What do you think happened to Pontius Pilate?

[Dom_Passeri]

I do agree with the premise of what you are saying, but I think that there is a special connection to the role of the Jewish people in Christ’s death. Christ himself a Jew said the I am sent to the house of Israel. Believing as we do in the entire Bible, we know that the Israelites were God’s chosen people. And so while I am not educated enough to offer an opinion of the role of the Jews in Christ’s death, I do believe that there is a mysterious purpose for their participation in His Death that is connected to their salvation. Just my opinion.

John 1:11 - “He came unto his own, and his own received him not.”

Obviously we know that on an individual level many of “His own” did indeed receive Him. But the nation as a whole didn’t. It was the representatives of that nation that had Him murdered…The people in power. Similarly, many Americans are pro-life, but the law of the land is anti-life. In the future, when people study American history, they will say America (meaning all of us, whether we like it or not) legalized the murder of the unborn from 1973-??? despite the fact that the popular majority is basically against abortion. Think about Nazi Germany. Certainly the Nazis had the power, but you’d have to be nuts or dumb to think that the majority of Germans at that time were Nazis. We are all lumped together under who’s in power. Lord, have mercy on us!

 

[Hokomai]

I would like to understand this reasoning you had as a believer.

1. If people act, it is obviously always in alignment with what they believe is right.
2. It is not possible to sin if one acts according to what they think is right.
3. Therefore, it is not ever possible for anyone to sin.

I don’t quite think this; as I believe it is possible for people do what they believe to be wrong, or what they would wish not to do. This is particulalry true when I apply it to my own failures by omission. Often failures of commission are crimes of passion, motivated by rage, or lust for example. In Pilate’s case, where he had an opportunity to weigh the issues and come to a conclusion in a dispassionate way, I think it is unlikely he thought he was doing wrong. I think the same about many people who did truly terrible things - Stalin and his purges, Hitler and extermination, Churchill and bombing, Truman and Hiroshima, Inquisitors and torture, Columbus and enslavement, Stepanic and support for fascism and so on. I think they all probably thought they were doing right, and were probably blameless in the Catholic sense of ‘blame for sin’.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Do you think he is in heaven, hell, or still in purgatory?

Well, that would be an extremely long timet to be in purgatory.

If the centurian who pierced Jesus’s side with a Lance is a saint then maybe we don’t need to be quite so pessimistic wrt Pilate.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

Do you think he is in heaven, hell, or still in purgatory?

Well, that would be an extremely long timet to be in purgatory.

Purely as speculative opinion, I think he’s in Hell.

It wasn’t just Christ whom he treated badly. He had a reputation for brutality, and that brutality would have been aimed at furthering his own political ambitions.

Moreover he was given several warnings. His wife warned him. He was afraid, so God was warning him. The Pharisees indirectly warned him - “He claimed to be the Son of God”. He’d heard of Christ. And in the end, self interest still won out.

If men desire positions of power, the flip side is that they are judged more severely. And it’s no good blaming God who gave them the authority, as Christ clearly stated in the case of Pilate - “You have power over me only because God has given it to you.”

For the simple fact is that they’re held to account as to how they use that power. I don’t see Pilate using his God-given power to give the order to scourge and crucify God’s own Son as going down real well with God the Father, who, if my experience is anything to go by, can be pretty harsh.

So that’s what I think. I also think that decision haunted him for the rest of his life, culminating in the traditional story of his suicide somewhere in the vicinity of Lake Pilatus in Switzerland.

 

[patrick457]

So that’s what I think. I also think that decision haunted him for the rest of his life, culminating in the traditional story of his suicide somewhere in the vicinity of Lake Pilatus in Switzerland.

Which really seems to have derived from pileatus, “cloud-covered.” The Lago di Pilato (Pilate’s Lake) near Monte Vettore is another burial place for Pilate. In fact, depending on which version you follow, Pilate seems to die and be buried in a number of places: Rome, Vienne, Switzerland, central Italy.

The Mors Pilati attempts to harmonize all this by saying that Pilate committed suicide in Rome, with his corpse being thrown in the Tiber. However, his body was so infested by evil spirits (which brought pestilence and natural disasters) that the Romans salvaged his body and sent it to Vienne, to be thrown once more into a river (the Rhone). When that produced the same result people took his body out of the water again and this time, took it “the territory of Losania” (Lucerne?). When Pilate’s body again gave the people there trouble, they finally disposed of it by dumping it “in a certain pit surrounded by mountains”.

