'The Crucifixion of the Paschal Lamb' by Joseph Tabory, in The Jewish Quarterly Review
, New Series, Vol. 86, No. 3/4 (Jan. – Apr., 1996), pp. 395-406; via JSTOR: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1454912
Justin's description [in Dial. 40
] of the crucifixion of the paschal lamb by the Jews is intended to prove that the offering of the lamb was a perfect prefiguration of the crucifixion of Jesus. However, Justin could not have been an eyewitness to the Jerusalem sacrifice as he was born some 30 years after the destruction of the Temple. One might assume that Justin saw Jews preparing lambs for the Passover meal in the same manner that they were prepared in Jerusalem during the Temple period since there is evidence of Jews doing so in spite of the objection of the rabbis. However, this custom was apparently not practised in the area where Justin lived, as he points out to his opponent [Trypho]
that the Jews no longer offer[ed]
the paschal sacrifice. His description might have been a theoretical reconstruction based on his belief that the sacrifice of Jesus was prefigured by the offering of the paschal lamb. Theological considerations might have led him to imagine that the paschal lamb had not only been offered in the traditional manner of sacrifices, but that it had actually being crucified. After all, Justin had accused the Jews of eliminating … passages from the Greek Bible which [had supposedly] prophesied the coming of Jesus [Dial
. 73], although scholarly opinion maintains that these passages were added by Christian scholars and copyists. We might argue therefore that his description is not historically accurate.
On the other hand it has been assumed that Justin's description was based on the Samaritan practice of offering the paschal lamb, a ritual which Justin might have witnessed personally during his childhood in Shechem. However there are certain discrepancies between the Samaritan custom, as described by modern observers, and Justin's portrayal. The contentions of this paper are that the Samaritan custom has indeed changed since Justin's time; that Justin accurately portrayed the contemporary Samaritan ritual; and that this ritual was similar to the paschal sacrifice in Jerusalem. To prove these points this paper…compare[d] Justin's account with modern accounts of the Samaritan ritual and with a reconstruction of the ancient Jewish practise based on rabbinic sources.
A summary of the end of the article:
Moreover, after the destruction of the Temple it would seem that one of the new rabbinic stipulations was only prohibition of roasting the lamb, but not of cooking it by other means. There was also disagreement between two key rabbis, R. Akiva and R. Yose ha-Galili, regarding the fate and cooking of the internal organs of the paschal lamb: according to R. Yose ha-Galili, these organs were replaced inside the lamb after cleaning and the entire land was roasted in this fashion. But R. Akiva, on the other hand, said the organs were hung around the lamb's head and neck for roasting, as in the form of a helmet.
Some have thought the similarity of the lamb ‘helmeted’ in its entrails with the crowned Jesus may have served as additional evidence of the connection between the two events.
And further speculation:
Another possibility is the notion that the lamb ‘helmeted’ in its entrails motivated the narrative about Jesus’ crown of thorns.