What Was on the Cross with Jesus?

What was on the cross with Jesus? Seems like a simple enough question, I suppose. If you give it consideration, it seems there was very little there with Him? Let’s examine this thought a little further.

As was the practice of the Romans, they wanted to make death on a cross as miserable as could be. Crucifixion was not just the agony of being nailed to a post. Had it been no more than that, it would still qualify as one of the most horrible ways to die imaginable. No, the Roman soldiers were experts at inflicting pain and humiliation on their intended victims.

A man destined for crucifixion, would spend whatever time he had left in the squalor of a cell with little, if any, food or water or sleep. He would, for the duration, be subjected to whatever tortures and humiliations that might present themselves to his jailers. When it came time for the actual event, he would be stripped of any possessions he had, including his clothing. Then they would flay him, quite literally, alive. (Yes, you might say, they removed any covering he might have including that of his own skin.)

He would then be forced to carry his own cross to the place of his death, being abused the entire trip. His arrival meant that his hands and feet would be swiftly and securely tied and nailed to the cross and he would lifted rudely above the earth. There he would hang, in the most conspicuous place they could find, usually on some very public avenue. This of course, (as was the case with our Lord,) add to his agony by humiliating him in the eyes of passersby, often including women, children and, of course, his family. As a matter of course, they would also nail his accusation on the cross, above his head for all the world to see. Here the poor man would find himself, stripped of his clothing, naked before the gawking crowds, bereft of hope and friendship.

If you should have happened by this macabre scene of slow death, you would have seen no more than what has been described: a naked man, nailed to a cross beam, his body covered only by his own blood and his accusation hanging, like the sword of Damocles, over his head.

So, back to my question: "What was on the cross with Jesus?"

Nothing! There was nothing there, but Himself, His blood, and His accusation. He was there alone, His blood completely poured out in a Holy Libation for you and me, His body, naked and trembling as He breathed His last breaths and the accusation, which foolish Pilot actually got correct: "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews."

Could we have a more beautiful, more perfect, more complete image of the salvation that our Savior offered? Could God have shown the world any more clearly what, or rather, Who, and who alone, was needed for the deliverance of sinful man?

In conclusion: Had we required anything else for our rescue from death and hell, God, in His infinite wisdom, would have put it on the cross with His Son. Yet, all He gave us was the Son of Man, the Son of God, crucified alone, for all mankind! Hallelujah! What a Savior!
 

A Kinder, Gentler Crucifixion

I wrote this blog quite a while back, but, for some reason or another, never published it. I sort of liked it, so, here it is. My daughter is now fourteen and has yet to see the film. I'm hoping we can sit down together with my wife next Easter to watch it.


************************************************************************************


Mel Gibson is set to release his new version of “The Passion of The Christ.” The skuttle-butt is, that he has deleted/edited the more graphic scenes out to make the movie more agreeable to the young and/or squeamish.

Now, I'm not about to accuse Brother Mel of going belly-up to the critics or grossly coveting the almighty dollar. I sincerely will give him all the benefit of the doubt I can muster.

I realize this movie has been criticized for its graphic violence and nauseating bloodshed. My very own ten year old daughter, by my choice, has yet to see what I would call the greatest feature film ever made.

Still, it’s so entirely hypocritical of the nay sayers who decried this movie because of its purposeful intensity. The very fact that they have such a problem with the blood and gore shows that they, because of their darkened hearts, missed the whole point of the affair.

Christ suffered one of the most violent, painful deaths ever devised by man. We can never fully realize what must’ve been the indescribable agony of one so unfortunate as to die by crucifixion. Much the worse, He was abandoned not only by His closest friends, but also by His Heavenly Father. Our revulsion at the depiction of what was surely only a fraction of the suffering that Christ must’ve endured is understandable, but to have an inkling of it’s value, requires closer scrutiny than most are willing to invest.

I’ll never forget how jovial we were before entering the theater and how somber we were upon our exit. I remember smiling wryly as I saw the blithe faces of those who were waiting their turn at the viewing. I thought, “Just wait. You’ll be changed soon enough.”

Brother Mel, I think, gave us only a passing glance at the passion that Jesus suffered for us poor sinners. I fear a sanitized version of the film may only weaken it’s impact and undermine the disturbing quality that made this not just a film, but an experience. I know that I was certainly disturbed by my viewing of The Passion. I wouldn’t have had it any other way.