# If Jesus had a wife, would that change anything? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 20, 2012, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337 "2012-09-20T23:55:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2014, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/141 "2014-05-16T23:33:18Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > . . . Also, the gospels portray the Romans as mocking Jesus in various ways (sign, crown of thorns, purple robe) as a pretend “king of the Jews” during his execution. Why the mockery, if the excecution was held only at the behest of the mob and Pilate himself thought he was okay? . . . I can buy that, given that it was just a bunch of rank-and-file soldiers doing the mockery. For them, it would have been a (bloody) holiday, a respite from patrolling and sentry-go. Pilate wouldn’t have said, “Take him and mock him.” He’d have just told an officer, “Take him and crucify him.” Of course, he couldn’t help but know that the soldiers would make a carnival of it… But, FWIW, I agree with most of your point here: the story doesn’t fit what we know of Roman jurisprudence. Pilate would have “washed his hands” of Jesus from the first, without the absurd spectacle of the crowd and the Barabbas nonsense. It’s the same problem as Joseph having to return to Bethlehem to register for the census. Nuh uh. Didn’t work that way. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2014, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/142 "2014-05-17T12:42:24Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > But when his overriding concern is to not allow anything to spark a riot among the biggest crowds of the year, to then go out and harangue the mob about which Jew he should execute seems absolutely, utterly, completely ridiculous, even if such a “custom” of allowing the Jewish mob to override Roman sentences wasn’t already ridiculous. On what evidence do you believe that Pilate was concerned about riots on that Passover in particular, and on what evidence do you believe that he harangued the mob? > [@](#): > > I don’t need to prove that it didn’t happen; you need to prove it did. Actually, you need to provide evidence for what you have been asserting, if possible. You seem to believe that Christians are obligated to prove even the mundane parts of the various Gospels. I would hope you see how you should be subject to the same standard, when you are asserting some mundane parts of the Gospels as reliable and rejecting other, equally mundane parts which contradict you. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2014, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/143 "2014-05-17T12:46:51Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > But, FWIW, I agree with most of your point here: the story doesn’t fit what we know of Roman jurisprudence. Pilate would have “washed his hands” of Jesus from the first, without the absurd spectacle of the crowd and the Barabbas nonsense. Could you please provide cites of other instances of Roman governors who acted in the same way? Please be specific. > [@](#): > > It’s the same problem as Joseph having to return to Bethlehem to register for the census. Nuh uh. Didn’t work that way. Could you please provide cites of other Roman censuses that were run differently, so we know the evidence you are basing your understanding of how it did work? Thanks in advance. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2014, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/144 "2014-05-17T13:58:18Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Could you please provide cites of other instances of Roman governors who acted in the same way? Please be specific. > > Could you please provide cites of other Roman censuses that were run differently, so we know the evidence you are basing your understanding of how it did work? > > Thanks in advance. > > Regards, > Shodan Just curious: what’s the record for the number of times someone has responded to you before getting tired of your act? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2014, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/145 "2014-05-17T14:32:32Z")
[About the Roman Census.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_census#Census) The bottom of that page show 103 references. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2014, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/146 "2014-05-17T15:21:33Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > It’s the same problem as Joseph having to return to Bethlehem to register for the census. Nuh uh. Didn’t work that way. > [@Shodan](#): > > Could you please provide cites of other Roman censuses that were run differently, so we know the evidence you are basing your understanding of how it did work? [Our name is Legion, for we are many.