Crucifixion the Bodily Support - "Biblical Evidence" – Installment 4.

(Part 5d of the series: Crucifixion the Bodily Support)


Introduction.

What sort of gear was the instrument of Jesus' execution?

I am treating the four gospels as separate, and then will harmonize the whole lot, to see what differences come up.

Previously I looked at the “Biblical Evidences” in Mark, Matthew and Luke, and inn each case came to the conclusion that the instrument of Jesus’ execution could not be determined because different possible types could match its functions as described in predictions beforehand and by the prior meaning of the Greek verb that was used to denote “crucify”.

I am going into Acts here because it's the second half of a double volume dubbed Luke-Acts by New Testament scholars through their consensus.

D. Acts.

At the start of this “history,” which is more like a Greek Romance, in which the author informs Theophilus that he is to pick up where he left off, at the Ascension. Acts contain several passages, which are tidbits withing speeches or retorts that may inform us on the manner of the method of Jesus' suspension.

D.1. Peter addreses the crowd.

The first passage occurs in Acts 2:14-36: Peter addresses the crowd from the Upper Room where 120 disciples were (assuming they cold all fit!) and the Holy Ghost descended upon them all with tongues of fire on top of their heads and the whole lot of them speaking in tongues, by which Jews from every nation of the Eastern Hemisphere to whence they had dispersed and from which they had made their Pilgrimage for Pentecost. Someone dismisses the goings-on, claiming they were drunk and Peter says, No so! and starts to tell them exactly why they, the 120, were creating such a scene.

Within his speech are two passages, the first right after he quotes the Septuagint, Joel 2:28-32:

22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 23 This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men*, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. 24 But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.

* or men who have not the law, that is, the Torah.

Acts 2:22-24 NIV 

Now what did those wicked Jews with the help of men not given the Torah do? In verse 23, "[you] put him to death by nailing him to the cross" The phrase is in the Greek, προσπήξαντες ἀνείλατε: "having fixed [stuck in, planted, fastened, joined, connected,] on [towards, besides, on, at, by, besides, engagement or connection with], you did away with him [lifted him on high]." Nota bene: if one were to remove προσ- "on the side of, in the direction of" from προσπήξαντες, one ends up with πήξαντες, an aorist active participle conjugate of πήγνυμι, "stick or fix in, plant, pitch [a tent], stick fast, stick or fix on or upon, impale**, be bent upon, be immovable or fixed, fasten together, fit together, build, join or put together, make solid or stiff, freeze, curdle, gongeal, make oneself [cheese], crystallize, petrify, strike dumb, establish, etc." A wide variety of meanings of which the relevant ones would boil down to "nail to [something], impale on [something]." But what something? Although Strong's defines the word προσπήγνυμι as "impale (on a cross)," Peter does not tell us what the gear of Jesus' execution was at all! 

** Martin Hengel recognises πήγνυμι as an impalement verb for penal bodily suspension (Crucifixion 1977 ed., p. 69, n. 1).

Maybe we can define that gear by figuring out what "with the help of wicked men" actually is in the Greek. Obviously, it is translated in the English to imply the Roman authorities. But what does it actually say? The Greek phrase is, ἔκδοτον διὰ χειρὸς ἀνόμων "betrayed [given up] through [by, by the agency of, by the unassisted agency of] lawless [impious] hands." Well who did the betraying in the Gospels? Judas Iscariot of course! (Mark 14:43-46; Matt 26:14-16, 47-50; Luke 22: 47-48; John 18:1-3). So we have the Jews being the beneficiary of the help of the wicked hands of Judas Iscariot! In that all four gospels are in perfect agreement. 

Now you Christians will be screaming, "WHAT ABOUT THE ROMANS!!!??!!???"

Okay, what about the Romans? We know that in Luke 23:1-25, Jesus was on trial before Pontius Pilate, who fobbed him off to Herod [Antipas], who sent him back to Pilate. And then Pilate says to the Chief Priests and Teachers of the Law, i.e., the Jewish elites in Jerusalem, that neither he nor Herod found no basis for their charges. But they kept demanding for his death, screaming "Crucify, crucify him! (Σταύρου, σταύρου αὐτόν = Pile-drive, pile-drive him! [Fence with pales, fence him with pales! (!!!!)])" So in the end he gave into their demands and he, Pilate, surrendered Jesus into their will (δὲ Ἰησοῦν παρέδωκεν τῷ θελήματι αὐτῶν = And Jesus he betrayed [handed, gave, or delivered over, surrendered, gave up] to the will of them"). The Latin has: Iesum vero tradidit voluntati eorum = "Jesus he certainly surrendered [gave up, handed over, delivered, transmitted, consigned, surrendered treacherously] to the will of them". And what squalid scene do we have next? The same Jewish elites who demanded his death, muscle Jesus up to Golgotha, forcing Simon of Cyrene to carry his pole, and do the dirty work of crucifying [hanging and pile-driving, impaling and/or fencing] Jesus themselves. Then the Roman soldiers show up in verse 36. That's how Luke 23 is written in the Greek, Latin and English. So here Pilate's actions conform to ἔκδοτον διὰ χειρὸς ἀνόμων = "betrayed by the unassisted agency of lawless [impious] hands." 

Yet we are supposed to believe that Luke is having Peter tell us the impious hands are those of the soldiers, and not of Judas Iscariot and Pontius Pilate (only). This is what happens when you interpret Acts by a harmonized sense of the gospels, and not treating each one separate. Deceitful Christians! 

Back to Acts.

Peter goes on with his speech interspersed with two passages commonly believed to be written by King David -- (Septuagint, Psalm 16:8-11 and Psalm 110:1) -- and goes on to say King David is still dead and buried and they could visit his tomb, and claims that King David was talking about Jesus Christ:

“Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

Acts 2:36 NIV 

And what does the author of Acts use for "whom you crucified?" He uses the Greek, ὃν ὑμεῖς ἐσταυρώσατε "whom you fenced with pales [pile-drove, impaled]" which is how σταυρόω would be interpreted without any sense of crucifixion (except by a "fencing with pales", or a pile-driving, i.e., impalement with a stake) unless Acts was written after the turn of the Second Century CE, perhaps well after. 

Despite the misunderstanding, though, the Apostle Peter converts 3,000 that day. As if.


D.2. Peter and John are called before the Sanhedrin.

In Acts 3, Peter and John create a scene at the Temple of Yahweh in Jerusalem by magically healing somebody and at the beginning of Chapter 4 they are hauled into the Sanhedrin.

And in Peter's short defense speech, he says flatly,

It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed.

Acts 4:10 NIV 

Here, the Greek for "crucified" is, again, ἐσταυρώσατε = "you fenced with pales [pile-drove, impaled]." That would be the earlier meanings that inform crucifixion under this verb. Again, nothing here about nailing to a cross!


