P
Pat_Payne
Guest
I was going to post this in another thread, when I realized that I’m not 100% sure it’s theologically kosher. But it sounds right, and I’d like to get some feedback to see if I’ve gone off the reservation somewhere. 
"No, I doubt that there is any reading like that. First off, the Romans were the ones who scourged Jesus – the Pharisees, Saducees, scribes and Sanhedrin (whom the evangelists are actually referring to when they use the term “the Jews” – Josephus Six-Amphora out in the Diaspora in Alexandria probably had no idea who Jesus was) wanted him crucified immediately and the scourging was Pilate’s desperate attempt to square the circle of not putting an innocent man to death yet keeping the Pharisees and others from stirring up trouble in Judea, which would have made him a target of Tiberius in Rome. If there was a “false religion” reading, it would have been the Roman pagan religion.
If you’re looking for a metaphorical reading, try this one on for size – Jesus was scourged both for our cowardice and our sins of the flesh. Pilate was a coward. As I’d mentioned above, he wanted to satiate the mob – just saying “he’s innocent, that’s final, and if you don’t clear out, I’ll send in the legions to thump your heads till you shut up about it” would have caused troubles that would have reached the ear of the Emperor Tiberius, who at that time was deep in his blood-purges in Rome (his trusted lieutenant and partner in crime, Sejanus, had himself been murdered, and anyone connected with him, by Tiberius in AD 29). Pilate probably had a well-grounded fear that failure to keep Judea, on the border with the Partians, quiet might make him liable to execution. And so he went along with the crowd.
Just as we do when we consent to sin. Rarely do we sin out of outright malice to God as the driving factor. Instead we consent due to psychological pressure, peer pressure or just plain weakness. But we still sin and we are culpable for it. If we really understood the magnitude of our offenses, and who we offend, we would see scourging as getting off lightly. And yet it is still a horrific punishment, that more often than not causes death by itself. One of the uses of a Roman scourging was to weaken victims of crucifixion so that they would die faster on their crux. Christ, the Son of God, willingly undertook the scourging to show us, weak and fallible humans that we are, how we should go. He was scourged horrendously, losing a considerable amount of His Precious Blood to the Romans’ flagella. He submitted, when He could have, with a flick of His finger, struck the Roman tormentors dead, or turned their whips to yarn, or called down legions of angels to wreak violent revenge. He did not, because He was and is obedient to the Father’s will, even unto death and suffering. The pillar for us is that surrender to obedience and avoidance of sin. Sometimes the denial of pleasure seems painful, just as the crucifixion of our passions may seem like the death of “fun”. But the rewards are so much greater if we persevere through to the Resurrection."
"No, I doubt that there is any reading like that. First off, the Romans were the ones who scourged Jesus – the Pharisees, Saducees, scribes and Sanhedrin (whom the evangelists are actually referring to when they use the term “the Jews” – Josephus Six-Amphora out in the Diaspora in Alexandria probably had no idea who Jesus was) wanted him crucified immediately and the scourging was Pilate’s desperate attempt to square the circle of not putting an innocent man to death yet keeping the Pharisees and others from stirring up trouble in Judea, which would have made him a target of Tiberius in Rome. If there was a “false religion” reading, it would have been the Roman pagan religion.
If you’re looking for a metaphorical reading, try this one on for size – Jesus was scourged both for our cowardice and our sins of the flesh. Pilate was a coward. As I’d mentioned above, he wanted to satiate the mob – just saying “he’s innocent, that’s final, and if you don’t clear out, I’ll send in the legions to thump your heads till you shut up about it” would have caused troubles that would have reached the ear of the Emperor Tiberius, who at that time was deep in his blood-purges in Rome (his trusted lieutenant and partner in crime, Sejanus, had himself been murdered, and anyone connected with him, by Tiberius in AD 29). Pilate probably had a well-grounded fear that failure to keep Judea, on the border with the Partians, quiet might make him liable to execution. And so he went along with the crowd.
Just as we do when we consent to sin. Rarely do we sin out of outright malice to God as the driving factor. Instead we consent due to psychological pressure, peer pressure or just plain weakness. But we still sin and we are culpable for it. If we really understood the magnitude of our offenses, and who we offend, we would see scourging as getting off lightly. And yet it is still a horrific punishment, that more often than not causes death by itself. One of the uses of a Roman scourging was to weaken victims of crucifixion so that they would die faster on their crux. Christ, the Son of God, willingly undertook the scourging to show us, weak and fallible humans that we are, how we should go. He was scourged horrendously, losing a considerable amount of His Precious Blood to the Romans’ flagella. He submitted, when He could have, with a flick of His finger, struck the Roman tormentors dead, or turned their whips to yarn, or called down legions of angels to wreak violent revenge. He did not, because He was and is obedient to the Father’s will, even unto death and suffering. The pillar for us is that surrender to obedience and avoidance of sin. Sometimes the denial of pleasure seems painful, just as the crucifixion of our passions may seem like the death of “fun”. But the rewards are so much greater if we persevere through to the Resurrection."
He truly did “turn the other cheek” in an extreme way. :sad_yes: