To limit our inquiry to the moral characters of the judges alone, the issue of the trial can be but fatal to the accused; and so, when the three chambers const.i.tuting the Sanhedrin council had entered into session, we can well imagine that there was no hope for the acquittal of Jesus; for are not all the high priests, as well as the majority of the scribes and ancients, against him?[212]
APPENDIX II
ACTS OF PILATE
The apocryphal Acts of Pilate are herewith given under Appendix II. The authenticity of these writings has never been finally settled by the scholarship of the world. It is safe to say, however, that the current of modern criticism is decidedly against their genuineness.
Nevertheless, the following facts seem to be very generally conceded by the critics: That there are now in existence certain ancient doc.u.ments called the "Acts of Pilate"; that they were probably discovered at Turin, in northern Italy, and were first used by the noted New Testament palaeographer, Dr. Constantine Tischendorf, who studied them in company with the celebrated orientalist, Victor Amadee Peyron, professor of oriental languages in the University of Turin; and, furthermore, that these doc.u.ments that we now have are approximately accurate copies of the doc.u.ment mentioned by Justin Martyr about the year 138 A.D., and by Tertullian about the year 200 A.D.
But, admitting all these things, the question of _genuineness_ and _authenticity_ still remains to be settled. Was the doc.u.ment referred to by Justin as the "Acts of Pilate," and again as the "Acts recorded under Pontius Pilate," a genuine ma.n.u.script, written by or composed under the direction of Pilate, or was it a "pious fraud of some Christian," who gathered his prophecies from the Old, and his facts from the New Testament, and then embellished both with his imagination?
The subject is too vast and the s.p.a.ce at our disposal is too limited to permit a discussion of the authenticity of the Acts of Pilate. We have deemed it sufficient to insert under Appendix II lengthy extracts from the writings of Tischendorf and Lardner, two of the most celebrated biblical critics, relating to the genuineness of these Acts. The reader would do well to peruse these extracts carefully before reading the Acts of Pilate.
LARDNER"S REMARKS ON THE ACTS OF PILATE
_The Acts of Pontius Pilate, and his letter to Tiberius_
"Justin Martyr, in his first Apology, which was presented to the emperor Antoninus Pius, and the Senate of Rome, about the year 140, having mentioned our Savior"s crucifixion and some of the circ.u.mstances of it, adds: "And that these things were so done you may know from the Acts made in the time of Pontius Pilate."
"Afterwards in the same Apology, having mentioned some of our Lord"s miracles, such as healing diseases and raising the dead, he adds: "And that these things were done by him you may know from the Acts made in the time of Pontius Pilate."
"Tertullian, in his Apology, about the year 200, having spoken of our Savior"s crucifixion and resurrection, and his appearance to his disciples, who were ordained by him to preach the gospel over the world, goes on: "Of all these things, relating to Christ, Pilate, in his conscience a Christian, sent an account to Tiberius, then emperor."
"In another chapter or section of his Apology, nearer the beginning, he speaks to this purpose: "There was an ancient decree that no one should be received for a deity unless he was first approved by the senate.
Tiberius, in whose time the Christian religion had its rise, having received from Palestine in Syria an account of such things as manifested our Savior"s divinity, proposed to the senate, and giving his own vote as first in his favor, that he should be placed among the G.o.ds. The senate refused, because he himself had declined that honor."
""Nevertheless the emperor persisted in his own opinion, and ordered that if any accused the Christians they should be punished." And then adds: "Search," says he, "your own writings, and you will there find that Nero was the first emperor who exercised any acts of severity toward the Christians, because they were then very numerous at Rome."