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_of_Quirinius#The_Gospel_of_Luke) > [@](#): > > The first two chapters of the Gospel of Luke indicate the birth of Jesus took place at the time of the census: > > > [@](#): > > > > In those days a decree went out from Emperor Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. All went to their own towns to be registered. Joseph also went from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to the city of David called Bethlehem, because he was descended from the house and family of David. He went to be registered with Mary, to whom he was engaged and who was expecting a child. (Luke 2:1–7) > > The passage describes how Jesus’ parents, Joseph and Mary, travel from their home in Nazareth, in Galilee, to Bethlehem, where Jesus is born. This explains how Jesus, a Galilean, could have been born in Bethlehem in Judea, the city of King David. > > This passage has long been considered problematic by Biblical scholars, since it places the birth of Jesus around the time of the census in 6/7, whereas both this Gospel and the Gospel of Matthew, which makes no mention of the census, indicate a birth in the reign of Herod the Great, who died in 4 BCE, at least ten years earlier.[12] In addition, no historical sources mention a census of the Roman world which would cover the entire population. Those of Augustus covered Roman citizens only,[13] and it was not the practice in Roman censuses to require people to return to their ancestral homes.[14][15][16][17][18] James Dunn wrote: “the idea of a census requiring individuals to move to the native town of long dead ancestors is hard to credit”.[19] E. P. Sanders points out that it would have been the practice for the census-takers, not the taxed, to travel, and that Joseph, resident in Galilee, would not have been covered by a census in Judaea.[20] More traditional commentators, however, note that while the Romans did not require the taxed to return to their ancestral homes, the Jews favoured this practice.[21][22] The Jews historically counted people by clans and families in specific locations, often in order to ensure that each clan, family, and tribe inherited their ancestral land.[23][24][25][26] > > Traditionally, biblical scholars tried to suggest ways of reconciling the two accounts, many of which involve making assumptions about the historical evidence: that Josephus was incorrect, or the text had been corrupted, and the census was actually conducted by one of the governors of Herod’s time, such as Gaius Sentius Saturninus or Publius Quinctilius Varus;[27][28] that there were two separate events, either a decree followed by a census ten years later, or a census followed by an imposition of tax ten years later;[29][30] that the words of Luke could be interpreted to mean that the census had been carried out before Quirinius was governor;[31][32] or that he had carried out an earlier census, either as governor or in a subordinate role.[33][34][35][36] > > In 1886, the theologian Emil Schürer, in his monumental study, Geschichte des judischen Volks im Zeitalter Jesu Christi (A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ), closely criticised the traditional view. He raised five points which showed, he believed, that the Luke account could not be historically accurate: > 1.Nothing is known in history of a general census by Augustus; > 2.In a Roman census Joseph would not have had to travel to Bethlehem, and Mary would not have had to travel at all; > 3.No Roman census would have been made in Judea during the reign of Herod; > 4.Josephus records no such census and it would have been a notable innovation; > 5.Quirinius was not governor of Syria until long after the reign of Herod.[37] > > The suggested alternative translations have been described as “implausible” [38] and “almost impossible”.[39] > > Most modern scholars explain the disparity as an error on the part of the author of the Gospel,[40][41] concluding that he was more concerned with creating a symbolic narrative than a historical account,[42] and was either unaware of, or indifferent to,[43] the chronological difficulty. In The Birth of the Messiah (1977), a detailed study of the infancy narratives of Jesus, the American scholar Raymond E. Brown concluded that “this information is dubious on almost every score, despite the elaborate attempts by scholars to defend Lucan accuracy.”[44] W. D. Davies and E. P. Sanders ascribe this to simple error: “on many points, especially about Jesus’ early life, the evangelists were ignorant … they simply did not know, and, guided by rumour, hope or supposition, did the best they could”.[45] Fergus Millar suggests that Luke’s narrative was a construct designed to connect Jesus with the house of David.