silver" (ibid. XNUMX).
Judah was reinforced with many people, equipped with swords and sticks, who were the messengers of the chief priests, that is, the men of the temple guard and the elders of the people. He pointed to Jesus with the agreed sign of a kiss and thus the man was captured. Jesus was led to the house of Caiaphas the high priest and there they gathered and the scribes and elders came. This is a legal gathering of the Sanhedrin, and it tried to find in Jesus something of a serious offense in order to condemn him to death, although the death penalty (laws of souls) was confiscated from the Sanhedrin by order of the Romans. The high priest urged Jesus to confess abominable lies and especially that the Messiah is the Son of God. Jesus understood that the high priest was trying to fail him and therefore remained silent and contented himself with the statement of "You said!" Like the high priest asking for his tongue, or in another version, in the Gospel of Mark, Jesus confirmed the things.
The high priest took out one of Jesus' government as an admission of blasphemy, as an admission of the guilt of blasphemy, tore his clothes and incited the Sanhedrin to condemn him to death. The members of the house immediately attacked Jesus and beat him vigorously.
In the Gospel of Yochanan, another version appears in this language: "Then the chief priests and the Pharisees will convene the Sanhedrin and say, "What shall we do, because this man is doing many signs. If we let him do it, everyone will believe him and the Romans came and took both our land and our people. And one of them, whose name was Caiaphas, and he was a high priest that year, said to them: They will not know anything, nor will they observe, because it is better for us that one man die for the Gentile than the entire nation perish. And this was not a word from his heart, but as he was a high priest that year, he decided that Jesus would die for the people, and not for the people alone, but to gather together the scattered children of God, and they would become one" (John 52:47-XNUMX). This text highlights the danger in the Jesuit phenomenon in the opinion of the High Priesthood and seeks to justify its disappearance in a way that does not place the blame on the heads of the community.
And what's next? "And it was early in the morning (after the night of Jesus' judgment) and all the chief priests and the elders of the people consulted about Jesus to put him to death. And they arrested him and led him away and handed him over to Pontius Pilate the governor (the governor in Judea)" (Matthew 2:1-XNUMX). It follows from this that the Sanhedrin, headed by the High Priesthood, wanted to get rid of Yeshua for the above reasons, but the right to sentence him to death was forfeited and therefore rushed to hand it over to the Commissioner, who has the prerogative to sentence Yeshua (if he so desires) to death. This whole move was based on a normal relationship between the commissioner and the Jewish leadership, i.e. the Sanhedrin, but as we know, from Joseph ben Mattathias we learned that the days of Pontius Pilate's commission were very tense in terms of the relationship with the Jews, and therefore it would be difficult to assume that Pontius Pilate was Receives the "bound" Jesus from the Sanhedrin and listens to their deadly request. This is not because both sides had Jesus as a dead man, but in terms of a "hot potion", when each side rushes to transfer him to the other side.
At the time when Jesus stood before the commissioner's trial, God asked him to be charged with treason and rebellion along the lines of "Are you the King of the Jews?!" And Jesus' answer: "You said!", it was reported that "And the chief priests and the elders spoke about him (Jesus), and he did not answer anything. And Pilate said to him: 'Don't you hear how much they testify about you?!' And they answered him not a single thing" (Matthew 14:11-XNUMX). Before us, then, is a shameful scene during which the priests and elders slander Jesus and humiliate him in the presence of the multitude of people.
More than that - it was customary on the Passover holiday to release one of the times for killing, when a famous criminal named Bar-Abba was sentenced next to Jesus, and it is said that the high priests and elders persuaded and enticed the crowd to support the death of Jesus and the release of Bar-Abba instead. Pilate turns to the crowd and asks him "innocently" - what will be done to Jesus, and the crowd is determined by his, twice with a cry: He will be crucified! Probably under the pressure of the high priests.
As he was nailed to the cross, the priests, the elders and the scribes mocked and attacked him with great bitterness: If you are the Son of God, save your soul and come down from the cross. After he breathed his last, Jesus' body was redeemed by one of his disciples and buried, the high priests and the Pharisees demanded that Pilate, the commissioner, seal the tomb well lest his disciples try to steal it, and he granted their request.
