The movie Passion of Christ -- directed by the actor Mel Gibson -- was one of the most controversial movies of all time. This graphic movie purports to show, in gruesome details, the horrific flagellation and crucifixion endured by the Messiah before his death on the tree.

Many Christians, unaware of the gross inaccuracies embedded in this movie, applauded Gibson's efforts and considered the movie a useful tool in enlightening the masses about what the Messiah went through "to save the world." On the other hand, however, many Jews were understandably fearful that the movie might ignite more anti-Semitism and persecution.

Recently, one of the major networks, with the aid of four Biblical "scholars," reviewed the events that led to the Messiah's death. At the end of the documentary, the four scholars were asked who they believed had killed the Messiah. The unanimous answer was: "Pilate and the Romans"!

Now is this true -- who REALLY killed the Messiah?

The United Church of God makes the following statement on their website: "The Romans carried out the sentence in typical fashion -- a brutal beating, scourging and crucifixion. It was a Roman who drove the nails into his wrists and feet. It was a Roman spear thrust into his side."

Can this be proven -- is this what the Bible REALLY says?

A similar argument can be found on a Catholic website -- notice!

"The best clue toward determining who killed Jesus is the mode of Jesus' death -- by crucifixion. In Jesus' time crucifixion was a Roman punishment inflicted mainly on slaves and revolutionaries. The usual Jewish mode of execution was stoning, as in the case of Stephen (see Acts 7:54-60). Crucifixion was a cruel and public way to die. As a public punishment, it was meant to shame the one being executed and to deter the onlookers from doing what he had done.

"The official who had the power to execute Jesus by crucifixion was the Roman governor or prefect. In Jesus' time the prefect was Pontius Pilate, who held that position between A.D. 26 and 36. Jesus was put to death 'under Pontius Pilate' around A.D. 30 [actually, A.D. 31]. Although the Gospels present Pilate as indecisive and somewhat concerned for justice in Jesus' case, the Alexandrian Jewish writer Philo (a contemporary of Jesus) described him as 'inflexible, merciless, and obstinate.'

"...And so the mode of death (crucifixion), the legal system in force (with Pilate as having ultimate authority in capital cases), the official charge against Jesus ('the King of the Jews'), and the identity of those crucified with Jesus (lestai) all point in the same direction. The ultimate legal and moral responsibility for Jesus' death lay with Pontius Pilate, the Roman prefect of Judea between A.D. 26 and 36. Pontius Pilate killed Jesus."

Another viewpoint holds that the High Priest Ananias bar Seth and his family were the ones responsible not only for the Messiah's death, but also for the death some thirty years later of the Messiah's brother James.

According to this scenario Ananias bar Seth and his five sons and one son-in-law (Joseph bar Caiaphas) were the dominant power behind the office of the High-Priesthood during the sixty years from 6 A.D. until 66 A.D. They achieved and maintained power in Judea by collaborating with Rome and heavily bribing the Roman procurators with political favors and gifts.

History records that Ananias bar Seth and his sycophant and puppet sons and son-in-law persecuted anyone who threatened to destabilize his dynasty over the office of the High-Priesthood. In particular he was responsible for having not the Messiah only killed in 31 A.D., but also the Messiah's brother James in 62 A.D. when Ananias' son (also named Ananias) held the office of High Priest. The Ananias clan also persecuted and killed many other Galileans -- true Israelites -- who sought to overthrow the corrupt leadership in Judea and Jerusalem.

It is, in fact, defamatory to suggest that "the Jews" (meaning Judahites -- those descended from Jacob's son, Judah) killed the Messiah. This Ananias dynasty of corrupt High Priests was so hated by the Judahite population that when the war against Rome erupted in full force in 66 A.D., the first thing that the Judahite rebels did was to assassinate Ananias bar Seth and his puppet High Priests. Historical records of the actions of the Ananias clan can be found in Josephus' Antiquities [1] and War of the Jews [2] -- as well as in other sources.

The Term "Jew"

We need to digress here and discuss the term "Jew."

