Rhea

Not sure what you're saying. You mean he felt this suffering once he laid on the cross? In which case whyb would he sweat blood hours earlier? Or do you mean he finally realized what was going to happen once he lay on the cross. In which case why did he finally realize it in the garden, but not the day before that? Or the year before that?

You seem to be saying that the "real" suffering didn't start "until it was laid on him on the cross". But that mkes me wonder - so why the conversation in the garden?

spurly

Why the conversation in the Garden? He knew that the separation because of the sins of humanity being laid on him was coming, and it was coming soon. He was hoping for a way out. he was hoping that God had come up with another way to save the world.

But he hadn't. The blood of a perfect sacrifice was still needed. So Jesus would go through with the plan, even if it meant separation from God for the first time in eternity.

Kevin

lpetrich

Spurly:
Why do I believe the suffering of Jesus was worse than any other death? Two reasons. One is that when he died, he was dying the death of every man. When he died, he took the sin of every man, woman, boy and girl who ever lived upon himself.

Except that we are told that he did not really "die". And if he was really god, he could have jumped off of that cross.

Up to this point in his life he had been sinless, righteous, completely holy. ...

Saying that name-calling was a no-no and then turning around and doing a lot of name-calling?

Foaming at the mouth at those who would not listen to him?

Cursing a fig tree simply because it had not borne figs when he wanted it to?

Driving some demons into some pigs, which then proceed to stampede into a lake?

Throwing a big temper tantrum in the Temple?

Talking about breaking up everybody's families and how everybody ought to desert their families to follow him?

spurly

Who told you he didn't die. That's what happened on the cross. The spear of the soldier confirmed it. The Roman guard who knew death when they saw it said he was dead. He was dead. Who says he didn't die? Just curious.

Kevin

Rhea

But Spurly, you said
[quote]It didn't bother him before this time because his relationship with the Father was not severed. While he was on earth his sinlessness allowed him to continue living in perfect harmony with God. It was only when the sins of the world were laid on him at the cross that the relationship he had with God, which had been unbroken since the beginning of time, was going to be severed.
quote]

So I don't understand which it is. Does it not bother him until it happens, or is he bothered beforehand.

And if it's beforehand, then why does he get all wrought up on the night before. (Do you have mercy on your kids when they finally realize that something you've been telling them is coming for 37 years is suddenly making them sweat the night before it's due?) Why doesn't he have boughts of fear earlier?

YOu seem to be saying two contradicting things, I'm confused.

Christian

Hi Rhea,

I get to be crimson? That works, I’m a Field Artilleryman in my day job and red is the branch color of the Field Artillery. I suppose it could also represent the blood of Christ covering me on this thread.

OK. I submit that you are a very rare person in that regard. If it really were imminent that someone was going to turn your back into hamburger and then torture you to exhaustion and finally death … I suggest the reality of anticipating that would be worse than you think. But I realize you are being sincere and accept that your opinion is what you say it is.

He was also anticipating the spiritual suffering of the atonement … of taking the wrath of the Father over every sin ever committed. That would have been huge psychological stress, although it’s difficult for us to imagine that.

May I ask, then, what would qualify an event as “some of the worst suffering ever?” What exactly is your standard for making that category? If I look at 3 instances of horrible suffering, how would I know which of the 3 instances would be considered “some of the worst suffering ever” by you?

Jesus had supernatural foreknowledge of the event. In my analogy I was trying to replicate what foreknowledge must be like. I don’t think that Jesus watched crucifixions ever day. But He could mentally run the “video tape” of His own crucifixion any time He chose to. Foreknowledge increases the horror of a horrible event.

Can’t claim every day. It was common and well known, though. From this internet site:

“How common was crucifixion in the ancient world? Quite common, at least among the Romans. Though Roman law usually spared Roman citizens from being crucified, they used crucifixion especially against rebellious foreigners, military enemies, violent criminals, robbers, and slaves. In fact slaves were so routinely crucified that crucifixion become known as the "slaves' punishment" (servile supplicium; see Valerius Maximus 2:7.12). Appian tells us that when the slave rebellion of Spartacus was crushed, the Roman general Crassus had six thousand of the slave prisoners crucified along a stretch of the Appian Way, the main road leading into Rome (Bella Civilia 1:120). As an example of crucifying rebellious foreigners, Josephus tells us that when the Romans were besieging Jerusalem in 70 A.D. the Roman general Titus, at one point, crucified five hundred or more Jews a day. In fact, so many Jews were crucified outside of the walls that "there was not enough room for the crosses and not enough crosses for the bodies" (Wars of the Jews 5:11.1).”

