© 2005 Jan Herca (license Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0)
Many books about the “time of Jesus” tend to study only the period between the Maccabean revolts and the Jewish uprising of 66 AD. But it is clear that this period is longer than the one Jesus lived through. That is why I found it especially satisfying to read H. Guevara’s book entitled Ambiente político del pueblo judío en tiempo de Jesús. The author truly sticks to the period between the end of Herod’s reign (4 BC) and the end of Pilate’s prefecture (36 AD) to carry out a thorough investigation that would more correctly be titled «Violent and Peaceful Nationalism in the Time of Jesus». The conclusions of his work have been so interesting and have had such a significant impact on the story of Jesus of Nazareth[1] that I have decided to write a brief summary here.
In essence, the questions that Guevara raises are set out in the introduction:
Was the period of divided Judea (6 BC to 41 AD) a revolutionary period, characterized by growing violent hostility toward Rome, or, on the contrary, was it a peaceful period in which Judea strove to resolve the inevitable tensions that arose by nonviolent means? What was the attitude of the Jews toward Rome during the period of divided Judea? Was it a conciliatory attitude or a revolutionary attitude?
_La_distruzione_del_tempio_di_Gerusalemme_-Francesco_Hayez_-_gallerie_Accademia_Venice.jpg){kind=link}
As Guevara points out, it is undisputed that a revolutionary party organized by a certain Judas Galileo emerged in 6 AD. And that open rebellion against Rome broke out in 66 AD. But what happened from the formation of the party until the rebellion? Was the entire period a constant and escalating state of war, or did it first pass through a more moderate stage?
The answer is important. Some authors have sought to see in Jesus a revolutionary teacher close to the circles of the guerrilla party that would eventually become known as the “Zealots.”
According to Guevara, these claims are unfounded, as is the fact that the followers of Judas Galileo called themselves “Zealots.” Apparently, this title, which reproduces the sound of a Greek word that was translated from the Aramaic qanna (“jealous”), was applied to themselves only by a small group of fanatics who entrenched themselves in Jerusalem during the siege by the Roman legions. In short, there were no Zealots in Jesus’ time (rather, a group of revolutionary followers of Judas Galileo, who did not give themselves that name at the time), and that the movement initiated by Judas Galileo, after an initial surge of popular enthusiasm that ended in tragedy in 6 AD, continued clandestinely and moderately throughout Jesus’ life.
Moreover, Guevara goes so far as to state in his conclusions:
The period of Jesus’ public life was a peaceful one. This does not mean that there were no tensions between Jews and Romans in those years, but that the Jews resorted to legal and peaceful means to demand respect for their law; their attitude toward the Roman government was conciliatory; they sought ways to coexist with foreign power, in complete fidelity to Jewish law.
That is, we’ve gone from considering the era in which Jesus lived as revolutionary to peaceful, and we’ve gone from seeing a supposed guerrilla group that constantly sowed panic among the Romans—and which some authors have wanted to see as part of Jesus’s activity—to seeing a group of organized, moderate Jews carrying out peaceful actions to seek a solution to their conflicts with the Roman government. This is undoubtedly a significant change in the way we view the era of Jesus. But how does Guevara reach these conclusions? Why do some authors view the era of Jesus as such a different period?
The author provides the explanation easily. Apparently, many researchers have not resorted to a thorough analysis of the literary sources we have about the time of Jesus, but have limited themselves to extrapolating the events narrated more than thirty years after Jesus’ death, to the period of his public life. All these scholars have followed the path blazed many years ago by Emil Schürer, the father of Jewish history in the time of Jesus and author of History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus.
In this work, Schürer states (volume I, p. 462):
Since the political situation in Judea during the period from 6 to 41 AD is essentially the same as that of Palestine as a whole during the years 44-66 AD, we will refer simultaneously to both periods, combining all the data at our disposal.
That is to say, they merge into two very distinct eras, as Guevara’s excellent analysis reveals. He was the first writer to note that there must have existed in Jesus’ time an organized group of Jews who acted through peaceful means, in contrast to the group of violent revolutionaries who joined Judas Galileo. Unfortunately, this group of pacifists never flourished, being finally stifled by the revolutionary outbreak of 66 AD. However, there are pages of history in which their imprint remains, for those willing to reread and restudy all subjects twice.
Guevara refers to the historical sources we have, which are, in order of importance: Flavius Josephus, Philo of Alexandria, Cornelius Tacitus, apocalyptic literature, Qumran literature, Targumic and rabbinic literature, and the New Testament.
Here I will only offer a brief summary of some references that I believe will be useful for understanding why Guevara reaches his conclusions. We will limit ourselves to references that relate to Jesus’s adult life (5-30 AD) and that show tensions or revolts that occurred during that period.