The nation that formed in Palestine after the captivity of Judah in Babylon, was made up mainly of people from the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, together with some Levites. They settled in two regions, with Judah primarily in Judea and with Benjamin in Galilee, and internally they are referred to as Judeans and Galileans in the New Testament. The Judeans of the region of Judea came to include all the people living there, regardless of their racial origins. All these people are referred to by translators as “Jews”, because they were “of Judea”. But this does not mean “of Judah” only. Included in the population were many descendants of Esau (Edomites); these came to control the Temple, but these leaders were they of whom the Messiah said could not hear (and understand) his words.

Historically, in the land of Judea, as well as Judahites there were Canaanites, Edomites, and others -- some of whom had become proselytes to the Jewish religion. As a consequence these were labeled “Jews” since they were “Jews” by religion and “Jews” because they lived in the land of Judea. But these were not of the descendants of Judah! This we need to keep in mind. The territorial term explains how Paul could be called a Jew. Paul was a Benjamite (Philippians 3:5). Paul and eleven of the disciples did not descend from the tribe of Judah.

In Judea, there were many races, and these could all be called “Jews” in the sense of being “Judeans” -- having this territory and/or a religious belief in common. Hence the phrase “the Jews” does not necessarily mean any common genetic origin such as physical descent from Abraham through Isaac. For example, the Messiah, in the Book of John chapter eight, was talking to the Judean leadership in the treasury who historically were mainly of Edomite extraction, and hence this majority were not Israelites in the racial and Biblical meaning. “Israelite” is a genetic racial-tribal term throughout Scripture.

By the time of the Messiah, this people had absorbed proselytes from many other sources. Particularly, the nations of the Idumeans and Itureans were completely absorbed into Jewry, and made Judaism their religion. This explains the antagonism of the Jews towards the Messiah, and he made reference to their practice of encouraging proselytes into the nation.

There are four main points we should consider in determining who the TRUE Jews (Judahites, descendants of Judah) really were -- and are today!

1). That the descendants of Esau (Edomites or Idumeans as well as many others) became known as “Jews.”

2). That “Jews” (by religion), many of whom were not of Israel stock, and included the descendants of Esau, existed both inside and outside of Judea, in those times. Even today we do not know the proportions!

3). That the words “Jew,” “Jews” and “Judeans” did not then equate solely with Judah or with Israel, by race, any more than they do today.

4). The control of Judea by Edom started at the time of the captivity of Judah, and the Edomite aristocracy eventually gained ascendancy over the returnees from Babylon. From this position of power they set about expanding their territory and power base by compelling all and sundry to follow their system of political and religious power.

With this firmly in mind we can now look at the mode of the Messiah's execution.

What, Exactly, Was the Messiah Nailed To?

The comment "The best clue toward determining who killed Jesus is the mode of Jesus' death" from the Catholic website is indeed true -- but not in the way they think!

The Bible DOES NOT support the traditional idea of three crosses. As a matter of fact, certain versions of the Bible -- such as the KJV, the Jerusalem Bible and the NIV -- more accurately translate the following passages by referring to a crucifixion “TREE.” Notice –

"The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the dead -- whom you had killed by hanging him on a TREE" (Acts 5:30, NIV [3]).

"The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a TREE" (Acts 5:30, KJV [4]).

"It was the God of our ancestors who raised up Jesus, but it was you who had him executed by hanging on a TREE" (Acts 5:30, Jerusalem Bible [5]).

"We are witnesses of everything he did in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They killed him by hanging him on a TREE..." (Acts 10:39, NIV [3]).

"And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a TREE" (Acts 10:39, KJV [4]).

"Now I, and those with me, can witness to everything he did throughout the countryside of Judaea and in Jerusalem itself: and also to the fact that they killed him by hanging him on a TREE" (Acts 10:39, Jerusalem Bible [5]).

"When they had carried out all that was written about him, they took him down from the TREE and laid him in a tomb" (Acts 13:29, NIV [3]).

"When they had carried out everything that scripture foretells about him they took him down from the TREE and buried him in a tomb" (Acts 13:29, Jerusalem Bible [5]).

