1-1-15 The Pierced Christ
47 That sinful city is called " the holy city" , even
though this will only be Jerusalem's title in the Kingdom age, after
her repentance (Is. 1:26). What imputation of righteousness! Again,
we see how the record breathes the spirit of grace. The
fact those mocking Jews died in their beds, that judgment didn't
immediately come, that the repentant thief was saved and not made
to apologize, that Joseph the secret doubter who voted for the Son
of God's crucifixion should be spoken of so highly...there are so
many examples of God's pure grace to man.
48 He said it twice: " This was a righteous man (Lk.), truly
this man was the son of God" (Mk.). And he might well have
added in his own thoughts: “And I’ve crucified him".
49 The people 'coming together to that sight' might imply that
the crowd which was milling around came clustering around the cross
once the Lord uttered His final cries and so evidently died. The
women also beheld His dead corpse from afar. This seems to be encouraging
us to imagine the picture of the Lord just at that point; the dead
body on the cross, the victory achieved. It was only at this stage
that the curse of Dt. 21 came into effect: " cursed (Heb. a
curse; the Hebrew is always translated this way) is every
one that hangeth on a tree" (Dt. 21:22,23). These words have
been misunderstood as meaning that the Lord as a living being was
under one of the Law's curses of condemnation. This cannot be. It
must be remembered that crucifixion was a Roman, not Jewish method.
The Deuteronomy passage was not written with reference to crucifixion,
but rather to the custom of displaying the already dead body of
a sinner on a pole as a witness and warning (cp. the display of
Saul's body). Sin brought the curse; and so every sinful person
who died for their sin was bearing the curse of God. They were to
be buried quickly as a sign of God taking no pleasure in the death
of the wicked. The Lord died the death of a sinner; He bore our
sins, and therefore our curse (Gal. 3:13,14). Every condemned sinner
whose body had been displayed had been a type of the sinless Son
of God. He was exhibited there for one or two hours (until Joseph
got the permission to take the body), totally, totally united with
sinful man. And then, because God had no pleasure in this condemnation
of sin, the body was taken and buried.
Smiting the breast connects with the sinner smiting his breast
in repentance (Mt. 11:17 RVmg.). The thoughts of many hearts are
revealed by meditation on the cross (Lk. 2:35). It leads us to repentance.
The prophecy that the Jews would look on His they pierced and mourn
in repentance may have had an incipient fulfilment at the crucifixion.
50 The women who stood afar off and watched in helplessness and
hopelessness and lack of comprehension also followed the
Lord and ministered to Him in the Galilee days. Their standing there
like that was still reckoned to them as active following and ministry
to Him. They also serve, who merely stand and wait.
There is great emphasis on people " beholding" (Mt. 27:36,54;
Lk. 23:35,47-49). He drew the eyes of all men unto Him (Jn. 12:32).
There was (and is) a magnetism about the cross.
51 A connection of thought arises from the word " pierced"
. Simeon had prophesied that a sword would pierce Mary's heart as
it also pierced that of Christ her son (Lk. 2:35). This is one reason
for thinking that Mary may still have been at the cross when the
Lord died. It could be that John took her to his home, arm round
her shoulders as she wrestled with the desire to take one last motherly
look back, and then returned himself to the cross; and then Mary
crept back, almost hot on his heels, or perhaps choosing another
route, and hiding somewhere in the crowd where neither her son nor
John, her new son, would see her. To me, this has the ring of truth
about it. Simeon's prophecy, as that sweet baby in cheap cloths
lay cradled in his arms, seems to imply that as the Lord's
heart was pierced, so would his mother's be. Are we to conclude
from this that there was a heart-piercing groan within her, as she
saw the spear head enter and the blood flow out? Each time they
called out ‘Come down from the cross!’, her heart must have been
in her mouth. Would He? She had learnt the lesson of Cana, not to
pressurize Him for convenient miracles; not to catch His eye as
if to say ‘Go on, do it, for my sake’. But nonetheless, because
she was only human, she would have hoped against hope. But now,
the finality of death forced itself upon her. And her heart was
pierced in that moment. Yet Yahweh Himself had prophesied, years
before: " They shall look upon me whom they have pierced,
and they shall mourn for him...and shall be in bitterness
for him" (Zech. 12:10). The use of pronouns here seems
to mean that God was in Christ on the cross, reconciling the world
unto Himself (2 Cor. 5:19). When the Son was pierced, so was the
Father. And so at the moment of that sword-thrust, we see the connection
of both parents with their suffering Son. As He was pierced, so
were the Father and mother. Here we see the wonder and yet the tragedy
of the Divine family. We have a very rare insight into the relationship
between the Father and Mary. The notion of personal pre-existence
and total Deity of Christ destroys this beauty and mystery. Indeed,
the whole relationship between the Lord and His mother and Father
is surpassingly beautiful, once His nature is correctly understood.