¶ Flavius Josephus
Josephus was born (probably in Jerusalem) around 37/38 AD, that is, only seven years after the death of Jesus. He belonged to one of the most influential priestly families. He was apparently a Jew who tried everything: for a time he became a Sadducee, a Pharisee, and an Essene, and then went into the desert in the style of John the Baptist in pursuit of a teacher named Bannus. He also traveled to Rome. Upon his return, he found his country in uprisings, and he had to take part as commander of Galilee. But he wasn’t convinced that a military uprising against Rome was a good idea, and as soon as he was captured by the Romans, he befriended them, providing every kind of help to try to suppress the rebellion. From captivity, he went on to win his freedom and the favor of the new emperor Vespasian. It was then that he wrote The Jewish Wars (BJ), a work highly critical of the so-called “Zealots.” Twenty years later, when the events of the war were already in the past, he published Jewish Antiquities (AJ), his Autobiography, and Against Apion, an epilogue to Jewish Antiquities. His work is invaluable for understanding the time of Jesus because he is the author who has gathered the greatest amount of historical data on the period.
Below I offer some fragments from Flavius Josephus (with parallels between BJ_ and AJ).
¶ The Rebellion of Judas Galileo
This was the best-known rebellion of the time. According to Flavius Josephus, Judas was the initiator of the Zealot movement, but it seems that the movement suffered a severe setback in its beginnings. Only much later (66 AD) did the movement become associated with open war against Rome. Until then, the type of activities they carried out is uncertain. The Jewish historian did not think highly of them, placing much of the blame for the sad fate of Jerusalem and the Jews of his time on them.
The rebellion occurred just as Coponius was sent as the first Roman prefect to replace Archelaus (6-7 AD), a time when Quirinus was also sent to Syria as consul.
The rebellion certainly came at a very inopportune time, because Coponius and Quirinus were surely eager to demonstrate to their superiors the wisdom of the trust placed in them, and they must have suppressed the revolt quite rigorously.
Once Archelaus’ territory was reduced to a province, the Roman knight Coponius was sent as governor, receiving full powers from Caesar, including capital punishment. Under his rule, a Galilean named Judas incited the country’s inhabitants to rebellion, accusing them of being cowards if they paid taxes to the Romans and if they acknowledged mortal masters alongside God. (BJ II, 8.1)
Archelaus’ territory having been annexed to Syria, Caesar sent Quirinus, a consular officer, to conduct a census of property in Syria and to liquidate Archelaus’s assets. (AJ XVIII, 1.1)
1 Quirinus, a Roman senator, a man who had risen through all the offices to the consulate, arrived in Syria, sent by Caesar as juridicus of the nation and censor of property. 2 Coponius, a Roman knight, was sent with him as governor of the Jews, with full powers. Quirinus then went to Judea, which had been annexed to Syria, to value the property and to liquidate the assets of Archelaus. 3 At first, the Jews were irritated at hearing about the declaration of assets; but later they yielded, thanks to the arguments given them by the high priest Joazar, son of Boethus, and, convinced by his arguments, they declared their assets without hesitation. 4 But Judas, a Gaulanite from the city of Gamala, supported by the Pharisee Zadok, launched a rebellion, saying that the census involved slavery, and inciting the people to rebellion. 5 If they succeeded, they said, they would have secured the happiness they possessed. If they failed in their attempt, they would gain fame and honor for the nobility of their purposes. He said that God would collaborate in their enterprise if they, enthusiastic about the greatness of the cause, remained steadfast in their purpose without retreating even in the face of death. 6 The people listened willingly to what they said; thus, the risky enterprise made rapid progress. There was no harm that these men did not cause, and that did not influence the nation more than can be said. 7 Wars of uncontrollable violence, the disappearance of friends who could have eased their hardships, attacks by bandits, the murder of notables. All this under the pretext of the common good; in reality, for personal gain. 8 From this arose seditions and political assassinations, whether at the hands of enemies or at the hands of one’s own countrymen, due to the blind hatred that set one against another. Hunger that led to the worst abjections, the capture and destruction of cities, until the very temple of God became food for the enemy’s flames. That was sedition. 9 Thus, innovation in national institutions is an immense danger to the health of the nation. In this case, Judas and Zadok introduced a “fourth philosophy,” strange to us; they won numerous followers; They filled the country with immediate disorders and sowed the roots of the evils that were felt later. It all happened because of the new philosophy. 10 About which I wish to say something,If only because the enthusiasm with which young people embraced it caused the ruin of our country. (AJ XVIII, 1.1)
Curiously, Flavius Josephus does not give the sect founded by Judas Galileo the name “Zealots,” but rather no name at all, speaking only of a “fourth sect.”
