# Lifestyles & Discussion > Peace Through Religion >  Jesus Of Nazareth, Enemy Of The State, Executed For Treason

## Anti Federalist

*Jesus Of Nazareth, Enemy Of The State, Executed For Treason*

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jerrybow...d-for-treason/

Jesus of Nazareth was executed today on the orders of the Roman State. Method of execution: Crucifixion. The charge under Roman law was treason, and under Herodian law blasphemy against the Temple. The evidence against this anarchist was so strong that authorities of both the Roman State and the Kingdom of Herod concurred with the arrest and execution, and he was subjected to trial by both governments. And in a rare uprising of spontaneous collective justice, the mass of people who were gathered for Passover called for his execution as well. The mob affirmed their loyalty to the state, chanting, We have no king but Caesar.

Fridays execution ended a career as an anti-government agitator with a long history of lawlessness. The family was in possession of falsified, illegal, and unsanctioned genealogical records which claim to indicate that Jesus was of royal lineage, and undermined the legitimate claim of Herod to the throne. The malicious claim, which has been spread widely among the people, is that the King is an Idumean and not a Jew. The king is tormented by this claim, and laments that shortly after his fathers rise to power the genealogical records (which would certainly have proven his legitimate right to reign) perished in a mysterious fire, likely set by anti-government agitators.

Even as a young child, Jesus was recognized as an enemy of the state and was sentenced to death by the current Kings predecessor, Herod the Great. Subversive foreign agents lied to the king, and with their help Jesus and his family escaped the lawful orders of the government authority by illegally emigrating to Egypt, where they remained in hiding until the death of the king. Afterwards they are known to have illegally immigrated back into greater Israel, where they settled in Galilee, toward the edge of the kingdom, and far from the swift justice of the capital region.

Jesus, who is also treasonously called The Christ by his followers, embarked on a public career roughly three years ago, with the assistance of his cousin, John, who himself was executed by the state for lack of respect for the office of the king.

Jesus criminal career included public insults of the king (calling Herod a fox and a reed blowing in the wind), implying that the Roman state was under God and not properly the other way around, harassment of government officials including at least one tax collector and one Sanhedrin member, as well as ordering and/or encouraging them to remit wealth back to the people from whom it was lawfully taxed. He was also guilty of a series of actions which treasonously called into legitimacy organs of the state such as Herods Temple. For example, he offered forgiveness and fellowship with God to sinners, violating the temple monopoly of public expiation and forgiveness. Furthermore, he illegally trespassed on government property and interfered with state-sanctioned money-changing operations which were properly operating with the permission of the appointees of the king at state-approved exchange rates.

He was able for a time to avoid arrest through a tactic of cleverly disguising his anti-government propaganda in the form of coded answers, suggestive but ambiguous analogies, and confusing aphorisms, by which he managed to gather a following without giving clear evidence of his treasonous views. However, his anti-government propaganda eventually became undeniable: Predicting the destruction of Herods temple, and even denying its legitimacy, declaring it to be desolate.

His execution was swift and merciless, and his disciples have been scattered. Authorities are confident that his name will quickly be forgotten, while Rome, the eternal city, will last forever. The temple built on the power of the Roman state and Herodian kingship will stand forever. Authorities assure the people that the ultimate punishment on which all state power rests, death by execution, is the final word on this short episode in Roman history.

----------


## thoughtomator

Looks like he lasted at Forbes only a few more months after writing this article. Fancy that.

----------


## mrsat_98

It was my understanding that he was the first "patriot" i.e. "Sovereign Citizen''. Bear in mind my idea is nothing akin to the picture painted by the media.

