To my mind, the most troubling and at the same time the most intriguing story in the New Testament is that of Barabbas, the "brigand" supposedly freed by Pontius Pilate at the behest of the so-called "Jewish mob." This story, more than any other, seems to reveal the true nature and bitterness of the conflict between pagan followers of Paul and the earliest Christian followers of Jesus; ie., those involved in the development of the movement as Jesus had originally intended it to be. Moreover, with all of its dripping irony, the story is representative of the very same conflict, I believe, that would eventually lead to the origin of "fake news," to the earliest form of "Q-Anon," and worst of all, to the perversion and corruption of the wonderful teaching of the person so many consider the best individual ever to walk the earth.
Even In the Pauline, pagan (commonly misnamed "Orthodox Christian") version of the story, Jesus is arrested, tried, and convicted of being the "King of the Jews." According to the Romans, that is his crime! Obviously, Jesus is not an insurrectionist. In preaching to his followers to "render unto Caesar what is his and to the Lord what is His," he is actually diametrically opposed to the ill-fated, hotheaded advocates of military rebellion! As if the irony is not thick enough, every time his followers call him "The Son of G-d," he admonishes them to call him "Son of Man." It is as if his native Jewish followers do not understand that only legitimate "Kings of Israel," starting with Saul and thereafter only those descended from the line of David were always referred to as "The Son of G-d." Does that mean that his Jewish followers did not know this or, more likely, that pagan Pauline "Christian" authors of those gospels attributed to Mark, Luke, and John pretended to understand virtually no Hebrew or Aramaic? Did they really fail to understand that Jesus is telling his followers that despite his being a rightful Davidic king, that if they keep calling him "The Son of G-d," it virtually guarantees that he will be tried, convicted, and executed by the Romans?
As further evidence of what would be an even more shocking lack of understanding of Hebrew and Aramaic by the three gospel authors, they seem to pretend not to realize that Barabbas or Bar Abbas is Aramaic for "Son of the Father," a clear reference to "Jesus Christ," himself. In fact, it is only in the earliest Jewish Christian "Gospel according to Matthew," that Bar Abbas's actual first name, Jesus, was ever allowed to be found. Is it a convenient coincidence that only in these versions of the gospel of the earliest "Christians," that we find the entire name? Did the other pagan Christian authors or their followers have something to hide, perhaps their bitter animosity toward Jesus' original and authentic disciples, including even the members of Jesus' own family and anyone else with whom the authors disagreed (Gospel of Mark 3:21)? In yet another act of hatred toward those original Christians, did they add to the already fictitious story of Judas, perverting the real story of "Bar Abbas," as well, by the invention of an evil twin? Are both stories among the earliest examples of "fake news?"
We know that St. Jerome was commissioned by his pope to translate the entirety of the "scriptures" from Greek into Latin. Due to the crude translation into Greek from Hebrew by the authors of the Septuagint, as well as the inherent differences between Latin and Greek, Jerome actually chose to learn Hebrew and to translate as much as possible of the Old Testament directly from Hebrew into Latin. He was told by his pope to purposely mistranslate certain words such as "young woman" and substitute "virgin" in the Latin version. (That is not meant to say that the "virgin birth" did not occur!) Moreover, when his task was completed, Jerome famously announced that a supposed "original" Gospel According to Matthew, written in Hebrew or Aramaic, was to be found in the library at Caesarea. This was met with intense criticism by pagan followers of Paul who claimed that the gospel had been "corrupted." What they meant, apparently, is that they had not yet had a chance to edit it and to add extra chapters to the older manuscript. We know from the Ebionites that their professed original "Hebrew" version of the gospel had no reference to Jesus as G-d, no virgin birth, no three wise men and probably no second Jesus the "evil twin" or even the edited story of Judas. Instead it said that Jesus was the true messiah who died for all mankind, and would return again someday and, most importantly, that they should emulate his actions, the true "way" to Jesus' "Kingdom of G-d" on earth!
Applying Occam's Razor to the story of Barabbas, as well as that of Judas, it is difficult to understand why the Romans needed Judas at all to identify Jesus, the most popular rabbi in that area. An Evion, an original "Ebionite" and authentic apostle, according to Luke, one who had voluntarily given most of his possessions to his evangelical community and could take back whatever he needed, Judas would have no pressing need for thirty pieces of silver (Acts 2:44-2:45 and 4:32-4:35). Even more troubling, wouldn't those same followers of the now famous "Son of the Father" beg Pilate to let their hero go because Pilate or anyone else that knew of Jesus was well aware that he was no insurrectionist? Clearly, there is no second Barabbas, no evil twin. There is only one "Jesus, the Son of the Father." Unfortunately, we know of no Roman custom of letting prisoners go out of kindness, certainly not by a miserable cur such as Pilate! No, there is no "Jewish mob" calling for Jesus's death. There are, ironically, only his own followers desperately begging for the release of a truly innocent man.
Instead, this story is one of obscene hatred by pagan Christians (supposed followers of Paul) toward Jewish Christians, actually attacking the original true followers of Jesus, those who actually lived with him, and accusing them of being responsible for his death. And, in so doing they become the inventors of fake news. Only a few years later the same hate mongers would go much further, not only accusing their favorite victims, innocent Jews, but even innocent Gnostic Christians of "blood libel," of sacrificing and eating children! Meanwhile, even fellow "orthodox Christians," shocked at the false accusations against the Gnostic Christians, finally forced the accusers to admit that their "evidence" was only hearsay. Sound familiar?
The conflict between pagan followers of Paul and the original, authentic followers of the historical Jesus is actually well outlined in the current New Testament itself. Thanks to quite brilliant authorship of the "Luke" gospel and Acts, much of the conflict has apparently been successfully muzzled for some two millenia. In fact, I believe that the recent viral spread to Europe and the United States of autocratic populism in the name of right-wing religious extremism can be traced back, for the most part, to the abject differences between the teachings of the real Jesus and those of many of Paul's followers. While Jesus seems to value, most of all, one's righteous and generous treatment of the human community, leading to his "Kingdom of G-d" on earth, too many of Paul's followers seem interested only in their own personal rewards in a magical "heavenly" vacation resort, somewhere in "outer space." While Jesus's followers believe in democratic principles and the inherently equal value of all human beings, so many of Paul's followers, just like fanatics of so many other religions, seem to feel that they are somehow superior simply because of special beliefs and solemn rituals. The question that followers of Donald Trump and fellow hypocrites in the Freedom Caucus and more than a few, as well, on the opposite side of the aisle, need to be asked is: "Do you really think Jesus would care about a person's religious beliefs at all as long that person treated others as equals, with dignity, respect, and compassion, no matter their origin, race, creed, sex or even their different, but equally insipid, political parties?"
Al Finkelstein
