Replies

1. Matthew's account doesn't 'go out of its way' and is certainly not 'quite preposterous'. He merely reports what was said by the Jews when Pilate attempted to distance himself from the forthcoming execution. Remembering that only Pilate could order the execution, the Jews quite naturally would be afraid that, having said, "I am innocent of this Man's blood; see to that yourselves," Pilate might be losing heart for the enterprise. They were in the position of supplicants to Pilate for the use of his power and they clearly did not want the 'opportunity' to slip away. Nothing preposterous about that; just the normal response of people set upon a goal.

So, let me get this straight now. You concur that, according to the Gospels, the "priests and scribes" betrayed jesus to the roman proconsul. You concur that the Jewish mob was screaming for Jesus's head on a platter--as totally unjustified, either in history, or from the context of the story, as this contention is. And you concur that PP was being portrayed as a kindly, sympathetic and reluctant executor, which is, of course, transparent nonsense.

So...how, exactly is it, that you are making a case for yourself that the gospels are not a heavily anti-jewish tract, as most historians think they were intended to be?

So, let me get this straight now. You concur that, according to the Gospels, the "priests and scribes" betrayed jesus to the roman proconsul.

Yup, that's what the printed word says. Did you have another account of the 'festivities'?

You concur that the Jewish mob was screaming for Jesus's head on a platter

Again, those are just the facts. Got another account, do you?

--as totally unjustified, either in history, or from the context of the story, as this contention is.

Perhaps you could share the 'alternative' historical account (which you simply presume). Most intriguing is your "context of the story" comment. What in the 'context of the story' suggests that the Jewish establishment of that day was not seeking Jesus' execution?

And you concur that PP was being portrayed as a kindly, sympathetic

No, the Gospels do not portray Pilate in any sense as 'kindly' or 'sympathetic'. Cowardly and indecisive, surely. Nothing kindly there.

and reluctant executor, which is, of course, transparent nonsense.

Yes, I think he was pretty clearly "reluctant.' At least reluctant to take responsibility for his own actions. Transparent, yes. Nonsense, no. So...how, exactly is it, that you are making a case for yourself that the gospels are not a heavily anti-jewish tract, as most historians think they were intended to be?