"It is fit that we should now observe what notice Eusebius takes of these things in his Ecclesiastical History. It is to this effect: "When the wonderful resurrection of our Savior, and his ascension to heaven, were in the mouths of all men, it being an ancient custom for the governors of provinces to write the emperor, and give him an account of new and remarkable occurrences, that he might not be ignorant of anything; our Savior"s resurrection being much talked of throughout all of Palestine, Pilate informed the emperor of it, as likewise of his miracles, which he had heard of, and that being raised up after he had been put to death, he was already believed by many to be a G.o.d. And it is said that Tiberius referred the matter to the senate, but that they refused their consent, under a pretence that it had not been first approved of by them; there being an ancient law that no one should be deified among the Romans without an order of the senate; but, indeed, because the saving and divine doctrine of the gospel needed not to be confirmed by human judgment and authority. However, Tiberius persisted in his former sentiment, and allowed not anything to be done that was prejudicial to the doctrine of Christ. These things are related by Tertullian, a man famous on other accounts, and particularly for his skill in the Roman laws. I say he speaks thus in his Apology for the Christians, written by him in the Roman tongue, but since (in the days of Eusebius) translated into the Greek." His words are these: "There was an ancient decree that no one should be consecrated as a deity by the emperor, unless he was first approved of by the senate. Marcus Aemilius knows this by his G.o.d Alburnus. This is to our purpose, forasmuch as among you divinity is bestowed by human judgment."
"And if G.o.d does not please man, he shall not be G.o.d. And, according to this way of thinking, man must be propitious to G.o.d. Tiberius, therefore, in whose time the Christian name was first known in the world, having received an account of this doctrine out of Palestine, where it began, communicated that account to the senate; giving his own suffrage at the same time in favor of it. But the senate rejected it, because it had not been approved by themselves. "Nevertheless the emperor persisted in his judgment, and threatened death to such as should accuse the Christians." "Which," adds Eusebius, "could not be other than the disposal of Divine Providence, that the doctrine of the gospel, which was then in its beginning, might be preached all over the world without molestation." So Eusebius.
"Divers exceptions have been made by learned moderns to the original testimonies of Justin Martyr and Tertullian. "Is there any likelihood,"
say they, "that Pilate should write such things to Tiberius concerning a man whom he had condemned to death? And if he had written them, is it probable that Tiberius should propose to the senate to have a man put among the G.o.ds upon the bare relation of a governor of a province? And if he had proposed it, who can make a doubt that the senate would not have immediately complied? So that though we dare not say that this narration is absolutely false, yet it must be reckoned as doubtful." So says Du Pin.
"These and other difficulties shall now be considered.
"Now, therefore, I shall mention some observations:
"In the first place, I shall observe that Justin Martyr and Tertullian are early writers of good repute. That is an observation of Bishop Pearson. These testimonies are taken from the most public writings, Apologies for the Christian religion, presented, or at least proposed and recommended to the emperor and senate of Rome, or to magistrates of high authority and great distinction in the Roman empire.
Secondly: It certainly was the custom of governors of provinces to compose Acts or memoirs or commentaries of the remarkable occurrences in the places where they presided.
In the time of the first Roman emperors there were Acts of the Senate, Acts of the City, or People of Rome, Acts of other cities, and Acts of governors of provinces. Of all these we can discern clear proofs and frequent mention in ancient writers of the best credit. Julius Caesar ordered that Acts of the Senate, as well as daily Acts of the People, should be published. See Sueton. Jul. Caes. c. xx.
"Augustus forbade publishing Acts of the Senate.
"There was an officer, himself a senator, whose province it was to compose those Acts.
"The Acts of the Senate must have been large and voluminous, containing not only the question proposed, or referred to the senate by the consul, or the emperor, but also the debates and speeches of the senators.
"The Acts of the People, or City, were journals or registers of remarkable births, marriages, divorces, deaths, proceedings in courts of judicature, and other interesting affairs, and some other things below the dignity of history.
"To these Acts of each kind Roman authors frequently had recourse for information.
"There were such Acts or registers at other places besides Rome, particularly at Antium. From them Suetonius learned the day and place of the birth of Caligula, about which were other uncertain reports. And he speaks of those Acts as public authorities, and therefore more decisive and satisfactory than some other accounts.