Yohanan and Peter, the distinct disciples of Jesus, followed his path and preached about the renewal of the Jewish, Jewish faith, and Jesus in his time arrived at the Temple and swept away many who were confused. This move was reprehensible in the eyes of the priests, the governor of the temple and those belonging to the group of Sadducees, and therefore they used their force against them and arrested them until the next day. At daylight they will be interrogated by Hanan the high priest, Caiaphas, Yohanan and Alexander and other members of the high priestly family, as part of an extraordinary legal gathering of the Sanhedrin, in order to extort a confession from the detainees on the charge of harming the religious sanctuaries, just like the mini-trial they conducted for Jesus on the eve of his crucifixion. The judges go out for consultation and debate among themselves because the disciples of Jesus have gained overwhelming support in the public for obvious economic, social and ideological reasons. Because of this, they content themselves with no choice but to pass on a warning to John and Peter lest they continue to teach and teach in the name of Jesus.
The two did not respect the directive of the Sanhedrin and continued to teach their Mishnah in the same place, in the Temple, and therefore were arrested again by the High Priest's order. Let them be interrogated while hurling heavy accusations and the legal direction drawn at the time was a death sentence (although the Sanhedrin was prevented from ordering it and carrying it out). And behold, "And one of the Pharisees, Gamaliel by name, stood up in the Sanhedrin, and he is a teacher of the Torah, respected in the eyes of all the people, and ordered the messengers to be taken outside for a short time, and said to them: Men of Israel, beware of these people, what you do to them, because before these days, Thuidas arose And he gave his life as one of the great ones, and about four hundred men clung to him, and he was killed, and all who listened to him were separated and became nothing. And then Judah the Galilean rose up in the days of the book, and many people followed him, and he was also killed, and all who heard him were scattered. And now I say to you: get rid of these people and leave them alone, because this advice and action, if it is from man, is violated, and if it is from God, you cannot violate it, lest you find yourself fighting God" (Acts 39:34-XNUMX).
This text raises several interesting points: first - the mentioned Gamaliel is, so it seems, the old Gamaliel, the president of the Sanhedrin, whose grandson, Rabbi Gamaliel Dibna, would struggle hard against the Christians (at the beginning of the second century AD); Second - the same Gamaliel mentions two events embodied in Joseph ben Mattathias. The first - the phenomenon of soothsayers and soothsayers of various kinds that reflected the period of the commission after the end of the term of office of the sons of Herod, and which threatened the Roman presence in Judea. One of them was Tuidas who, according to the testimony of Joseph ben Mattathias, acted during the days of the Roman governor Phados, pretended to present himself as a prophet and promised to miraculously split the Jordan in two and bring many multitudes through it. He gathered around him many supporters (about four hundred according to the words of the New Testament), was captured and executed by the Romans. The second event was connected with the appearance of Yehuda the Galilean who opposed the execution of the census of property valuations in Judea initiated by the Romans. He wrapped his resolute opposition in a distinct anti-Roman ideology, what Joseph ben Matthieu calls the "fourth philosophy".
The High Priesthood therefore wanted to show muscle at a time when the Herodian royal house ceased to function. This is the period of the commissioners when a somewhat chaotic atmosphere is brewing in Rome, and this is the radiation on the historical events in the Judean estate. During it, the High Priesthood sought to restore Ataret to its former glory and lead the Jewish public. One of the proofs of this is its function in the case of Jesus and the beginning of Christianity. It shows strength on the one hand and cooperation with the Roman government on the other. This affair is somewhat similar to the attempts of the priesthood to strengthen itself in the Persian era, immediately after the return of Zion.
The series of articles "The Priesthood You Didn't Know" by Dr. Yehiam Sorek
- Part I - the end of the First Temple and the exile in Babylon
- Part II - Return to Zion
- Part III - The Hellenistic period
- Part XNUMX - The priesthood in Marumiya
- Part XNUMX - The priesthood makes muscles
- Part XNUMX - Matthew turns over in his grave
- Part XNUMX - The priesthood begins to lose height
- Part VIII - The reign of Hyrcanus
- Part IX - Herod stirs up the priesthood
34 תגובות
Jesus/pbuh is a historical figure like our father Abraham and like our rabbi Moses so he cannot be dismissed, the professor does not use miracles and does not tell you that Jesus died because of our sins and we should return to... and all the missionary terminology. He selects the scriptures and takes the things that are linked by Josephus Pelatius and connects them, we must not disconnect from the problems that existed even then within the Jewish society of rule and power, yes both within the priesthood and within the group that later ruled the Pharisees from whom the sages came.
It must not be ignored that the belief that Jesus is the son of God was also created only a few years after in the 4th century when Constantine made it a formal religion and for that the evidence and completed the parts that make Jesus the "Son of God". This can be examined according to a stylistic change that exists within the texts that show why before.
