In Reply to: How Jesus could have survived the Cross? posted by moonshiner on April 06, 2006 at 14:15:43:
Maybe I'm missing something, or maybe Baigent explains it elsewhere (but not here), but could you see if you can explain this contradiction? The first article reads:
Pilate didn't want him dead (Baigent's Jesus is a prominent Jew friendly to Rome), but didn't dare face down a mob of anti-Roman Jews demanding his execution. So Pilate had Jesus hung on the cross, but he also had him taken down alive and smuggled to safety in Egypt.
It also says:
"My starting point was realizing Pilate's dilemma," Baigent says, meaning Pilate's need to avoid executing a prominent Jew who was friendly to Rome, balanced by the risk of public unrest in a notoriously unruly province. So Pilate cut a deal with the Zealots -- they could have their sacrificial victim or their martyr (he can't make up his mind which), but only for show: Jesus had to come down alive, and depart Israel forever (to Egypt, Baigent believes).
But the second article says:
But there is yet another oddity that we need to note: in the Gospel of Mark, Joseph of Arimathea is described as visiting Pilate and requesting the body of Jesus. Pilate asks if Jesus is dead and is surprised when told that he is indeed, for his demise seems very rapid to Pilate. But since Jesus is dead, Pilate allows Joseph to take the body down. If we look at the original Greek text, we see an important point being made: when Joseph asks Pilate for Jesus's body, the word used for "body" is soma. In Greek this denotes a living body. When Pilate agrees that Joseph can take the body down from the cross, the word he uses for "body" is ptoma (Mark 15:43-45). This means a corpse. In other words, the Greek text of Mark's Gospel is making it clear that while Joseph is asking for the living body of Jesus, Pilate grants him what he believes to be the corpse. Jesus's survival is revealed right there in the actual Gospel account.
So Pilate cuts a deal with the Zealots: Jesus can be nailed up but not die. Stunningly, the Roman-hating Zealots (who unbelievably implicate themselves in a high-level conspiracy with the Roman governors himself!) agree. So Pilate works it out with Joseph of Arimathea to drug Jesus & then take him down alive, take him to a tomb & revive him & send him packing to Egypt.
But now when Joseph says Jesus is dead, Pilate is surprised. 'Oh, he's really dead? too bad!' Like things have gone too far & his plan didn't work. Pilate says yeah, take away his corpse. But no, Jesus is still alive & the plan still gets followed thru: Jesus is revived & sent off to Egypt.
Does Pilate know what's happening here? Or more likely, does Baigent?
And why doesn't Pilate take a hint if Joseph asks for a 'living body'? Why doesn't he say, 'Oh right, you mean a living body. Jesus is still living.'
Baigent's theory is highly interesting but seems very hypothetical & little more than special pleading.
What exactly