Judas Galileo was the master of his own sect, which was unlike the others. (BJ II, 8.1)
23 Judas Galileo was the founder of the “fourth sect.” This sect agrees in every way with Pharisaic doctrine, with the exception of their irrepressible passion for freedom; convinced that the only Lord and master is God, they are happy to submit to the most terrible deaths and to lose friends and relatives so as not to have to give any mortal the title of “Lord.” 24 I will omit to relate the unshakeable firmness they displayed in such circumstances; of this many were witnesses. I do not fear that what is said about them may seem incredible; rather, I fear that my words may fall short in relation to the manner in which they bore pain. 25 Such was the madness that began to affect the nation from the time of Gesius Florus, whose arbitrary measures decided the Jews to rebel against Rome. (AJ XVIII, 1.6)
¶ Desecration of the Temple Courts by Samaritans
We cannot regard this event as a rebellion. Apparently, during the reign of Coponius (6-9 AD), some Samaritans scattered human bones from tombs in the temple in Jerusalem. The reason why the Samaritans did this is unknown, but it is possible that it was provoked by some previous action by the Jews, which must have displeased the Samaritans. In fact, Josephus records that the Jews did not retaliate for this act, but simply took measures to prevent it from happening again, probably by strengthening the security of the temple. The passage is found in AJ XVIII 2.2.
¶ Pilate introduces images into Jerusalem
From Coponius to Pilate nothing worthy of note happened. Only Josephus mentions three prefects more contemporary with Jesus: Marcus Ambibulos (9-12 AD), Rufus (12-15 AD), and Valerius Gratus (15-26 AD). The latter frequently changed the high priest until he left Joseph Caiaphas in charge. But no disturbances or disorders of any kind occurred, or at least not of a magnitude that Josephus deigns to mention.
Pilate, however, was a different matter. Josephus spends a great deal of time describing two very significant events. The first was the introduction of images (or rather, ensigns without any images at all), which most likely occurred during the winter of 26 AD, the year he took office. He may have arrived in Judea that summer, as sea voyages were common at that time, and he would have traveled from Rome. The second event was the suppression of a demonstration against the use of temple money.
169 Pilate, sent by Tiberius as governor to Judea, smuggled busts of Caesar, called ensigns, into Jerusalem by night, hidden away. 170 When the day came, this caused an enormous uproar among the Jews; those present were stupefied to see how the laws prohibiting the placing of images in the city were being violated. The people of the countryside immediately joined in their indignation. 171 The Jews rushed to Caesarea, where Pilate was, to beg him to remove the images from Jerusalem and to respect his laws. When Pilate refused, they fell prostrate around Pilate’s house and remained motionless for five days and five nights. 172 The next day Pilate went up to the tribunal, which was set up in the great stadium, and summoned the people under the pretext of answering their demands. He then gave the signal to the armed soldiers to surround the Jews. 173 The Jews were speechless when they saw themselves surrounded by a triple row of soldiers. Pilate told them that he would cut them to pieces if they did not accept Caesar’s images, and he ordered the soldiers to draw their swords. 174 But the Jews immediately, at an agreed signal, all fell to the ground and, stretching out their necks, cried out that they were ready to die rather than transgress the law. Pilate, greatly amazed by their profound religiosity, immediately ordered the images to be removed from Jerusalem. (BJ II 9.2)
55 Pilate, the commander of Judea, moved his army from Caesarea to Jerusalem to winter there. He, in order to abolish the Jewish laws, conceived the plan of introducing into the city busts of the emperor attached to the standards, although the law forbade the making of images. 56 Therefore the earlier commanders had entered the city without such adornment. Pilate was the first who, without anyone’s knowledge, brought these busts into Jerusalem by night and set them up there. 57 When the Jews learned of this, they appeared in force at Caesarea and begged Pilate for many days to remove the images. Pilate refused, because he considered it an insult to Caesar. The Jews continued to press their demands. On the sixth day, Pilate, after secretly placing his armed soldiers, went up to the tribunal. He had arranged everything so that he could hide the army stationed there. 58 Again the Jews persisted in their supplication. At a prearranged signal, he surrounded the Jews with his armed soldiers and threatened to put them to death immediately if they persisted in the tumult and did not return home. 59 The Jews fell face down on the ground and, baring their necks, said that they would gladly accept death rather than transgress the wisdom of their laws. Pilate, amazed at their firmness in observing the law, immediately removed the images from Jerusalem to Caesarea. (AJ XVIII 3.1)
¶ Pilate builds an aqueduct with sacred monies
Josephus places this event in his narrative before speaking of the death of Jesus, so it seems that it occurred during Jesus’ lifetime, although it is strange that it is not mentioned in the gospels, unless this event and the one that is glimpsed in Luke 13:1-2 are the same.