When Caesar knew of the death of Pilate, he said: “Truly he has died by a most disgraceful death, whom his own hand has not spared.” He is therefore bound to a great mass, and sunk into the river Tiber. But malignant and filthy spirits in his malignant and filthy body, all rejoicing together, kept moving themselves in the waters, and in a terrible manner brought lightnings and tempests, thunders and hail-storms, in the air, so that all men were kept in horrible fear. Wherefore the Romans, drawing him out of the river Tiber, in derision carried him down to Vienna, and sunk him in the river Rhone. For Vienna is called, as it were, Via Gehennoe, the way of Gehenna, because it was then a place of cursing. But there evil spirits were present, working the same things in the same place. Those men therefore, not enduring such a visitation of demons, removed froth themselves that vessel of malediction, and sent him to be buried in the territory of Losania. And they, seeing that they were troubled by the aforesaid visitations, removed him from themselves, and sunk him in a certain pit surrounded by mountains, where to this day, according to the account of some, certain diabolical machinations are said to bubble up.

For the record, the work even proposes a rather fanciful etymology for Vienne: Via Gehenna. (A rather odd and terrifying name for a city! )

 

[GEddie]

If the centurian who pierced Jesus’s side with a Lance is a saint then maybe we don’t need to be quite so pessimistic wrt Pilate.

There’s a difference between striking someone you believe to be dead, who is anyhow too near dead to suffer anymore; and deliberately ordering the hideous torture of someone you know to be innocent, for your own reasons.

Saint Longinus was attested to have become a believer and a martyr later on. We will never know what happened to PP.

ICXC NIKA

 

[patrick457]

If the centurian who pierced Jesus’s side with a Lance is a saint then maybe we don’t need to be quite so pessimistic wrt Pilate.

As GEddie says, there’s a difference: making sure a guy is dead out of duty (I mean, you can’t really risk condemned criminals faking their own death - it’s either them or you) has a different level of culpability than actively sentencing innocent people to gruesome and shameful deaths.

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

I don’t quite think this; as I believe it is possible for people do what they believe to be wrong, or what they would wish not to do. This is particulalry true when I apply it to my own failures by omission. Often failures of commission are crimes of passion, motivated by rage, or lust for example.

I do not understand. Can you give me an example of someone doing something that they would wish not to do? It sounds like you are describing a mental illness or demonic possession.

In Pilate’s case, where he had an opportunity to weigh the issues and come to a conclusion in a dispassionate way, I think it is unlikely he thought he was doing wrong. I think the same about many people who did truly terrible things - Stalin and his purges, Hitler and extermination, Churchill and bombing, Truman and Hiroshima, Inquisitors and torture, Columbus and enslavement, Stepanic and support for fascism and so on. I think they all probably thought they were doing right, and were probably blameless in the Catholic sense of ‘blame for sin’.

Perhaps the issue is with the defintion of what is ‘right’. If we do not have a common definition for that word, I will likely remain confused. What is your definition of what is ‘right’?

 

[Blue_Horizon]

As GEddie says, there’s a difference: making sure a guy is dead out of duty (I mean, you can’t really risk condemned criminals faking their own death - it’s either them or you).

Hmmmn…are you saying the centurian wouldn’t have done it if Jesus moaned even slightly?

 

[patrick457]

Hmmmn…are you saying the centurian wouldn’t have done it if Jesus moaned even slightly?

First off, a minor nitpick. We are only told that the guy who jabbed Jesus was “one of the soldiers.” It doesn’t say whether it is the centurion or not.

Crucifixion was designed to make the victim survive (and thus suffer) for as long as possible. It wasn’t meant to be a quick death like beheading or strangling, it was prolonged torture which only ended with the victim’s demise: the only way you come down a cross is dead.

Still, Jesus apparently died pretty quickly - three to six hours, while a regular victim would have lasted for days. As per John, the crucified bodies needed to be taken down for the holidays. Of course, you can’t risk the possibility of any of these criminals surviving (that’s what the soldiers are there for: to keep watch on the victims as they waste away. It’s their job to make sure that crucified victims stay on their crosses and end up dead - these three weren’t sentenced to death for nothing) so they have to ‘artificially’ speed up death a bit by breaking the legs of the two crucified with Jesus (death by shock). They come to Jesus, they see that He looks quite dead, which is fine - but to make sure that He is really dead (and not just in a coma or faking it) one guy comes in and stabs His side. If Jesus was still alive, He would probably have had His legs broken like the two others.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

First off, a minor nitpick. We are only told that the guy who jabbed Jesus was “one of the soldiers.” It doesn’t say whether it is the centurion or not.