There are many other references to primary sources for Roman crucifixion in that article, if you want to check them out.

For clarity, I am not making the claim that crucifixions happened every day in Jerusalem, or that Jesus watched crucifixions every day.

Thank you. I’m currently slotted to go to a 1 year Army school in Kansas this summer that should be a cushy job with lots of chance for family time. It will be a nice change up from Korea!

I do not disagree with you on those points. Those things would make it easier to endure, although not less painful.

If your definition of death is “cease to exist” then nobody has ever “died.”

What if I just say that Jesus experienced “physical death.” All biological functions in His body stopped, and the decay process started. Is that terminology acceptable?

Well first, neither Jake nor I would trivialize the suffering of the other person in that case. We would probably identify with each other and both complain bitterly. Misery loves company.

I don’t understand your need to trivialize Jesus’ suffering. Jesus is not in the business of trivializing anyone’s suffering. In fact He is the avenger of those who suffer unjustly.

I think that if Jesus met Bana she would identify with Him as a fellow sufferer, and Him with her. They would cry over it together, and then He would wipe her tears away. I suggest that you would have a very difficult time convincing Bana that Jesus didn’t really experience some of the dirtiest worst parts of humanity.

I’m not understanding your point here. Is it the “only to an extent” comment you are disagreeing with?

If so, then you are claiming that those particular factors completely mitigate suffering. That it’s not even suffering any more. And then you would be claiming that Christian martyrs did not suffer at all when they were tortured and executed.

Is that what you are claiming? I don’t want to misunderstand you here, but I am confused about your point.

Again I say that you are a rare person indeed, and ask you define precisely what characteristics put someone into the worst suffering category in your eyes? Jesus doesn’t meet your standard … so I am asking what your standard is? Thanks.

If such a tape is on the Internet and if it is used by atheists then I assert very strongly that exploitation is occurring. I’ll try not to get sidetracked on irrelevant characteristics of any examples you offer, but that was a very offensive example to me. You could have used it as an example without mentioning that her suffering is being broadcast to the world on demand 24 hours a day.

I will try not to get distracted again. But that example would have gotten a reaction from me no matter what the conversation.

…. continued ...

Christian

… continued

OK. I don’t understand how you can arrive at that conclusion, but I believe you that you have.

Jesus was fully, 100% human (and fully God). He experienced all the typical human weaknesses other than sin. Any human would experience that kind of stress in anticipation of what historians of that day described as the cruelest type of execution ever. From the article I linked to earlier:

Respectfully,

Christian

Christian

Lori,

I would ask you to clarify how my response was a strawman. If I was mischaracterizing Rhea’s position, please explain in what way? Thanks.

Let me see if I understand what you are saying here. Please correct me if I mischaracterize your position.

You acknowledge a category of suffering known as “worst possible suffering.” Right?

You claim that only people who have suffered physically more than Jesus are eligible for the “worst possible suffering” category. Right?

You claim that if the subset of people who have suffered more than Jesus hold a belief in resurrection, that belief disqualifies them from the category “worst possible suffering.” Right?

If I understand your argument correctly, then I must ask:
Who exactly does make the cut in your eyes?

But if I have understood the above two facts correctly you are denigrating the suffering of all people who believe they will be resurrected, and of all people who have suffered less than a Roman crucifixion.

Consider how much suffering that is: First, in the garden the night before He experienced a great deal of psychological stress. So much psychological stress that it produced hematidrosis … where severe anxiety causes the release of chemicals that break down the capillaries in the sweat glands. A small amount of blood is mixed with the sweat, but it also sets the skin up to be extremely fragile and very sensitive.