My personal conclusion is that this riot, like the one about the ensigns, did take place in Jesus’ time, although neither is recorded in the Gospels, although a different one related to some Galileans did. It seems that riots were not uncommon in Pilate’s time, although they were never guerrilla-like or popular insurrections.
175 After this, Pilate stirred up further chaos by squandering the sacred money, called korbonas, on an aqueduct; the waters were brought from a distance of 400 stades. At this, the people were enraged, and when Pilate arrived in Jerusalem, they surrounded his tribunal, reproaching him with loud voices. 176 Foreseeing the uproar, he had mixed armed soldiers among the people with orders not to use the sword, but to beat those who shouted with clubs. From his tribunal, he gave the agreed signal. 177 Many Jews fell under the blows of the clubs, and many more were trampled to death by the same Jews as they fled. At the massacre, the people remained silent. (BJ II 9.4)
60 Pilate built an aqueduct for Jerusalem with sacred money, bringing the water from a distance of 200 stades. The Jews were not pleased with this. Thousands of people gathered and shouted loudly for him to desist from the project; some even insulted him with profanity, as crowds do. 61 He had sent a large number of soldiers dressed in the Jewish manner, with clubs under their tunics, and had scattered them among the crowd. Then he ordered the Jews to withdraw. When they persisted in insulting him, he gave the agreed signal. 62 The soldiers attacked with more violence than Pilate had ordered, beating indiscriminately. The Jews showed no cowardice, despite having been surprised unarmed by the soldiers who had premeditatedly attacked them. Many Jews were killed; others retreated wounded. Thus ended the sedition. (AJ XVIII 3.2)
¶ The Crucifixion of Jesus
It is mentioned in Josephus in a passage that has provoked bitter debate among scholars, evidently because, if authentic, it is the most evident and tangible proof that Jesus indeed existed and that the tradition about the manner of his death is true. It must have been a disturbance of some magnitude for Josephus to remember, given that he later created the sect of the “Christians,” who were already known to Josephus at the time he wrote.
63 At that time there lived a wise man, if he can be called a wise man, for he did wonderful things and taught in such a way that people received the truth with joy. He won over many Jews and many Greeks. 64 He was the Messiah. When Pilate, on the accusations of our leaders, condemned him to the cross, he was not abandoned by his followers. On the third day he was presented to them risen, just as God’s prophets had foretold of him—this and other wonderful things. The group that has taken the name Christians from him has not disappeared to this day. (AJ XVIII 3.3)
¶ Conclusions about Josephus
Guevara’s conclusions about these passages is that the events that occurred during the Jewish rebellion cannot be extrapolated to the time of Jesus. Josephus seems to speak of two periods: “they filled the country with immediate disorders and sowed the roots of the evils that were felt later.”
That is, after the revolt of Judas Galileo, the only one that occurred during the time of Jesus, which was bitterly suppressed, there came a period of tranquility or rather of clandestine and shadowy fighting. The revolutionaries did not again launch themselves against the established power. Throughout Jesus’ lifetime, the Jews sought peaceful ways to demonstrate against Roman power. Only later, more than twenty years later, did that seed of Judas’s revolt germinate, with the revolutionaries reappearing as a group fully committed to armed struggle.
The phrase clearly contrasts immediately with later; in the original text, παρόν-αΰθις appears. The image of sowing the roots suggests an effect at a later date; after the disorders immediately provoked by the rebellion had passed, the roots remained, the fruits of which were later perceived. The phrase suggests that after the rebellion there was a recess, a period of calm; it does not say that the disorders continued uninterrupted. (Guevara, p. 75)
During the mandate of Pontius Pilate, the most important for our research, two episodes of serious tension occurred between the Roman prefect and the Jews. The Jewish reaction is characterized in both moments, and, notably, in both versions as resistance to a specific measure by the Roman magistrate, but not as an attempt to regain the nation’s freedom. They neither resorted to violent means nor did revolutionary groups emerge. It is true that the Jewish reaction in the first episode was more orderly and respectful; but in the second, the Jews did not commit violence, but rather suffered it. (Guevara, p. 108)
¶ Philo of Alexandria
Philo is the writer most contemporary with Jesus’ time. He was born in 20 BC and died between 45 and 50 AD. He belonged to an aristocratic financial family from Alexandria. The purpose of his writings was to unify the best of the Jewish faith and Greek philosophy. He wrote his book Legatio ad Caium shortly after the assassination of Caligula, to convince Claudius that the success of his government would depend on the policy he followed towards the Jews.
