Were Barabbas and Jesus the same person?

[vadermanu89]

I recently chanced upon this article from wikipedia and it was most intriguing.

Barabbas full name was Jesus Barabbas -

offers them the choice of an insurrectionist named Barabbas or Jesus, somewhat confusing because Barabbas had the full name Jesus Barabbas, and Barabbas (bar-Abbas) means Son of the Father, so the crowd had been given the choice of Jesus Son of the Father or Jesus. The crowd states that they wish to save Barabbas (i.e., Jesus Son of the Father).

This means that Barabas full name was Jesus Son of the Father. Since that too was the Real Jesus true title, could they have been the same person? Were the Gospel authors attempting to teach a parable within their narration? Or was the Latin mistranslation due to Roman pressure? Did the Jews truly wished to save the true Jesus ie Barrabas being his official title?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barabbas#Were_Barabbas_and_Jesus_the_same_person.3F

 

[juliamajor]

Joshua, Yehoshua, Yeshua, Jesus are all forms of the same name. just like John , Johan,Ian are variations of the same name. Son of God is peculiar to Jesus because Jesus is the “unique” son of God…The name Jesus is not peculiar to anyone- except if your a Christian then it is’the name above all names’. In that era Jesus was an extremely common name. Just like Joseph Smith is a common name for us doesn’t mean that every Joseph Smith is the same as the LDS Joseph Smith.

 

[vadermanu89]

Joshua, Yehoshua, Yeshua, Jesus are all forms of the same name. just like John , Johan,Ian are variations of the same name. Son of God is peculiar to Jesus because Jesus is the “unique” son of God…The name Jesus is not peculiar to anyone- except if your a Christian then it is’the name above all names’. In that era Jesus was an extremely common name. Just like Joseph Smith is a common name for us doesn’t mean that every Joseph Smith is the same as the LDS Joseph Smith.

I do agree about the popularity of Jesus name. I did not bring that up. On the contrary, I was highlighting the meaning behind the term Barabbas which means Son of the Father. As a result, Pilate had two criminals - Jesus of Nazerene and Jesus Son of the Father.

I was wondering whether this 2 criminal thingy could have been fictional or was used to blame the Jews etc. Perhaps the Gospel Writers were using a parable to illustrate the Human and Divine Nature of Christ?

 

[davidv]

I do agree about the popularity of Jesus name. I did not bring that up. On the contrary, I was highlighting the meaning behind the term Barabbas which means Son of the Father. As a result, Pilate had two criminals - Jesus of Nazerene and Jesus Son of the Father.

I was wondering whether this 2 criminal thingy could have been fictional or was used to blame the Jews etc. Perhaps the Gospel Writers were using a parable to illustrate the Human and Divine Nature of Christ?

I believe that it was to highligh how easily we are duped into accepting a counterfeit. The crowd demanded the counterfeit eventhough they had the real thing in their midst.

 

[bill210]

I recently chanced upon this article from wikipedia and it was most intriguing.
Barabbas means son of the FATHERS not Son of the Father. If any thing it signifies the peoples’ choice between the worldly and the Divine. They chose the worldly.

Bill
Barabbas full name was Jesus Barabbas -

This means that Barabas full name was Jesus Son of the Father. Since that too was the Real Jesus true title, could they have been the same person? Were the Gospel authors attempting to teach a parable within their narration? Or was the Latin mistranslation due to Roman pressure? Did the Jews truly wished to save the true Jesus ie Barrabas being his official title?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barabbas#Were_Barabbas_and_Jesus_the_same_person.3F

 

[vadermanu89]

I believe that it was to highligh how easily we are duped into accepting a counterfeit. The crowd demanded the counterfeit eventhough they had the real thing in their midst.

Hmm yes I do agree with your exegesis of Scripture. The idea of a counterfeit Christ whose title is Son of the Father is very plausible. It is surprising that this piece of information is not well-known.

Could it be expanded to provide an explicit proof for the Hynotastic Union of Christ?

I feel that the Gospel Writers were using a Parable within the Narration to settle Christ’s nature. Based solely on each individual title and Scripturial background, I deduced the following identities for each individual. Jesus of Nazrene as we know from the Canonical Gospels, was born as a singular person with human nature and a divine nature as well. Barabbas could depict the idea of Christ being solely the Son of the Father (without any human nature).

Hence the following ‘Christ’ identites -

Jesus of Nazrene - a Person with a Divine and Human Nature
Barabbas - a Divine Person solely
Good Thief - Human Nature solely

The Gospel Writers then used the oppurtunity to show that the crowd will reject the true Christ (Jesus Christ) for a false Christ (a sole divine person). Eventually the true Christ dies for all men and his sacrifice will provide salvation for many. As a result, I feel that the Gospel Writers were rejecting the notion of Christ being solely a Heavenly Spirit (Gnosticism) or solely possesing a divine nature. They were clearly espousing the hynotastic Union of Christ by showing that it was a dual natured Christ that died for us.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

I believe that it was to highligh how easily we are duped into accepting a counterfeit. The crowd demanded the counterfeit eventhough they had the real thing in their midst.

note also that Barrabas was a rebel and a murderer, like all mankind. Barrabas represents us all, Jesus died instead of him as He died instead of us.