If Jesus was still alive, He would probably have had His legs broken like the two others.

I think what you are saying is that the NT doesn’t name the soldier as a centurian. However tradition appears to make this identification and seems to name him as Saint Longinus.

Regardless, the centurian, “doing his duty”, would no doubt have killed Jesus (tortured and killed if you like) by breaking his legs had Jesus been alive when they decided to go home.

I find it difficult to see how this soldier could be considered innocent in the matter as your previous post suggests . Clearly he would have known who this man reputedly was as all Jerusalem was aware.

 

[patrick457]

I think what you are saying is that the NT doesn’t name the soldier as a centurian. However tradition appears to make this identification and seems to name him as Saint Longinus.

It’s rather confusing since as in many other cases there are contradictory traditions: sometimes the soldier who spears Jesus is treated as distinct from the centurio (‘hexachontarch’) who confesses Jesus, while at other times they are conflated with one another.

Let’s take for example the so-called Acts of Pilate, the first part of which has three main recensions: an earlier version (Recension A), a later reworking (Recension B), and a Latin version. In Recension A and in the Latin form, the centurion is not named, and the soldier who pierces Jesus’ side (named Longinus) is clearly a separate character.

First Greek Form: And it was about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over the land until the ninth hour, for the sun was darkened: and the veil of the temple was rent asunder in the midst. And Jesus called with a loud voice and said: Father, baddach ephkid rouel, which is interpreted: Into thy hands I commend my spirit. And having thus said he gave up the ghost. And when the centurion saw what was done, he glorified God, saying: This man was righteous. And all the multitudes that had come to the sight, when they beheld what was done smote their breasts and returned. (11.1)

Then said Annas and Caiaphas: Ye have well said those things which are written in the law of Moses, that no man saw the death of Enoch, and no man hath named the death of Moses. But Jesus spake before Pilate, and we know that we saw him receive buffets and spittings upon his face, and that the soldiers put on him a crown of thorns and that he was scourged and received condemnation from Pilate, and that he was crucified at the place of a skull and two thieves with him, and that they gave him vinegar to drink with gall, and** that Longinus the soldier pierced his side with a spear**, and that Joseph our honourable father begged his body, and that, as he saith, he rose again, and that (lit. as) the three teachers say: We saw him taken up into heaven, and that Rabbi Levi spake and testified to the things which were spoken by Rabbi Symeon, and that he said: Behold this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel and for a sign spoken against. (16.7)

===

Latin: And it was about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over the whole earth; and the sun was obscured, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst. And crying out with a loud voice, He said: Father, into Your hands I commend my spirit. And thus saying, He gave up the ghost. And the centurion, seeing what was done, glorified God, saying: This was a just man. And all the people who were present at that spectacle, seeing what was done, beating their breasts, returned. (11.1)

Then Annas and Caiaphas said: Rightly have ye said that these things are written in the law of Moses, that no one saw the death of Enoch, and no one has named the burying of holy Moses. And Jesus gave account to Pilate, and we saw him scourged, and receiving spitting on his face; and the soldiers put a crown of thorns on him, and he received sentence from Pilate; and then he was crucified, and they gave him gall and vinegar to drink, and two robbers were crucified with him, and the soldier Longinus pierced his side with a lance; and our honourable father Joseph begged his body, and he has risen again, and, as they say, the three teachers have seen him taken up into heaven. And Rabbi Levi has borne witness to what was said by Simeon the elder— that he has been set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel, and for a sign which shall be spoken against. (16.7)

But in Recension B, the name ‘Longinus’ is applied to the centurion.

Then Jesus, crying out with a loud voice, Father, into Your hands I shall commit my spirit, breathed His last. (Luke 23:46) And immediately one could see the rocks rent: for there was an earthquake over all the earth; and from the earthquake being violent and great, the rocks also were rent. And the tombs of the dead were opened, and the curtain of the temple was rent, and there was darkness from the sixth hour till the ninth. And from all these things that had happened the Jews were afraid, and said: Certainly this was a just man. And Longinus, the centurion who stood by, said: Truly this was a son of God. Others coming and seeing Him, beat their breasts from fear, and again turned back. (Luke 23:44-49) (11.1)

Regardless, the centurian, “doing his duty”, would no doubt have killed Jesus (tortured and killed if you like) by breaking his legs had Jesus been alive when they decided to go home.