In this writing, Philo mentions, as an example to Caesar of Tiberius’s respect for Jewish customs, an incident involving some shields that is not mentioned in Josephus.
Tiberius… appointed Pilate governor of Judea. This man, not so much to honor Tiberius as to humiliate the Jewish people, placed in Herod’s palace, located in the Holy City, some golden shields that did not have any image or anything prohibited, but only an inscription mentioning the name of the one who built them and the name of the one to whom they were dedicated.
When the people learned of this, and it became known immediately, they took as their spokespersons the king’s four sons, who had royal dignity, and, accompanied by the notables and principals, demanded that the law not be violated any longer with these shields, that the ancestral customs that had been religiously observed throughout the previous centuries by emperors and kings be respected.
Do not incite the people to rebellion, do not make war on us, do not destroy the peace. Do not use Tiberius as a pretext to outrage our people. The emperor does not want to destroy our customs. If you assert the contrary, then show us the order or decree of Tiberius, so that, ceasing to trouble you, we may send an embassy to our lord. (Legatio 299-301)
Pilate, hearing of an embassy that might accuse him to the emperor, was exasperated but did not remove his shields (Legatio, 302). The leading Jews then wrote a letter to Tiberius, who angrily replied to Pilate ordering him to remove the shields immediately and transport them to Caesarea (Legatio 303-305).
The conclusion is again the same as that reached with Josephus’ data: the Jewish people are presented as a single united voice appealing to the authority of the emperor and pleading through peaceful diplomatic channels for respect for their customs.
It is also interesting to note that this event is often considered to be separate from the one involving the ensigns mentioned by Josephus, which suggests that Josephus limited himself to recording only those events that were most notable to him, but there probably were more.
¶ P. Cornelius Tacitus
Tacitus was born around 55/56 AD. He was a Roman aristocrat with a great career in administration: first a vigintivir or tribunus lacticlavius under the Emperor Vespasian, then a quaestor during the reign of Titus, a tribune or aedile under Domitian, a praetor around 88 AD, a consul under Nerva in 97 AD, and finally a proconsul of Asia around 112/113 AD
. He wrote two large books, the Histories, which deal with the history of the Flavian emperors, and the Annals, which deal with the Julio-Claudian dynasty.
The only mention he makes of Jewish subjects is in Book V of his Histories, but everything he refers to is outside the period of Jesus’ public life. It is also curious that he only mentions violent acts before and after: an uprising led by a certain Simon, just after the death of King Herod; the tension caused by the statue that Caligula ordered to be erected in the temple; and finally the open rebellion during the procuratorship of Gesius Florus.
Guevara’s conclusion is that the absence of mentions of violent acts during the period related to Jesus clearly indicates that this period lacked such events.
¶ Jewish Writings of the Time
Guevara mentions several books that were written around the time of Jesus: the Book 1 of Enoch or Ethiopian Enoch, the Book of Jubilees, the Psalms of Solomon, and the Testament of Moses. These writings all contain a reflection of the apocalyptic mentality of this generation. This movement, contrary to what its current meaning seems to imply, had as its center of gravity a hopeful illusion for the immediate future. According to apocalypticism, there was a certainty that the era of tribulations and foreign domination to which the Jewish people had been subjected for so many centuries would soon end to give way to a new era of peace and prosperity, thanks to the liberating intervention of God and a special being, the Messiah.
Of all the books mentioned, it is worth dwelling, as Guevara does, on the Psalms of Solomon. In its many verses, it can be understood that the promised divine intervention was seen not as an armed struggle, but as a war on a spiritual plane, as the expression “with the word of his mouth” suggests.
21 Behold, O Lord, set up over them their King, the Son of David,
At the time that you see, O God, that he may reign over your servant Israel.
22 And gird him with strength to throw down unjust rulers,
And to cleanse Jerusalem from the nations who trample it to destruction.
23 With wisdom and justice he will remove sinners from the inheritance,
He will crush the pride of the sinner like a potter’s vessel.
24 With a rod of iron he will break in pieces all their possessions,
He will destroy the wicked nations with the word of his mouth;
25 At his rebuke, the nations will flee before him,
And he will rebuke sinners for the thoughts of their hearts.
26 And he will gather a holy people and lead them in righteousness,
And he will judge the tribes of the people whom the LORD his God has sanctified.
27 He will no longer allow injustice to take root among them,
Nor will anyone who knows wickedness dwell with them,
For he will know that they are all children of his God.
