Posted: Aug 20, 2011 3:50 pm
A short while ago, I had a brief discussion with a friend of mine (also an atheist) about why was Jesus crucified and not stoned. His reply was that under Roman rule only they could execute someone (e.g. crucfixion) and that the Jews had no autonomy in this matter (even though Jesus was given back to the Jews for sentencing - allegedly).
Yet we read (in the Bible) that on a couple of occaisions the crowd were ready to stone Jesus because he 'blasphemed'.
Could someone enlighten me on the historical practices of Roman occupation with regard to local customs and punishment? Was some autonomy granted to the occupied? Scholarly references would be useful.
I've tried Googling but all I get are the self-opinionated religious offering their views and trying to justify this or that according to their beliefs.
Yet we read (in the Bible) that on a couple of occaisions the crowd were ready to stone Jesus because he 'blasphemed'.
Could someone enlighten me on the historical practices of Roman occupation with regard to local customs and punishment? Was some autonomy granted to the occupied? Scholarly references would be useful.
I've tried Googling but all I get are the self-opinionated religious offering their views and trying to justify this or that according to their beliefs.