מקדש או משיח? 'משפטו' של ישו, המקדש והמדיניות הרומית

The article's point of departure is that the Passion narrative should be newly re-examined from two perspectives: non-eschatological (or non-messianic), and comparative Roman politics. A new trend in New Testament scholarship views the historical Jesus and the Jesus movement as being non-messianic and non-eschatological, but rather sapiental. Although this view is somewhat over-exaggerated, it is legitimate to understate the role of eschatology and messianism in earliest Christianity. The use of this paradigm in the study of Jesus' trial, as well as other historical doubts arising from Jesus' messianic confession before the high priest, lead to the conclusion that it is unreasonable that Jesus was convicted and crucified as a Messiah by his own words. Examination of the Passion narrative, however, implies that the charges against Jesus pertained to his 'cleansing of the Temple' and especially to his public declaration that he would destroy the Temple (although I suspect that he actually did not say that). It is suggested that the Roman motive for the crucifixion of Jesus stemmed from the fact that Jesus was seen as a threat to the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, hence threatening Roman rule. Cults in general, and Jewish cults in particular, were sponsored by the emperor and symbolized his rule. Many cases in first-century Europe indicate that the Romans were very sensitive to acts against prevailing cults and interpreted them as being rebellious. In the appendix it is also suggested that Jesus' being charged as a threat to the Temple may perhaps also explain why Jesus was crucified as 'King of the Jews'. In many cases opposition and revolts emerged from symbolic acts against Roman cults. Thus, Jesus' deeds against the Jerusalem Temple may have been interpreted by the Roman authorities as a challenge to Roman rule in the Temple or Judaea in general. The Romans had good reason to think that Jesus' motives were revolutionary, and thus (mistakenly) labeled him as a would-be-Messiah. If this suggestion is accepted, it explains how, following Roman intervention, after his execution the non-eschatological historical Jesus became the subject of a messianic movement or movements.