Is the Golgotha the trace of an old lapidation story?
Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 12:44 pm
Stephen was stoned out of the city, too.
Assume for a moment that the Golghota, as a hill outside a city, was the ideal place for lapidation. Was the crucifixion on Golghota an implicit overlap/eclipse of a previous death of Jesus (via lapidation) by a new death of Jesus (via crucifixion)?
According to Talmud, Jesus was stoned in Lydda.
The Tosefta (San. 10:11), states:
The skull itself may refer to the bones of the stoned victims left unburied. The Golgotha is the "place of a skull", because that was the place where Goliath himself was stoned by David: wasn't he stoned? In the his case, the "first stone" thrown against him killed him.
Hence I think that if Jesus was crucified in a place otherwise used for lapidation then the intention is to reiterate again and again and again, ad nauseam et ad infinitum, that the crucified Jesus was the Christ.
The memory of a real historical Jesus who was really stoned (sic) could be used to insist on the earthly crucifixion of the mythical Jesus of Paul. To euhemerize him. Against the separationists who denied that the crucified Jesus was the spiritual Christ.
Assume for a moment that the Golghota, as a hill outside a city, was the ideal place for lapidation. Was the crucifixion on Golghota an implicit overlap/eclipse of a previous death of Jesus (via lapidation) by a new death of Jesus (via crucifixion)?
According to Talmud, Jesus was stoned in Lydda.
The Tosefta (San. 10:11), states:
"And that is precisely what they did to Ben Sṭada (other readings: Sṭara) in Lydda – they placed two scholars in hiding [to testify against him] and stoned him."
The skull itself may refer to the bones of the stoned victims left unburied. The Golgotha is the "place of a skull", because that was the place where Goliath himself was stoned by David: wasn't he stoned? In the his case, the "first stone" thrown against him killed him.
Hence I think that if Jesus was crucified in a place otherwise used for lapidation then the intention is to reiterate again and again and again, ad nauseam et ad infinitum, that the crucified Jesus was the Christ.
The memory of a real historical Jesus who was really stoned (sic) could be used to insist on the earthly crucifixion of the mythical Jesus of Paul. To euhemerize him. Against the separationists who denied that the crucified Jesus was the spiritual Christ.