----------


## aGameOfThrones

Listen up--Jesus, christ, savior, and everybody else. Most Roman crucifixions can be avoided. It comes down to respect for authority and obedience. If a Roman soldier tells you to stop, you stop. If a Roman soldier tells you to put your hands in the air, you put your hands in the air. If a Roman soldier tells you to lay down face first with your hands behind your back, you lay down face first with your hands behind your back. It's as simple as that. Even if you think the Roman soldier is wrong-YOU OBEY. Parents, teach your children to respect and obey those in authority. Mr. Emperor, this is a message our empire needs to hear, and it needs to hear it from you. Some of the unnecessary crucifixions we have seen recently might have been avoided. *The Bible says to submit to your leaders and those in authority "because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account."*

----------


## mrsat_98

What about those who falsely claim authority ?

----------


## donnay

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

~ Joseph Goebbels

Being the enemy of the state puts you with good company.

----------


## Anti Federalist

Perfect. +rep




> Listen up--Jesus, christ, savior, and everybody else. Most Roman crucifixions can be avoided. It comes down to respect for authority and obedience. If a Roman soldier tells you to stop, you stop. If a Roman soldier tells you to put your hands in the air, you put your hands in the air. If a Roman soldier tells you to lay down face first with your hands behind your back, you lay down face first with your hands behind your back. It's as simple as that. Even if you think the Roman soldier is wrong-YOU OBEY. Parents, teach your children to respect and obey those in authority. Mr. Emperor, this is a message our empire needs to hear, and it needs to hear it from you. Some of the unnecessary crucifixions we have seen recently might have been avoided. *The Bible says to submit to your leaders and those in authority "because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account."*

----------


## BUTSRSLY

> *Jesus Of Nazareth, Enemy Of The State, Executed For Treason*


IM NOT REALLY UP ON CURRENT EVENTS

----------


## enhanced_deficit

If Jesus were on earth today, he would have opposed fear laced police state and called for trying ddg and his puppet masters to bring justice for the innocent killed.

----------


## Theocrat

> The evidence against this anarchist was so strong that authorities of both the Roman State and the Kingdom of Herod concurred with the arrest and execution, and he was subjected to trial by both governments.


Jesus Christ was not an anarchist; He was a king, which is why the inscription above Him during His crucifixion read: "King of the Jews" (in three languages). The reason why Herod wanted Christ killed as an infant was because Herod knew that Jesus was a king Whose kingdom would one day supplant his own, by the Old Testament prophecies.

----------


## Voluntarist

> Afterwards they are known to have illegally immigrated back into greater Israel, where they settled in Galilee, toward the edge of the kingdom, and far from the swift justice of the capital region.


Illegal immigrant; and engaged in the construction trades.

----------


## acptulsa

Meanwhile, Carl Reiner, our reporter in the field, found a man who knew the instigator as a youth; says he was a "nice boy".

----------


## A. Havnes

Not to mention, just like all racial minorities, this instigator was a bastard child.  We all know Joseph never claimed he was his actual son.  His mom was a tramp who ran around with other men whilst engaged to a hard-working carpenter.  Then again, this carpenter probably lived off of welfare and never actually bothered to learn Egyptian after "moving" there.

BTW, I heard that he not only insulted the temple, but actually caused a riot in there!   Good thing Tiberius Caesar had the sense to take away all their guns, or there might've been another mass shooting!  I hear he was a great peace leader who would never have done that, but it's probably just his crazy followers covering his grander agenda.

----------


## Ronin Truth

What's my (earlier) thread, chopped liver?

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471990-Jesus-Of-Nazareth-Enemy-Of-The-State-Executed-For-Treason

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Jesus Christ was not an anarchist; He was a king, which is why the inscription above Him during His crucifixion read: "King of the Jews" (in three languages). The reason why Herod wanted Christ killed as an infant was because Herod knew that Jesus was a king Whose kingdom would one day supplant his own, by the Old Testament prophecies.


Could you please provide me with a few of those evidence Biblical scriptures where Jesus held any human governments in high esteem?


Thanks!

----------


## Christian Liberty

> Jesus Christ was not an anarchist; He was a king, which is why the inscription above Him during His crucifixion read: "King of the Jews" (in three languages). The reason why Herod wanted Christ killed as an infant was because Herod knew that Jesus was a king Whose kingdom would one day supplant his own, by the Old Testament prophecies.


