“Phineas” may be a variant of the name “Phanni, son of Samuel”, high priest of the temple installed by the zealots in 67 CE.
[the Zealots]...undertook to dispose of the high priesthood by casting lots for it, whereas, as we have said already, it was to descend by succession in a family. The pretense they made for this strange attempt was an ancient practice, while they said that of old it was determined by lot; but in truth, it was no better than a dissolution of an undeniable law, and a cunning contrivance to seize upon the government, derived from those that presumed to appoint governors as they themselves pleased. Hereupon they sent for one of the pontifical tribes, which is called Eniachin, and cast lots which of it should be the high priest. By fortune the lot so fell as to demonstrate their iniquity after the plainest manner, for it fell upon one whose name was Phannias, the son of Samuel, of the village Aphtha. He was a man not only unworthy of the high priesthood, but that did not well know what the high priesthood was, such a mere rustic was he! Yet did they hail this man, without his own consent, out of the country, as if they were acting a play upon the stage, and adorned him with a counterfeit thee; they also put upon him the sacred garments, and upon every occasion instructed him what he was to do. This horrid piece of wickedness was sport and pastime with them, but occasioned the other priests, who at a distance saw their law made a jest of, to shed tears, and sorely lament the dissolution of such a sacred dignity.
But where do we find again
"Woe unto him who maketh himself alive by the name of God....A sectarian said to R. Chanina: Do you know how old Balaam was? [R. Chanina] replied: It is not written. However, since it says (Psalms 55:24) "Men of bloodshed and deceit will not live out half their days..." he was 33 or 34. [The heretic] said: You said well. I have seen the chronicle of Balaam and it said "At 33 years Balaam the lame was killed by Pinchas (Phineas) the robber."
"Baalam" who is 33 years old is, obviously, the talmudic parody of Jesus.
According to scholar hearsay (the reader may verify freely), the Talmudic passage quoted above seems to be the only
passage, in all the Talmud, where Pilate is mentioned behind the name of Pinchas (Phineas).
Pontius = Pinchas.
Hence, note the coincidence: also the Zealot high priest works as the Pilate of the Gospels:
- Pilate is piloted by the sinedrites
- Pinchas/Phannias is piloted by the Zealots
Could it be by a simple mistake
by "Mark" (author), that the story about a Jesus ben Sapphias condemned by the high priest Pinchas in 60 CE was confused as the story about a Jesus son of Jo-Sapphias (=Joseph) condemned by the governor Pilate in 30 CE?
. As initially far-fetched as this my hypothesis sounds, I suggest reading Doudna's case
before rejecting it out of hand.
I have modified the title of the thread.