(11 votes, average: 4.64 out of 5)
Loading...In my previous post I began to deal with the first of two arguments that Craig Evans provides from Josephus. Craig wants to argue that Josephus, a first-century Jewish authority, explicitly indicates that Romans allowed Jews to provide decent burials for their dead. In this first argument Craig provides a concatenation of passages from Josephus that together, Craig argues, indicate that Jews would not leave a corpse (such as that of Jesus) on the cross, but would provide a burial for it. Here is the argument again.
“Josephus asserts the same thing. The Romans, he says, do not require “their subjects to violate their national laws” (Against Apion 2.73).
The Jewish historian and adds that the Roman procurators who succeeded Agrippa I “by abstaining from all interference with the customs of the country kept the nation at peace…” (Jewish War 2.220)
“… customs that included never leaving a “corpse unburied” (Against Apion 2.211).
I dealt with the first quotation in yesterday’s post, where I pointed out that in Against Apion Josephus is not referring to burial practices but to idolatry: Jews were not forced to worship representations of the emperor against their customs. Even if one generalizes the point broadly to say that Romans never forced Jews to do anything contrary to their customs, I argued that (a) this is not true and (b) leaving Jesus’ body on the cross would not require Jews to violate their customs because it was not Jews who put him on the cross in the first place. Jewish law applied to Jews, not to Romans, and it was Romans who executed Jesus.
Jews of course would not have liked for bodies to remain unburied – just as they would not have liked other things Romans did, such as ruling the promised land and requiring Jews to pay tribute. But in some instances, Romans frankly didn’t care what the Jews liked and didn’t liked. When it came to punishing enemies of the state, Romans did what they thought was in their own best self-interests. Our surviving sources indicate that this included not just
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
If Jusus’ body was left on the cross, how come some of his followers came to believe they met or saw him if the dead body was there for everyone to see? Just a complete speculation on my part: maybe instead of empty tomb narrative it was originally an ’empty cross’ narrative? Maybe Jusus’ body one day mysteriously disappeared from the cross and noone knew why? Was it taken a bit earlier by the Romans? Was it stolen by some followers of his? And that could have given the impulse to ponder where his body was? And to his possible sightings? To the mystery of empty cross/tomb/resurrection…
Do we know how long would such a body be kept on the cross? Do we talk days or weeks or months?
Bodies would be left for some days at least. The disciples woulnd’t have known this becaues they appear to have fled to Galilee after the arrest, as suggested by Matthew and mark.
Bart: Where can I find the most accurate and objective analysis of the crucifixion events? I assume it is in one of your books but you may know other sources also. Thanks so much!
I give an account in my book Jesus: Apcalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium. For a very full account in the form of a commentary on the Gospel accounts, see Raymond Brown, The Death of the Messiah.
I think these apologists’ arguments for Jesus being buried are sort of a red herring. It’s nothing special to be crucified or buried. Resurrection is the key. Between Paul and the 4 gospels we have 5 different, I would say contradictory accounts of the resurrection. Paul correctly asserts that the resurrection is the key point of Christianity. You’d think of all the things in the New Testament God would want that story to be clear and consistent.
Again I have to ask: How is it that a scholar of Craig Evans’s experience and reputation thinks he can take quotes so out of context like this? If nothing else, he has to know he’ll be called out for doing so.
You might ask him! He probably will have an explanation.
Good question, Dan. In my experience (as a slightly-older-than-Evans, Baptist-Christian-fundamentalist apologist, in younger days), many Evangelical New Testament scholars are not historians, as defined by Bart (or myself in my many years as a professor in a secular university), but they are actually apologetic theologians, who sadly engage in “quote mining” to defend their religion and are not interested in reading entire ancient texts (which is very hard time consuming work) or more precisely in the difficult research to determine historical context. Bart will be far more charitable than me, but I too have known the prolific work of Evans (with religious publishers) as one of the better (i.e., not so judgmental) “anti-modernist” apologist. His devotion is to his faith and his institutional career, and not primarily to contemporary historical analysis. Evans would agree, in part!
Dr. Ehrman
Why would there even be a need for
Josephof Arimathea( if he existed) to
intervene by going to Pilate asking
for Jesus’ body if Romans respected
the Jewish laws and burial traditions ?
According to the gospels Pilate
had to issue an order, as if making
an exception in this case.
By the way Mary Magdalene and the
other Mary don’t seem to know
Joseph of Arimathea while gospels
claim he was a disciple.
Excellent question/point!
