Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Matthew 28:3 is the only verse where ἡγεμὼν is the title recognized to Pilate:


I think that mythicist Jean Magne is correct in concluding that in the Earliest Gospel the Roman governor was without a name. I am arrived independently to that conclusion and now I give the case:

• 1) The name "Pilate", in virtue of its retroverted meaning (PLT the semitic root for all the variants of "to free, to release"), was chosen in order to have a governor who would have liked to release Jesus.

• 2) but a Roman governor who would have liked to release Jesus is strictly connected with the Barabbas episode.

• 3) Now, the Barabbas episode is a clear anti-marcionite interpolation (the complete proof is found here).

• 4) per (3), the idea of a Roman governor who would have liked to release Jesus, being strictly connected with an anti-marcionite intrepolation, is in turn itself a late addition. This is corroborated by the fact that (a) Justin insists on Pilate and (b) Loisy recognized that the simple mention of Pilate in the interpolations added on the (originally marcionite) Ignatian epistles served an anti-marcionite point and (c) the mention of Pilate in the catholic Creed.

• 5) it follows that the original idea was about a Roman ἡγεμὼν who, far from wanting to release Jesus, wanted to condemn him. Which means that the same name "Pilate" was part and parcel of the pro-Roman late apology interpolated in the Gospel.

Therefore Magne is probably correct in the original Roman trial resembling something as:


IMPLICATIONS:
Why did a Christian writer introduce the idea of an anonymous Roman governor crucifying Jesus? What interest in the introduction of a mere anonymous ἡγεμὼν as killer of Jesus?

The best explanation I have found until now:


(Robert M. Price, 'Does the Christ Myth Theory Require an Early Date?' in Is This Not The Carpenter? The Question of the Historicity of the Figure of Jesus, Thomas L. Thompson, Thomas S. Verenna, Routledge, 2012, p. 100)

This scenario is expected insofar it doesn't require that Marcion knew the Hebrew meaning of PLT, since Marcion would have ignored completely Pilate.

The governour's question and the reply of Jesus are also interpolated. Jesus was just taken to the gov and sentenced right away to whipping and crucifixion.

Correct.