Replies

Kevmo: "I suppose some day you’ll get around to posting those sources as well... /s"

FRiend, I acknowledge your amazing ability to stare evidence straight in the face while denying it's existence.
I just can't help you with that...

I have already posted the biblical text which confirms this report:

"Pilate agrees to condemn Jesus to crucifixion, after the Jewish leaders explained to him that Jesus presented a threat to Roman occupation through his claim to the throne of King David as King of Israel in the royal line of David. "

I combine that with the "King of the Jews" plaque and conclude that Pilate crucified Jesus for rebellion.

I find the gospel accounts of Pilate's exaggerated "reluctance" unconvincing because other accounts show Pilate of a very different temperament indeed.

Beyond that, whole books have been written on these subjects, books which you obviously reject because they don't comfort your religious beliefs -- and that's fine, I don't have a problem with your beliefs.

I combine that with the “King of the Jews” plaque and conclude that Pilate crucified Jesus for rebellion.
***Then there are no sources. It is a conjecture, just as I have been saying. The only problem with your conjecture is that it contradicts the actual source you proceeded from in allowing the King of the Jews” plaque: the gospels. It is those same gospels that record that Jesus was found innocent of rebellion by Pilate. So, now it’s time that “I acknowledge your amazing ability to stare evidence straight in the face while denying it’s existence.”

I find the gospel accounts of Pilate’s exaggerated “reluctance” unconvincing because other accounts show Pilate of a very different temperament indeed.
***Your own conjecture, and this time based upon your own perception. Doubly wrong. Your extrabiblical source for Pilate makes him look very similar to how he was portrayed in the gospels.

Beyond that, whole books have been written on these subjects,
***By all means, post the books. Post your sources. Not your own conjecture, post the actual sources.

books which you obviously reject because they don’t comfort your religious beliefs -
***Wow, with a sweeping a-priori argument you throw all positive discussion into the gutter with such a pile of crap statement.

- and that’s fine, I don’t have a problem with your beliefs.
***That’s so mightily magnanimous of you /s. I have problems with some of your HISTORICAL beliefs. I don’t know anything about your religious beliefs and don’t care to. Basically, you don’t know what you’re talking about.