After staying up all night he was flogged by Roman soldiers. Floggings were usually 39 lashes, but often more at the whim of the soldier applying the blows. The whip was braided leather thongs with metal balls woven into them. The balls would cause deep bruises which would break open on later blows. The whip also had pieces of sharp bone woven in, which would cut the flesh severely. Often in Roman floggings the back would become so shredded that parts of the spine would become exposed. The beating would have shredded the flesh all the way from the shoulders down to the backs of the legs. History tells us that many people died from this type of beating before they could be crucified. At the very least the victim would experience tremendous pain and go into shock from loss of blood (hypovolemic shock). In this state of shock the heart races to pump blood that isn’t there, the blood pressure drops causes fainting or collapse, the kidneys shut down, and the person becomes very thirsty.

He carried the horizontal beam of the cross as far as He could before collapsing. Once they got to the execution site He was laid down with His hands outstretched on the horizontal beam. The horizontal beam was not yet attached to the vertical beam, which remained permanently in the ground. Pointed spikes that were 5-7 inches long were driven through His wrists onto the cross. The spikes went through the place where the median nerve runs, the largest nerve going into the hand. That nerve would have been crushed by the spike as it was pounded in. This would have been excruciatingly painful. It also would have rendered the hands useless. He was hoisted as the crossbar was attached to the vertical stake. Then the same type of spikes were driven through His feet into the vertical beam. The nerves in His feet would have been crushed and He would have experienced a similar type of pain. Then His arms would have immediately become stretched, probably about 6 inches, and both shoulders would have become dislocated.

Once hanging in the vertical position, crucifixion was an excruciatingly slow death by suffocation. The stresses on the muscles and the diaphragm put His chest in the inhaled position. In order to exhale He would have to push up on His feet so that the tension on the muscles would be eased for a moment. By doing so the spikes would tear through His feet, eventually locking up against the tarsal bones. After exhaling He could relax down and take another breath in. Then back up to exhale again. Every time He pushed Himself up He would scrape His bloodied back up and down the course wood of the cross. Eventually complete exhaustion would take over and He would not be able to push up and breath any more. As His breathing slowed down the carbon dioxide in His blood dissolved as carbonic acid, causing the acidity of the blood to increase. This led to an irregular heart beat, and then He died of cardiac arrest.

And all of this, every second of it, purely voluntary. He could have cried “uncle” at any point and ended it, but He willed Himself to endure it.

And you claim that any amount of suffering less than that doesn’t count as some of the worst suffering in humanity? With all due respect, that seems both irrational and uncaring to me.

Respectfully,

Christian

erehwon

Is it not sad that the gift of salvation through the crucifixion is crucified again and again. Jesus knew of his journey and that crucifixion was part of it. Was the crucifixion an act of
fear and punishment or was it an example of love. Was it because he so wanted to instil fear into mankind or because he so wanted to ressurect love into mankind. Did jesus perceive himself as persecuted, or was that mankinds perception? Jesus was persecuted and mankind judged the experience and has taught persecution, would not the best teaching be of the crucifixion be love. Was the example of the crucifxion about resurrection or seperation?

In our want to understand the crucifixion do we project our own fear onto it and in this projection miss the message of love. Then do we teach this message of fear as christianity. Does not fear cause separation. Do we forsake the message of Jesus by doing this.

Just wondering

Christian

Rhea,
None of the worst parts? I fail completely to understand how you can make such a claim. If someone reduced your back to hamburger, put a robe on you while spitting in your face and mocking you, and after the blood had congealed ripped the robe off of your body again opening the deep lacerations where your back used to be. If someone did that to you would you say “ah well, at least it wasn’t one of the worst things I could have experienced.”

And that was just the intro. How can you trivialize mutilating a live human body?

What if someone did that to one of your children (if you have children)? Would you still consider it just the old ho hum sort of everyday suffering? Nothing to merit an adjective like “horrible” or “great suffering?”

Please read through the medical description of a crucifixion again. You really don’t think that’s some of the worst man has to offer??? If someone did that to you, you really wouldn’t be impressed by the amount of pain you went through?

I’m not claiming that you took your argument to it’s logical conclusion. I was just pointing out what its logical conclusion is.

OK. But then what were you claiming?

Respectfully,

Christian