Final answer:
The emperor in question is likely Emperor Tiberius, who ruled during the time of Jesus' ministry. No historical document directly confirms any specific emperor's reaction to Jesus' kingship, but Roman emperors' general disdain for potential threats to their rule suggests Tiberius may have been troubled by the notion of Jesus as a king.
Step-by-step explanation:
The emperor who was not happy about Jesus' kingdom and reign was likely Emperor Tiberius, the reigning emperor during the time of Jesus' crucifixion. However, the given reference materials do not directly confirm the displeasure of any specific emperor regarding Jesus' kingdom, nor do they mention Marcellus in this context. The nature of Roman emperors to be hostile towards threats to their authority or new movements could imply that Jesus' teachings may have been seen as such a threat.It is important to distinguish the historical context from the narrative provided in the Gospels. Jesus was crucified under the rule of Pontius Pilate, the governor of Judea under Emperor Tiberius. The Gospels suggest that the concept of Jesus as the 'King of the Jews' was seen as a challenge to Roman authority, potentially eliciting a negative response from the emperor. Yet, historical records like that of Philo and Suetonius, which reference emperors like Caligula, Vespasian, Claudius, and others do not provide specific details about any emperor's reactions to Jesus' claim to a kingdom. These documents do, however, illustrate the various ways Roman emperors interacted with different groups and ideologies during their reigns.Conclusion Although historical documents can shed light on the general attitudes and policies of the Roman emperors, they do not offer a clear answer as to which emperor, if any, had specific discontent regarding Jesus. It is reasonable, however, to infer from the historical context that Emperor Tiberius, as the ruler during Jesus' time, may have been the emperor in question.