D.3. The Apostles are again reprimanded by the Sanhedrin.

In chapter 4 of this tale the Sanhedrin adjured Peter and John not to preach in Jesus' name. Since this is a story of heroism, the two naturally disobeyed and so they are dragged in again! The Sanhedrin are angry with them and the High Priest says to them, 

“We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name. Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man’s blood.”

Acts 5:28 NIV

To which Peter and the others reply,

29 “We must obey God rather than men! 30 The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the dead—whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree."

Acts 5:29, 30 NIV

Now here, the verbiage is different The Greek for "whom you killed by hanging him on a tree" reads: ὃν ὑμεῖς διεχειρίσασθε κρεμάσαντες ἐπὶ ξύλου = "whom you killed, having hanged him on a tree." The word is κρεμάσαντες, an aorist active participle of the verb κρεμάννυμι, "to hang or suspend (by any means)." According to the rabbinical code in the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 6:4) the method of hanging was this: 

A post is sunk into the ground with a beam protruding from it [at the top]. He places his hands together, one over the other and hangs him. Rabbi Yose says: The post is leaned against the wall, and he hangs him in the manner that butchers do. He is immediately untied [and let down].

Mishnah, Sanhedrin 6:4, eMishnah.com

"In the manner that butchers do" would have been with the wrists apart, with ropes. But this is, according to the same section in M. Sanhedrin, strictly for post-mortem hangings! Hanging alive could have been in a different manner entirely. It could have been by tying to a tree with ropes, nailing to a simple cross, or in the manner that the Roman government did, or in the manner of Ezra 6:11: impaled with a stake and lifted on high, and smitten by it. In fact, the Hebrew for "hang upon a tree" (תָּלָה עַל־ עֵֽץ) (talah 'al 'etz) throughout the Hebrew bible / Old Testament is translated into the Greek as (conjugates of) κρεμάννυμι ἐπὶ ξύλου and in the 1985 JPS Translation of the Tanakh as "impale on a stake," as I have shown in Impalements in Antiquity (3A). And David W. Chapman in Ancient Jewish and Christians Perspectives of Crucifixion hints that the Jews routinely hanged people alive, when legally warranted in the manner that the Roman government did. Which is NOT how it is shown in Church, or in all that Christian art and all those Hollywood films!

So here we still don't have a clear understanding what the gear of Jesus' execution was.


D.4 The conversion of the centurion, Cornelius Quoteright.

Okay, that last word is a tongue-in-cheek reference to an error at scripturetext.com. ;^)

This whole entire chapter is devoted to the interaction of Peter who is at Simon the Tanner's house in Joppa (present-day Yafo). He has a vision of vile, unclean animals on an enormous sheet and the LORD says to Peter, "Get up and eat," three times. Each time Peter protests and the LORD says to do it anyway and so he does. Then when he is thinking about the dream, the Centurion's servant-couriers, sent for Peter, arrive at Simon the Tanner's house after driving down from Caesarea Maritima along Israel Route 2 and fighting traffic along the Ayalon South and through the streets of Yafo ;^) (Ha, ha, ha! I'm mixing time periods 2,000 years apart here!) and ask that Peter accompanies him back home. He goes with them, and they all proceed north, fighting traffic again ;^) (okay, horse-and-chariot traffic), and finally get back to Caesarea. And Peter gives a gospel speech about Jesus Christ. Jumping ahead to verse 39: 

39 We are witnesses of everything he did in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They killed him by hanging him on a tree, 40 but God raised him from the dead on the third day and caused him to be seen.

Acts 10:39-40 NIV 

Now who kills Jesus in this yarn? The Jews. And how do they do it? By hanging him on a tree (κρεμάσαντες ἐπὶ ξύλου). Here we encounter the same exact verbiage that we encountered in Acts 5:29. The same uncertanties apply. 

D.5. Paul's angry lecture in Pisidian Antioch.

Now this chapter involves the First Missionary Journey of Saint Paul. First as Saul he goes to Cyprus, where he rebukes a certain Jewish "sorcerer and false prophet" named Elymas bar-Jesus (or Elymas bar-Yeshu: even the Greek texts indicate one or the other). He picks up the name Paul from the local Proconsul Sergius Paulus without so much as a thank-you (this is the location his name became Paul) and proceeds to Pisidian Antioch. There he sits down in one of the seats at the local Synagogue. And when one of the leaders of the synagogue, after the readings of selected passages from the Torah and the Nevi'im were finished, asks Paul if he would like to give a word of encouragement to his fellow Jews. And what a word of encouragement it was! He immediately goes into a diatribe, essentially picking up where Saint Stephen the Martyr left off. And he doesn't take long in getting around to the life of Jesus and condemning the Jewish leadership in Jerusalem for it. He has this to say: 

27 The people of Jerusalem and their rulers did not recognize Jesus, yet in condemning him they fulfilled the words of the prophets that are read every Sabbath. 28 Though they found no proper ground for a death sentence, they asked Pilate to have him executed. 29 When they had carried out all that was written about him, they took him down from the tree and laid him in a tomb.

Acts 13:27-29 NIV

Now here Paul says the instrument of Jesus' execution was some kind of "tree" for he said "After they had carried out all that was written (ὡς δὲ ἐτέλεσαν πάντα τὰ περὶ αὐτοῦ γεγραμμένα = but when they carried out [fullfilled, accomplished, executed, performed (i.e., did the dirty work)] all that was written about him), they took him down from the tree (καθελόντες ἀπὸ τοῦ ξύλου = having taken down [pulled down, deposed , dethroned , fetched down as a prize or booty] from the tree [gallows, beam, stake]), and put him in a tomb (ἔθηκαν εἰς μνημεῖον = they placed [laid, put] into a tomb). 

So we still have the uncertainty that we had encountered in Acts 2:23, 5:29-30 and 13:39-40, especially so here in Acts because the Greek verbiage is (a) just as congruent for impaling the criminal on the ground and lifting him on high so he may be smitten by the pale, and (b) the hanging on a tree business is now interpreted and accepted by (at least parts of) the Jewish community as impaling on a stake, and could have been and probably as such, or as whatever the Romans did, by the Second Temple Jewish community.

D.6. Conclusions.

And so here is where I draw my conclusions on what Acts is saying about the gear of Jesus' execution:

1. It was designed so one could lifted up, either onto it or by it, or by one of its constituent parts. 
2. It was designed so that one was fastened to it or fixed on/by it. 
3. It was designed so that one could hang on it. 
4. It was designed so that people had to take the body down in order to remove the body from it. 
5. The use of σταυρόω indicates that a "fencing with pales", or a "pile driving (impalement)" is going on, or both.

