Changes

==== (lost) Acts of Pilate ====

==== (lost) Acts of Pilate ====

The Acts of Pilate is a lost text, purportedly an official document (of the ''commentaii principis'') from Pilate to the Emperor Tiberius reporting events in Palestine.  It was mentioned by [[Justin Martyr]], in his ''First Apology'' (''c''. A. D. 150) to [[Antoninus Pius]], [[Marcus Aurelius]], and [[Lucius Verus]].  Justin said that his claims concerning Jesus' crucifixion, and some miracles, could be verified by referencing the official record, the "Acts of Pontius Pilate".<ref>Justin Martyr, ''First Apology'' 48</ref> With the exception of Tertullian, no other writer is known to have mentioned the work, and Tertullian's reference says that Tiberius debated the details of Jesus' life before the Senate, an event that is almost universally considered absurd.<ref>see Tertullian, ''Apology'' V.</ref>  However, Tertullian may not have been well informed about the work's genuine contents, and doubts about the supposed debate need not necessarily extend to the Acts of Pilate itself.   

The Acts of Pilate is a lost text, purportedly an official document (of the ''commentaii principis'') from Pilate to the Emperor Tiberius reporting events in Palestine.  It was mentioned by [[Justin Martyr]], in his ''First Apology'' (''c''. A. D. 150) to [[Antoninus Pius]], [[Marcus Aurelius]], and Lucius Verus.  Justin said that his claims concerning Jesus' crucifixion, and some miracles, could be verified by referencing the official record, the "Acts of Pontius Pilate".<ref>Justin Martyr, ''First Apology'' 48</ref> With the exception of Tertullian, no other writer is known to have mentioned the work, and Tertullian's reference says that Tiberius debated the details of Jesus' life before the Senate, an event that is almost universally considered absurd.<ref>see Tertullian, ''Apology'' V.</ref>  However, Tertullian may not have been well informed about the work's genuine contents, and doubts about the supposed debate need not necessarily extend to the Acts of Pilate itself.   

There is a later apocryphal text, undoubtedly fanciful, by the same name, which was likely inspired by Justin's reference.  It is highly unlikely that Justin's reference was to the known apocryphal text.<ref>For a discussion, see Daniel-Rops, ''Silence of Jesus' Contemporaries'', p. 14</ref>  And it would be unlikely that Justin would cite a document, one he claimed to be official and kept in the imperial archives, that was known to be fallacious or non-existent in a letter written to the emperor designed to defend Christianity.  Nonetheless, it is impossible to conclude any certain position about the text, given the obscure nature of the evidence.

There is a later apocryphal text, undoubtedly fanciful, by the same name, which was likely inspired by Justin's reference.  It is highly unlikely that Justin's reference was to the known apocryphal text.<ref>For a discussion, see Daniel-Rops, ''Silence of Jesus' Contemporaries'', p. 14</ref>  And it would be unlikely that Justin would cite a document, one he claimed to be official and kept in the imperial archives, that was known to be fallacious or non-existent in a letter written to the emperor designed to defend Christianity.  Nonetheless, it is impossible to conclude any certain position about the text, given the obscure nature of the evidence.