Would Jesus obey the current regime?

----------


## 56ktarget

Jesus wasn't executed for treason by the Romans, he was executed because he threatened the established Jewish religious/political order. Pontious Pilate wanted to spare him but there was too much Jewish opposition.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> Jesus Christ was not an anarchist; He was a king, which is why the inscription above Him during His crucifixion read: "King of the Jews" (in three languages). The reason why Herod wanted Christ killed as an infant was because Herod knew that Jesus was a king Whose kingdom would one day supplant his own, by the Old Testament prophecies.


In the context of this thread, the A-word is is only being used WRT human-built regimes.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Jesus wasn't executed for treason by the Romans, he was executed because he threatened the established Jewish religious/political order. Pontious Pilate wanted to spare him but there was too much Jewish opposition.


All the Sanhedrin needed to do was convince Pilate that he was a threat to "civil authority".

Done.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> All the Sanhedrin needed to do was convince Pilate that he was a threat to "civil authority".
> 
> Done.


Pilate wasn't convinced of that.  That's why he washed his hands of the matter.  If you want to argue that Pilate should have intervened, that's a different story and I'm willing to hear ya out.

----------


## PierzStyx

> Jesus Christ was not an anarchist; He was a king, which is why the inscription above Him during His crucifixion read: "King of the Jews" (in three languages). The reason why Herod wanted Christ killed as an infant was because Herod knew that Jesus was a king Whose kingdom would one day supplant his own, by the Old Testament prophecies.


A kingdom "not of this world' and which is not enforced by compulsion. Sounds like an anarchist to me; a completely voluntary government for those who accept His rule.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Pilate wasn't convinced of that.  That's why he washed his hands of the matter.  If you want to argue that Pilate should have intervened, that's a different story and I'm willing to hear ya out.


He was convinced enough to give the order, just like they do today to innocent men.

----------


## JohnM

> He was convinced enough to give the order, just like they do today to innocent men.


There is no evidence in the New Testament that Pilate was convinced.  Indeed the New Testament evidence suggests something different: that Pilate acted not because he was convinced, but because he feared trouble for himself if he went against the opinion of the crowd.  

Pilate was a politician.  He didn't really care whether he killed an innocent man.  His career was what mattered.  And he knew that if there was an outbreak of violence because he refused to do what the mob wanted, it would cause him career problems.  And he also knew that if the Jewish religious authorities reported him to Caesar for freeing someone who had been accused of being against the Roman State, it might cause him career problems.  So Pilate ordered the execution.

The Forbes article, while amusing, completely misrepresents what actually happened.  Pilate didn't have any major problems with Jesus.  Caesar didn't have any major problems with Jesus.  Herod didn't have any major problems with Jesus.  The New Testament is completely clear that the people who had a major problem with Jesus and who saw him as a threat, and who got him killed, were the Jewish religious leadership.  They simply manipulated Pilate.  

Strangely enough, the Forbes article is completely silent about the fact that the people who got Jesus killed were the Jewish religious leadership, and about the fact that they did it for religious reasons.  

Very strange.  Ignorance?  Unwillingness to accept the record given in the New Testament?  Or dishonesty?

----------


## acptulsa

> Jesus wasn't executed for treason... he was executed because he threatened the established... political order.


Huh?

You _do_ realize the Israelites were a Roman colony, right?

----------


## Suzanimal

> What's my (earlier) thread, chopped liver?
> 
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471990-Jesus-Of-Nazareth-Enemy-Of-The-State-Executed-For-Treason


Poor Ronin. That's twice this week it's happened to you.

