fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
Here is a paper I wrote on the crucifixion of Jesus. Any debate or discussion is welcomed.
The Crucifixion of Jesus
The Crucifixion is one of the foundational beliefs of Christianity. For me, it is one of the most interesting aspects of the life of Jesus. It is also one of the events of the life of Jesus that we can be sure that actually happened.
One can be certain that the crucifixion occurred for a few reasons. The first is that we have multiple independent attestation to the event. The four canonical Gospels all include the event. In addition to the Gospel accounts, we have Paul mentioning the crucifixion of Jesus as well.
More convincing though, in my opinion, is that the crucifixion story is embarrassing. Crucifixion, as according to Deuteronomy 21:22-23, was considered a curse. This is a belief that was also held by Jews in the first century as well. We know this from Paul, Galatians 3:13, who makes the belief clear: Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: 'Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree' [emphasis mine].
In addition, Jesus being crucified, and thus dying, ruled him out as being the Messiah. Before Christianity, the idea of a suffering Messiah that would die for the sins of others was not, as far as we know, had no place in the Jewish belief. Jesus dying ruled him out as the Messiah. Since he did not overthrow the Romans, and could not since he died, for most Jews, it was beyond laughable, and was blasphemy towards their God, to call Jesus the Messiah.
Even though the crucifixion is agreed to have occurred though, the actual circumstance surrounding the actual event are not fully agreed upon. The first discrepancy we see is on the day in which Jesus was crucified. We will start first with the event as described in the Gospel Mark.
According to the Gospel of Mark, Jesus was crucified on the day of Passover. This is the account that Christians have taken to be accurate, and for the most part, is the only one they are aware of. In Mark 14:12, we are informed of Jesus's disciples questioning him as to where they are to prepare the Passover meal. This tells us that the day in Mark 14:12 is the Day of Preparation for Passover, the day before Passover. In the following verses, we are told that the meal is prepared, and is eaten. The meal was eaten on Passover day. We are later told, in Mark 15:25, that Jesus is crucified, and died, on that same day, which was Passover day.
The Gospel of John relates the events a little differently. John tells us specifically what day Jesus was crucified on. John 19:14 tells us that the day in which Jesus was crucified, and died, was the Day of Preparation for Passover. Unlike Mark, John does not have Jesus sitting down with his disciples and partaking of the Passover meal. The reason is quite simple, as according to John, Jesus was crucified the day before Passover.
The reason for this discrepancy is theological in nature. The author of John was trying to convey a message, that Jesus was the sacrificial lamb that would take away the sins of this world. We see two accounts in John that we are told this; John 1:29 and John 1:35. It is logical for the author of John thus to change the date of the crucifixion of Jesus; by having Jesus crucified on the Day of Preparation for Passover, the same day that the sacrificial lamb was slaughtered, John was trying to convey the idea that Jesus was the sacrificial lamb for the world. Seeing the theological overtones in this account, we can say with little doubt, that the account in John is less accurate.
As a prelude to the crucifixion, we are told by the authors and Mark, Matthew, and John that Jesus was flogged (Mark 15:15, Matthew 26:27, John 19:1). Luke on the other hand does not mention this event during its passion narrative. However, that should not be taken that the author of Luke is suggesting it did not happen. The reason for this is that we see in Luke 18:31-33 (Jesus took the Twelve aside and told them, "We are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written by the prophets about the Son of Man will be fulfilled. He will be handed over to the Gentiles. They will mock him, insult him, spit on him, flog him and kill him. On the third day he will rise again.") that it was already stated that flogging would be a precursor to the death of Jesus.
Flogging was a common precursor to crucifixion. This may be another reason that Luke did not feel it necessary to state specifically that Jesus underwent flogging. People during the time the Luke wrote his account would have known that flogging was a precursor to crucifixion.