"And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the TREE, and laid him in a sepulchre" (Acts 13:29, KJV [4]).

"Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: 'Cursed is everyone who is hung on a TREE'” (Galatians 3:13, NIV [3]).

"Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law by being cursed for our sake, since scripture says: Cursed be everyone who is hanged on a TREE" (Galatians 3:13, Jerusalem Bible [5]).

"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a TREE" (Galatians 3:13, KJV [4]).

"He himself bore our sins in his body on the TREE..." (1 Peter 2:24, NIV [3]).

"Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the TREE..." (1 Peter 2:24, KJV [4]).

The Greek word xulou (or xulon) is translated “tree” in each of the above passages. This Greek word refers to a LIVING TREE -- not a Roman cross! We should note that even as Yeshua the Messiah was being led to his crucifixion, he made a direct reference to this act being carried out “when the TREE is green” (Luke 23:31, NIV). The descriptive Greek word means “full of sap.” Such a tree is clearly living.

This is confirmed by Nancy L. Kuehl:

"Whatever one believes, we must believe Jesus was hanged alive on a living tree. The evidence is overwhelming. From the New Covenant, we have several references to it. Never is the word xulon translated as the 'cross.' The word for 'cross' would have been stauros, and even then the Greek word only reflects the upright nature of the tree! The word xulon, however, is the same that Luke uses in 23:31 for 'moist wood' and refers to a living tree! The Hebrew equivalent would be the 'ets (derived from 'atsah), which is also used as a term for 'gallows' in the book of Esther where Haman is 'hanged' (Esth. 5:14; 8:7).

"It is the same word used in Genesis 40:19 and Deuteronomy 21:22 to describe the hanging of an individual on a 'tree.' These 'gallows' DO NOT refer to a Roman cross. The word is even used to describe the fruit trees of the Garden of Eden, including the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. In the New Covenant, the disciples were quite clear about HOW Jesus was hanged, and it wasn't upon a Roman cross." [6]

Old Testament Executions

The apostle Paul makes the following statement when referring to the Messiah’s crucifixion: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a TREE” (Galatians 3:13). This is a direct reference to Deuteronomy 21:22-23, which says –

"And if a man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, his corpse shall not hang all night on the TREE, but you shall surely bury him on the same day (for he who is hanged is accursed of God), so that you do not defile your land which the LORD your God gives you as an inheritance."

A controversy raged among the Pharisees as to whether this passage from the Old Testament refers to a man being hanged on a TREE before or after death. Based on humane considerations, the Pharisees interpreted this passage to mean that the criminal should be put to a quick death by strangulation -- followed by hanging. There is, however, evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls (Temple Scroll and Nahum Commentary) that this same passage was originally interpreted to mean that a criminal was hanged on a TREE as the method of execution.

According to the Temple Scroll (Column 64), those found guilty of certain capital offenses were killed by hanging on a tree:

"If a man informs against his people, and delivers up his people to a foreign nation, and does harm to his people, you shall hang him on a TREE and he shall die....And if a man has committed a crime punishable by death, and has defected into the midst of the nations, and has cursed his people and the children of Israel, you shall hang him also on the TREE, and he shall die." [7]

According to the Sages, only blasphemers and idolaters were to be hanged on a tree -- though they abided by the more humane act of hanging after death. However, the Temple Scroll clearly shows that hanging on a tree could be used as a legitimate method of execution. Notice what Yigael Yadin says –

"It is possible...that hanging alive goes back to the Second Temple period as the legitimate interpretation of the Bible’s command to execute by “hanging,” and that it was only the later Pharisaic halachah which gave a different interpretation, and condemned the practice of stringing up a condemned man while still alive. There is in fact proof of this in the Aramaic Targum (of a sentence in Ruth) which dwells on the four methods of carrying out judicial sentences of death. It affirms that the fourth type, which is strangulation in rabbinic terminology, is indeed “hanging on a tree.” And the late Israeli scholar Professor J. Heinemann pointed out that this Targum preserves an ancient pre-Tannaitic (i.e. Before the mishnaic sages) tradition of punishment by actual hanging -- namely, with hanging as the cause of death." [8]