[46] > > See also[edit] > Luke 2 > Biblical inerrancy > > Footnotes[edit] > > 1.Jump up ^ H.H. Ben-Sasson, A History of the Jewish People, Harvard University Press, 1976, ISBN 0-674-39731-2, page 246: “When Archelaus was deposed from the ethnarchy in 6 CE, Judea proper, Samaria and Idumea were converted into a Roman province under the name Iudaea.”; page 274: “Josephus connects the beginnings of the extremist movement with the census held under the supervision of Quirinius, the legate of Syria, soon after Judea had been converted into a Roman province (6 CE).” > 2.Jump up ^ Emil Schürer, Fergus Millar (editor), Geza Vermes (editor), The history of the Jewish people in the age of Jesus Christ Vol I, (Continuum, 1973), page 424: “It was started … in the earliest in the summer of C.E. 6.” and completed “at the latest in the autumn of C.E. 7” > 3.Jump up ^ Josephus, Antiquities 17.355 & 18.1–2; c.f. Matthew 2:22 > 4.Jump up ^ Jewish Encyclopedia, page 653; Rivka Gonen, Contested Holiness, KTAV Publishing House (2003), pages 37–8. > 5.Jump up ^ Antiquities 18.3–10. See also Emil Schürer (1973). The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ: Volume I. revised and edited by Geza Vermes, Fergus Millar and Matthew Black (revised English ed.). Edinburgh: T&T Clark. pp. 381–382. ISBN 0-567-02242-0. > 6.Jump up ^ James S. Jeffers, The Greco-Roman World of the New Testament Era: Exploring the Background of Early Christianity (InterVarsity Press,1999), p. 129. > 7.Jump up ^ Martin Goodman, The Ruling Class of Judaea: The Origins of the Jewish Revolt Against Rome, A.D. 66-70 (Cambridge University Press, 1993), page 10. > 8.Jump up ^ Jack Pastor, Land and Economy in Ancient Palestine, Routledge (London 1997), page 139. > 9.Jump up ^ Fergus Millar (1993). The Roman Near East: 31 BC – AD 337. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. pp. 48, 250. > 10.Jump up ^ Fergus Millar, Rome, the Greek World, and the East, UNC Press (2006), page 238 > 11.Jump up ^ Sabine R. Hübner, The Family in Roman Egypt: A Comparative Approach to Intergenerational Solidarity and Conflict (Cambridge University Press, 2013) page 26. > 12.Jump up ^ e.g. R. E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah (New York: Doubleday), p. 547. > 13.Jump up ^ Emil Schürer (revised by Geza Vermes, Fergus Millar and Matthew Black), The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, Continuum International, 1973, Volume I page 401. > 14.Jump up ^ E. P. Sanders, The Historical Figure of Jesus, Penguin, 1993, p86 > 15.Jump up ^ Spong, John Shelby. Jesus for the non-religious. HarperCollins. 2007. ISBN 0-06-076207-1 > 16.Jump up ^ Brown, R.E. The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke. Doubleday, NY. 1993. Page 549 > 17.Jump up ^ Bromiley, Geoffrey W, ed. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. William B. Eerdmans Publishing. 1995. ISBN 0-8028-3785-9. Page 655 > 18.Jump up ^ Ehrman, Bart D… Jesus, Interrupted. HarperCollins. 2009. ISBN 0-06-117393-2 > 19.Jump up ^ James Douglas Grant Dunn, Jesus Remembered, p. 344 > 20.Jump up ^ E. P. Sanders, The Historical Figure of Jesus, Penguin, 1993, p86; see also Bart Ehrman, A Brief Introduction to the New Testament, p103. > 21.Jump up ^ Brown, David. “Luke Chapter 2”. > 22.Jump up ^ Henry, Matthew. “Luke Chapter 2”. > 23.Jump up ^ “Numbers 1:2”. > 24.Jump up ^ “Numbers 26:2-63”. > 25.Jump up ^ “Leviticus 25:10-17”. > 26.Jump up ^ “Numbers 36”. > 27.Jump up ^ Lardner 1730, pp. 392-3. > 28.Jump up ^ Georg Benedikt Winer, A Grammar of the New Testament Diction, Translated by Edward Masson, T. & T. Clark (1860), page 259. > 29.Jump up ^ Lardner 1730, pp. 393-5. > 30.Jump up ^ Suggested also by Paulus and William Hales: John Kitto, ed., A cyclopædia of biblical literature > 31.Jump up ^ Lardner 1730, pp. 398-413. > 32.Jump up ^ Georg Philipp Eduard Huschke, Über den Zensus zur Zeit der Geburt Jesu Christi (Berlin 1840); Friedrich Wieseler in 1843 chronolog. Synopse der vier Evangelien, Hamburg, 1843. A view also held by Tholuck along with Storr, and Friedrich Süskind; F.M. Heichelheim, “Roman Syria,” in An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome, ed. T. Frank (Baltimore, 1938), pp. 161; F. F. Bruce, Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans) p. 192; Nigel Turner, Grammatical Insights into the New Testament, pp. 23–24; Harold Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1977), p. 21; L. H. Feldman in W. Brindle, “The Census and Quirinius: Luke 2:2” in JETS 27 (1984), pp. 48–49; P. W. Barnett, ‘Apographē and apographesthai in Luke 2:1–5’, Expository Times 85 (1973–1974), 337–380; Ben Witherington III, What Have They Done With Jesus? (San Francisco: Harper, 2006), p. 101. > 33.Jump up ^ Lardner 1730, pp. 413-434. > 34.Jump up ^ A view supported by Johann Leonhard Hug in 1808, and later August Wilhelm Zumpt, “De Syria Romanorum provincia ab Caesare Augusto ad T. Vespasianum”, in Comment. Epigraph., Berol. 