It appears the gear of Jesus' execution would be:

1. An impaling stake. 
2. An ordinary pole with a blunted, smoothed spike that the condemned had to sit on. 
3. A two-beam or two-pole cross with or without the same kind of spike. 
4. An overhead beam supported on two poles, from which the condemned hanged, with or without a stake in the middle, on which the victim would be impaled. 

And another conclusion:

This was all supposed to happen when Pontius Pilate was the Prefect of Judaea (after 18 to 36 CE). Which means he and he alone would have had the ius gladii, the supreme legal power including the power of the sword, which was taken from the Judaean authorities in 6 CE. Which means, of course, that the execution of Jesus by the Jews in Luke-Acts isn't historical, it isn't true, it's just astounding Anti-Semitic rubbish.

Hat tip to Kenneth Humphries. ;^)

Next and last up: John.

Crucifixion the Bodily Support - "Biblical Evidence" – Installment 3.

(Part 5c of the series: Crucifixion the Bodily Support)


Introduction.

What sort of gear was the instrument of Jesus' execution?

I am treating the four gospels as separate, and then will harmonise the whole lot, to see what differences come up.

Previously I looked at the “Biblical Evidences” in Mark and Matthew, and came to the conclusion that the instrument of Jesus’ execution could not be determined because four possible types could match its functions as described in predictions beforehand and by the prior meaning of the Greek verb that was used to denote “crucify”.

C. Luke.

There are several passages in this “history” in which the author admits to a certain Theophilus (friend of God) that he is not an eyewitness (Luke 1:1-4) that give us clues as to what the gear of Jesus' execution was imagined to be.

C.1. "He must take up his pole."

The first passage occurs in Luke chapter 9 verses 18-27, as Jesus questions his disciples who and what the crowds thought him to be, and who and what they the disciples themselves though him to be. Peter replies, “The Christ of God.” Then he warns them not to tell anybody because:

…“The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.”
Then he said to them all: “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross (σταυρὸν) daily and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will save it. What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit his very self? If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.”

Luke 9:22-27 NIV

Here again, as in Mark and Matthew, σταυρὸν would probably mean "pole" as in the patibulum or crossarm of a two-pole cross, simple or single-horned, or of an impaling stake, or of a simple pole, to which one is nailed or otherwise fixed and left to die. Except here Luke inserts the words daily (καθ' ἡμέραν "each day") which symbolizes something far more symbolic: the figurative “crucifying (or hanging or impaling)” the flesh and killing the desires thereof (Galatians 5:24, 6:14). And it is viewed as a positive thing! It is entirely without parallel outside the New Testament and Christian writings expounding on the subject; in some ancient Jewish and Pagan sources like Cicero, Seneca Minor and Philo, a figurative crucifixion was seen as a bad thing, for example., the “fixing” of the soul to the body or a person to his desires like a cruciarius literally fixed and/or fastened onto his instrument of execution.

C.2. No request by the Sons of Zebedee or their mum.

The passages about the twelve sitting on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel, and about those who would be the greatest has been surgically removed from this passage and deftly spliced into the narration of the Last Passover Seder or Last Supper (Luke 22:24-30). This of course, obviates the need to address the request of James and John the sons of Zebedee with a foreshadowing of the Crucifiction. (Mark 10:40, 45; Matthew 20:23,28).

Which means, of course, that the author of Luke appears to be avoiding the subject of sitting (καθίζω "to sit, cause to sit, take one's seat, settle, sink down") on the cross or pole.

C.3. "And then they fenced him with pales"

Some scholars like Martin Hengel (Crucifixion, p.25) state that the Gospels contain the most detailed accounts of a crucifixion. They do not. All they have is a simple statement that they did. Not how.

And Luke is no exception. We start again in the Prefect Pontius Pilate’s court:

He released the man who had been thrown into prison for insurrection and murder, the one they asked for, and surrendered Jesus to their will. As they led him away, they seized Simon from Cyrene, who was on his way in from the country, and put the cross on him and made him carry it behind Jesus. A large number of people followed him, including women who mourned and wailed for him. Jesus turned and said to them, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children. For the time will come when you will say, ‘Blessed are the barren women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ Then

“‘they will say to the mountains, “Fall on us!”
and to the hills, “Cover us!”’

For if men do these things when the tree is green, what will happen when it is dry?”

Two other men, both criminals, were also led out with him to be executed. When they came to the place called the Skull, there they crucified him, along with the criminals—one on his right, the other on his left. Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” And they divided up his clothes by casting lots.

Luke 23:25-34 NIV

Again there is a lot of detail about what went on before. Delivering the prisoner over to the will of the Jews, and now the Jews (!) leading him out to be crucified, making Simon of Cyrene carry his cross (σταυρὸν - pole), Jesus preaching to and prophesying at the masses of the city including weeping women (shades of women weeping for Tammuz!), arriving at Golgotha with two other criminals to be executed (ἀναιρεθῆναι) and then there they crucify him (ἐκεῖ ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτὸν). And they crucify the two others, one on his right, and one one his left, meaning Jesus is most conspicuous in the middle. And after that they gambled over his clothes. Now here, the author openly calls Jesus a criminal! Or at least that is how the sentence comes off. The Greek reads: Ἤγοντο δὲ καὶ ἕτεροι κακοῦργοι δύο σὺν αὐτῷ ἀναιρεθῆναι” (And were led with him two other criminals to be put to death / to be lifted up). The verb ἀναιρεθῆναι is in the aorist tense, infinitive case, passive voice, and could just as easily or more easily mean, “to be raised, taken up, lifted.” So we have here the first detail besides the definitions of the verb σταυρόω itself and it indicates that crucifixion (inexplicaply this time by the Jews instead of the Romans as we expect) involves lifting, hoisting. 

And again, the basic meaning of the verb σταυρόω applies here: "impale on [a] cross", according to the Greek-English Lexicon in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. A pole or pale will do as well. And of course, we have the LSJ which defines σταυρόω as: "to fence with pales" and Thucydides The Peloponnesian War 7.25.7 defining the verb as: "to drive piles". So despite the lifting, these meanings cannot be ruled out. 

Luke does not have the Roman soldiers offer Jesus vinegar – yet!

Now one would think the soldiers would have been the ones doing the sorry business of crucifixion, except Luke indicates the Jews did it, by carelessly or cleverly using a chain relative pronouns back to their antecedent clearly identified as “the chief priests, the rulers and the people” (Luke 23:13 NIV).

Now despite not repeating the Sons of Zebedee incident and the foreshadowing of the Crucifiction therein, the author of Luke does include the two robbers. Now ‘Luke’ doesn’t say this, but if they were "seated" on poles (σταυρούς) under lesser charges (armed robbery) as they would have been in Mark and Matthew what about the one crucified under the charge of crimen maiestatis (high treason) as "The King of the Jews?" He would have to sit, too. Remember, the acuta crux that Tertullian called a sedilis excessu was there not to alleviate the suffering of the crucified, but to introduce horrible pain… and completely humiliate the condemned, utterly.