Jesus did not want to establish a new religion and wanted to return the people of Israel to the right path and introduce social justice and morality on the one hand and on the other hand he wanted to clean the temple. He was influenced by the groups that roamed the Judean desert that were close to Bethlehem and was also probably close to certain Pharisees and tried to create a framework that would connect the things through the fact that he chose from the common people from the poor from the isolated among the people.
There is no doubt that this is a fascinating figure who tried to bring about an internal change within the people and was used throughout history by the haters of the Jewish people as part of a false propaganda aimed at putting the supremacy of the new religion over the Jewish religion from which Jesus belongs and that Saul Paul who is credited with founding the church which is also information and a false claim . It is enough to know the idea of the 7 commandments of Noah and to read Jacob's words about the Gentiles in the book of Acts of the Apostles. In order to understand that the so-called community or the early church was intended to allow Gentiles who did not want to convert and knew the Holy One through the believers to come and also to thank Jesus whom they saw as the Messiah or as a wise prophet who revealed the Creator to them through the apostles.
from the broader aspect of human development, in the context of adopting lifestyles and ways of governance; It would be correct in our time to refer to the facts below:
1 . The Christian Jesus was crucified and became a saint in the eyes of many believers around the world - for generations.
2. It would be correct to analyze and make comparisons between religions, ways of government, and it turns out that the method that was able to better monitor the income and assets, survived better.
3. At the same time as the unusual success of Christianity and despite the opposition of the church; Humanity has developed science and advanced forms of government in relation to the form of democracy, despite being evil in its minority.
4. In view of what has happened to humanity in the past, in the form of world wars, epidemics and more; It would be correct to mobilize the full range of human reason (educational and scientific), with the aim of providing a solution to future problems, which must be taken into account, that everything humanity has experienced in the past - pales in comparison to what is expected in the future.
Dr. Shurk,
I continue to admire your patience to respond to dark and provocative comments...thank you!
Indeed...even though we are already in the 21st century, there is still a lot of darkness, ignorance and religious fanaticism in our world.
These are probably inescapable elements of our human nature despite progress, technology and ages of enlightenment, science and free thought.
Please keep posting.
Each of your articles is enlightening and enlightening, and you already have one loyal reader...
I would appreciate it if you would refer to the recent discussion on the subject of the Dead Sea cults in connection with the buried scrolls and their origin.
Hello to Google
Thank you for your response and below is my brief response:
First of all - there is no proof, even partially solid, of the existence of any of the characters in the ancient era in the XNUMXth century, with the exception of a few exceptional cases.
Second - on the principle level yes, but the post-Herodian space was filled by state and powerful figures such as the Roman commissioners and the heads of the Sanhedrin, who were not from the Pharisees.
Thirdly - it is certainly possible to associate this, and this opinion is held by several researchers, but first the connection between Jesuitism and the Pharisees must be found. John the Baptist and Jesus grew out of the special atmosphere of the sect of the Judean desert, which was far from the Pharisees. The Sadducees in any case fought against the Pharisees, and one of the difficult results of this struggle, among other things, was the lever to break out the great rebellion among the Romans.
Dr. Sorek.
I have no method and no concept, I did not express bewilderment and did not understand the connection to nihilism.
And after the table is clean - I will rest, and I will ask more questions and if you take the time to answer me - my thanks are given in advance.
I understand from your answer that there is no proof of the existence of Jesus (but I assume that there is proof of the existence of some of the others involved in the story such as the XNUMXth century Cephas and Pontius Pilate).
In the last paragraph (which is interesting in your article) - you claim that the High Priesthood wanted to show muscle after the fall of Herod's house.
Can such behavior be attributed to Pharisees as well?
Was there a struggle between the Pharisees and the priests for control and power?
Can the mythical Jesus be associated with the Pharisee struggle - if there was such a thing? (despite your claim that "there was scorn... in the eyes of the Sanhedrin (which feared the strengthening of forces that are not from "Beit Sfra")?)
Dear Friends
Below are my responses
Lakhla Maboa: I understand that the foam came out of me due to my use of the New Testament - a composition whose degree of credibility does not fall here and there from the degree of credibility of the Old Testament (oops, the Bible), and therefore the disbeliever, in the same way disbelieves. I used the writings of the New Testament because they extend much longer the The unfolding of events confirms Josephus. I tried, however, not to get carried away by some purely missionary tendency.
By the way, the priests of the Inquisition did not persecute Jews, but Maranos-Conversos-who were allegedly converting to Christianity for purely economic and prestigious reasons.