In Addition to this, Yadin has reinterpreted the Nahum Commentary [9] in light of the Temple Scroll to support the contention that the passage in Deuteronomy does indeed refer to hanging criminals alive on a TREE -- as practiced in ancient Israel. It is also a fact that crucifixion, as a form of hanging, was also practiced later in Israel’s history. According to the Jewish historian Josephus, the Hasmonean king Alexander Jannaeus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in the first century B.C. (Wars of the Jews). [10] With this knowledge it is obvious what the Jewish leaders meant when they informed Pontius Pilate that they had a law, and by that law the Messiah must die:

"The Jews answered him, 'We have a law, and by that law he [Yeshua] ought to die because he made himself out to be the Son of God'” (John 19:7).

The Bible records that Pilate washed his hands of the entire affair because he knew the Messiah was innocent of any charge. He then handed the matter over to the religious leaders and stated: “See to it yourselves” (Matthew 27:24). Their response indicates they understood Pilate’s action as a statement made according to Jewish law -- absolving him from any responsibility for this action (Deuteronomy 21:1-9). In this fashion Yeshua the Messiah fulfilled prophecy according to Jewish law -- not Roman law (Matthew 5:17; 26:54).

In an interesting aside Melito, the well-known Bishop of Sardis during the second century A.D., referred to the TREE as the instrument of crucifixion: “Just as from a TREE came sin, so also from a TREE comes salvation.” It is apparent that the early Christians were well aware of the fact that the Messiah was crucified on a literal, living TREE. Also, it is a matter of historical record that before 326 A.D., the cross did not even exist as a Christian symbol, but was derived from paganism. For a fascinating discussion of the origin and history of the cross, read Babylon Mystery Religion by Ralph Woodrow. [11]

So who, at this time, crucified (or hung) perceived criminals on a living tree?

The Babylonian-Edomite Role in the Messiah's Execution

Contrary to popular opinion, the execution of the Messiah in 31 A.D. was carried out in a "Jewish" (non-Judahite) fashion -- down to the most minute details! Writes Nancy L. Kuehl:

"That the execution was a Jewish affair, we have written verification in Acts 4:9, where the RULERS OF ISRAEL [the Sanhedrin] are confronted with the execution of Jesus. There is just no getting around the fact that the ENTIRE PROCESS was a Jewish affair from beginning to end, and it is the ONLY conclusion we can draw from the Talmudic writings, which speak NOTHING of the Romans." [12]

We find proof of this in the Babylonian Talmud [13], notice!

"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu [the Messiah] was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy...he was hanged on the eve of the Passover! [Nisan 14]" (b. Sanh. 43a).

The above passage -- and others -- was written by "Jews"! "There is no reason," argues Nancy Kuehl, "for them to have contrived such 'fantasies' concerning Israel's involvement in the arrest and execution of Jesus, especially in light of the tendency toward anti-Semitic persecution of Jesus by the universal [Catholic] church of the latter first century and onward. Quite simply, the arrest (and execution) was ENTIRELY a Jewish affair. There is little doubt that both Herod (as reigning royal ruler) and the Sanhedrin (the legislative body of Israel) had already identified Jesus as a wanted man and were only awaiting their opportunity to seize him in Jerusalem." [14]

So who, exactly, was responsible for the Messiah's death?

Justin -- an early "Christian" writer who was a Semite by birth -- wrote in his Apology (between 148 and 154 A.D.) that the SANHEDRIN was responsible for the Messiah's death. [15]

Also, we have further confirmation from Tertullian (160-230 A.D.) that the execution of the Messiah was carried out by the SANHEDRIN -- NOT Pilate! [16]

All the earliest documents show, without a doubt, that the Sanhedrin was responsible for crucifying the Messiah. Think about it -- if the Roman procurator Pontius Pilate wanted the Messiah put to death in the Roman fashion -- then there would have been absolutely NO REASON for him to hand the Messiah over to the Sanhedrin! The apostle John clearly makes this point when he records the following:

"Pilate said to them, 'Shall I crucify your King?' The chief priests [of the Sanhedrin] answered, 'We have no king but Caesar!' So he [Pilate] delivered him [the Messiah] to them [the Sanhedrin] to be crucified. So they [the Sanhedrin] took Jesus and led him away" (John 19:15-16).