Jumping ahead to verse 39:

One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: “Aren’t you the Christ? Save yourself and us!”

Luke 23:39 NIV

Now Luke confirms the clue that condemned persons to be crucified were lifted up, by showing once the job was done, the criminals were hanged (κρεμασθέντων “having been hanged”, from κρεμάννυμι, “hang”). The verb ordinarily includes ἀποτυμπανισμός (apotympanismos) (Artayctes: Herodotus Histories 7.33.1, 9.120.4, 9.122.1) crucifixion as practiced in the late 70s BCE (a Roman POW and 6,000 captive rebellious slaves: Appian Bella Civilia 1.119,120) and impalement (Polycrates: Herodotus Histories 3.125.3,4; Onomarchus: Diodorus Siculus Library of History, 16.35.6, 16.61.2) as valid means of hanging.

C.4. The Mockery.

Now here the mockery is far different from that in Mark and Matthew. Here, no one dares Jesus to “Come down from the cross!” It is as if the author of Luke knows that ordinarily, or at least according to mark and Matthew, to come down of the cross or pole, the cruciarius has to lift himself off of the sedilis excessu in order to dismount himself, and come down to the ground, and he does not wish to acknowledge this. But he already let the cat out of the bag, so to speak, by using a conjugate of σταυρόω. And so the nature of the mockery is very different:

The people stood watching, and the rulers even sneered at him. They said, “He saved others; let him save himself if he is the Christ of God, the Chosen One.” The soldiers also came up and mocked him. They offered him wine vinegar and said, “If you are the king of the Jews, save yourself.”

There was a written notice above him, which read: THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: “Aren’t you the Christ? Save yourself and us!”

Luke 23:35-39 NIV

Now here the mockery is far different and rather astounding! The masses were looking on while their rulers, who surely have better things to do, were now mocking him, saying, “let him save himself!” (σωσάτω ἑαυτόν). Then the soldiers finally show up, coming up to him and mocking him. And what do they offer him? Vinegar. And what do they challenge him to do? They challenge him “to save yourself!” (σῶσον σεαυτόν). Now let us jump ahead to the two others hanging with him. The dare one of them calls out is, “Save yourself and us!” (σῶσον σεαυτὸν καὶ ἡμᾶς). In the Greek, σωσάτω and σῶσον are derived from σῴζω, “save from death, keep alive, keep safe, preserve”. Luke's verb choice still shows the gear of Jesus' execution was lethal and impossible to remove one's self from, but it appears to be more vague than Mark and Matthew's chosen verb καταβαίνω "step down, dismount" would be, regarding the existence of a seat on the cross.

And of course this is just a set piece for the well-known penitent thief on the cross, shown slightly above to the left.

C.5. Where was the Sign?

Now after they crucified Jesus, where did the Roman soldiers the Jews install the sign bearing his name and charge of crimen maiestas?

There was a written notice above him: THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Luke 23:38 NIV

The Greek for verse 38 is: "ἦν δὲ καὶ ἐπιγραφὴ ἐπ' αὐτῷ Ο ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ ΤΩΝ ΙΟΥΔΑΙΩΝ ΟΥΤΟΣ." Transliterated as: "Moreover there was also an inscription (on / at / near / over / against / upon / behind / in dependence on) him, THIS, THE KING OF THE JEWS." Now according to the author Luke, the titulus could have been placed (Gk. ἐπί) upon, above, behind, against, in dependence on him (the last with a chain), It does not define clearly the structure of the gear of Jesus’ execution, if you ask me.

C.6. The Deposition.

Again, Joseph of Arimathea asks Pilate for the body of Jesus, and Pilate agrees. Josephus takes down the body, wraps it and lays it in an unused tomb just like in the other three gospels. The removal of the body from the execution gear is as follows:

Then he took it down, wrapped it in linen cloth and placed it in a tomb cut in the rock, one in which no one had yet been laid.

Luke 23:53 NIV

The Greek for “took” is καθελὼν, a conjugate of καθαιρέω, “take down, put down bring down, depose, dethrone, fetch down as a reward or prize, take and carry off.” Again, Joseph may be doing this for the Sanhedrin in this Gospel, but we don’t have a Roman guard from the cohort that guards the Temple (Josephus Antiquities 20.5.3, Wars of the Jews 2.12.1) guard the tomb! And the Luke may be acknowledging a common Christian view that the gear of Jesus’ execution may also have been his “throne.”

C.7. "It is I, myself!"

This scene is after the Resurrection in Luke's story, after he appeared on a highway to and had supper (lit,: broke bread) with two others, Jesus appears to the whole assembled eleven in a room right after the two told the other nine the news:

While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.”

They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost. He said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds? Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.”

When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, “Do you have anything here to eat?” They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate it in their presence.

Luke 24: 36-44

Now here he shows them his hands and feet to prove that he was a living human with flesh and bones, and then he eats some broiled fish.

What do we make of this, unless this story's purpose was wholly theological?

First, there is no evidence of nails. Second, there is no evidence of a wound from an impalement stake (those things would transfix the body like fish on spits, or a roast lamb on a spit. It also shows that in this case any acuta crux (sedilis excessu) attached to the pole, cross, or frame did not do lethal damage to any internal organs, particularly the lower G.I. tract.

C.8. Conclusions.

And so here is where I draw my conclusions on what Mark is saying about the gear of Jesus' crucifixion:

1. It might have been or included a pole one wore on one’s death march.

2. It was designed so one could lifted up, either onto it or by it, or by one of its constituent parts.

3. It was designed so one could hang on it.

4. It might have been designed so that a sign could be placed on top or alternatively the sign was placed on a separate pole near it.
5. The use of σταυρόω indicates that a "fencing with pales", or a "pile driving (impalement)" is going on, or both.

6. There was no mention of wounds.

7. Lethal damage from an impaling stake is not plausible. If the gear of Jesus' execution had an acuta crux typical of Roman devices, the point was blunted and the spike itself smoothed.

It appears the gear of Jesus' execution would be:

1. An ordinary pole with a blunted, smoothed spike the condemned had to sit on.
2. A two-beam or two-pole cross with the same kind of spike.

3. An overhead beam supported on two poles, from which the condemned hanged, with or without a stake in the middle on which the condemned was impaled (but without internal damage).

Next up: Acts.

Crucifixion the Bodily Support - "Biblical Evidence" – Installment 2.

(Part 5b of the series: Crucifixion the Bodily Support)


Introduction.

What sort of gear was the instrument of Jesus' execution?

I am treating the four gospels as separate, and then will harmonize the whole lot, to see what differences come up.

Previously I looked at the “Biblical Evidences” in Mark, and came to the conclusion that the instrument of Jesus’ execution could not be determined because four possible types could match its functions as described in predictions beforehand and by the prior meaning of the Greek verb that was used to denote “crucify”.