28 He will divide them according to their tribes in the land,
And no longer will the alien or the stranger dwell with them.
29 He will judge the peoples and the nations in the wisdom of his justice. Selah.
30 And the pagan nations will serve him under his yoke;
And he will glorify the Lord in a place visible to all the earth;
And he will purify Jerusalem, sanctifying it as in the past.
31 So that nations may come from the ends of the earth to see his glory,
Bringing as gifts their children who had fainted.
And to see the glory of the Lord with which God has adorned her.
32 And a righteous king will be over them, taught by God,
33 And in his days there will be no injustice among them,
For they will all be holy, and their king will be the Lord’s anointed.
34 For he will not put his trust in horse, nor in rider, nor in bow,
Nor will he multiply to himself gold and silver for war,
35 Nor will he gain the confidence of the multitude for the day of battle.
36 The Lord himself is their King, the hope of the mighty, because of their hope in God.
37 All nations will fear him,
For he will strike the earth with the word of his mouth forever.
38 He will bless the people of the Lord with wisdom and with gladness,
And he himself will be cleansed from sin, so that he may rule over a great nation. Psalms of Solomon 17:21-38
Basically the underlying refrain seems to be the same in these psalms. The Messiah, when he comes, will not require armed struggle, because he will be so miraculous that just with his voice his enemies will fall to the ground. In other words, it is a somewhat peaceful vision, in a way, of a possible popular liberation. These verses are from Psalm 17 of the Psalms of Solomon, and it is dated to the time of Pompey, not many years before the birth of Jesus.
The rest of the Jewish literature from Jesus’ time that has survived to this day does not seem to contain any further information that sheds light on the prevailing mentality regarding the use or non-use of violence against the occupation. That is, the literature that falls into the group known as “Qumran literature” (literature found near an ancient Jewish monastery), rabbinic literature (writings of rabbis from after Jesus’ time), and Targumic literature (translations with commentary of the Torah, also from a later period) none of them offer interesting qualitative data on historical events that occurred during that period. It seems as if all the relevant historical data is contained in the accounts of the historians mentioned above.
But there is something else…
¶ Christian Writings
It is certainly interesting to take a look at the New Testament and the writings of the early Christians that have survived. After all, these are also writers who comment on the time of Jesus, and they do so even more than their Jewish contemporaries.
¶ Acts of the Apostles
The evangelist Luke drops some precious details in his account of the Acts of the Apostles. In the passage Acts 5:21-33 he tells how the apostles had to appear before the Sanhedrin, where they were interrogated and pressured to abandon their missionary activity in the name of Jesus. The discussion that arose was smoothed over thanks to the advice of the teacher Gamaliel I. The rabbi brought to the minds of those present two events that should have been very present in the audience:
36 Some time ago, Theudas, who thought he was someone, arose and was followed by about four hundred men. They executed him, and all his followers disbanded, and it all came to nothing.
37 After him, at the census, Judas of Galilee arose, drawing away the people after him; he too was killed, and all his followers were scattered. Acts 5:36.37
The two revolts mentioned by Luke date from the time of Jesus. We already know about the one led by Judas Galileo, which Flavius Josephus mentions in AJ XVIII 1.1, but here we are also given the final outcome: Judas was executed and his followers dispersed. It also indicates, supporting AJ and contradicting BJ, that the rebellion was caused by a census (Josephus said it was a census of goods, not people) and not by the payment of a tribute.
The one we weren’t familiar with was the one at Theudas. And this is because the only source that explicitly mentions a Theudas is Josephus in AJ XX, 5.1, whose description of the rebel and the results seem to coincide very well with the information given by Luke. Historians debate whether Luke was wrong or not, because the Theudas mentioned by Josephus dates from the time of the procurator Cuspius Phaedus (44-46 AD) while Luke places his Theudas at a time before Judas Galileo, whose rebellion occurred at the time of Quirinus’ appointment as consul in Syria (6-7 AD). In any case, it would be a rebellion either provoked after the death of Herod I, or well after the death of Jesus, and therefore outside the period of our interest. However, this rebellion at Theudas further confirms our idea that the time of Jesus was more peaceful than both previous and subsequent ones.
¶ Luke 13:1-5
This other passage in Luke is the only one in the gospels that clearly mentions a dispute during the time of Pontius Pilate, and from its appearance, it does not seem to coincide with any of those mentioned by Josephus.
