Post by Mark on Feb 21, 2009 6:47:20 GMT -8
Messiah must be betrayed and put to death. The horrific story of the Passion is never refuted by Jewish antiquity. It is viewed as a tragedy, by many; an unfortunate event in history. The idea that early Church leaders could piece together a biblical legitimacy to these events after they happened is positively absurd. Yet Jewish scholars argue that these Scriptures of the Tanakh are taken out of their rightful context and given a Messianic interpretation to support the claims of Yeshua being the Messiah. Psalm 109 is given as an account of Yeshua’s betrayal. It suggests that the betrayer (Judas) would soon die after the betrayal (verse 8) and that another would take his office (Acts 1:20). It declares that foreigners would benefit from the proceeds of this betrayal (verse 11): the exchange for the betrayal purchased a field for burying foreigners (Matthew 27:7). The leadership is embarrassed by these events (verse 29). While bold claims are made by the synoptic gospels that the veil in the Temple was torn in two (Matthew 27:51, Mark 15:38, Luke 23:45), which could have easily been disproved, the Levitical authority remained silent.
The trial, had it not occurred in the manner that the disciples of Yeshua testified, would have been worthy of intense rebuttal; yet the authorities offered no defense for their actions. It was an illegal trial by both Jewish and Roman standards:
✡ the accused was tried by his accusers, not an impartial judge (Luke 22:52)
✡ the accused was arrested before an indictment was given (they arrested Him, then determined what He did that was illegal; actually changing the indictment mid-process in order to appeal to the Roman court) (Luke 23:1-2)
✡ the indictment and trial occurred at night (not legal in Jewish Law because legal proceedings were required to be made public) (John 18:12-14, 19-23)
✡ the indictment and trial took place on the same day, not allowing the defendant to prepare any kind of defense (Luke 23:50-51, Mishna, "Sanhedrin" IV, 1)
• Roman Law forbids a man to be tried twice for the same crime- Yeshua was tried three times (twice before Pilate and once in the court of Herod) before the Roman court was politically pressured into issuing a guilty verdict. (John 18:38, John 19:1-4)
If the Gospel accounts are true, it is little wonder that both Roman and Jewish authorities would want to keep the events as quiet as possible. If these accusations were false, the authorities would have spared little effort in defending themselves.
The trial, had it not occurred in the manner that the disciples of Yeshua testified, would have been worthy of intense rebuttal; yet the authorities offered no defense for their actions. It was an illegal trial by both Jewish and Roman standards:
✡ the accused was tried by his accusers, not an impartial judge (Luke 22:52)
✡ the accused was arrested before an indictment was given (they arrested Him, then determined what He did that was illegal; actually changing the indictment mid-process in order to appeal to the Roman court) (Luke 23:1-2)
✡ the indictment and trial occurred at night (not legal in Jewish Law because legal proceedings were required to be made public) (John 18:12-14, 19-23)
✡ the indictment and trial took place on the same day, not allowing the defendant to prepare any kind of defense (Luke 23:50-51, Mishna, "Sanhedrin" IV, 1)
• Roman Law forbids a man to be tried twice for the same crime- Yeshua was tried three times (twice before Pilate and once in the court of Herod) before the Roman court was politically pressured into issuing a guilty verdict. (John 18:38, John 19:1-4)
If the Gospel accounts are true, it is little wonder that both Roman and Jewish authorities would want to keep the events as quiet as possible. If these accusations were false, the authorities would have spared little effort in defending themselves.