In all of these arguments from Craig, it seems obvious that his goal is to protect faith rather than allow evidence to lead us to reasonable conclusions. The simple fact that he believes in God and the divinity of Christ to begin with, essentially disregarding the body of scientific evidence amassed throughout human history, disqualifies him from the role of objective researcher in my opinion. When one begins with assumption fueled by personal belief, all that follows stands on shaky ground particularly when engaged in scientific discourse. You must give him points for tenacity, however. I wonder if he has ever been required in a debate class to play Devil’s Advocate and base an argument contrary to his own position just to see what he himself is up against and to better understand the opposition. This would at least be scientific.
Muy interesante. Escuche que existe una mencion de Josefo que hace mencion que los judíos aquellos ajusticiados y sus propios enemigos ellos enterraban únicamente por el cumplimiento de la ley.
En relaciona a los ajusticiados hace mencion a crucificados o no han tal mencion por Josefo.
Hi, Dr. Ehrman! My question is unrelated, but I was told—after posting a longer question in another forum—this is the best way to get a response! I was wondering if you could recommend any books in the same vein as yours about Mormonism. I’ve found many by apologists and many by fierce, angry critics, but I’m just looking—as a former Mormon who enjoys the academic study of religion as a layperson—for books written for a general audience turning that critical, academic eye to this relatively newer flavor of Christianity. I’ve read works by you, Elaine Pagels, Francesca Stavrakopoulou, and so I’m looking for a comparable book/author, one that won’t shy away from historical facts but then won’t also try to claim that the most likely origin story for the Book of Mormon is indeed Smith’s angelic account.
Thank you!
-Patrick
There are a lot out there, but I don’t really have any one in particular to recommend. Maybe some others on the blog can cite their favorites for us.
One person you should definitely try to ask for authors / books is Dan McClellan. He is a serious, dare I say progressive Biblical scholar and a member of the LDS church. He should be very easy to contact via twitter (https://twitter.com/maklelan). He also co hosts a YT channel called Data Over Dogma. He does a lot ot TikTok videos etc.
Good luck and I hope you find what you’re looking for.
I’m a big fan of Dan’s! I hope he writes such a book one day.
LDS Discussions (both the podcast and the website!)
Dr. Ehrman… if your theory about Jesus being left on the cross is true, do you also have a theory about the origins of the tomb story? It has some pretty specific components, notably Joseph of Arimathea’s role in it. I can think of no logical reason why such an elaborate story would be concocted by the gospel authors when it isn’t really necessary. Couldn’t the faithful just as easily have resurrection visions and preach the resurrected Jesus without the tomb story? And it seems so embedded in the gospels that it must’ve been accepted truth in the earliest years after the crucifixion (pre-gospels).
Many of the oral traditions in circulation about Jesus became elaborate over time with names named. We have later traditoins for example, of the names of the wise men, and of the two robbers crucified with Jesus, etc. That’s how stories work when they are in ciculation: they often acquire details and specifics in order to make them both more interesting and believable (not just stories about Jesus — but stories in gneral). In this case, when the disciples said Jesus got raised, stories started circulating saying that there was *proof*, the tomb was empty; as that story circulated a burial story emerged; then a story of the name of the person; and then to counter claims that the disciples stole the body, a story emerged about Pilate posting a guard at the tomb; and then later a story about the name of the centurion in charge; and then a story about how the soldiers saw Jesus come out of the tomb as a giant with the cross walking out behind him, etc… I don’t think the specificities of these stories demonstrate they are historical; but they certainly make them more entertaining!
Bart,
I recently purchased and finished the course: Jesus the Secret Messiah and enjoyed it very much.
My question is about…snake handling !
My wife actually grew up in the foothills of the Smokey Mtns and attended a church once where they brought out the snakes. She said she was terrified…and of course never went back. Just as recently as roughly 10 yrs I recall reading reports of a couple of people who had died from this. All for a verse that wasn’t even in Mark to begin with.
My question is was/is (although slowly disappearing and less common still takes place albeit less openly in a few isolated places) this *only* a phenomena of the American South from a particular time period or do we have reports of this from any other parts/time of Christendom ?
Thanks,
SC
” But these passages from Josephus – for *all* the reasons I’ve cited in previous posts – simply cannot be used to show that the Romans would not have been allowed by the Jews to leave crucified insurgents and enemies of the state on their crosses, in accordance with standard Roman practice.”
I think if craig is arguing that no bodies would ever be left on the cross he would be wrong.
But he could argue that these passages show that it cant be said the gospel accounts are wrong. The passages leave open the possibly that jews were allowed practice their custom of burying even those condemned to death before sunrise.