1854, vol. ii. 88–125, and Das Geburtsjahr Christi, Leipzig, 1869 > 35.Jump up ^ Sir William Ramsay: see Ian Howard Marshall, The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1978, page 103. > 36.Jump up ^ T Corbishley, Journal of Roman Studies 24 (1934), 43–49 > 37.Jump up ^ Emil Schürer, A History of the Jewish People in the time of Jesus Christ (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1890) > 38.Jump up ^ A. N. Sherwin-White, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963) p. 171, n. 1. > 39.Jump up ^ Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics – An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament, Zondervan (1996), page 304 > 40.Jump up ^ Ralph Martin Novak, Christianity and the Roman Empire: background texts (Continuum International, 2001), page 293. > 41.Jump up ^ Raymond E. Brown, Christ in the Gospels of the Liturgical Year, (Liturgical Press, 2008), page 114. See, for example, James Douglas Grant Dunn, Jesus Remembered, (Eerdmans, 2003) p344. Similarly, Erich S. Gruen, ‘The expansion of the empire under Augustus’, in The Cambridge ancient history Volume 10, p157, Geza Vermes, The Nativity, Penguin 2006, p.96, W. D. Davies and E. P. Sanders, ‘Jesus from the Jewish point of view’, in The Cambridge History of Judaism ed William Horbury, vol 3: the Early Roman Period, 1984, Anthony Harvey, A Companion to the New Testament (Cambridge University Press 2004), p221, Meier, John P., A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. Doubleday, 1991, v. 1, p. 213, Brown, Raymond E. The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke. London: G. Chapman, 1977, p. 554, A. N. Sherwin-White, pp. 166, 167, Millar, Fergus (1990). “Reflections on the trials of Jesus”. A Tribute to Geza Vermes: Essays on Jewish and Christian Literature and History (JSOT Suppl. 100) [eds. P.R. Davies and R.T. White]. Sheffield: JSOT Press. pp. 355–81. repr. in Millar, Fergus (2006). “The Greek World, the Jews, and the East”. Rome, the Greek World and the East (University of North Carolina Press) 3: 139–163. > 42.Jump up ^ Marcus J. Borg, Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time: The Historical Jesus and the Heart of Contemporary Faith, (HarperCollins, 1993), page 24. > 43.Jump up ^ Elias Joseph Bickerman, Studies in Jewish and Christian History, Page 104 > 44.Jump up ^ Raymond E. Brown The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke, Anchor Bible; Updated edition (1999), page 413. > 45.Jump up ^ W.D Davies and E. P. Sanders, ‘Jesus from the Jewish point of view’, in The Cambridge History of Judaism ed William Horbury, vol 3: the Early Roman Period, 1984. > 46.Jump up ^ "Only Matthew and Luke take the story back to the birth of Jesus, and do so in wholly different and incompatible ways. . . Both birth narratives are constructs, one historically plausible [i.e. Matthew], the other wholly impossible [i.e. Luke], and both are designed to reach back to the infancy of Jesus, and to assert his connection to the house of David… and his birth in Bethlehem."Millar, Fergus (1990). “Reflections on the trials of Jesus”. A Tribute to Geza Vermes: Essays on Jewish and Christian Literature and History (JSOT Suppl. 100) [eds. P.R. Davies and R.T. White]. Sheffield: JSOT Press. pp. 355–81. repr. in Millar, Fergus (2006). “The Greek World, the Jews, and the East”. Rome, the Greek World and the East (University of North Carolina Press) 3: 139–163. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2014, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/147 "2014-05-17T15:29:58Z")
While we’re on the subject, Dopers are smarter than most, and have access to internet search engines and the like. Does anyone reading this know which city his ancestors lived in 1000 years ago? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2014, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/148 "2014-05-17T16:43:48Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [Our name is Legion, for we are many.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_of_Quirinius#The_Gospel_of_Luke) I’m afraid I didn’t see any cites of other, similar censuses or how they were run. Censuses of Roman citizens would not have required travel, but the Gospels don’t say that it was of Romans. And your cite says that Jewish censuses did require it. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2014, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/149 "2014-05-17T16:44:56Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > Just curious: what’s the record for the number of times someone has responded to you before getting tired of your act? Usually when they don’t have any evidence, they do what you did. I don’t count the times, but it is pretty obvious pretty quick. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2014, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/150 "2014-05-17T20:21:16Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Could you please provide cites of other instances of Roman governors who acted in the same way? Please be specific. > > Could you please provide cites of other Roman censuses that were run differently, so we know the evidence you are basing your understanding of how it did work? We know some about Roman jurisprudence from discussions by their historians. We know about the crucifixion of Spartacus and his followers. We have a pretty fair idea of how their system worked. The census issue is well documented: there is no extra-Biblical reference to anyone’s being compelled to return to their ancestral city to register. Caesar numbered the Franks, and other Roman censuses were performed. [Here’s just one quick cite.](http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/census.htm) Cute try, but you can’t peddle nonsense by claiming to be fresh out of sense. Can you prove that the Romans ever held any other trial by a procurator in the entirety of their history? (Can you provide any other references to the miracles at Cana or Lake Tiberius? Be specific…) [I can also cite the words of the master.](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2001/what-did-the-census-at-the-time-of-the-birth-of-christ-accomplish) ETA: Thank you to the others who answered, and did a much better job than I ever could have. