Jews did not kill Jesus

Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea at the time of Jesus' crucifixion, likely would not have crucified Jesus without the pressure and demands from the Jewish authorities and certain segments of the Jewish population. Several factors suggest that Pilate's decision to crucify Jesus was heavily influenced by the Jewish leaders rather than his own initiative:

1. Pilate's Reluctance

• The Gospel accounts, particularly in the New Testament, portray Pilate as being somewhat reluctant to execute Jesus. For instance, in the Gospel of John, Pilate questions Jesus and finds no basis for a charge against him (John 18:38). He even attempts to release Jesus, offering the crowd a choice between releasing Jesus or Barabbas, a known criminal. The crowd, however, demands Barabbas' release and insists on Jesus' crucifixion (John 18:39-40).
• Pilate’s wife, according to the Gospel of Matthew, had a dream warning her about Jesus, and she urged Pilate not to have anything to do with "that righteous man" (Matthew 27:19). This further suggests that Pilate was aware of the potential innocence of Jesus and was uneasy about the decision to crucify him.

2. Pressure from Jewish Leaders

• The Jewish religious leaders, particularly the high priests and the Sanhedrin (Jewish council), were instrumental in bringing Jesus to Pilate. They accused Jesus of claiming to be the King of the Jews, a title that could be seen as a challenge to Roman authority and a potential source of unrest (Luke 23:2).
• The Jewish religious leaders framed Jesus' claim to kingship in political terms to ensure that Pilate would see him as a threat to Roman rule. Pilate, as a Roman governor, was responsible for maintaining order and preventing rebellion in Judea, so a claim to kingship would have been taken seriously if presented as a potential threat to Roman authority.

3. Pilate's Political Calculations

• Pilate was known for his harsh and often brutal methods of governance. He had previously clashed with the Jewish population over issues like the placement of Roman standards (which were seen as idolatrous) in Jerusalem and the use of Temple funds for an aqueduct. These incidents had already created tension between Pilate and the Jewish population.
• The Gospel of John suggests that the Jewish leaders threatened Pilate by saying, "If you release this man, you are no friend of Caesar" (John 19:12). This could be interpreted as a subtle reminder that if Pilate did not act against Jesus, the Jewish leaders might report him to the Roman Emperor Tiberius as being lenient on someone claiming to be a king, which could be seen as disloyalty to Caesar.

4. Maintaining Order

• Pilate’s primary duty was to maintain peace and order in Judea. The Jewish authorities presented Jesus as a potential threat to this order, which would have compelled Pilate to take action, even if he personally did not see Jesus as a significant threat.
• The crucifixion of Jesus can be seen as a way for Pilate to placate the Jewish leaders and the crowd, thereby avoiding a possible uprising or unrest, which would reflect poorly on his ability to govern.

Conclusion

Without the demands and pressure from the Jewish leaders, it is unlikely that Pilate would have crucified Jesus on his own initiative. The historical accounts suggest that Pilate was reluctant to execute Jesus and that his decision was largely influenced by the Jewish authorities who saw Jesus as a threat to their religious and political authority. Pilate ultimately made a political calculation to maintain order and avoid conflict, leading to the decision to crucify Jesus.

The points discussed in the previous answer are based on various sources, primarily the New Testament accounts and historical analysis by scholars. Here are the references and sources that support the key elements:

References

1. Pilate's Reluctance

• New Testament References:
  • John 18:38: "Pilate said to him, 'What is truth?' After he had said this, he went back outside to the Jews and told them, 'I find no guilt in him.'"
  • Matthew 27:19: "While Pilate was sitting on the judge's seat, his wife sent him this message: 'Don’t have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him.'"
  • Luke 23:4: "Then Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowds, 'I find no guilt in this man.'"

2. Pressure from Jewish Leaders

• New Testament References:
  • Luke 23:2: "And they began to accuse him, saying, 'We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding us to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ, a king.'"
  • John 19:12: "From then on Pilate sought to release him, but the Jews cried out, 'If you release this man, you are not Caesar’s friend. Everyone who makes himself a king opposes Caesar.'"

3. Pilate's Political Calculations

• Historical Analysis:
  • Pilate’s history of dealing harshly with the Jews is well-documented by the Jewish historian Josephus in his works Antiquities of the Jews (18.3.2) and The Jewish War (2.9.2-4). These texts describe incidents where Pilate used force to suppress Jewish dissent, which would have made him cautious about provoking further unrest.
• Scholarship:
  • Scholars like Raymond E. Brown in The Death of the Messiah and E.P. Sanders in The Historical Figure of Jesus discuss how Pilate’s decision to crucify Jesus was likely influenced by the desire to maintain order and avoid any accusation of disloyalty to Caesar.

4. Maintaining Order

• New Testament References:
  • Matthew 27:24: "When Pilate saw that he was gaining nothing, but rather that a riot was beginning, he took water and washed his hands before the crowd, saying, 'I am innocent of this man’s blood; see to it yourselves.'"
• Historical Context:
  • The Roman practice of maintaining Pax Romana (Roman peace) in its provinces, especially in troublesome regions like Judea, often involved harsh measures to prevent uprisings. Pilate’s decision can be seen as an attempt to prevent any potential unrest that could arise from not dealing with someone accused of claiming kingship.