Luke concurs in 24:20 --

"...and how the chief priests and OUR RULERS delivered him [the Messiah] to be condemned to death, and crucified him."

Notes Nancy Kuehl, "Although Pilate had  sent a representation of Roman soldiers to be present at the execution, it was NOT these soldiers who hanged him on the tree: it was the Temple captains." [17]

In the Letter of Barnabas [18] -- written by a person from Jerusalem about A.D. 90 -- the author states that the Red Heifer, in Christian circles, was reckoned as the Messiah: "The calf is Jesus: the sinful men offering it [the Temple priests] are those who led him [the Messiah] to the slaughter" (8:2). Here we find the author of the Letter of Barnabas directly stating that "the calf [heifer] is Jesus" and that "the sinful men offering it [the Temple priests] are those who led him [the Messiah] to the slaughter."

It is well known in Jewish circles that the Temple priests did indeed lead the heifer from the Temple on Mount Moriah eastward across a double-tiered arched bridge (called the Bridge of the Red Heifer) to an altar just outside the camp near the summit of the Mount of Olives. This is where the Temple priests sacrificed and burnt to ashes the Red Heifer. Notes Ernest L. Martin:

"...the Book of Hebrews associat(es) the sin offerings of the Temple with the crucifixion of Jesus. The author [Paul in the Book of Hebrews] stated that Jesus carried his reproach (the cross-piece for his crucifixion) to an altar located 'outside the gate,' even 'outside the camp' (Hebrews 13:10-14)." [19]

Martin goes on to relate:

"Since Jesus was judged by the Jewish authorities at the Passover season, Caiaphas [Joseph bar Caiaphas] and Annas [Ananias bar Seth] [John 18:13-14] were not at their private homes during Jesus' interrogation. Jesus was judged by the chief priests and condemned by the Sanhedrin while all parties were within the Temple enclosure....

"After his judgment by the Sanhedrin...Jesus was then taken a short distance to the northwest part of the Temple courtyard where there was a stairway that led to Fort Antonia where Pilate was amongst his troops.....

"After interrogating Jesus, Pilate washed his hands of the matter. Jesus was then led out of Fort Antonia and through the east gate of the Temple (which was also the east gate of Jerusalem) and taken [by the Temple priests] over the two-tiered arched bridge of the Kidron Valley to the summit of Olivet near where the Red Heifer was sacrificed..." [20]

The Herodian Dynasty

Now that we have established that the Sanhedrin and the Temple authorities were directly responsible for the execution of the Messiah, and NOT the Romans as people have assumed, what do we know about the Sanhedrin and the rulers of Judea at that time? Nancy Kuehl elaborates --

"The Herodian Dynasty which had ruled over Judea was founded by Herod the Great, AN IDUMEAN, said to be of Jewish blood but in reality only a proselyte to Judaism. Politically, his allegiance was to Antony and Cleopatra and, later, to Augustus who conferred upon him the title of king. It was through Roman military aid that Herod had solidified his position in Judea by defeating the Jewish Hasmonean kings....He knew little of Jewish culture nor religion....

"It was Herod who instituted the Hellenic Babylonian-Alexandrian priesthood in Judea. These priests were especially composed of the families of Boethus (to a lesser extent) and Phiabi, who became his political allies. He appointed as the first high priest one Hanamel, A BABYLONIAN....

