I
incense
Guest
The OT prophesies that Jesus’ bones will not be broken on the cross. I always pondered why His bones would require an exception. He was beaten bloody, nailed, suffocated, and killed. What’s so special about His bones that they shouldn’t be broken?
Then this was posted on another thread:
Any thoughts? Am I getting this right?
Then this was posted on another thread:
So the reason His bones weren’t to be broken is because He was to die by being pierced in the heart like a sacrifice. It’s not that the bones were special, but that He was not to die by suffocation by breaking His bones, but by piercing like traditional sacrifices. So a Roman could complete the sacrifice.Originally Posted by Huiou Theou
How quickly one forgets that Jesus was purchased for money – just as the lamb was purchased for sacrifice. Far more telling is to whom Jesus was Given – eg: to the Romans whom had no sacrifice. The scene at the foot of the cross is a Roman acting as priest thrusting the spear into the victim. It is the ritual of the passover which John is showing has been given to the Romans. This isn’t to convince Jews Jesus was dead --It’s more likely to shame them and recall that the sacrifice was prophecied to be offered by the Gentiles because God was unhappy with the sacrifice the Jews offered.
God wanted A CLEAN sacrifice always and everywhere.
Any thoughts? Am I getting this right?