Comments on: Historical Jesus http://www.ritmeyer.com/2009/03/11/historical-jesus/ ...for the latest research, analysis and products on Biblical Archaeology Fri, 27 Jan 2012 17:15:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Harry Eisenstein http://www.ritmeyer.com/2009/03/11/historical-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-13156 Harry Eisenstein Sat, 02 May 2009 05:06:48 +0000 http://www.ritmeyer.com/?p=239#comment-13156 The DVDs appear to sacrifice accuracy for the sake of marketing a specific viewpoint. Brief case in point: to support the idea that the Sanhedrin did in fact "examine” Jesus, the scholars dismiss the argument that the procedures described in the Gospels violated Sanhedrin rules articulated in the Mishna by noting that (a) the Mishna was written two hundred years later and (b) priests often violated their own rules anyway. Excuse me. The Mishna was merely a compilation of scrupulously kept rules and laws passed from generation from generation that were well understood by Herod’s time and did not appear after the fact as the scholars suggest. Secondly, the Sanhedrin were not for the most part priests who by Herod’s time had become corrupt but were “Perushim” or Pharisees who were strict in their interpretation of Jewish law and rules, especially in matters that could lead to life and death. It certainly is possible that the Gospels are right, but the possibility that they are wrong cannot be so breezily dismissed and certainly not for the reasons articulated. I have not had the time to go through the DVDs but what I have seen so far leaves me very disappointed. The DVDs appear to sacrifice accuracy for the sake of marketing a specific viewpoint. Brief case in point: to support the idea that the Sanhedrin did in fact “examine” Jesus, the scholars dismiss the argument that the procedures described in the Gospels violated Sanhedrin rules articulated in the Mishna by noting that (a) the Mishna was written two hundred years later and (b) priests often violated their own rules anyway.

Excuse me. The Mishna was merely a compilation of scrupulously kept rules and laws passed from generation from generation that were well understood by Herod’s time and did not appear after the fact as the scholars suggest. Secondly, the Sanhedrin were not for the most part priests who by Herod’s time had become corrupt but were “Perushim” or Pharisees who were strict in their interpretation of Jewish law and rules, especially in matters that could lead to life and death. It certainly is possible that the Gospels are right, but the possibility that they are wrong cannot be so breezily dismissed and certainly not for the reasons articulated.

I have not had the time to go through the DVDs but what I have seen so far leaves me very disappointed.

]]> By: Ian Hall http://www.ritmeyer.com/2009/03/11/historical-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-11806 Ian Hall Sat, 14 Mar 2009 06:33:36 +0000 http://www.ritmeyer.com/?p=239#comment-11806 Thanks. Thanks.

]]>