To Isaiah the servant of Hashem: the saying life and death in the hand of the tongue also boomerangs for the irrelevant slanders you use. Whether the evangelical sayings were used against the Jews or not, this does not prevent the engagement with the subject, and the same will be said about the engagement with the Bible.
Lashmulik - Rather enlighten me regarding the Talmudic text concerning our case and I will refer to it, since I am aware of the Talmudic texts.
To Gogil: You must address your question and your puzzlement to most of the personalities and figures in the ancient era. There is no certainty, if we follow your method and even the nihilistic view (of which I am one of its supporters), that personalities such as Saul, David, Solomon, Judah the Maccabee and others acted, except as those whose existence was confirmed through myths only. However, the historian will recognize, without choice, the fact that something was written about one or another character. It was important for the writer-editor-signer to mention the character and his activities. The historian will ask to examine the reliability of the bars in the light of known historiosophical and historiographical parameters, and then he is invited to reach conclusions with reasonable plausibility.
Dr. Sorek - Is there proof of the historical existence of Jesus?
If so, what is it?
Avi,
For you at least, I hope that you are aware of the facts written on your website and that you do not close your eyes due to mental inability to recognize the living facts - black and white and recognize the strange process that is happening right under your nose.
Isaiah:
I've always liked honest and straightforward responses and your latest response does meet those qualifications.
I'm not cynical either.
I announce - however - that I intend to continue demanding that you justify your claims (or admit that you avoid justifying them) in the future as well.
Michael R. – Why are you pulling me with my tongue? I don't want to confront you.
Things were enough for Khimma to imply. If the prayer doesn't mean anything to you, then I didn't succeed in conveying my intention to you and the fault lies entirely with me. Dear, have a good day. I promised (without a vow) that I would not send any more posts to this list and here I am getting dragged again and again. But gentlemen, it's only because this site is fascinating, interesting and second to none (seriously, I'm not being cynical). So forgive me if I don't respond anymore. And if you claim that I'm avoiding a confrontation with you - you'll be disappointed. I do dodge.
Isaiah:
But you did not explain why the prayer of folding the tallits should be blessed now (or ever).
I meant the content of the words more than the timing of their utterance. But, strive for proficiency!
Isaiah, what are you implying by bringing up the prayer that all the worshipers are waiting for - after which they can go home?
Last post for this list (without a vow) - I recommend to anyone who has read, against his will, the above list, to say the following prayer:
We must praise the Lord of all, give glory to the creator in the beginning, that we did not act like the heathen of the lands, and we did not become fat like the families of the earth. That we were not divided there like them, (nor) were we destined like all the multitude, (that they bow down to vanity and emptiness, and pray to a god that is not Jesus). And we bow before the King of Kings of Kings, the Holy One, blessed be He, who tilts the heavens and establishes the earth, and whose precious seat is in the heavens above, and dwells in And this at elevated heights. He is our God and there is no other, the truth of our king and nothing else. As it is written in the Torah: And you shall know this day and take it to heart, that Jehovah is the God in the heavens above and on the earth below. no more:
Therefore we pray to you, O Lord our God, to see quickly in the glory of your power, to remove the stones from the earth, and the idols to be cut down, to establish a world in the kingdom of my breasts , and all the sons of flesh will call in your name, to turn to you all the evils of the earth. Let all the inhabitants of Thevel know and know, for to You shall every knee bow, every tongue shall be satisfied. Before you, O our God, they will kneel and fall, and to the honor of your precious name they will give, and they will all receive the burden of your kingdom, and you will reign over them quickly forever and ever. Because it is your kingdom, and forever and ever you will reign in honor, as it is written in your Torah: The Lord will reign forever and ever: and it is said: And the Lord will be king over all the earth. On that day God will be one and his name will be one:
Here is a link for those who want to get a picture from a less sensational angle -
http://www.daat.ac.il/encyclopedia/value.asp?id1=2255
For the benefit of anyone who does not know and wants to know the truth (that part of the truth that is known today) about the founder of Christianity, I attach here, as a counterweight to the anti-Semitic version brought up above, a link to a well-known and respected website, where you can read a balanced picture, and not a dubious Indiana III-style picaresque a miracle Here is the link and I know that Mr. Blizovsky will not delete it, being an honest person and a lover of freedom of expression, no less than me -
http://www.daat.ac.il/encyclopedia/value.asp?id1=2255
Mr. Blizovsky,
I did not disrespect the author. Precisely because of his honor and due to the academic aura that accompanies every word that comes out from under his keyboard, he should be careful. Haters of Israel eagerly collect references for their beastly hatred and bloodshed, and they will dismiss any such writing as a source of great loot, claiming that "even a respected Israeli scholar confirms it." The issue is too charged and saturated with the blood of millions of Jews throughout the generations to be taken lightly. You fully understand that the accepted "Christian" version of the circumstances of Christ's death was well written by the Roman urge to clear their conscience for having crucified their "Messiah" themselves. What is easier than to divert the fire of the believers' anger towards the Jewish minority persecuted by incitement? And this they have done with deadly efficiency throughout the ages. And here we are, in our generation, adding fuel to the fire and adopting Satan's version on the basis of the confused and embarrassing text called "the Gospel"?