"The Hellenistic and Babylonian influence upon the Jewish priesthood would forever change Judaism. These individuals were known to have demonstrated the views, political, religious, and economic, of their crafty monarch. Together, the Herodians and the Priesthood, became the aristocratic ruling class in Judea, reflecting Roman politics and Greek culture and learning so prominent in the PAGAN SOCIETIES surrounding Judea." [21]

We have seen that the Herodian Dynasty was Idumean to the core. What about the priestly families of Boethus and Phiabi? Since we have sketchy information regarding the origins of these families we cannot say with certainty they were of Edomite or Idumean ancestry, however, they certainly were NOT descended from Judah the son of Jacob -- or any other of the twelve tribes of Israel! We find proof of this in the Talmud -- Tractate Sanhedrin. [22] This tractate deals with the composition and procedures of the courts that administered Jewish law. The GREAT SANHEDRIN consisted of seventy-one ordained scholars who served as judges -- and it met in the chamber of Hewn Stone in Jerusalem. This court of seventy-one was a kind of appellate court, and it also dealt with special cases, such as trying a High Priest or a whole city accused of idolatry.

The Judean Judicial System

The LESSER SANHEDRIN consisted of twenty-three judges, and it met both in Jerusalem and in other parts of the country. This court DEALT WITH CRIMINAL CASES and was competent to INFLICT THE DEATH PENALTY. There were also minor courts of three members -- which are referred to by the general term beth din. The court of three dealt with monetary matters.

More details on the different courts within the first-century Judean judicial system is provided by Nancy Kuehl:

"There were, during the time of Jesus, three Sanhedrins:

1) a three-judge panel;
2) a twenty-three-member judicial Sanhedrin; and
3) a full seventy-one-member religious Sanhedrin.

"ONLY the twenty-three-member Sanhedrin was qualified to try criminal cases. Individuals accused of capital crimes were brought before this court over which the nasi and ab bet din presided. At the time of Jesus the Sadducees held the powerful offices of the criminal court....The Great Sanhedrin (sometimes called the Great Beth Din) was a tribunal body consisting of three chambers: the Chamber of the Chief Priests; the Chamber of the Scribes; and the CHAMBER OF THE ELDERS (sometimes called counselors). These three chambers were divided into twenty-three members each, which when combined constituted a body of sixty-nine members. Added to this were the two high priests: the nasi and the ab bet din, making a total of seventy-one members in all. This legislative unit was responsible ONLY for the administration of the Temple." [23]

Now the CHAMBER OF THE ELDERS (who were also called "senators" of "councilors" ) were men of aristocratic lineage who held the view that the nation should faithfully follow the written law of Moses. This was the more conservative group in which the Messiah was accepted as hasidim. According to Nancy Kuehl,

"The conservative Pharisees with whom Jesus was congenial generally associated themselves with the CHAMBER OF THE ELDERS. This is the reason that Jesus sometimes is found dining with, conversing with, and visiting with some Pharisees. It was to this conservative group that Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimaethea belonged. Unfortunately, this chamber was the LEST influential of the three chambers and had nothing to do with criminal law." [24]

According to S. Srinivasa Aiyar, in his work,  "in order for one to apply for membership in this elite political and religious governing assemblage that person must have been A HEBREW and A LINEAL DESCENDANT OF HEBREWS"! [25]

The very fact that this was stressed for those applying for membership in the Chamber of the Elders (which was one of the three chambers of the Great Sanhedrin) infers that the other chambers and courts -- including the twenty-three-member Lesser Sanhedrin than dealt with criminal cases -- were NOT staffed by lineal descendants of the Children of Israel! It is evident that the Lesser Sanhedrin consisted of a mixture of Edomites, Canaanites, Babylonians and sundry other non-Israelites in its membership. This was the group that condemned and killed the Messiah! Those who were actually descended from Judah had nothing to do with this nefarious act!

