THE DEATH-WARRANT OF JESUS CHRIST
Sentence rendered by Pontius Pilate,
Acting Governor of Lower Galilee,
Stating that Jesus of Nazareth shall suffer Death on the Cross.
In the year Seventeen of the Emperor Tiberius Caesar, and the 27th Day of March, the City of the Holy Jerusalem - Annas and Caiaphas being priests, sacrificators of the People of God - Pontius Pilate, Governor of Lower Galilee, sitting in the Presidential Chair of the Praetory, Condemns Jesus of Nazareth to die on the cross between two thieves. The great and notorious evidence of the people saying:
I. Jesus is a seducer.
II. He is seditious.
III. He is the enemy of the Law
IV. He calls himself falsely the son of God
V. He calls himself falsely the King of Israel
VI. He entered into the Temple followed by a multitude bearing palm branches in their hands.
Orders the first centurion, Quilus Cornelius, to lead him to the place of execution.
Forbids any whomsoever, either poor or rich, to oppose the death of Jesus Christ.
The witnesses who signed the condemnation of Jesus are-
I. Daniel Rabani, a Pharisee
II. Joannus Robani.
III. Raphael Robani
IV. Capet, a Citizen
Jesus shall go out of the city of Jerusalem by the Gate of Struenus.
http://www.goldenageproject.org.uk/459.html
I think this will solve the debate since no roman documents record jesus being put to death then he did not exist.
Thanks for sharing.
May God bless Jesus, the savior.
This document is surely a forgery. I hope no-one will be misled by it.
priests, sacrificators of the People of God
to die on the cross between two thieves
These should have been among the first two red flags to show this was a fake. Romans felt that Jews were as pagans, because they did not worship the plethora of gods the Romans did, nor highly esteemed Caesar...who was worshipped in Asia.
No one would sign a certificate designating the specifics of how many people a person would be crucified with. Especially not a ruler over an entire small country. He'd say, "carry out my orders", and down the chain of command it would go. A centurion might say, over here or over there...and it might even go to one level lower than him to make the final decision of exactly where, and if he is to hang alone or have company.
Further, the Gospel accounts and Josephus, as I have shown elsewhere, confirm that Pontius Pilate, exercising his authority, using Roman Law precedent, officially recognized Jesus as "King of the Jews" (as I have shown and taught elsewhere). .V alone is contradicted by the Gospel writers themselves, and apparently unknown to the document's forger.
I commend you on finding this piece of obscure information...but we too, need to be careful and analyze like the Bereans. I am sure, that upon careful scrutiny, from a view of a Roman unbeliever and his world view, you will see the wording as not credible.
"I commend you on finding this piece of obscure information...but we too, need to be careful and analyze like the Bereans. I am sure, that upon careful scrutiny, from a view of a Roman unbeliever and his world view, you will see the wording as not credible."
RE:
If you read the document with reasonable sense of understanding, you'll find most that was written to be true
Law? What is Law?
From the view of an anti-semitic Roman, Jewish law is superstitious nonsense. When written to Caesar, the word "custom" may appear.
Whom would Jesus have been seditious to? That charge is left ambiguous. A Roman judge of matters of Roman Law, which Pilate was and had counsellors to aid him upon, would have specifically designated the sedition against Caesar, the Laws of custom, or the act(s) of which he was guilty of.
Jesus called himself a Son of G-D. The Romans believed in pluralized "gods"...so to be a son of the "gods" was not heinous to a Roman, had a Roman written this so-called correspondence.
From Pilate's perspective, a miracle worker who displayed the power greater than any Greek or Roman deity of mythology, who claimed a kingdom in a nether sphere not of this world, might indeed be exactly who and what he claimed to be. Jesus had no claim to any kingdom on earth, so then, to who was he being seditious?
Fats forward in time some 20 plus years later: in the time of Claudius, the Roman senate voted Simon the Samaritan, as a "living Roman deity".
By the Imperial Senate (as was neccessary under existing Augustan Roman law), Simon was even given a statue on the Tiber, and regularly performed his black arts until Peter came along and squelched his powers in the simple name of "Yeshua". After which, Simon committed a public suicide in attempting to duplicate Jesus' resurrection, and was buried alive under a juniper tree, instead of in a cave. (oops).
Hence, even if Pilate thought the reverse, due to the miracles of Jesus, it would be outside his jurisdiction -- being that of the Roman Imperial Senate and Casar to decide. History left us in Patristics tells us that Tiberius, receiving the Pilate report on Jesus death etc. sent his opinion to the Senate to make Jesus a Roman worshipped deity, but the request was refused only because there were no senators who first put forth the proposal or who had first verified the miracles in this cesspool of the Empire that noone really cared about while Jesus was alive. That was the Roman attitude...and if you read the Roman histories of the period, you'll see the forger thinks too highly of the "Jew", whom the Romans would rather equate as dogs that should be put on a leash, rather than people. And the Jew, would rather equate Romans as flies rather than people vice versa.
So with a reasonable sense of understanding, HAVING READ the Roman histories and historians of the day, etc., I find this "letter" to be nothing more than a scheme by someone who had no imagination, especially in the fabrication of the names of its alleged witnesses. Rabani, Robani, Robani? Give me a break.
Homework assignment: research classic Roman opinion on Jews, and governor (etc.) relationships (or lack thereof) with Jews in whatever provinces, and correspondence (etc.) relationships with his Caesar.