I don’t think Josephus helps much either way about as vague as Bible is about what really happened, it’s just drives me crazy this Jesus is supposed be most important being and message ever given to humanity, you think a god would want the true story as accurate as possible if wanted all humans to understand.
My only thought is maybe the Roman’s sometimes allowed others to take Bodies down not for religious reason not cause they cared wtf Jews or others wanted, because just saves Roman’s time from having to do it. That’s why I have hard thinking Roman’s even crucify common thieves unless they stole from Roman’s or the empire, it’s lot work and used up resources needed for people who challenge the Roman Empire, I would used lower criminals as slaves to to put others on cross and dig the mass graves and toss bodies into it and buried them. I would wanted keep my troops fresh and available for more important actions.
Have mass graves ever been discovered in that area from that time period?
They’ve never found any mass graves of crucified vicitms, no (they’ve only discovered two skeletal remains of crucified victims). That may suggest they simply put them in quickly buried trenches or … something else.
I don’t think Josephus helps much either way about as vague as Bible is about what really happened.
My only thought is maybe the Roman’s sometimes allowed others to take Bodies down not for religious reason not cause they cared, because just saves Roman’s time from having to do it. That’s why I have hard time thinking Roman’s even crucify common thieves unless stole from Roman’s or the empire, it’s lot work and used up resources needed for people who actually challenge the Roman Empire.
Any knowledge of mass graves ever been discovered in that area from that time period?
If that was the case (that they didn’t want to be bothered) we don’t have any record of it. And no, no mass graves of crucified victims have been discovered.
• FEAR OF THE CROWDS FOLLOWING JESUS: Pilate and the Jewish authorities were fearful of Jewish uprisings during the Passover Festival:
• Mk.11:18, –The Jewish authorities started looking for a way to kill Jesus, but they were afraid of him because of the crowds…
•Mk.11:32, Mt.21:26, Lk.20:6, –The Jewish authorities were afraid of the crowds… We are afraid of what the crowd might do to us… The crowd will stone us to death…
•Mk12:12, Mt.21:45-46, Lk.20:19, –The Jewish authorities were afraid of the crowd… The Jewish authorities were afraid because the people thought Jesus was a prophet… The Jewish authorities wanted to arrest Jesus right then, but they were afraid of the people.
——– Therefore isn’t it reasonable to assume that letting Jesus rot on the cross could have enraged the Jesus crowds into an uprising that the authorities feared? This would compliment Pilate granting permission to guard the Tomb [Mt.27.62-66]
I suppose in part it depends on whether you think these verses are themselves historically reliable. The Gospel writers want to make out that Jesus literally had thousands of followers, and that the crowds turned out for him even in Jerusalem. If that’s actually what happened, that would certainly have an effect on how we understand the reactions of the rulers. If it’s implausible, then that too has implications.
Ancient Correspondence from JOSEPHUS found!
Jewish rebellions: •4BC_Simon Peraea, rebellion against Romans, killed after Herod’s death. •2BC_Athronges, two year rebellion against Herod Archelaus. •6AD_Judas Galilee, Zadok Pharisee, Zealot rebellion against Roman tax. •7AD_Sicarii (splinter Zealots) use guerrilla tactics against Romans.
Pilate & Temple High Priests are fearful: Passover & Jerusalem overcrowded. Zealots-Sicarii plotting against ruling elite? Riots? Social Chaos? Assassinations? Pilate & THPs must control crowds or face punishment from higher-ups. Jesus: +/- hundreds of enthusiastic followers. Must wait for a night arrest, outside city, no crowds. Crucifying a beloved prophet at Passover is risky. Letting him rot on a cross all week, during Passover, is too risky. Tell Joe A: ”get rid of the body” and the Guards: ”followers stole the body”
Now what?
Followers say Jesus has appeared and went to Heaven. Movement is growing.
What are we gonna do?
Send Paul.
(hope this doesn’t offend, if so, delete)
This sounds ghoulish, sorry, but thinking of respectful removal from the cross for burial (Joseph of Arimathea) compared with disrespectful (Roman), what are the logistics of cruxification? How tall is the cross; does it get re-used; how is the criminal attached, raised; once dead, how is the body removed taking bodily distortion and rigor mortis into account?
I’m afraid we don’t have any explicit descriptions from any ancient sources, and so there has to be a lot of guess work involved; the best guesses are that the crosses were not too high, just enough to get someone above the ground or a bit higher; it gets reused; criinals are attached by ropes and/or nails; raised with pulleys?; removed by untying or hammering out the nails, or wrenching with pliers?