"There were also Acts of the governors of provinces, registering all remarkable transactions and occurrences.
"Justin Martyr and Tertullian could not be mistaken about this; and the learned bishop of Caesarea admits the truth of what they say. And in the time of the persecuting emperor Maximin, about the year of Christ 307, the heathen people forged Acts of Pilate, derogatory to the honor of our Savior, which were diligently spread abroad, to unsettle Christians, or discourage them in the profession of their faith. Of this we are informed by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History.
Thirdly: It was customary for the governors of provinces to send to the emperor an account of remarkable transactions in places where they presided.
"So thought the learned Eusebius, as we have seen.
"And Pliny"s letters to Trajan, still extant, are a proof of it. Philo speaks of the Acts or Memoirs of Alexandria sent to Caligula, which that emperor read with more eagerness and satisfaction than anything else.
"Fourthly: It has been said to be very unlikely that Pilate should write such things to Tiberius, concerning a man whom he [Pilate] had condemned to death.
"To which it is easy to reply, that if he wrote to Tiberius at all, it is very likely that he should speak favorably and honorably of the Savior.
"That Pilate pa.s.sed sentence of condemnation upon our Lord very unwillingly, and not without a sort of compulsion, appears from the history of the Evangelist: Matt. xxvii.; Mark xv.; Luke xxiii.; John xviii. Pilate was hard pressed. The rulers of the Jews vehemently accused our Lord to him. They said they had found him perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that himself is Christ, a king, and the like; and all without effect for a while.
"Pilate still sought for expedients to set Jesus at liberty.
"As his reluctance had been very manifest and public in a court of judicature, in the chief city of the nation at the time of one of their great festivals, it is highly probable that when he sent to Rome he should make some apology for his conduct. Nor could anything be more proper than to allege some of our Savior"s miracles which he had heard of, and to give an account to the zeal of those who professed faith in him after his ignominious crucifixion, and openly a.s.serted that he had risen from the dead and ascended to heaven.
"Pilate would not dare in such a report to write falsehood, nor to conceal the most material circ.u.mstances of the case about which he was writing. At the trial he publicly declared his innocence: and told the Jews several times "that he found no fault in him at all."
"And when he was going to p.r.o.nounce the sentence of condemnation, he took water and washed his hands before the mult.i.tude, saying: I am innocent of the blood of this just person: "See ye to it." Matt. xxvii.
24.
"When he wrote to Tiberius he would very naturally say something of our Lord"s wonderful resurrection and ascension, which were much talked of and believed by many, with which he could not be possibly unacquainted.
The mention of these things would be the best vindication of his inward persuasion, and his repeated declarations of our Lord"s innocence upon trial notwithstanding the loud clamors and united accusations of the Jewish people and their rulers.
"Pilate, as has been said several times, pa.s.sed condemnation upon Jesus very unwillingly, and not until after long trial.
"When he pa.s.sed sentence upon him he gave orders that this t.i.tle or inscription should be put upon the cross: "Jesus of Nazareth, the king of the Jews."
"When he had expired, application was made to Pilate, by Joseph of Arimathea, an honorable counsellor, that the body might be taken down and buried. To which he consented; but not till a.s.surance from the centurion that he had been sometime dead. The next day some of the priests and pharisees came to him, saying: "Sir, we remember that that deceiver said while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again. Command, therefore, that the sepulchre be made sure, until the third day, lest his disciples come by night and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead." "So the last error shall be worse than the first."
"Pilate said unto them: "Ye have a watch; go your way, make it sure as you can." So they went and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone and setting a watch.
"Whilst they were at the sepulchre there was a "great earthquake," the stone was rolled away by an Angel, "whose countenance was like lightning, and for fear of whom the guards did shake and become as dead men." Some of the guards went down into the City, and showed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.