Why Pilate according to John M. Allegro

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 11105
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Why Pilate according to John M. Allegro

Post by Giuseppe »


The timetable for Jesus’ story can be worked out according to the precepts in the Scrolls and set by the destruction of the Temple in AD 70 because the Damascus Document (B II, 14, recalling in turn Deuteronomy II, 14) says forty years must pass between the death of the Teacher of the Community and the end of the men of war – so if the end-time is taken to be the fall of the Temple, the crucifixion must be around AD 30 and the birth about thirty years before that, as Community leaders had to be at least 30 before taking office

https://bibleinterp.arizona.edu/article ... legro_Myth
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 11105
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why Pilate according to John M. Allegro

Post by Giuseppe »


...the fall of the Temple was thereafter pivotal in any estimate of the approach of the millennium, and if the Redeemer's appearance on earth was intended to be a sign of the imminence of that event, then the Joshua/Jesus of the Gospels had to be placed in the immediate run-up to the end of the epoch. More precisely, an important Essene tradition stated that:

from the day the Teacher of the Community died until the end of all the men of war who had deserted to the Man of Lies there shall pass about forty years.

(Damascus Document, Col. XX 14-15)

The 'about forty years' is a reflection of the 'thirty-eight years' that it took the entire generation of the 'men of war' to perish from the camp during the desert wanderings of the Israelites under Moses, because they had doubted the promise to bring them in safety to the land flowing with milk and honey (Deuteronomy 214) . Reckoning back from the apocalyptic event of the destruction of the Temple, the mythmakers fastened upon AD 30 for the crucifixion of their latter-day Joshua/Jesus, during the procuratorship of Pontius Pilate. The date of the Messiah's birth had then to fall thirty years before that since, as we have seen, it was a rule that the Essene administrative leaders should not be younger than that when they took office. So the Gospel of Luke records
Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age. (3:23)

All we know about this period ill-accords with the kind of pro-Roman attitude adopted by this 'low-profile' Messiah of the Gospel myth, or at least with its being tolerated by the fiercely anti-imperialist factions of the Jewish underground movements active at that time, the 'men of war' of the myth-maker chronologists.

(John M. Allegro, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Myth, p. 224-225)
Post Reply