We are not told much about the flogging of Jesus. It has been assumed that he received thirty-nine lashings as the Jewish practice was to give forty lashed minus one (Deuteronomy 25:1-3; 2 Corinthians 11:24). There is no suggestion that this was true in the case of Jesus though. Instead, we know that Jesus was flogged by the Romans. Under the Romans, there was no limit as to how many lashes could be administered. This was left up to the decision of those who administered the lashings; the lictors (typically there were two lictors, but there are some accounts of up to six lictors). Normally, the lictors were not suppose to kill the victim; however, we do know that in certain cases, death did occur as a consequence.
As to the severity of the flogging of Jesus, we can not be completely sure. There is a reasonable chance that is was quite severe though. This would explain why Jesus died after only a relatively short time on the cross. However, we do have little to go on as Mark, Matthew, and John only tell us that he was flogged, and do not expand on that.
After the flogging, Jesus would have been expected to carry the cross to the place that was designated for crucifixion, Golgotha (Mark 15:21-22, Luke 23:26, Matthew 27:32-33, John 19:16-17). Contrary to popular depictions though, Jesus would not have been expected to carry the entire cross. Instead, only the crossbeam was carried.
In the accounts of Mark, Luke, and Matthew, (Luke and Matthew most likely having borrowed from Mark), we are told that a man named Simon from Cyrene was forced to carry the cross for Jesus. If Jesus truly had a severe flogging, this may have been a possibility as Jesus would have been weak. To support this idea, tradition has been created which states that during the journey to Golgotha, Jesus fell three times. However, this is not attested to in the Biblical account, and is later tradition.
The account in John tells us that Jesus carried the cross himself. Various apologetics have tried to reconcile the two differentiating accounts by explaining that Jesus first carried the cross, was weak from the flogging, and thus fell. After that, the Romans forced Simon to carry the cross. Since John does not actually state this, we can not assume that to be the case.
It is possible that Simon would have been forced to carry the cross of Jesus. The brief excerpt that we have of the instance (Mark 15:21- A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross) gives us little reason to assume that it was added for any specific reason.
The Crucifixion of Jesus
The Crucifixion is one of the foundational beliefs of Christianity. For me, it is one of the most interesting aspects of the life of Jesus. It is also one of the events of the life of Jesus that we can be sure that actually happened.
One can be certain that the crucifixion occurred for a few reasons. The first is that we have multiple independent attestation to the event. The four canonical Gospels all include the event. In addition to the Gospel accounts, we have Paul mentioning the crucifixion of Jesus as well.
More convincing though, in my opinion, is that the crucifixion story is embarrassing. Crucifixion, as according to Deuteronomy 21:22-23, was considered a curse. This is a belief that was also held by Jews in the first century as well. We know this from Paul, Galatians 3:13, who makes the belief clear: Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: 'Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree' [emphasis mine].
In addition, Jesus being crucified, and thus dying, ruled him out as being the Messiah. Before Christianity, the idea of a suffering Messiah that would die for the sins of others was not, as far as we know, had no place in the Jewish belief. Jesus dying ruled him out as the Messiah. Since he did not overthrow the Romans, and could not since he died, for most Jews, it was beyond laughable, and was blasphemy towards their God, to call Jesus the Messiah.
Even though the crucifixion is agreed to have occurred though, the actual circumstance surrounding the actual event are not fully agreed upon. The first discrepancy we see is on the day in which Jesus was crucified. We will start first with the event as described in the Gospel Mark.
According to the Gospel of Mark, Jesus was crucified on the day of Passover. This is the account that Christians have taken to be accurate, and for the most part, is the only one they are aware of. In Mark 14:12, we are informed of Jesus's disciples questioning him as to where they are to prepare the Passover meal. This tells us that the day in Mark 14:12 is the Day of Preparation for Passover, the day before Passover. In the following verses, we are told that the meal is prepared, and is eaten. The meal was eaten on Passover day. We are later told, in Mark 15:25, that Jesus is crucified, and died, on that same day, which was Passover day.