1 At that time some came to him and told him about those Galileans whom Pilate had killed, mingling their blood with the blood of the sacrifices they offered. 2 Jesus said to them,
“Do you think that those Galileans died in this way because they were greater sinners than all the other people? 3 I tell you, no, indeed, unless you repent, you too will perish in the same way.” 4 And those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were worse offenders than all the other people living in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, no, unless you repent, you will all perish in the same way. Luke 13:1-5
This passage is truly intriguing, since it gives the impression that the Galileans Pilate executed did not find popular favor. It seems as if the people considered them sinners. But what did these men do that caused them to fall out of favor with their people?
¶ The Urantia Book?
Although I do not intend to include The Urantia Book here as a historical document, it may be helpful in forming a new understanding of these contradictory and scattered passages in our sources.
The incident in Luke 13:1-5 is mentioned in the same words in [LU 166:4.4]. It does not offer much more information about this event. But the passage that is extraordinarily interesting is LU 185:1. This entire section is worth reproducing here.
If Pontius Pilate had not been a reasonably good governor of the minor provinces, Tiberius would hardly have suffered him to remain as procurator of Judea for ten years. Although he was a fairly good administrator, he was a moral coward. He was not a big enough man to comprehend the nature of his task as governor of the Jews. He failed to grasp the fact that these Hebrews had a real religion, a faith for which they were willing to die, and that millions upon millions of them, scattered here and there throughout the empire, looked to Jerusalem as the shrine of their faith and held the Sanhedrin in respect as the highest tribunal on earth.
Pilate did not love the Jews, and this deep-seated hatred early began to manifest itself. Of all the Roman provinces, none was more difficult to govern than Judea. Pilate never really understood the problems involved in the management of the Jews and, therefore, very early in his experience as governor, made a series of almost fatal and well-nigh suicidal blunders. And it was these blunders that gave the Jews such power over him. When they wanted to influence his decisions, all they had to do was to threaten an uprising, and Pilate would speedily capitulate. And this apparent vacillation, or lack of moral courage, of the procurator was chiefly due to the memory of a number of controversies he had had with the Jews and because in each instance they had worsted him. The Jews knew that Pilate was afraid of them, that he feared for his position before Tiberius, and they employed this knowledge to the great disadvantage of the governor on numerous occasions.
Pilate’s disfavor with the Jews came about as a result of a number of unfortunate encounters. First, he failed to take seriously their deep-seated prejudice against all images as symbols of idol worship. Therefore he permitted his soldiers to enter Jerusalem without removing the images of Caesar from their banners, as had been the practice of the Roman soldiers under his predecessor. A large deputation of Jews waited upon Pilate for five days, imploring him to have these images removed from the military standards. He flatly refused to grant their petition and threatened them with instant death. Pilate, himself being a skeptic, did not understand that men of strong religious feelings will not hesitate to die for their religious convictions; and therefore was he dismayed when these Jews drew themselves up defiantly before his palace, bowed their faces to the ground, and sent word that they were ready to die. Pilate then realized that he had made a threat which he was unwilling to carry out. He surrendered, ordered the images removed from the standards of his soldiers in Jerusalem, and found himself from that day on to a large extent subject to the whims of the Jewish leaders, who had in this way discovered his weakness in making threats which he feared to execute.
Pilate subsequently determined to regain this lost prestige and accordingly had the shields of the emperor, such as were commonly used in Caesar worship, put up on the walls of Herod’s palace in Jerusalem. When the Jews protested, he was adamant. When he refused to listen to their protests, they promptly appealed to Rome, and the emperor as promptly ordered the offending shields removed. And then was Pilate held in even lower esteem than before.
Another thing which brought him into great disfavor with the Jews was that he dared to take money from the temple treasury to pay for the construction of a new aqueduct to provide increased water supply for the millions of visitors to Jerusalem at the times of the great religious feasts. The Jews held that only the Sanhedrin could disburse the temple funds, and they never ceased to inveigh against Pilate for this presumptuous ruling. No less than a score of riots and much bloodshed resulted from this decision. The last of these serious outbreaks had to do with the slaughter of a large company of Galileans even as they worshiped at the altar.
It is significant that, while this vacillating Roman ruler sacrificed Jesus to his fear of the Jews and to safeguard his personal position, he finally was deposed as a result of the needless slaughter of Samaritans in connection with the pretensions of a false Messiah who led troops to Mount Gerizim, where he claimed the temple vessels were buried; and fierce riots broke out when he failed to reveal the hiding place of the sacred vessels, as he had promised. As a result of this episode, the legatus of Syria ordered Pilate to Rome. Tiberius died while Pilate was on the way to Rome, and he was not reappointed as procurator of Judea. He never fully recovered from the regretful condemnation of having consented to the crucifixion of Jesus. Finding no favor in the eyes of the new emperor, he retired to the province of Lausanne, where he subsequently committed suicide.