 

[vadermanu89]

note also that Barrabas was a rebel and a murderer, like all mankind. Barrabas represents us all, Jesus died instead of him as He died instead of us.

That would have been the literal intepretation. But what if the Gospel Writers went to a deeper level and attempted to preach Christology by depicting an inevitable clash between the ‘dual nature’ Christ and the ‘divine nature alone’ Christ with the hynotastic union understanding of Christ eventually being shown to be the true Saviour despite the attraction of a sola divine Saviour?

 

[LilyM]

note also that Barrabas was a rebel and a murderer, like all mankind. Barrabas represents us all, Jesus died instead of him as He died instead of us.

The crowd knew well enough who was the true Son-of-God Jesus - and they were demanding His crucifixion for His supposed blasphemies, remember, they were certainly not trying to save Him nor demanding His release!

 

[vadermanu89]

The crowd knew well enough who was the true Son-of-God Jesus - and they were demanding His crucifixion for His supposed blasphemies, remember, they were certainly not trying to save Him nor demanding His release!

That is true. But do you disagree that the Gospel Writers could have a subtle intention of using this episode to prove the Hynotastic Union of Christ against the the-popular Gnostic notion of Christ being a heavenly spirit?

 

[Joe_5859]

I recommend reading Pope Benedict XVI’s book “Jesus of Nazareth.” He talks about Barabbas and Jesus on pages 40-41.

Here’s an excerpt: “The choice is between a Messiah who leads an armed struggle, promises freedom and a kingdom of one’s own, and this mysterious Jesus who proclaims that losing oneself is the way to life” (p. 41).

Basically, Barabbas is the type of “Messiah” that everyone was expecting and, ultimately, what they wanted. He wanted to free the Jews from Roman control and restore the earthly Kingdom of Israel.

Jesus, on the other hand, was not at all like the Messiah they wanted. He did not come to establish an earthly kingdom but a heavenly one.

And the people chose Barabbas.

We still do this today, though. We pick and choose our “Messiah” to be who we want him to be rather than who he is in reality.

 

[marymol]

With Feast of St.John of The Cross upon us ( 12/14) , this discussion also help us to get a little more , on the extent of our Lord’s Passion …and love for us !

Here is, may be even an imposter , possibly prompted by the father of lies ( thus making him - Bar abbas ) …and may be a cause of our Lord being misunderstood too …

( Does it not ring some notes of that other heartbreak Father -son event - of David and Absalom as well…)

Yet , our Lord , having forseen all this and wanting to be the strenght of His many children who too would be misunderstood and rejected ( like St.John was ) , down through the centureis , bears this too …

May His Love guide and protect us always !

 

[EphelDuath]

This topic has given me some good insights.

 

[vadermanu89]

Based on the various response, this is the list of intepretations -

i) How easy it is to be duped into accepting a counterfeit Christ.
ii) literal exegesis - Robber Barabbas representing us
iii) Dual Nature Jesus vs Divine Nature Alone (Gnostic) Jesus
iv) The contradiction between Christ purpose and the Jewsih idea of the Messiah.

 

[neuro_nurse]

I recently chanced upon this article from wikipedia and it was most intriguing.

Consider the source!

Wikipedia can be edited by anyone. I use Wikipedia for general information, but before I draw any conclusions from what I read on Wikipedia, I always check it against another source.

 

[patg]

This topic has given me some good insights.

Another thing to note is that although the gospel says this was a usual practice, there is no mention of this type of prisoner release in any Jewish or Roman historic writings at all. So instead of it being a common practice, there is really no historic basis for believing it ever occured. Which of course leads one at least in the direction of this being a symbolic account written to teach more about who Jesus was and who was rejecting who.

 

[MH84]

I recommend reading Pope Benedict XVI’s book “Jesus of Nazareth.” He talks about Barabbas and Jesus on pages 40-41.

Here’s an excerpt: “The choice is between a Messiah who leads an armed struggle, promises freedom and a kingdom of one’s own, and this mysterious Jesus who proclaims that losing oneself is the way to life” (p. 41).

**Basically, Barabbas is the type of “Messiah” that everyone was expecting and, ultimately, what they wanted. He wanted to free the Jews from Roman control and restore the earthly Kingdom of Israel.

Jesus, on the other hand, was not at all like the Messiah they wanted. He did not come to establish an earthly kingdom but a heavenly one.**

And the people chose Barabbas.

We still do this today, though. We pick and choose our “Messiah” to be who we want him to be rather than who he is in reality.

The OP might be on to something here, but i dont understand yet exactly what that is. OTOH, this is what I have heard from the Pope as well, only I’d forgotton this. Yes, this makes sense to me. The people (in general) who who were crying for the release of Barabbus seems to be showing that they would rather have a “military” Messiah, instead of the heavenly Messiah. The real sad part in this as well is this:

Matthew 27 from www.biblegateway.com
24 When Pilate saw that he could not prevail at all, but rather that a tumult was rising, he took water and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, “I am innocent of the blood of this just Person. You see to it.”
25 **And all the people answered and said, “His blood be on us and on our children.” **

Surely they didnt know what they were doing.