B. Matthew.

There are several passages in this tale that give us clues as to what the gear of Jesus' execution was imagined to be.

B.1. "He must take up his pole."

The first passage occurs in Matthew chapter 10, as Jesus sends out the Twelve to preach round about Galilee and gives them authority to drive out devils and heal the sick. He segues into the cost of discipleship and they might be arrested and even killed. And then he says families will break up because of the sword he will bring upon the Earth, finishing up with saying that those who love their biological family more than him are not worthy of him. Then he says this:

… and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

Matthew 10:38-39 NIV

Here again, as in Mark, σταυρὸν would probably mean "pole" as in the patibulum or crossarm of a two-beam or two-pole cross, simple or single-horned, or as in an impaling stake, or as in a simple pole, to which one is nailed or otherwise fixed and left to die. Of course, the last type of pole would have to be of a small enough thickness and short enough length to be portable. This, of course, precludes the Jehovah's Witnesses' stake because it’s too long and far too big in diameter. A heavy two-beam cross made of 6 x 6 or larger dimensional lumber is also precluded.

The second passage occurs in Matthew 16 and the scene there is identical with the scene in Mark chapter 8. Jesus predicts his death that he must suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the Torah, and be killed and rise again the third day. Peter objects and Jesus sternly reprimands him. And again he tells the whole crowd of disciples around him,

“If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it.

Matthew 16:24, 25 NIV

Again, the Greek for “cross” is σταυρὸν, "pole". And the author indicates that he knows that taking up one’s “pole” is the beginning of one’s death march, escorted by his executioners.


B.2. "Grant that these sons of mine may sit."

Again, Jesus makes his second prediction that he will be condemned to death, be handed over to the goyyim, who will mock him, spit on him, flog him and kill him. This time they will crucify him (as opposed to just killing him in Mark 10). And then he will rise again on the third day.

And then we go right into the scene between Jesus and Mrs. Mary Zebedee the mother of James and John, the Sons of Zebedee.

Then the mother of Zebedee’s sons came to Jesus with her sons and, kneeling down, asked a favor of him.

“What is it you want?” he asked.

She said, “Grant that one of these two sons of mine may sit at your right and the other at your left in your kingdom.”

“You don’t know what you are asking,” Jesus said to them. “Can you drink the cup I am going to drink?”

“We can,” they answered.

Jesus said to them, “You will indeed drink from my cup, but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared by my Father.”

Matthew 20: 20-23 NIV

And then after this Jesus calls the other ten, who are indignant, together and told them if they wish to be great ones among themselves and their followers, they must be their subjects' servants, not the other way around. He then concludes this with another premonition of his death, "that the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

Now the reference to "the baptism that I am baptized with" and "the cup I shall drink" is an allusion to his up-coming sufferings. Otherwise, why does he ask, "Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will” at Gethsemane? Because the cup is the cup of suffering that he must drink during his illegal trial before the Sanhedrin, his legal trial before Pilate, his floggings and tortures and even the crucifixion. And the baptism? It could very well be his death, for in Romans 6:3, we have Paul asking his readers if they knew that those who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death. After all, baptism back then was immersion and if the person dunking you didn't lift you back up, you'd drown... and be immersed in death, not just water.

Now what about the ones sitting at his right and at his left when Jesus comes into his glory? Well notice he said if one wished to be great, one has to serve. Which means his ultimate service is "giving his life for many." Which means of course, he is foreshadowing his crucifixion with two highwaymen, that is, two armed robbers, one on either side, so that when he comes into his glory, it will be on an Roman execution pole, as I have explained in more detail in my article about Mark.

And what is this about sitting (καθίζω "to sit, cause to sit, take one's seat, settle, sink down") at his right and at his left? Again, what Maecenas preferred and Seneca rebuked his verse for (Epistles101:10-14) applies here, as I have also gone into further detail previously.

What Mrs. Zebedee was asking of Jesus for her two sons, and didn't know it, and they didn’t know it either, was for them to "sit on" or rather "ride"  the crosses, poles or pales the two armed robbers were going to "sit on." For they were already told that they were going to take their seats on actual royal thrones in the World to Come, judging the Twelve Tribes of Israel (Matthew 19:16-30).

B.3. "And then they fenced him with pales"

Some scholars like Martin Hangel (Crucifixion, p. 25) state that the Gospels contain the most detailed accounts of a crucifixion. They do not. All they have is a simple statement that they did. Not how.

And what Matthew says, seems to be copied line-for-line from Mark:

Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.

Then the governor’s soldiers took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole company of soldiers around him. They stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him, and then twisted together a crown of thorns and set it on his head. They put a staff in his right hand and knelt in front of him and mocked him. “Hail, king of the Jews!” they said. They spit on him, and took the staff and struck him on the head again and again. After they had mocked him, they took off the robe and put his own clothes on him. Then they led him away to crucify him.

As they were going out, they met a man from Cyrene, named Simon, and they forced him to carry the cross. They came to a place called Golgotha (which means The Place of the Skull). There they offered Jesus wine to drink, mixed with gall; but after tasting it, he refused to drink it. When they had crucified him, they divided up his clothes by casting lots.

Matthew 27:26-35 NIV

Notice they have a lot of detail about what went on before. Flogging, delivering the prisoner over to the soldiers, mocking him, leading him out to be crucified, making someone else, that is, Simon of Cyrene carry his cross (σταυρὸν - pole), arriving at Golgotha (Κρανίου Τόπος, lit.: Place of the Cranium), the refused offering of a tincture of wine and gall, and then they crucify him (καὶ σταυροῦσιν αὐτὸν). And after that they gambled over his clothes.

No details are given how Jesus was crucified. Just the use of the verb σταυρόω "impale on [a] cross", according to the Greek-English Lexicon in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. And of course, we have the LSJ which defines σταυρόω as: "to fence with pales" and Thucydides The Peloponnesian War 7.25.7 defining the verb as: "to drive piles".

So we have not a single clue as how the Roman Soldiers crucified Jesus, except the basic definition of the verb σταυρόω. Not one clue as to the nature of the structure of Jesus' execution.

And instead of a tincture of wine and myrrh, Matthew says the Roman soldiers gave Jesus a tincture of wine and gall (χολῆς “bile, cuttle-fish ink, a disgust”). The author of Matthew is invoking Psalm 69:21 as a prophecy here: “They put gall in my food and gave me vinegar for my thirst.”

B.4. Where was the Sign?

Now after they crucified Jesus, where did the Roman soldiers install the sign bearing his name and charge of crimen maiestatis?

And sitting down, they kept watch over him there. Above his head they placed the written charge against him: this is jesus, the king of the jews.