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2014, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/151 "2014-05-20T13:06:09Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Well, if I may answer - I have no actual evidence, other than from what I’ve read of Romans as imperial authorities, it strikes me as unlikely that a high official like Pontus Pilate would give a shit about some Jewish troublemaker accused of troublemaking. > > In the gospels, he’s pictured as genuinely conflicted and disturbed by the whole process, eventually ordering the execution of Jesus because the mob forces him into it, against his concience. This simply strikes me as unlikely and unlike the more typical Roman iron-fisted rule. > > Also, the gospels portray the Romans as mocking Jesus in various ways (sign, crown of thorns, purple robe) as a pretend “king of the Jews” during his execution. Why the mockery, if the excecution was held only at the behest of the mob and Pilate himself thought he was okay? > > Certainly not to appease the Sanhedrin - as he goes out of his way to piss them off. > > Indeed, at one point the Sanhedrin ask Pilate to change the sign on Jesus form “King if the Jews” to “Pretend King of the Jews” - and he refuses. How does this make sense, if he is only excecuting Jesus to placate them? One moment he’s ordering the horrible excecution of an innocent man to appease them, the next he deliberately pisses them off, for no good reason? > > The whole story reads like it has been “adjusted” by later scribes - it simply does not ‘feel’ true to the times. How much more likely that Jesus was executed for being a troublemaker and that Pilate felt not an iota of concern about it at the time - to him, a totally routine event, just another day at the office. Also the Bible as I read it, the close followers, friends, and Apostles didn’t expect Jesus to come back to life, or they wouldn’t have come to anoint a dead body, act surprised that The Tomb was empty ,and Mary M was said not to recognize Jesus, and she had just seen him . So Jesus saying he would return in 3 days didn’t make his followers etc. believe Jesus as he was quoted to have said. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2014, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/152 "2014-05-20T13:46:14Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > So, in essence, you reject the most detailed accounts we have of Pilate and Jesus, because they don’t ‘feel’ true to you? > > That’s fine, I guess. Believe what you want. If you want to believe that Jesus was a space alien from Mars, you can believe that too. Don’t expect me to join you, though. > > In all honesty, though I personally am more or less am a literalist when it comes to the Gospels, I have a lot of respect for the mythicist position. The mythicist is at least honest, he dismisses the Gospels as tall tales made up three or four decades after the fact, and so he has no reason to believe that Jesus was a real person. That person is more skeptical than me, temperamentally, but I can’t prove to him Jesus existed, so I’m content to leave it at that. I have much less respect for attempts to construct a ‘historical Jesus’ based on selecting some things out of the Gospels and rejecting other things. Because all such attempts seem to boil down to picking and choosing based on hopelessly subjectiev and arbitrary standards that simply replicate what the person picking and choosing is already determined to believe. > > If you think the Gospels are just making up the details about Pilate and the Passion, why not take it a step further and just say ‘they were making up the whole thing’? Well, a couple of reasons. First, something inspired Christianity. Why not a real preacher, who was really killed by the Romans? There is nothing inherently unlikely about that. Second, if we are going to accept a real preacher, there is no reason to accept he actually performed miracles and rose from thew dead. A real preacher who really existed is probable. A guy performing miracles, less so. Chances are good that it was later myth-making. Mythologizing doesn’t require, note, that the guy himself was a complete fabrication! Third, if we are going to hypothesize a real preacher who was really executed by Romans, but whose life was “mythologized” by later followers - who added in miracles and the like - why not subject his whole story to the same picking and choosing, for inherent probability? It is _highly improbable_ that a Procreator or Governor of Judea would give much of a shit about a Jewish street preacher, who whould have approximately the same status, in Roman aristocratic eyes, as a foreign street person suspected of terrorism. Making Pilate care (and go through that whole rigamoarole with Barrabas) has the same “feel” of myth-making as attributing miracles to the guy. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2014, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/153 "2014-05-20T13:58:18Z")
