Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

§15.3 Who Did They Think Jesus Was?
the Prefect; 72 this memory too is deeply burned into the Christian tradition. 73
This was the way Rome treated rebels against its rule. 74 (3) It follows in turn that
there must have been some trial or hearing before Pilate (15.2-5 pars.). 75 There
are various problematic features about the fuller accounts at this point, 76 but no
doubt that the key issue before Pilate was whether Jesus had claimed to be 'the
king of the Jews' (15.2 pars.). 77 Whether or not Pilate regarded Jesus as a serious
threat to Rome's power need hardly be decided; at the very least the charge provided
sufficient reason (or excuse) to dispatch a potential troublemaker. 78 The
representative of Rome's ruthless imperium required no further reason. 79
Moving backwards, we need not become involved in the old question of
72. Theissen and Merz, Historical Jesus 455-58, provide a good summary of the legal
powers and procedures involved. Further detail in Gnilka, Jesus 298-302.
73. Mark 15.1-15 pars.; Acts 3.13; 4.27; 13.28; 1 Tim. 6.13; Ignatius, Magn. 11; Trail.
9.1; Smyrn. 1.2; but also Josephus, Ant. 18.64; Tacitus, Annals 15.44. The point is frequently
made that Pontius Pilate is the only person other than Jesus named in the classic creeds: passus
sub Pontio Pilato; see further below §17.1 introduction and §17.le.
74. See M. Hengel, Crucifixion (London: SCM, 1977) 46-50; H.-W. Kuhn, 'Die
Kreuzesstrafe während der frühen Kaiserzeit. Ihre Wirklichkeit und Wertung in der Umwelt
des Urchristentums', ANRW 11.25.1 (1982) 648-793 (here 706-18). E.g., Josephus reports the
crucifixion of 2,000 rebels by the Roman legate Varus after he put down the revolt following
the death of Herod the Great (Ant. 17.295). 'There can be no reasonable doubt that Jesus met a
death which was reserved for those whom the Roman governor regarded as a threat to the peace
and security of the state' (Harvey, Jesus 12-13); see also Becker, Jesus 350-51.
75. Probably at Herod's palace, where he usually resided, rather than at the fortress
Antonia (see, e.g., Charlesworth, Jesus 120-22; Gnilka, Jesus 299-300; S. Legasse, The Trial of
Jesus [London: SCM, 1997] 60-62; Murphy-O'Connor, Holy Land 22, 34).
76. Particularly the practice of releasing a prisoner at Passover (Mark 15.6-14 pars.; see
below chapter 17 n. 67) and whether Herod Antipas was at all involved (Luke 23.6-12), as is
quite possible — the note about renewed friendship (23.12) may well be more than a novellistic
touch (discussion in Fitzmyer, Luke 2.1478-79). For Pilate's own role and character see Bond,
Pontius Pilate and below §17.le.
77. Evans points out that the Jesus Seminar's rejection of the historicity of the trial scene
(Funk, Acts of Jesus 152) leaves it unable to provide a convincing explanation of what led to Jesus'
death ('Authenticating the Activities of Jesus' 26-28).
78. Kuhn, 'Kreuzesstrafe' 732-33. According to Josephus, Herod Antipas had decided
to get rid of John the Baptist as a precautionary measure (Ant. 18.118). But there is no good reason
to doubt the tradition that Pilate took the opportunity afforded him to follow a (quasi-judicial
procedure (pace Crossan, Who Killed Jesus? 117).
79. 'From the viewpoint of the rulers the crucifixion of Jesus was not a mistake' (Horsley,
Jesus 320; see further Horsley's 'The Death of Jesus' 395-422). Fredriksen's study of Jesus
is motivated by the question Why was Jesus executed by the Romans as an insurrectionist but
not his followers? (Jesus 8-11). Her answer is that Jesus was crucified because others thought
he was Messiah. Pilate knew Jesus was harmless, but potential trouble could be easily dealt
with by eliminating the focus of the messianic enthusiasm (234-35, 240-41; see further below,
n. 163).
629