Matthew 27:36, 37 NIV

The Greek for verse 37 is: "καὶ ἐπέθηκαν ἐπάνω τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ τὴν αἰτίαν αὐτοῦ γεγραμμένην ΟΥΤΟΣ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΙΗΣΟΥΣ Ο ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ ΤΩΝ ΙΟΥΔΑΙΩΝ." Transliterated as: "And they put* over the head of him of the accusation of him written**: THIS IS JESUS, THE KING OF THE JEWS." Now the titulus was placed above his head, and the Greek implies it was placed on something that would keep it there.

* also placed, laid, applied
** also inscribed, engraved, scratched

B.5. And Who Were with Him?

If you recall Matthew 20: 20-23, Mrs. Zebedee came up with her two sons James and John to Jesus and asking that they get to sit beside him one at his right and the other at his left, naively thinking that he was speaking of the sitting on his throne in the World to Come. In reply, Jesus said it was outside of his power to grant their request, for the seats were reserved for those for whom it was prepared. This, of course, was an illusion to his crucifixion.

And who were the two to sit at his right and at his left, for whom it was prepared?

Two robbers were crucified with him, one on his right and one on his left.

Matthew 27:38 NIV

That is right, the two robbers. And if they were "seated" on poles (σταυρούς) under lesser charges (armed robbery) what about the one crucified under the charge of high treason as "The King of the Jews?" He has to sit, too. Remember, the acuta crux "pointed stake" that Tertullian called a sedilis excessu "projection of a seat" was there not to alleviate the suffering of the crucified, but to aggravate it by introducing horrible pain… and completely humiliating the condemned, utterly. If the Romans dealt this part of the extreme punishment to those convicted with lesser charge, they certainly would have subjected with this thing those in the same group convicted of a greater charge.


B.6. The Mockery.

Then there are the insults heaped on Jesus.

Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, “You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! Come down from the cross, if you are the Son of God!”

In the same way the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders mocked him. “He saved others,” they said, “but he can’t save himself! He’s the King of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, ‘I am the Son of God.’” In the same way the robbers who were crucified with him also heaped insults on him.

Matthew 27:39-44 NIV

The part of the insults that I will focus on is the taunts "save yourself! Come down from the cross!" (σῶσον σεαυτὸν… καὶ κατάβηθι ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ) in verse 40 and "He’s the King of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross" (βασιλεὺς Ἰσραήλ ἐστιν. καταβάτω νῦν ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ) in verse 42. In verse 40 the Greek transliterates as: - "save yourself,… and come down from the pole." The relevant line in verse 42 transliterates from the Greek as: "King of Israel he is. Let him come down now from the pole."

Now, in the Koine Greek the verbs, shown for "come down" are conjugated from καταβαίνω. As I have said before, in the Scott-Liddell Greek-English Lexicon, if one were to replace "horse" (ἵππου), "carriage" (ἁρμαμάξης) or "chariot" (δίφρου or ἁρμάτων), the verb καταβαίνω means "dismount," meaning, of course, that there is a strong possibility that Jesus has to dismount the pole somehow so he can step down from it, because he, too, is "mounted" or "stuck" on it, in mid-air. Note Matthew like Mark does not mention the use of nails at all. When one compares this with Matthew 20:20-23 and the remarks of Seneca, it is fairly obvious what is happening here.

B.7. The Deposition.

Again, Joseph of Arimathea asks Pilate for the body of Jesus, and Pilate orders the body released. And so, Josephus takes down the body, wraps it up and lays it in an unused tomb just like in the other three gospels, except Matthew states Joseph carved it out of the rock for his own use. The removal of the body from the execution pole or frame is as follows:

Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut out of the rock. He rolled a big stone in front of the entrance to the tomb and went away.

Matthew 27:59, 60 NIV

The Greek for “took” is λαβὼν, a conjugate of λαμβάνω, “take, lay ahold of to take or receive, grasp, seize, carry off as a prize of booty.” So the implication here is Joseph may be doing this for the Sanhedrin. Which is also implied by what follows the next day when the Sanhedrin approaches Pilate and ask that the tomb be guarded. It is obvious they were somehow informed that he was placed there. Who else could have informed them in this story, except Joseph of Arimathea? Or are we to assume that the Sanhedrin had spies watching them, when Matthew, like Mark, mention only the women who followed Jesus as the ones who were watching? Or that the women themselves were the spies?

B.8. Conclusions.

And so here is where I draw my conclusions on what Mark is saying about the gear of Jesus' crucifixion:

1. It was a pole (or beam) one could wear.
2. It was designed so one could sit, sink, or settle onto it.
3. It could have been designed so that a sign could be placed on top or alternatively the sign was placed on a separate pole immediately behind it.
4. The use of σταυρόω indicates that a "fencing with pales", or a "pile driving (impalement)" is going on, or both.

It appears the gear of Jesus' execution would be:

1. An impaling stake with a separate pole right behind, for the sign.
2. An ordinary pole with a spike the condemned had to sit on.
3. A two-beam or two-pole cross with the same kind of spike.
4. An overhead beam supported on two poles, from which the condemned hanged, with a stake in the middle on which the condemned was impaled.

Next up: Luke and Acts.

Another Update - The Romans... 9 - Utility Poles and Masts

Update to the post dated 21-Feb-2012:


The Romans NEVER CRUCIFIED the Way We Think They Did! 9 - Utility Poles and Masts has been updated to reflect the use of tar or pitch in crucifixions as prescribed in the Lex Puteoli. and the implication of the crucifixions outside Jerusalem as depicted in the Roman Coliseum.

Crucifixion the Bodily Support - "Biblical Evidence"

(Part 5a of the series: Crucifixion the Bodily Support)

Introduction.

What sort of gear was the instrument of Jesus' execution?

There was a big stink raised by the sensationalist press a few years ago when Gunnar Samuelsson's hypothesis that successfully defended before his peers at Gotheburg University in Sweden was released upon the world. As a result, most people think he believes

Conservative Christians scholars, professional and armchair alike, as for example, Martin Hengel, Leolaia and Stephen C. Jones have treated the gospels as complimentary. However, critical scholars -- and ancient critical philospohers like Porphyry -- have determined them not to be complimentary, and contradictory. Ancient Christians have found parallels between the Crucifixion and the sailing of Odysseus and his crew past the Sirens, with Odysseus himself lashed to the mast. Furthermore, critical modern scholars believe the accounts of the crucifixion itself  to be not based on eyewitness accounts at all, but midrashed out of the Septuagint and patterned after a triumph of a Caesar, perhaps that of Flavius Vespasian Caesar; the funeral of Julius Caesar, with his wax image crucified on a cruciform tropaeum; the capture, trial, scourging and release of Jesus ben Ananias in Josephus' Wars of the Jews 6.301-309 = 6.5.3 and even Josephus' account of the rescue of three of his friends from Roman execution poles in Life 420-421 = Life 75. In other words, they are saying that there wasn't a crucifixion (f, i, x, i, o, n), but a crucifiction! (f, i, c, t, i, o, n). And judging by internal evidences in the gospels, they are correct. But I will deal with that a later time.