> [@monavis](#): > > Also the Bible as I read it, the close followers, friends, and Apostles didn’t expect Jesus to come back to life, or they wouldn’t have come to anoint a dead body, act surprised that The Tomb was empty ,and Mary M was said not to recognize Jesus, and she had just seen him . So Jesus saying he would return in 3 days didn’t make his followers etc. believe Jesus as he was quoted to have said. It’s interesting that Matthew says that the priests and Pharisees were so worried about the disciples faking a resurrection that they asked Pilate for a guard on the tomb, but the synoptic Gospels say that the disciples themselves didn’t believe Jesus had been resurrected, even when told by their closest friends, until they saw him with their own eyes. And some not even then. Luke even says they thought it was nonsense. This in spite of all the other resurrected saints wandering around Jerusalem. Heck, according to Matthew 10:8, the disciples had long since been given the power to raise the dead. So why didn’t they raise Jesus, instead of just moping around and thinking it impossible? Anybody? Hector? And no, Shodan, I’m not going to give you specific examples of them failing to raise the dead. ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/154 "2014-05-27T21:03:45Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > But, FWIW, I agree with most of your point here: the story doesn’t fit what we know of Roman jurisprudence. Pilate would have “washed his hands” of Jesus from the first, without the absurd spectacle of the crowd and the Barabbas nonsense. > > It’s the same problem as Joseph having to return to Bethlehem to register for the census. Nuh uh. Didn’t work that way. These sentiments are expressed with way too much confidence. First, Roman jurisprudence tells us pretty much nothing about trials before actual officials, especially not in the early 1st century. Not a great deal is known about trials at all outside of Egypt, where over 60 records of trial proceedings survive. In one papyrus record, _Papiri Fiorentini_ 61, the Roman governor of Egypt (known as the Prefect) had one of the litigants flogged just for the hell of it, likely because he thought the matter was trivial. There were no constitutional restrictions on the Prefect’s power, and when he wanted to, he flexed it. This would not entirely have been true for the other provinces, but it is mistake to think that they were somehow constrained by the niceties of Roman law. They weren’t. Their job was to keep the provinces “pacata atque quieta,” settled and orderly, and they had a great deal of latitude to achieve this. This did not mean that Prefects were inherently abusive. What we know tends to suggest otherwise. But there is plenty of evidence that they had these powers and that knowledge of occasionally flagrant use of power was widespread. We know a lot more about the Roman census later, and again, we know the most for Egypt. In later periods people did have to return to their home districts for the census in order to be held accountable for the poll tax. ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/155 "2014-05-27T21:15:01Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > It is _highly improbable_ that a Procreator or Governor of Judea would give much of a shit about a Jewish street preacher, who whould have approximately the same status, in Roman aristocratic eyes, as a foreign street person suspected of terrorism. Making Pilate care (and go through that whole rigamoarole with Barrabas) has the same “feel” of myth-making as attributing miracles to the guy. This is not actually all that implausible. The Roman administration in Judea (and everywhere else, really) in this period was very small. People at the top, emperors included, were directly involved in a lot of the small-fry business of governance. There was an ancient tradition, in the east especially, of petitioning the ruler directly to resolve all sorts of issues, great and small. A provincial governor would have sorted out whether the widow Jones improperly registered an olive tree she planted in her back yard and who robbed Smith’s vegetable patch before dealing with yet another troublemaking longhair. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/156 "2014-05-27T21:25:11Z")