Claudia Procula, Pilate’s wife, had heard much of Jesus through the word of her maid-in-waiting, who was a Phoenician believer in the gospel of the kingdom. After the death of Pilate, Claudia became prominently identified with the spread of the good news.
And all this explains much that transpired on this tragic Friday forenoon. It is easy to understand why the Jews presumed to dictate to Pilate—to get him up at six o’clock to try Jesus—and also why they did not hesitate to threaten to charge him with treason before the emperor if he dared to refuse their demands for Jesus’ death.
A worthy Roman governor who had not become disadvantageously involved with the rulers of the Jews would never have permitted these bloodthirsty religious fanatics to bring about the death of a man whom he himself had declared to be innocent of their false charges and without fault. Rome made a great blunder, a far-reaching error in earthly affairs, when she sent the second-rate Pilate to govern Palestine. Tiberius had better have sent to the Jews the best provincial administrator in the empire. LU 185:1.1-9
According to The Urantia Book, a number of riots occurred during the reign of Pontius Pilate. However, there were four of particular significance, three of which are mentioned identically by Josephus and one by Philo.
The first was the image of Caesar on the banners of his troops as they entered Jerusalem, which coincides with the account of the Incident of the Ensigns.
The second was the placing of shields on the walls of the temple in Jerusalem, an event mentioned by Philo.
The third was the use of sacred temple money, without authorization from the Sanhedrin, to finance the construction of an aqueduct. This is also mentioned by Josephus, but the historian mentions an incident involving a protest outside the temple. The novelty is that The Urantia Book connects this event with the Galilean massacre mentioned in Luke 13. Simply put, The Urantia Book says that this event had much broader implications, causing more than twenty riots, the last of which was a massacre of Galileans worshipping at the altar, the event mentioned by Luke.
The fourth, which led to Pilate’s dismissal, occurred after Jesus’ death and was a massacre of Samaritans.
Regarding the Galilean incident, I tend to develop my own hypothesis. Probably these Galileans, or all or some of them, were followers of the “fourth sect,” the Zealots, and had caused some disturbance upon entering the temple, possibly by rebuking the soldiers stationed at the gates. This provoked the wrath of the prefect, who was already very angry about the temple money issue, and in a fit of rage, he ordered them executed right there at the altar. In the end, some of the Galileans died without any fault of their own, which is why Jesus refers to them as “sinners.” In reality, no one considered them as such; rather, Jesus seems to be using the typical expression that in the end, “the righteous pay for the sinners.” In The Urantia Book, Jesus’ speech is recorded more completely in LU 166:4, and he speaks of how “human misfortunes have no relation to sin or God” but are often the result of chance.
¶ In Summary
Jesus’ adult life was a tense time, where conflict with the authorities was a frequent occurrence. But it cannot be said that it was a time of insurrection, filled with violence, and where there was a guerrilla group that spent its time committing murders and riots. This did occur during Jesus’ childhood, although he lived in Egypt for a long time and didn’t experience that, and also after his death, until the open war against Rome in 66.
But the period of his ministry, almost all of it under the rule of Pilate in Judea and Samaria, Herod Antipas in Galilee and Perea, and Herod Philip in Iturea, Gaulanitide, and Auranitide, was marked by nothing more than a peaceful desire on the part of his countrymen to resolve the inevitable disputes with the Roman authorities.
This was precisely what allowed Jesus to preach freely and travel without problems throughout the nation, visiting towns and cities. Had he lived in an atmosphere of tension, confrontation, and violence, such insecurity would not have made so many trips prudent.
But there is a larger conclusion to be drawn from all the readings carried out, and that is the fact that not only did a group (Josephus speaks of a sect) exist in Jesus’ time that advocated the use of weapons, but also one or more groups that advocated the opposite: the peaceful use of deterrence and the use of Roman legal channels. These groups, which we will see appear in our account, have been strangely silenced from the pages of history. They do not appear under a common name, but they had radical importance despite their anonymity.
¶ References
- Hernando Guevara, Ambiente político del pueblo judío en tiempos de Jesús (Ambiente político del pueblo judío en tiempo de Jesús), Ediciones Cristiandad, 1985.
- Emil Schürer, Historia del pueblo judío en tiempos de Jesús (Historia del pueblo judío en tiempo de Jesús), Ediciones Cristiandad, 1985.
- Writings of Flavius Josephus and Philo available at https://www.earlyjewishwritings.com and Urantiapedia.
¶ External links
¶ Notes
This novel, «Jesus of Nazareth», is a biography of the Master based on The Urantia Book that is in preparation by the author. ↩︎