So I am going to treat the four gospels as separate, and then harmonise the whole lot, to see what differences come up. So here we go.

A. Mark.

There are several passages in this tale that give us clues as to what the gear of Jesus' execution was imagined to be.

A.1. "He must take up his pole."

The first passage occurs in Mark chapter 8, right after Simon bar Jonah, now Simon Peter, confesses that he, Jesus, is the Christ. Jesus predicts his own death: that he must be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the Torah, be killed and after three days rise again. And then he calls to the crowd and also to his discpiles:

Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross (τὸν σταυρὸν αὐτοῦ) and follow me.

Mark 8:34 NIV

Now here, σταυρὸν would probably mean "pole" as in the patibulum or crossarm of a two-beam or two-pole cross, simple or monohorned, or of an impaling stake, or of a simple pole: to which one is nailed or otherwise fixed and left to die. Of course, the last type of pole would have to be of small enough of a thickness and short enough of a length, say, 3.5 m in length by 150 mm in diameter (11'8" x 6" dia) of Jerusalem Pine at say 510 kg / cu m (32 pcf). This, of course, would be no Jehovah's Witnesses' stake but something much lighter and very easy to carry. And obviously it would be no heavy two-beam cross made of 6 x 6 or larger dimensional timber.

A.2. "Grant that we may sit."

Again, Jesus makes his second prediction that he will be condemned to death, be handed over to the goyyim, who will mock him, spit on him, flog him and kill him. And then he will rise again on the third day.

And then we go right into the scene between Jesus and the James and John, the Sons of Zebedee.

Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to him. “Teacher,” they said, “we want you to do for us whatever we ask.”

“What do you want me to do for you?” he asked.

They replied, “Let one of us sit at your right and the other at your left in your glory.”

“You don’t know what you are asking,” Jesus said. “Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?”

“We can,” they answered.

Jesus said to them, “You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with, but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared.”

Mark 10: 35-40 NIV

And then after this Jesus calls the other ten, who are indignant, together and told them if they wish to be great ones among themselves and their followers, they must be their subjects' servants, not the other way around. He then concludes this with another premonition of his death, "that the Son of Man did not come to be served, but serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

Now the reference to "the baptism that I am baptized with" and "the cup I shall drink" is an allusion to his up-coming sufferings. Otherwise, why does he ask, "Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will” at Gethsemane? Because the cup is the cup of suffering that he must drink during his illegal trial before the Sanhedrin, his legal trial before Pilate, his floggings and tortures and even the crucifixion itself. And the baptism? It could very well be his death, for in Romans 6, we have Paul asking his readers if they knew that those "who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death." After all, baptism back then was complete immersion and if the person dunking you didn't lift you back up, you'd drown... and be immersed in death, not just water.

Now what about the ones sitting at his right and at his left when Jesus comes into his glory? Well notice he said if one wished to be great, one has to serve. Which means his ultimate service is "giving his life for many." Which means of course, he is forshadowing his crucifixion with two highwaymen, that is, two armed robbers, one on either side, so that when he comes into his glory, it will be on an Roman execution pole! (Hint: the pole won't look like the Jehovah's Witnesses' depiction with ordinary poles on the left, for the three are not "sitting.") 

And sure enough, the Antenicene Church fathers thought so, for starting with Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho 73), they accused the Jews of doctoring the 96th Psalm from the Christians' copies of the Septuagint to remove the words, "from the wood!" (ἁπό του ξύλου) So that the sentence "Tell among the nations, the Lord has reigned!" was originally supposed to have been, "Tell among the nations, the Lord has reigned from the wood!" Christians actually believed this back then.

And what is this about sitting (καθίζω "to sit, cause to sit, take one's seat, settle, sink down") at his right and at his left? Well there is some interesting rhetorical literature back then that people did actually "sit" on their crosses. For the apparent normative Roman execution pole (at least from the turn of the second century on for the entire Empire, and earlier, perhaps much earlier, for Italy) had a crossarm and a central point called by various names including a sedile, a cornu, a palus, and a σκόλοψ. Indeed, Seneca (Epistles 101:10 through 14) who inveighed against Maeceneas for preferring to sit on a pointed crux over suicide. The two of them are openly explicit in line 12:

" 'One may nail me up and set underneath a pointed crux for sitting'* " (Suffigas licet et acutam sessuro crucem subdas) "Is it so great to press down** on one's own wound and to hang stretched out tight from a patibulum?" (Est tanti vulnus suum premere et patibulo pendere districtum?)

*also "ride, sink down, settle on, subside, be fixed, stuck fast, etc." (Lewis and Short)
**also "bear down upon, press hard upon, press down, press into, force in, overwhelm, weigh down, etc." (Lewis and Short)

What makes it worse, is that in naughty Roman verse, the Latin vulnus refers to the "wound" opened by a man's entry into the back passage of his co-participant in anal sex. (Martial, Quintus Serenus and Priapeia 10, ap. The Priapeia, Sacred-Texts.com) So Seneca is apparently using a euphemism here.

Well, back to the throne. What the two were asking of Jesus, and they don't know it, was for them to "sit on" or rather "ride"  the crosses, poles or pales the two armed robbers were going to "sit on!" For they were naively think they were going to take their seats on actual royal thrones in the Kingdom of God, i.e., the World to Come.

 A.3. "And then they fenced him with pales" (or is it "pile-drove him?") 

Some, including some scholars, believe that the Gospels contain the most detailed accounts of a crucifixion. They do not. All they have is a simple statement that they did, not how they did it.

Here is what Mark says, from when Pilate passes sentence:

Pilate released Barabbas to them. He had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.

The soldiers led Jesus away into the palace (that is, the Praetorium) and called together the whole company of soldiers. They put a purple robe on him, then twisted together a crown of thorns and set it on him. And they began to call out to him, “Hail, king of the Jews!” Again and again they struck him on the head with a staff and spit on him. Falling on their knees, they paid homage to him. And when they had mocked him, they took off the purple robe and put his own clothes on him. Then they led him out to crucify him.

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. They brought Jesus to the place called Golgotha (which means The Place of the Skull). Then they offered him wine mixed with myrrh, but he did not take it. And they crucified him. Dividing up his clothes, they cast lots to see what each would get.

Mark 15:15-24

Notice they have a lot of detail about what went on before. Flogging, delivering the prisoner over to the soldiers, mocking him, leading him out to be crucified, making someone else, a certain Simon of Cyrene carry his cross (σταυρὸν - pole), arriving at Golgotha - Cranium Place - , the refused offering of a tincture of wine and myrrh, and then they crucify him (καὶ σταυροῦσιν αὐτὸν). And after that they gambled over his clothes.