----------


## William Tell

> There is no evidence in the New Testament that Pilate was convinced.  Indeed the New Testament evidence suggests something different: that Pilate acted not because he was convinced, but because he feared trouble for himself if he went against the opinion of the crowd.  
> 
> Pilate was a politician.  He didn't really care whether he killed an innocent man.  His career was what mattered.  And he knew that if there was an outbreak of violence because he refused to do what the mob wanted, it would cause him career problems.  And he also knew that if the Jewish religious authorities reported him to Caesar for freeing someone who had been accused of being against the Roman State, it might cause him career problems.  So Pilate ordered the execution.
> 
> The Forbes article, while amusing, completely misrepresents what actually happened.  Pilate didn't have any major problems with Jesus.  Caesar didn't have any major problems with Jesus.  Herod didn't have any major problems with Jesus.  The New Testament is completely clear that the people who had a major problem with Jesus and who saw him as a threat, and who got him killed, were the Jewish religious leadership.  They simply manipulated Pilate.  
> 
> Strangely enough, the Forbes article is completely silent about the fact that the people who got Jesus killed were the Jewish religious leadership, and about the fact that they did it for religious reasons.  
> 
> Very strange.  Ignorance?  Unwillingness to accept the record given in the New Testament?  Or dishonesty?


Yes, here's what the author says in the comments about inaccurate parts. 




> Jerry Bowyer, Contributor        1 day ago:        Is this a joke, Valarie, surely you know the article is satire, right?

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Poor Ronin. That's twice this week it's happened to you.


Sometimes it's just really tough to get any respect. <sniff>  

(Geeze, am I being morphed into the Rodney Dangerfield of the RPF?)

----------


## JohnM

> Yes, here's what the author says in the comments about inaccurate parts.





> surely you know the article is satire, right?


Thank you for pointing that out.  

Needless to say, I didn't know it was satire.  

However . . . it is not difficult to be fooled.  I hear and read and see a lot of comment which is so bizarre that should be satire, but which turns about to be absolutely straight.   

And there are a lot of people who would read what Bowyer wrote and not realize that it was satire and would agree with every word.

----------


## William Tell

> Thank you for pointing that out.  
> 
> Needless to say, I didn't know it was satire.  
> 
> However . . . it is not difficult to be fooled.  I hear and read and see a lot of comment which is so bizarre that should be satire, but which turns about to be absolutely straight.   
> 
> And there are a lot of people who would read what Bowyer wrote and not realize that it was satire and would agree with every word.


Yeah, but its mostly here and Lew Rockwell that people would take it at face value.

----------


## donnay

> There is no evidence in the New Testament that Pilate was convinced.  Indeed the New Testament evidence suggests something different: that Pilate acted not because he was convinced, but because he feared trouble for himself if he went against the opinion of the crowd.  
> 
> Pilate was a politician.  He didn't really care whether he killed an innocent man.  His career was what mattered.  And he knew that if there was an outbreak of violence because he refused to do what the mob wanted, it would cause him career problems.  And he also knew that if the Jewish religious authorities reported him to Caesar for freeing someone who had been accused of being against the Roman State, it might cause him career problems.  So Pilate ordered the execution.
> 
> The Forbes article, while amusing, completely misrepresents what actually happened.  Pilate didn't have any major problems with Jesus.  Caesar didn't have any major problems with Jesus.  Herod didn't have any major problems with Jesus.  The New Testament is completely clear that the people who had a major problem with Jesus and who saw him as a threat, and who got him killed, were the Jewish religious leadership.  They simply manipulated Pilate.  
> 
> Strangely enough, the Forbes article is completely silent about the fact that the people who got Jesus killed were the Jewish religious leadership, and about the fact that they did it for religious reasons.  
> 
> Very strange.  Ignorance?  Unwillingness to accept the record given in the New Testament?  Or dishonesty?


Mel Gibson was persecuted for pointing this out in _ The Passion of Christ_.  He was labeled antisemitic by many of the movie critics.  Even the actor, Jim Caviezel was outed by Hollywood because he played Jesus in the movie.

----------


## Ender

> Mel Gibson was persecuted for pointing this out in _ The Passion of Christ_.  He was labeled antisemitic by many of the movie critics.  Even the actor, Jim Caviezel was outed by Hollywood because he played Jesus in the movie.


