Has anyone seen this video?

[drhunter1]

I just happened to run across this on YouTube. It’s a letter that was discovered in the Vatican. It is supposedly an archaeological letter from Pontious Pilate to Cesar in Rome concerning what transpired concerning Jesus of Nazareth.

I don’t know if it’s authentic but it does match what the gospels say about Jesus’ death. There are some things in the letter that are surprising. Apparently Pilate did not want to put Jesus to death and actually seemed to be very fond of Jesus. He seemed to fear his power. He actually said he was the Son of God at the end.

Interesting to say the least.

 

[gordon 2]

Acta Pilati (Acts of Pilate)

Acta Pilati (or GOSPEL OF NICODEMUS).—This work does not assume to have been written by Pilate, but to have been derived from the official Acts preserved in the...

www.catholic.com

If I understood correctly the first historical record of the Acta Pilate dates from 376. There are no records of someone talking about it prior to this time and so it is a work, as we know it now, which most likely had origin at this time--376.

As you will see in the link above, the document is made up of three parts for which scholars have indicated are not from the same pen or time frame.


The documents were printed several times in different languages in the 1400s and 1500s.


Quote: [The book aimed at gratifying the desire for extra-evangelical details concerning Our Lord, and at the same time, to strengthen faith in the Resurrection of Christ, and at general edification. The writers (for the work as we have it is composite) could not have expected their production to be seriously accepted by unbelievers.] end quote.

However,

The well-informed Eusebius (325), although he mentions the Acta Pilati referred to by Justin and Tertullian, ( 120 AD) and heathen pseudo-Acts of this kind, shows no acquaintance with this work.

 

[drhunter1]

Acta Pilati (Acts of Pilate)

Acta Pilati (or GOSPEL OF NICODEMUS).—This work does not assume to have been written by Pilate, but to have been derived from the official Acts preserved in the...

www.catholic.com

If I understood correctly the first historical record of the Acta Pilate dates from 376. There are no records of someone talking about it prior to this time and so it is a work, as we know it now, which most likely had origin at this time--376.

As you will see in the link above, the document is made up of three parts for which scholars have indicated are not from the same pen or time frame.


The documents were printed several times in different languages in the 1400s and 1500s.


Quote: [The book aimed at gratifying the desire for extra-evangelical details concerning Our Lord, and at the same time, to strengthen faith in the Resurrection of Christ, and at general edification. The writers (for the work as we have it is composite) could not have expected their production to be seriously accepted by unbelievers.] end quote.

However,

The well-informed Eusebius (325), although he mentions the Acta Pilati referred to by Justin and Tertullian, ( 120 AD) and heathen pseudo-Acts of this kind, shows no acquaintance with this work.

What if they’re wrong.

 

[drhunter1]

If this is an ancient hoax I am at a loss as to why someone felt the need to do it. It’s pretty detailed. Not saying it’s not a hoax but why?

 

[gordon 2]

The article I linked to explains that it had a purpose. So the answer to your why is in it--at the very end if I recall.

So to your question, " what if they're wrong". If they were wrong what would these documents mean and change for Christians now? Of what benefit would they be? Ideas?

 

[drhunter1]

The article I linked to explains that it had a purpose. So the answer to your why is in it--at the very end if I recall.

So to your question, " what if they're wrong". If they were wrong what would these documents mean and change for Christians now? Of what benefit would they be? Ideas?

Probably nothing. I think it probably says more about who would fabricate it. Their motives in essence.

 

[BassMan31]

i think it's fake. Jesus did not come to deliver peace but a sword. the words attributed to Jesus in this "letter" conflict with words attributed to Him according to the Bible. imma go with Bible.

now... if a man who presided over the death of the completely innocent Son of the Living GOD were writing a letter to his superior recounting the event, would he include "details" of his own making in order to attempt to cover/bury his guilt? maybe. Is the letter genuine and Pilot just didn't correctly recount everything said as such, maybe.

but... scripture says since very early times that Jesus wasn't going to give an answer for himself. this whole letter seems like an "answer" of sorts.