The Trial of Jesus is NOT Believeable
John says No Trial
According to John there was no trial of Jesus. One man "advised" the Jewish leaders to kill him.
and brought him first to Annas, who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the high priest that year.
Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jewish leaders that it would be good if one man died for the people. John 18:13- 14
Mark and Matthew describe a trial.
64 But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?"
62 "I am," said Jesus. "And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."
63 The high priest tore his clothes. "Why do we need any more witnesses?" he asked.
64 "You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?" They all condemned him as worthy of death.
63 But Jesus remained silent. The high priest said to him, "I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God."
64 "You have said so," Jesus replied. "But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."
65 Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, "He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Look, now you have heard the blasphemy.
66 What do you think?" "He is worthy of death," they answered.
Jesus claiming to be Christ, or the anointed one, or the Messiah is NOT, NOT Blasphemy under Jewish law. Jesus said several times that he was the “son of man.” Even if he said he was the son of God, isn't every male on the planet the son of God? But more to the point, every anointed King of Israel was bestowed the honorary title of "The son of God." Psalm 2:7. This title is NOT a claim of deity.
This alleged crime of blasphemy was no real crime (deserving the death penalty?). The eastern provinces swarmed with self proclaiming Christs (anointed ones) and claimed Messiahs. They would call themselves son of God and would announce the end of the world has come and was imminent. Not one person was ever executed for blasphemy.
Trial against Jewish Law
The two "Christian" gospels of Jesus having the described trial would be blatantly against Jewish law. It is stated that the trial occurred in a private residence. The Sanhedrin was prohibited from trying a criminal case outside the Temple grounds. The Sanhedrin conducted trials in the Hall of Hewn Stones in the Temple. The trials had to commence and finish during the day time (No night trials as alleged with Jesus). Jewish law prohibits capital convictions on self-incriminating statements. The Jewish law requires two fully qualified witnesses. No exceptions. The Gospels claim Jesus was convicted solely on his testimony alone which clearly violates Jewish law. The creative forgers of the Gospels were not familiar with Sanhedrin law.
Romans Crucified Jesus but Jews were Responsible???
Notice how the Constantine New Testament made sure to blame the Jews for the death of "the Savior of mankind", instead of the real crucifier in the story - the Romans. Just another Christian contradiction.
Pontius Pilate, a Roman judge, heard the accusations and said he finds no fault deserving the death penalty. But then the New Testament wants people to believe that this Roman judge was so intimidated by this mob that he went against his judgement and handed over this "Roman judge deemed innocent man" to an angry mob so they can kill him. But then the Romans decided to kill him. This is not even good fiction.
To make as real the trial the Christian forgers produced a book "The Acts of Pilate" (AKA the Gospel of Nicodemus) This detailed out the trial and what was said. At first it was deemed canonical, but after it was realized that the story was based from dramatic passages and scenes from the 24 book of Iliad, it was then deemed "spurious" (opinion rather than inspired by God). The fictitious nature of the writing is obvious.
New Testament says Jews were not permitted to execute a person?
Not so New Testament writers. The Jews did not have to turn over a person to the Romans to be executed as stated in Mark 14:64, 15:1, 11-13; Matthew 27:1, 2, 20 .
The New Testament writers themselves later cite executions by Jews during that period as permissible.
1 The high priest tried, convicted, and executed Stephen. Acts 6:12 15, 7:59.
2 A woman about to be executed in the Temple, John 8:2-11.
3 Paul didn't want a Jewish trial so he insisted on a Roman trial. Acts 25:11,15
4 Paul stated that the High Priest gave him authority to put to death the saints by "I cast my vote against them. Acts 26:10
5 King Herod, a King of the Jews, executed John the Baptist. Mark 6:27
6 King Herod executed James, the son of Zebedee. Acts 12:2
7 Historian Josephus reported Jews condemned to death by the Sanhedrin during the Roman occupation.
8 Josephus also revealed that the Sanhedrin could actually execute Roman citizens for entering the sanctuary of the Temple. Antiquites of the Jews, 14:9:3; and Wars of the Jews, 6:2:4, both by Josephus.
Was It Lawful for the Jews to put to Death Jesus?
The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die. (John 19:7.)
The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death. (John 18:31.)
Age of Jesus when He Died
There was bitter debates by the church fathers as to the age of Jesus when he died. Irenaeus, who was highly educated and established much church doctrine (helped canonize the gospels), insisted that Jesus was at least 50 years of age when he was crucified. His peers position was that Jesus was 30 to 33 years of age at his death. Irenaeus flatly denied this position and labeled it heresy to say the age of Jesus's death was around 30 years of age.
By the third century there were at least 25 writings circulating that had many different accounts of the death of Jesus. Some had Jesus not put to death at all, some had him revived back to life, and some had him living to an old age and dying in Egypt.
The New Testament --
In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. Hebrews 9:22
Totally false. The only law I can think of is Leviticus 17:11 which deals with the prohibition of the consumption of blood.
There are many examples in the Old Testament where sins were forgiven without any "shedding of blood"; the story of Jonah, the story of the golden calf, the story of David and Bathsheba. Aaron used incense to atone for sin and a plague. The poor could bring fine flour to atone for sin. But blood sacrifices at the Temple was only used for the atonement of unintentional sin. Blood did not atone for intentional sin.