I think that Bermejo-Rubio is referring to the "fifth" bit about "the crucifixion of three people by the Romans" being "purely coincidential," where the questioner to Bermejo-Rubio has stipulated to its historicity but suggests that it need not be the source of meaning that Bermejo-Rubio finds in it.Fifth, in your final conjectures we have a good example of what Richard Carrier has called the possibiliter, ergo probabiliter fallacy. Perhaps the crucifixion of three people by the Romans was purely coincidental? Yes, perhaps, who knows? The historian, however, does not work with mere possibilities, but with the most likely scenario, and the most likely scenario is that of an actual relationship among the crucified men, for the reasons I have extensively set forth (incidentally, since I am arguing that a collective crucifixion is the umpteenth trace of Jesus’ involvement in anti-Roman ideology and praxis, I see an increasing number of confessionally-oriented people trying to do this kind of conjectures: perhaps, perhaps, perhaps… But -unlike charlatans- responsible historians trying to reconstruct the past do not rely on mere “perhaps”…).
That bit from the questioner (Ignacio González):
Fifth, "After all, the simplest and most probable reason why a group of men was crucified together by the Romans at the same time in the same place is that there was indeed an actual connection among them." Provided the crucifiction of three people around 30 AD near Jerusalem was real and not a literally device. También podría haber sido un ejercicio de pisuerguismo, ¿quién sabe? ("Tenemos a este problemático Jesús, sus compinches han huido, ¿los perseguimos, damos con ellos y los crucificamos todos juntos, como hemos hecho siempre?" "No, déjalo, aquí tenemos a otros dos revoltosos que cogimos hace un par de días. Mejor los crucificamos a los tres y nos ahorramos un paseo." "Cojonudo."
It could also have been an exercise in Pisuerguismo, who knows? ("We've got this troublemaker Jesus, his cronies have fled, do we chase them down, find them and crucify them all together, like we always do?" "No, leave it, we've got two other troublemakers here that we caught a couple of days ago. We'd better crucify all three and save ourselves a walk." "Great."
Pisuerguismo:
"Pisuerguismo" is a humorous or ironic Spanish term derived from the saying "aprovechando que el Pisuerga pasa por Valladolid" (taking advantage of the fact that the Pisuerga River passes through Valladolid). It refers to doing something unrelated or taking an opportunity that isn't directly connected to the original situation. It’s like saying, "while we’re at it" or "since we’re here anyway," to justify doing something convenient but unrelated.
Statistics: Posted by Peter Kirby — Thu Sep 05, 2024 4:15 am
