Barabbas, ‘son of god’

NETIZENS have been posting a meme about how people chose Barabbas over Jesus. It has been appearing on my newsfeed since “holy week.” I suspect it will continue circulating on the Internet until the midterm elections next month.

The meme goes on to say that 2,000 years later, people still tend to choose thieves and white-collar criminals over supposed people of conscience. Right off the bat, any self-respecting critical thinker would say the meme is loaded with political agenda – as if the political terrain in the Philippines isn’t fractious enough.

So, in the spirit of public service, I would like to share with you the context behind the Jewish people’s choice two millennia ago with the end in view that you stop sharing that ignorant meme. My source of information for this context is culled from the writings of Roman-Jewish historian, Titus Flavius Josephus.

First, let us start with his name. The “Bar” part of his name is actually the Aramaic version of “Fitz” and “Ben” in medieval Europe. It means “son of.” For instance, Fitzgerald and BenCyrus would mean sons of Gerald and Cyrus, respectively.

Barabbas, then, means son of Abbas. However, his full name is Yeshua Barabbas. Yeshua is a common Hebrew alternative name to Yehoshua or Joshua in the Second Temple period. Joshua, in turn, is where the name Jesus has been derived from. Loosely translated, Abbas means lion but for the Hebrew, it means god. So, Yeshua Barabbas translates to Jesus son of god.

If you are a Bible freak and find these translations ridiculous, you can look it up in Mathew 27:16-17 that gives the full name of Barabbas as “Jesus Barabbas” and this was most probably the name as originally written in the ancient texts.

With this information, it would be safe to posit that Pontius Pilate, the fifth governor of the Roman province of Judea, could have made the Jews choose between “Jesus son of god” and “Jesus of Nazarene,” son of a carpenter. More on this “choice” later.

Second, Barabbas was neither a bandit nor a thief. He was part of the Jewish armed resistance — the Zealots. They were a political movement in 1st century Second Temple Judaism which sought to incite the people of Judea province to rebel against the Roman Empire.

During King Herod’s regime over Galilee and Perea, which includes Judea, decreed to put the Roman insignia, an eagle, in all the synagogues across his realm. The Jewish people saw this as a desecration of their places of worship. Thus, the formation of the Zealots.

Barabbas was imprisoned for being a “lestes” (Greek for bandit) after leading a riot in Judea. He could not have been a thief since the Greek word for thief or robber is “kleptes.” The word bandit does not necessarily mean a thief but that the person belonged to a band or a group. In Barabbas’s case, the Zealots.

Also, thieves during that time weren’t executed publicly because they consider theft a petty crime. Being an insurrectionist, however, needed to be made as an example to other Jews not to rebel, ergo the crucifixion.

Joseph ben Caiaphas, the Jewish high priest who presided over the Sanhedrin trial of Jesus argued specifically that Jesus was claiming to be the “king of the Jews” as opposed to being the “son of god” because King Herod would care less if Jesus claimed to be the son of the Jewish god.

That’s is why the cross where Jesus was nailed bore the inscription “INRI,” which means Iesvs Nazarenvs Rex Ivdaervm or Jesus the Nazarene, King of the Jews.

This argument played into supporting the cause of the Zealots. The Jews would have preferred to choose a person actively fighting for their cause than Jesus who, years before, had been correcting high priests, questioned the Jewish dogmas, and even dismantled the stalls of traders in front of a synagogue and shooed them away. Jesus even publicly forgave a taxpayer and worked to heal the sick even during the Sabbath.

So, it is an understandable choice for an oppressed people at that time to choose a fighter over what they perceived to be a pacifist.

The vilification is understandable too since it still happens in contemporary history. Remember what the Americans called Macario Sacay and the last remaining Katipuneros? Yes, you guessed it right – bandits.

Now, this should’ve been the contents of the Barabbas meme. Enemies of the state who have been vilified 2,000 years ago are still being vilified as bandits today or in the modern jargon — terrorists. Pfft.

Who is the dummy?

LIKE other professions and vocations, we, journalists and media practitioners, belong to a community. At least, that’s what I believed in.

Having worked with national and international media organizations made me believe that. There are lots of organizations that help the local press. Like me, many local media practitioners know this. They have been aided in one way or the other.

These organizations fund pieces of training, seminars and yes, even bail money when media practitioners get into trouble with this country’s archaic libel law.

This is the reason why I felt so disappointed with some of my colleagues who just kept mum when Rappler executive editor Maria Ressa was arrested again last week.

Ressa may not be the most lovable of journos in the country but that’s not what journalism is about. Make no mistake about it, but what this insecure administration is doing to her and Rappler can happen to you and your outlet.

Most of them parroted this administration’s legalese bovine crap. It’s like these people don’t know how to use Google search. It’s like these people haven’t learned how this administration used legal proceedings to curtail the freedoms of Sen. Leila de Lima, booted out Supreme Court Chief Maria Lourdes Sereno, and many others.

Ressa was arrested because the complainant, the National Bureau of Investigation,, claimed that Rappler violated the Anti-Dummy Law in connection with its relationship with Omidyar Network.

It is disappointing that some veteran journalists and editors in Mindanao take this crap hook, line, and sinker. It is as if they haven’t attended seminars in Manila funded by the likes of Omidyar.

A simple Google search would show you that Omidyar is a philanthropic funding organization. Any media outlet could access funds from this organization. This organization gives grants and program-related investments. Their ledgers can be accessed at their website www.omidyar.com. Check it out and then you will realize that the charges they slapped Rappler are just a smokescreen to silence it.

As the fourth estate, media outlets are strategic organizations that tyrannical regimes shut down. This administration has successfully whipped into submission the legislative and judiciary branches. You would be naive if you think that the attack on Rappler is not an attack to press freedom.

Meanwhile, this administration has unabashedly partnered with the communist People’s Republic of China. In fact, it has been brandishing the communists’ investments in the Philippines. Now, I dare pose this question: Who is the real dummy here?