Jesus' Real Life Passion

[Faith1960]

I know that Jesus suffered tremendously during his beatings, but does anyone know if it was as extreme and bloody as portrayed in The Passion of the Christ or was that the idea of Mel Gibson?

 

[itullian]

I know that Jesus suffered tremendously during his beatings, but does anyone know if it was as extreme and bloody as portrayed in The Passion of the Christ or was that the idea of Mel Gibson?

Don’t know, but seemed overdone.
?

 

[patrick457]

I know that Jesus suffered tremendously during his beatings, but does anyone know if it was as extreme and bloody as portrayed in The Passion of the Christ or was that the idea of Mel Gibson?

A short answer for now (I’ll go into depth later): Roman crucifixion was indeed a very brutal and shameful way to die, but Mel’s portrayal of it isn’t too historically (or for that matter, even physically) accurate.

I would say that personally, I think the scourging scene is a bit overdone.

 

[snarflemike]

What we do know is that the ancient Romans could torture and brutalize with the best (worst) of them.

 

[triumphguy]

The scourge:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
This sketch depicts a Roman Flagrum which was designed to quickly remove the flesh from the body of a victim.

The Romans would, according to custom, scourge a condemned criminal before he was put to death. The Roman scourge, also called the “flagrum” or “flagellum” was a short whip made of two or three leather (ox-hide) thongs or ropes connected to a handle as in the sketch above. The leather thongs were knotted with a number of small pieces of metal, usually zinc and iron, attached at various intervals. **Scourging would quickly remove the skin. **According to history the punishment of a slave was particularly dreadful. The leather was knotted with bones, or heavy indented pieces of bronze.

Sometimes the Roman scourge contained a hook at the end and was given the terrifying name “scorpion.” The criminal was made to stoop which would make deeper lashes from the shoulders to the waist. According to Jewish law (discipline of the synagogue) the number of stripes was forty less one (Deut. 25:3) and the rabbis reckoned 168 actions to be punished by scourging before the judges. Nevertheless, scourging among the Romans was a more severe form of punishment and there was no legal limit to the number of blows, as with the Jews.** Deep lacerations, torn flesh, exposed muscles and excessive bleeding would leave the criminal “half-dead.” Death was often the result of this cruel form of punishment though it was necessary to keep the criminal alive to be brought to public subjugation on the cross. The Centurion in charge would order the “lictors” to halt the flogging when the criminal was near death. **

bible-history.com/past/flagrum.html

Basically the scourge was meant to strip the skin off the accused’s back. Sounds bloody and brutal to me.

 

[ZoeyBdo]

I have to say that is a part of the movie that I cannot watch… the first time I saw the film in the theatre I cried and cried and cried… during that part and hid my eyes… I just couldn’t…

 

[patrick457]

The scourge:
http://www.indyprops.com/pp-flagrum4.jpg
This sketch depicts a Roman Flagrum which was designed to quickly remove the flesh from the body of a victim.

bible-history.com/past/flagrum.html

Basically the scourge was meant to strip the skin off the accused’s back. Sounds bloody and brutal to me.

Here’s another proposed reconstruction of a flagrum.

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/2693/cofntbig.jpg

 

[tqualey]

Hi, ZoeyBdo,

I, too, was very distressed by the graphic violence depicted by Gibson. But, given the nature of Christ’s suffering under the Romans, I think it is as accurate as a film could present.

Christ suffered greatly for our sins. We have a most Loving God!

God bless

I have to say that is a part of the movie that I cannot watch… the first time I saw the film in the theatre I cried and cried and cried… during that part and hid my eyes… I just couldn’t…

 

[patrick457]

As a follow-up to the previous post:

Yes, it is true that St. Isidore of Seville’s (admittedly quite late) Etymologies describe a pointed whip or rod called scorpio.

1. Verbera dicta, quia cum agitantur, aerem verberant. Hinc flagra et plagae et flagella, quia cum flatu et strepitu in corpore sonant. Nam plagae, quasi flagae; sed plagae et flagra primae positionis sunt, flagella autem per diminutionem dicta.
2. Anguilla est qua coercentur in scholis pueri, quae vulgo scotica dicitur.
3. Fustes sunt quibus iuvenes pro criminibus feriuntur, appellati quod praefixi in fossis stent; quos palos rustici vocant.
   …]
4. Virgae sunt summitates frondium arborumque, dictae quod virides sint, vel quod vim habeant arguendi; quae si lenis fuerit, virga est; si certe nodosa vel aculeata, scorpio rectissimo nomine, quia arcuato vulnere in corpus infigitur.
5. Ictus proprie flagellorum sunt, ab agitando vocati.

===

1. Whips are named verbera because, when agitated, they lash, verberant, the air. Hence flagra are lashes, plagae are blows, and flagella are whips, because they resound on the body with a breeze, flatu, and noise. Plagae is as if flagae; plagae and flagra are the primary use, and flagella is the diminutive.
2. Anguilla, “eel”, is the whip by which boys are corrected in schools, commonly called scutica.
3. Fustes, cudgels, are things by which young men are struck for their offences, named because they stand fixed in ditches, fosses; rustics call them pali, stakes.
   …]
4. Virgae, switches, are the end-branches of bushes and trees, named because they are green, virides, or because they have the power of censuring, vis arguendi. If it is smooth, it is virga; if knotty and prickly, it is very correctly called scorpio, since it inflicts a curved wound on the body.
5. Blows from whips are properly called ictus, from agitado, brandishing.

• Etymologiae, Book V, 27 (De poenis in legibus constitutis “Of penalties determined in the laws”), 14-16, 18-19

 

[patrick457]

Hi, ZoeyBdo,

I, too, was very distressed by the graphic violence depicted by Gibson. But, given the nature of Christ’s suffering under the Romans, I think it is as accurate as a film could present.

Christ suffered greatly for our sins. We have a most Loving God!

God bless

I personally think that one flaw in Mel’s film is I feel that he seems to focus a tad too much on the physical aspect of the Passion. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but as pretty much anyone knows, Jesus’ sufferings were more than just physical pain.

In fact, I notice this to be rather true amongst many popular studies of crucifixion: they almost always tackle it from the medical perspective. Based on personal experience, there aren’t much well-known studies of crucifixion, and specifically Jesus’ Passion, from other perspectives - such as literary or social or archaeological - intended for popular consumption, even though such would also be beneficial in our understanding of the practice. (At least, I could only name a handful like Martin Hengel’s Crucifixion, David W. Chapman’s Ancient Jewish and Christian Perceptions of Crucifixion, Sverre Böe’s Cross-bearing in Luke, and Shimon Gibson’s The Final Days of Jesus. If anyone knows more, I’ll appreciate it.)

While crucifixion was a very painful and excruciating (from ex cruciatus “out of the cross”) way to die, but with it also came emotional and mental suffering. I mean, if hanging naked and wounded on a gibbet in public view with ropes and/or nails through your hands and feet (and according to a few folks, with the possibility of a pointed spike (sorry for the expression) up your bottom) is not shameful, I don’t know what is.