The Only Conclusion

Concludes Nancy Kuehl:

"The execution of Jesus was primarily instigated by a single corrupt family: the family of Hanan (Annas). It is obvious that the Jewish [Israelite] people during the first century, who had absolutely nothing to do with the death of Jesus, recognized this Sadducean priesthood as overlords. Both Josephus and the rabbis of the Talmud referred to them as "hissers" or "whisperers" and connected them with the evil serpent. Jesus himself, referred to them as "vipers" and compared them to their "father;" i.e., the ancient serpent of Genesis." [26]

Ruling during the first century, these members of the Babylonian-Alexandrian priesthood had first been appointed by the Edomite king, Herod, who also included Edomites amongst their ranks. These Herodian-appointed Babylonian-Alexandrian-Edomite priests were primarily Sadducees -- and it was this cabal that tried and nailed the Messiah to the tree -- NOT the Romans, who provided a few centurions to keep order at the execution site on the Mount of Olives.

[1] Flavius Josephus, The Complete Works of Josephus. Translated by Wm. Whiston, "Antiquities of the Jews," Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, MI, 1991.

[2] Flavius Josephus, The Complete Works of Josephus. Translated by Wm. Whiston, "Wars of the Jews," Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, MI, 1991.

[3] The New Testament, New International Version.

[4] The New Testament, King James Version.

[5] The New Testament, Jerusalem Bible.

[6] Nancy L. Kuehl, A Book of Evidence: The Trials and Execution of Jesus, Resource Publications, Eugene, OR, 2013, p. 199.

[7] Yigael Yadin, The Temple Scroll: The Hidden Law of the Dead Sea Sect, Random House Publishers, 1985, p. 206.

[8] Ibid., pp. 207-208.

[9] Yigael Yadin, The Message of the Scrolls, "The Commentary on Nahum," Simon & Schuster Publishers, 1957.

[10] Flavius Josephus, The Complete Works of Josephus. Translated by Wm. Whiston, "Wars of the Jews" (IV, 6), Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, MI, 1991.

[11] Ralph Woodrow, Babylon Mystery Religion, Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Assn., Riverside, CA. 1981.

[12] Nancy L. Kuehl, A Book of Evidence: The Trials and Execution of Jesus, Resource Publications, Eugene, OR, 2013, p. 71.

[13] The Talmud of Babylonia: An American Translation, Vol. 23 - Bavli Tractate Sanhedrin, Part B: Chapters 8-12, University of South Florida Publisher, 1996.

[14] Nancy L. Kuehl, A Book of Evidence: The Trials and Execution of Jesus, Resource Publications, Eugene, OR, 2013, p. 72.

[15] L. Russ Bush, Classical Readings in Christian Apologetics, "The First Apology of Justin," Zondervan Academic Publishers, 1983, p. 21.

[16] Ibid., pp. 93-94.

[17] Nancy L. Kuehl, A Book of Evidence: The Trials and Execution of Jesus, Resource Publications, Eugene, OR, 2013, p. 150.

[18] Writings of the Apostolic Fathers: Mathetes, Polycarp, Barnabas, and Papias, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2014.

[19] Ernest L. Martin, An A.S.K. Historical Report, "Updated Information On the Crucifixion of Jesus," Associates for Scriptural Knowledge, Portland, OR, 1992, p. 2.

[20] Ibid., p. 3.

[21] Nancy L. Kuehl, A Book of Evidence: The Trials and Execution of Jesus, Resource Publications, Eugene, OR, 2013, pp. 133-134.

[22] Heinrich W. Guggenheimer, Editor. The Jerusalem Talmud, "Tractates Sanhedrin, Makkot, and Horaiot," De Gruyter Publisher, 2020.

[23] Nancy L. Kuehl, A Book of Evidence: The Trials and Execution of Jesus, Resource Publications, Eugene, OR, 2013, pp. 99-100.

[24] Ibid., p. 102.

[25] S. Srinivasa Aiyar, The Legality of the Trial of Jesus, Chas. E. George, Editor, New Orleans, LA, 1914, p. 49.

[26] Nancy L. Kuehl, A Book of Evidence: The Trials and Execution of Jesus, Resource Publications, Eugene, OR, 2013, p. 193.

Hope of Israel Ministries -- Preparing the Way for the Return of YEHOVAH God and His Messiah!

Hope of Israel Ministries P.O. Box 853 Azusa, CA 91702, U.S.A. www.hope-of-israel.org

Scan with your Smartphone for more information