Crucifying and Mocking One’s Savior!

from Google Images

When Jesus arrived at the site of the crucifixion, he was offered wine mixed with myrrh (Mark 15:23). Matthew says it was mixed with gall (Matthew 27:34). Gall was a term applied to many bitter substances, including myrrh and was an intoxicant meant to dull the pain that was about to be endured by criminals. The gesture was a Jewish one, not Roman, and probably based upon Proverbs 31:6-7. It was probably prepared by women of the city. Jesus accepted the gesture, but when he tasted the intoxicant, he refused to drink it. So, they crucified him and divided his cloths among themselves by lot (Mark 15:24), and it was the third hour (about 9 AM as we reckon time), which was the hour of prayer. Luke records the prayer: “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34) but not the time, while Mark records the time, but not the prayer (Mark 15:25).

 

What Has Changed from Jesus’ Day to This?

from Google Images

After Pilate released Barabbas, the murderous felon, he handed Jesus, whom he knew to be innocent, over to his men, professional military men, to the end that he would be crucified. Nevertheless, before that would occur these men would mock Jesus (Mark 15:15-16). They were professionals, and they knew how to cause their enemy to look and feel small and weak. To be mocked, then, is to receive no honor, no respect or comfort. It means all one’s closest associates had deserted him to face this hour alone. And, all the high-sounding loyalty of: “Though I should die with you, yet I will not deny knowing you…” (Matthew 26:35; Mark 14:31; cp. Matthew 26:72, 74; Mark 14:71; Luke 22:60-61) is but an echo of boisterous dinner talk, which, truth be told, has no place in reality. The professionals really know how to make one’s life appear meaningless.

 

Unbelief and Mocking Jesus

from Google Images

For practical purposes the Romans needed an accusation to charge Jesus in order to crucify him, because such a thing would become a matter of public record. In the second century AD Justin Martyr, while addressing the Emperor, Pius, mentioned that proof of what he said could be obtained from the Acts of Pilate,^[1] something that hardly could be so, if Pilate wasn’t required to record the reasons for the executions he commanded. Therefore, Pilate’s official verdict was: Jesus of Nazareth was the King of the Jews—a political crime, something for which he had earlier found him innocent. Nevertheless, he could hardly mention in a public record that he had executed Jesus for claiming to be the Son of God, a religious crime, according to the Jews (John 19:7, 13-16), but a matter of harmless superstition, according to Rome (cf. Acts 25:18-20).