I find it difficult to see how this soldier could be considered innocent in the matter as your previous post suggests . Clearly he would have known who this man reputedly was as all Jerusalem was aware.

I’m not saying that the soldiers were innocent, only that they were less culpable - since it was their duty, after all. Pilate, on the other hand,…

 

[NonServiam]

So that I may understand, please clarify my paraphrasing of what you are saying.

Alrighty.

Since there is no evidence yet observed by human consciousness, to support consciousness without a brain, then it is reasonable to assume that consciousness cannot exist without a brain?

No. It’s not merely that we haven’t yet observed a consciousness without a brain. It’s that:
– we have tons of evidence indicating that influencing the brain influences consciousness, which strongly implies that consciousness is an emergent property of brains
– we not only have no knowledge of any mechanism by which a “non-physical mind” (whatever that means) may interact with a physical brain, any such mechanism would violate what we understand about the natural world

It’s not ironclad “proof” of any kind, but the evidence that we have definitely points in a direction: that consciousness – however it works exactly – is the product of brains.

Unless and until some convincing evidence comes along to demonstrate otherwise, that’s the only conclusion that we’re justified in accepting.

 

[GEddie]

Hmmmn…are you saying the centurian wouldn’t have done it if Jesus moaned even slightly?

If HE had moaned or even breathed, they would have shattered His legs, as they did to the others. That, of course, would have invalidated the sacrifice.

They knew HE was dead or near enough dead not to breathe.

ICXC NIKA

 

[Blue_Horizon]

I’m not saying that the soldiers were innocent, only that they were less culpable - since it was their duty, after all. Pilate, on the other hand,…

Patrick
Both knew Jesus was a good man and innocent. In fact it may be arguable that the soldier personally knew Jesus’s character better than Pilate (“truly this was a son of God” surely didn’t come from nowhere) thereby increasing the seriousness of his actions. Had Jesus been alive he would have killed him directly. “Duty” is a red herring in the face of clear moral mandates. The “Nuremberg Defence” was not found acceptable at the end of WWII even by secular authorities. Even if it were Pilate also had a mandated duty to keep the peace in Judea …which duty he wisely carried out by executing this messiah (one of many).

It seems arbitrary to think that superiors are more culpable than inferiors (for the same offence) simply by reason of their stature…

Or is it because we believe that someone who became a saint couldn’t have been that bad after all? I find this thinking repugnant as it underestimates the power of God’s grace and the amazing “miracle” of conversion of even the hardest hearts.

As today’s reading (the Widows Mite) shows, lowly almsgiving does not mean minor virtue, major almsgiving does not mean major virtue. So too with vice.

Thus there is no logical reason I can see to presume that Longinus was any less culpable than Pilate - status alone (and his later known conversion) appear too simplistic an approach. Circumstance, knowledge and internal motivation are very important. Longinus was also seriously implicated by circumstance and close personal knowledge of Jesus’s character (and reputation).

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

Alrighty.

No. It’s not merely that we haven’t yet observed a consciousness without a brain. It’s that:
– we have tons of evidence indicating that influencing the brain influences consciousness, which strongly implies that consciousness is an emergent property of brains
– we not only have no knowledge of any mechanism by which a “non-physical mind” (whatever that means) may interact with a physical brain, any such mechanism would violate what we understand about the natural world

It’s not ironclad “proof” of any kind, but the evidence that we have definitely points in a direction: that consciousness – however it works exactly – is the product of brains.

Unless and until some convincing evidence comes along to demonstrate otherwise, that’s the only conclusion that we’re justified in accepting.

Fair enough, thank you.

And what is the evidence of consciousness? And does evidence of consciousness only exist where we find brains?

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

Did anyone mention Pontius Pilate is a saint in the Ethiopian Orthodox Church on the basis of him confessing Christ to be king and refusing to recant it, “What I have written I have written!”?

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Fair enough, thank you.

And what is the evidence of consciousness? And does evidence of consciousness only exist where we find brains?

Guys
I would like to contribute to this interesting sideline but this is getting way off topic.
Why not start a new thread and advise…

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

Guys
I would like to contribute to this interesting sideline but this is getting way off topic.
Why not start a new thread and advise…

As requested: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=9392879#post9392879

Contribute away!