Yep- plus Mel had the nerve to produce the film on his own dime; he was never forgiven by the Industry and set up a few times to "prove" he was anti-Semitic.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> There is no evidence in the New Testament that Pilate was convinced.  Indeed the New Testament evidence suggests something different: that Pilate acted not because he was convinced, but because he feared trouble for himself if he went against the opinion of the crowd.  
> 
> Pilate was a politician.  He didn't really care whether he killed an innocent man.  His career was what mattered.  And he knew that if there was an outbreak of violence because he refused to do what the mob wanted, it would cause him career problems.  And he also knew that if the Jewish religious authorities reported him to Caesar for freeing someone who had been accused of being against the Roman State, it might cause him career problems.  So Pilate ordered the execution.
> 
> The Forbes article, while amusing, completely misrepresents what actually happened.  Pilate didn't have any major problems with Jesus.  Caesar didn't have any major problems with Jesus.  Herod didn't have any major problems with Jesus.  The New Testament is completely clear that the people who had a major problem with Jesus and who saw him as a threat, and who got him killed, were the Jewish religious leadership.  They simply manipulated Pilate.  
> 
> Strangely enough, the Forbes article is completely silent about the fact that the people who got Jesus killed were the Jewish religious leadership, and about the fact that they did it for religious reasons.  
> 
> Very strange.  Ignorance?  Unwillingness to accept the record given in the New Testament?  Or dishonesty?


That^^  Were Pilate really interested in killing a guilty person, he would've killed Barabbus instead of releasing him.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> That^^ Were Pilate really interested in killing a guilty person, he would've killed Barabbus instead of releasing him.



I thought the tradition was that the Jews (the mob) got to pick who was to be released, in celebration of Passover. That's the very lame "justification"(so called) for blaming and persecuting the Jews, by the "Christians", down through the centuries since.

----------


## pcosmar

> I thought the tradition was that the Jews (the mob) got to pick who was to be released, in celebration of Passover. That's the very lame "justification"(so called) for blaming and persecuting the Jews, by the "Christians", down through the centuries since.


I'm not into blaming a "people".  The mob was incited. But the article is correct that he was killed by the Police State.

This was predicted (or foreseen).. long before.

As well as the end of that Police State. The same one that crucified Christ will still exist in broken form when he returns.


*Daniel 2*




> 31 Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible.
> 
> 32 This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,
> 
> 33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.
> 
> 34 Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces.
> 
> 35 Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.
> ...




The remnants of the Roman Empire exist today,, as Iron mixed with Clay.

----------


## JohnM

> But the article is correct that he was killed by the Police State.


What is the difference between a State and a Police State?

----------


## pcosmar

> What is the difference between a State and a Police State?


Very little,, except for the level of authoritarianism.  and the existence of Police.

The Roman Empire (and many others) used the military(occupying Army) as a Police Force,

The British Govt did the same with these colonies..

When this country (state) was founded,, there were NO POLICE. And the founders warned of such a standing Army.

The Authoritarians won,, and this is no longer a free country.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> What is the difference between a State and a Police State?


https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...69.nsfq5EkSHvg

----------


## JohnM

> https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...69.nsfq5EkSHvg


Yeah, I read the Wikipedia article before posting.  The part that stood out was 



> Because there are different political perspectives as to what an appropriate balance is between individual freedom and national security, there are no definitive objective standards to determine whether the term "police state" applies to a particular nation at any given point in time. Thus, it is difficult to evaluate objectively the truth of allegations that a nation is, or is not becoming, a police state.

----------


## pcosmar

> Yeah, I read the Wikipedia article before posting.  The part that stood out was


I would place it on the existence of Police (Control Enforcers).  and from there is is only varying levels of severity.

Police did not exist in this country for many years. until well after the founders were all dead.
http://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/cops.htm

A "state" can exist as a Free state without Police. It has been done.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Yeah, I read the Wikipedia article before posting. The part that stood out was


Perhaps it's a crude measure of the degree of megalomania and paranoia (AKA tyranny) of TPTB.

*"The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire." ~ Robert A. Heinlein (1907-1988)*

----------