No details are given how jesus was crucified. Just the use of the verb σταυρόω "impale on [a] cross", according to the Greek-English Lexicon in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. And of course, we have the LSJ which defines σταυρόω as: "to fence with pales" and Tucydides 7.25.7 defining the verb as: "to drive piles".

So we have not a single clue as how the Roman Soldiers crucified Jesus, except the basic definition of the verb σταυρόω. Not one clue as to the nature of the structure of Jesus' execution.

What's worse, is the tincture of wine and myrrh. Historic scholars believe that in Judea, the Jewish womens' auxiliaries would minister to persons about to be crucified by offering them wine mixed with some kind of strong painkiller, that basically would knock them out or put them into a stupor. But the Jews would have used olibanum or libanum, called by the Hebrews libanah, to do this. They would not have used myrrh, for myrrh was and is a tonic and a stimulant. Now what did the Romans believe myrrh was good for? For one thing, they believed it was a sexual aphrodisiac -- and not necessarily only as an herbal scent! It is still used as such in Ayurvedic medicine today because it works.

And Mark has the Roman soldiers give Jesus the tincture of wine and myrrh! It is just as plain in the Greek as it is in the English; antecedents and relative pronouns work just the same in Greek as the do in English. So it is possible the soldiers intended to sexually stimulate Jesus, which would make the shame and humiliation of crucifixion even greater. Of course, for Jesus refuses to drink this stimulative tincture!

A.4. Where was the Sign?

Now after they crucified jesus, where did the Roman soldiers install the sign bearing his name and charge of crimen maiestasis, i.e., high treason?

It was the third hour when they crucified him. The written notice of the charge against him read: THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Mark 15:25, 26

The Greek for verse 26 is: "καὶ ἦν ἡ ἐπιγραφὴ τῆς αἰτίας αὐτοῦ ἐπιγεγραμμένη Ο ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ ΤΩΝ ΙΟΥΔΑΙΩΝ." Transliterated as: "And was the epigraphy of the accusation of him: THE KING OF THE JEWS." Nothing about where the writing was posted, except it was on-site.

A.5. And Who Were with Him?

If you recall Mark 10: 35-40, James and John bar Zebedee came up to Jesus and asking that they get to sit beside him one at his right and the other at his left, naively think that he was speaking of the sitting on his throne in the World to Come. In reply, Jesus said it was outside of his power to grant their request, for the seats were reserved for those for whom it was prepared. This, of course, was an illusion to his crucifixion.

And who were the two to sit at his right and at his left, for whom it was prepared?

They crucified two robbers with him, one on his right and one on his left.

Mark 15:27

That is right, the two robbers. And if they were "seated" on poles (σταυρούς) under lesser charges (armed robbery) what about the one crucified under the charge of high treason as "The King of the Jews?" If the acuta crux was just a horizontal dowel, beam, cleat or a plank, then it would have been added to the punishment for those with the greater charge as well as for those with the lesser, except when it made the crucifixion less torturous. When it was an upright stake designed for crucifixion by penetration, no way would have it been remitted for those with the highest charge when those with the lower charges were forced to "sit on it." 

A.6. The Mockery.

Then there are the insults heaped on Jesus.

They crucified two robbers with him, one on his right and one on his left. Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, “So! You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, come down from the cross and save yourself!”

In the same way the chief priests and the teachers of the law mocked him among themselves. “He saved others,” they said, “but he can’t save himself! Let this Christ, this King of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.” Those crucified with him also heaped insults on him.

Mark 15: 27-32 NIV

The part of the insults that I will focus on is the the taunts "come down from the cross and save yourself" (σῶσον σεαυτὸν καταβὰς ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ) in verse 30 and "Let this Christ... come down from the cross" (ὁ χριστὸς..  καταβάτω νῦν ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ) in verse 32.  In verse 30 the Greek transliterates as: - "save yourself, having come down from the pole." The relevant line in verse 32 transliterates from the Greek as: "The Christ...  let him come down now from the pole."

Now, in the Koine Greek the verbs, shown for "come down" are conjugated from καταβαίνω. Now, in the Scott-Liddell Greek-English Lexicon, if one were to replace "horse" (ἵππου), "carriage" (ἁρμαμάξης) or "chariot" (δίφρου or ἁρμάτων), the verb καταβαίνω means "dismount," meaning, of course, that there is a strong possibility that Jesus had to dismount his execution pole somehow so he can step down from it, because some how, he, too, is "sitting" or "sinking down" on it. When one compares this with Mark 10:35-40 and the remarks of Seneca on Maeceneas' preferences for the tortures of crucifixion over suicide, to me it is fairly obvious in this story that this is what Jesus has to do.

A.7. The Removal from the Cross.

Next, we have Joseph of Arimathea request the body of Jesus so he can bury it. Then he does so, right before the sun was to set. In Mark chapter 15 verse 44, Pilate was surprised that Jesus was already dead. The Greek for "was surprised" (ἐθαύμασεν) expresses a sense of amazement, with a suggestion of the beginning of speculation as to why it came about. Why? Because crucifixion was supposed to be a slow, lingering death that would take two days or more. Ditto for impalement, unless the executioner pierces any vital organs. Yet according to Mark, Jesus died after only six hours. Pilate then checks with the centurion and, after that was out of the way, permits Joseph to do so, and in verse 46, we see him taking Jesus' body down from the cross (καθελὼν αὐτὸν). Now here, καθελών (καθαιρέω) means "take down, bring down, depose, dethrone (see Justin Martyr Dialog. w/ Tryph. 73, above) take down as a reward or prize, take and carry off, etc."

Conclusions from this? First, Jesus died far too soon. Second, the body was suspended and needed to be taken down to the ground for Joseph of Arimathea to bury it. (What about the other two?)

A.8. Conclusions.

And so here is where I draw my conclusions on what Mark is saying about the gear of Jesus' crucifixion:

1. It was a pole one could wear.
2. It was designed so one could sit, sink, or settle onto.
3. Consumption of a myrrh and wine tincture could make the sufferer sexually stimulated (as well as drunk).
4. The use of  σταυρόω indicates that a "fencing with pales", or a "pile driving (impalement)" is going on, or both.
5. Jesus died far too soon.
6. The bodies of those hanged were suspended above the surface of the Earth. 

It appears the gear of Jesus' execution was one of four items:

1. An impaling stake with a blunt point,
2. A simgle vertical pole with a central point wherewith one sat, sank, settled, or "rode" when he hung in the down position, 
3. It was a multiple pole frame with the same type of attachment to sit on, or
4. A horizontal beam resting on two poles and suspending Jesus, who is impaled on a third, pointed pole in the middle.

Next at bat: Matthew.