The Gospel of John relates the events a little differently. John tells us specifically what day Jesus was crucified on. John 19:14 tells us that the day in which Jesus was crucified, and died, was the Day of Preparation for Passover. Unlike Mark, John does not have Jesus sitting down with his disciples and partaking of the Passover meal. The reason is quite simple, as according to John, Jesus was crucified the day before Passover.
The reason for this discrepancy is theological in nature. The author of John was trying to convey a message, that Jesus was the sacrificial lamb that would take away the sins of this world. We see two accounts in John that we are told this; John 1:29 and John 1:35. It is logical for the author of John thus to change the date of the crucifixion of Jesus; by having Jesus crucified on the Day of Preparation for Passover, the same day that the sacrificial lamb was slaughtered, John was trying to convey the idea that Jesus was the sacrificial lamb for the world. Seeing the theological overtones in this account, we can say with little doubt, that the account in John is less accurate.
As a prelude to the crucifixion, we are told by the authors and Mark, Matthew, and John that Jesus was flogged (Mark 15:15, Matthew 26:27, John 19:1). Luke on the other hand does not mention this event during its passion narrative. However, that should not be taken that the author of Luke is suggesting it did not happen. The reason for this is that we see in Luke 18:31-33 (Jesus took the Twelve aside and told them, "We are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written by the prophets about the Son of Man will be fulfilled. He will be handed over to the Gentiles. They will mock him, insult him, spit on him, flog him and kill him. On the third day he will rise again.") that it was already stated that flogging would be a precursor to the death of Jesus.
Flogging was a common precursor to crucifixion. This may be another reason that Luke did not feel it necessary to state specifically that Jesus underwent flogging. People during the time the Luke wrote his account would have known that flogging was a precursor to crucifixion.
We are not told much about the flogging of Jesus. It has been assumed that he received thirty-nine lashings as the Jewish practice was to give forty lashed minus one (Deuteronomy 25:1-3; 2 Corinthians 11:24). There is no suggestion that this was true in the case of Jesus though. Instead, we know that Jesus was flogged by the Romans. Under the Romans, there was no limit as to how many lashes could be administered. This was left up to the decision of those who administered the lashings; the lictors (typically there were two lictors, but there are some accounts of up to six lictors). Normally, the lictors were not suppose to kill the victim; however, we do know that in certain cases, death did occur as a consequence.
As to the severity of the flogging of Jesus, we can not be completely sure. There is a reasonable chance that is was quite severe though. This would explain why Jesus died after only a relatively short time on the cross. However, we do have little to go on as Mark, Matthew, and John only tell us that he was flogged, and do not expand on that.
After the flogging, Jesus would have been expected to carry the cross to the place that was designated for crucifixion, Golgotha (Mark 15:21-22, Luke 23:26, Matthew 27:32-33, John 19:16-17). Contrary to popular depictions though, Jesus would not have been expected to carry the entire cross. Instead, only the crossbeam was carried.
In the accounts of Mark, Luke, and Matthew, (Luke and Matthew most likely having borrowed from Mark), we are told that a man named Simon from Cyrene was forced to carry the cross for Jesus. If Jesus truly had a severe flogging, this may have been a possibility as Jesus would have been weak. To support this idea, tradition has been created which states that during the journey to Golgotha, Jesus fell three times. However, this is not attested to in the Biblical account, and is later tradition.
The account in John tells us that Jesus carried the cross himself. Various apologetics have tried to reconcile the two differentiating accounts by explaining that Jesus first carried the cross, was weak from the flogging, and thus fell. After that, the Romans forced Simon to carry the cross. Since John does not actually state this, we can not assume that to be the case.
It is possible that Simon would have been forced to carry the cross of Jesus. The brief excerpt that we have of the instance (Mark 15:21- A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross) gives us little reason to assume that it was added for any specific reason.