incidentally
I have now gone through all of his research again
I have not seen a single quote from the Talmud
Although it is the most reliable historical document that we know of its existence throughout the years
In front of documents that "emerged" much later...
Isn't there a bit of a tendency of ifka to be found here?
And searching for a priesthood that you did not know leads us to find a priesthood that no one knew
my father
I don't have a problem if a researcher researches and it doesn't really matter to me if he studied it for 2000 years or 20
But I am allowed not to accept a study that seems "addicted" even if a doctor writes it
Right?
I really think you have completely exaggerated
You are relying on a text that you admit is unreliable
on the grounds of "what to do - that's what there is"
and deliberately ignores the Talmud version
You yourself, while reading the text, understand that there is a problem with the story - because the Jews then did not have the authority to kill
But prefer to leave the anti-Semitic version for the piquancy of the research
There is a version in the Talmud for the whole story and it is much more reliable, I suggest you study it and verify it against these gibberish gibberish...
So it's true, the story will be less spicy - but what to do if you have to face the truth
Isaiah, give Dr. Sorek credit for a subject he is well versed in and has been researching for decades as a historian.
What is the contribution of your friends who have already studied for 2000 years but decided that it is permissible to investigate and that it is forbidden to investigate? That's why we got to where we are.
Dr. Shork,
Isn't it true that things like the ones you wrote here have been used for thousands of years as a pretext for pogroms, persecutions, hatred of Jews, defamation, torture, forced conversion, burning them at the stake, and more?! And if so, why do you lend your hand to the continued publication of satanic plots?
Will your next chapter, in the fictional suspense plot you concoct here about the priesthood, be a quote from your reliable historical source "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion".
Life and death in the hand of the tongue, respected doctor.
Do you think the Gospel quotes are "the priesthood you did not know"?
And what else will you do to discredit Judaism?
And do you hold a PhD? You are a disgrace. Fallen in Nepalim. be ashamed
Bringing anti-Semitic Christian propaganda, under the guise of a piece of history.
How are you different from the priests of the Inquisition for example?
You brought the anti-Semitic, Jew-hating version of Christianity in full, a la Mel Gibson and his Passion. You added almost nothing of your own. Will this be called an academic article?
I know that my father Blizovsky is a known hater of religion. He already received his punishment in this world. retroactively.
Why don't you bring in your next article a review of the no less convincing counter-arguments, and accepted by historians, of historians considered "a little more" than you, such as David Flosser?
Why don't you bring the historical criminal analysis of Judge Haim Cohen who wrote "The Trial and Death of the Christian Jesus", in which he contrasts the versions of the Gospels and Joseph son of Matthew and turns them into a legal jurisprudence, a real circus, and shows you how much Christianity is founded on chicken's knees? Cohen's book is worth reading no less than the children's version of the Gospels.
After all, Judea was then ruled by a Roman procurator. It was the Romans who determined that Jesus was a threat - and they were the ones who crucified him. All the bogus stories of the Gospels, as well as Josephus forgeries are nonsense. After all, it is known that Christian monks censored Josephus ben Matthew hundreds of years after the events themselves - and his version came to us from their mouths, not from his mouth!
And this is just one chapter among many.
The evangelicals themselves contradict each other.
Hello point
Indeed, the Gospels are not a historical source, but the lack of information about the period discussed in Josephus leads us to need the New Testament, and with a limited warranty of course.
Also, the texts were selected and examined in a careful comparison between the Gospel books.
Thirdly - the little that has been revealed from the writings of Joseph ben Mattathias confirms the picture of the situation depicted in detail in the New Testament.
Fourth - the problem of historical reliability arises for almost every text from the ancient period, and even from the selection of Roman historians.
Best regards
Yehiam
To the point - because that's what the Romans called it. Province is a later disruption.
I read to the middle and realized that you are telling us from the Evangelion.
what's the point After all, the historical stories in the Evangelion are less reliable than the claim that the world was created ~6000 years ago.
Why not write a province?