> [@Maeglin](#): > > This is not actually all that implausible. The Roman administration in Judea (and everywhere else, really) in this period was very small. People at the top, emperors included, were directly involved in a lot of the small-fry business of governance. There was an ancient tradition, in the east especially, of petitioning the ruler directly to resolve all sorts of issues, great and small. A provincial governor would have sorted out whether the widow Jones improperly registered an olive tree she planted in her back yard and who robbed Smith’s vegetable patch before dealing with yet another troublemaking longhair. I did not say Pilate would not have dealt with Jesus. I said it was unlikely he would have given much of a shit about him, had he dealt with him. It would, in all probability, just been another tedious day at the office - deal with a bunch of complaints by provincials at 10 AM, have a troublemaking hippie street person executed at 11 AM, followed by a light lunch, and then the afternoon agenda. That sort of thing. The gospels have Pilate go through all sorts of rigamarole, indicating he cared - a lot - about this Jesus guy, presumably because Jesus was just. That. Awesome. Including that stuff about Barabas, intended to spare him. That just stikes me as the stuff of myth. At one and the same time Pilate dares not let him go (though he would like to) out of fear of the priests - and pisses the same priests off, by refusing to change the sign reading “king of the Jews” to “pretend king of the Jews”. More inconsistency (and more stuff that seems like myth-making). ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/157 "2014-05-27T21:58:34Z")
> [@Maeglin](#): > > We know a lot more about the Roman census later, and again, we know the most for Egypt. In later periods people did have to return to their home districts for the census in order to be held accountable for the poll tax. Going to your home district makes perfect sense, although surely they would have a provision for proxies when it was inconvenient, e.g. when your wife is nine months pregnant. Going to the home district of your ancestor of 1000 years ago makes no sense at all, and it would be impossible for 99% of people to even have a clue where to go, even today. Seriously, does anyone reading this know? ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2014, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/158 "2014-05-28T01:04:06Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > Going to the home district of your ancestor of 1000 years ago makes no sense at all, and it would be impossible for 99% of people to even have a clue where to go, even today. > > Seriously, does anyone reading this know? I do. And for much the same reason that Joseph would have, had such a requirement been imposed upon him (which, FTR, I rather doubt). ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2014, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337/159 "2014-05-28T14:03:53Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > I did not say Pilate would not have dealt with Jesus. I said it was unlikely he would have given much of a shit about him, had he dealt with him. > > It would, in all probability, just been another tedious day at the office - deal with a bunch of complaints by provincials at 10 AM, have a troublemaking hippie street person executed at 11 AM, followed by a light lunch, and then the afternoon agenda. That sort of thing. > > The gospels have Pilate go through all sorts of rigamarole, indicating he cared - a lot - about this Jesus guy, presumably because Jesus was just. That. Awesome. Including that stuff about Barabas, intended to spare him. That just stikes me as the stuff of myth. > > At one and the same time Pilate dares not let him go (though he would like to) out of fear of the priests - and pisses the same priests off, by refusing to change the sign reading “king of the Jews” to “pretend king of the Jews”. More inconsistency (and more stuff that seems like myth-making). I agree completely that the account on the gospels contains mythmaking, whether intentional or merely due to accretions in the transmission of the document from its putative original source. I am more cautious of the idea that we can reject it purely based on plausibility. The governor had tremendous power over non-Romans and was free to fuck with them as he saw fit, and good evidence suggests that sometimes, governors did. To put it another way, if a provincial in AD 150 read the gospel, he probably would not have thought that the account of Pilate was crazy _prima facie_. > [@TonySinclair](#): > > Going to your home district makes perfect sense, although surely they would have a provision for proxies when it was inconvenient, e.g. when your wife is nine months pregnant. > > Going to the home district of your ancestor of 1000 years ago makes no sense at all, and it would be impossible for 99% of people to even have a clue where to go, even today. > > Seriously, does anyone reading this know? Yup, the ancestors bit requires truly heroic gospel apologetics to explain. It doesn’t jive with anything we know about later Roman censuses, about which we know a great deal. Among other things, censuses give us the best proof for widespread brother-sister marriage and reproduction in Egypt in the Roman period. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-jesus-had-a-wife-would-that-change-anything/635337.md?page=7)