There is so much one could speculate and yet dares not hardly think
or say (e.g. whether the Lord appeared to His mother after the resurrection;
what their relationship will be in the Kingdom).
Luke's record that Joseph himself took the body down invites us
to imagine him using a ladder, perhaps that used to place the title.
However, Acts 13:29 suggests that the Roman soldiers on behalf of
Jewish people (i.e. Joseph) took the body down; Pilate " commanded
the body to be delivered" , implying he gave a command to underlings.
So in what sense did Joseph take the body down and wrap
it? Are we to imagine him humbling himself before the crowd to assist
those soldiers in the physical act of taking the nails out and lowering
the body down? Or it could be that he attracted so much attention
to himself and had to humble himself so much to ask the soldiers
to do it, that it was effectively as if he did it. But there is
no reason to think that he himself didn’t walk out in that no man’s
land between the crowd and the cross and humble himself to take
it down, hearing the gasp from the crowd as he touched the blood
and dead body which would make him unclean for the feast. His act
was a tremendous mental sacrifice as well as a social and physical
one. He is described as " honourable" , literally 'well-formed
/ bodied', as if to emphasis his deportment befitting a leader of
men. But he humbled himself before that stake. " He took it
down" may imply that the stake was left standing. Or was it
laid backwards and lowered down horizontal, with Joseph's anxious
hands guiding it down? His contact with the body meant that he couldn't
keep the Passover (Num. 9:9,10). The people would have watched incredulous
as one of the leaders of Israel openly showed his preference for
the crucified Nazarene as opposed to keeping the Mosaic Law. The
phobia for cleanliness at Passover time would have meant that everyone
was extremely sensitive to what Joseph did.
It is difficult to tell if a body is dead or not. But there was
something about the Lord's corpse which somehow shone forth the
message that He had given up His life. " He that saw it bare
record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true,
that ye might believe" (Jn. 19:35). Do we not get the sense
here of a man, even under inspiration, grasping for adequate words
and finding there are none? This is an experience beyond the paradigm
of verbal description.
The description of blood and water flowing has raised the question
as to whether the Lord had been fasting, or had emptied His bowels
in Gethsemane, before the crucifixion. It has been suggested that
for this to have happened the Lord would have been pierced from
the right hand side above the fifth rib, piercing the right auricle
of the heart (from which the blood came) and also the pericardium,
from where the serum came which appeared like water. However there
are critics of these suggestions, which leaves the possibility that
the flow of blood and water was in fact a miracle- hence John’s
insistence that yes, he actually saw this happen. And he says that
he records it so that we might believe. The implication is that
meditation upon the cross is what inspires faith, as well as conviction
of sin and repentance.
The way the Lord’s blood flowed out from His heart is highly evocative
of powerful lessons. He gave out from the very core and foundation
of His being. We may serve God in good deeds, in writing books,
in labouring for Him, without any real demand being made on our
innermost self. The challenge of the cross is to give from the very
centre and fountain of our life, our very selves, our person, our
most vital soul.
52 It is twice stressed that Joseph was on the Sanhedrin council.
So was Nicodemus (Jn. 3:2). Yet the whole council unanimously voted
for the crucifixion (Mk. 14:64). " The whole Sanhedrin"
(Mk. 15:1 NIV) agreed the High Priests' plan of action. They all
interrogated Him and “the whole multitude of them" led Jesus to
Pilate (Lk. 22:66,70; 23:1). This is some emphasis. Joseph “was
not in agreement" with them, we are told, but it seems this was
a position held within his own conscience. It was only the actual
cross which brought faith into the open. “You shall not be in agreement
with the wicked as an unjust witness" (Ex. 23:1) probably tore out
his heart. It may be that these men weren't present and that the
Jews broke their own law, that the death sentence must be unanimously
agreed. However, I have an intuitive sense (and nothing more) that
these men voted for the Lord's death; and that they went along with
the discussion in which " all" the council were involved,
as to which incidents in His life they could remember for which
they could condemn Him (Mk. 14:55) . They may not have consented
to what was done in their hearts, but they still went along with
it all on the surface. Acts 13:28,29 is at pains, almost, to associate
Joseph, Nicodemus and the rest of the Sanhedrin: " They
have fulfilled them in condemning him. And though they
found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate
that He should be slain...they took him down from the tree,
and laid him in a sepulchre" . The text records that they desired
Pilate for the death of Jesus; but the very same Greek words are
used to describe how Joseph desired Pilate to let him have the body
of Jesus (Mt. 27:58)- as if to show how Joseph openly undid his
request for the crucifixion, by requesting the body.
They were secret disciples, fearing the loss of standing among
the Jews. It was only after the Lord's death that they came out
in the open. It seems to me that they voted for the Son of God to
die. But in His grace, the Father emphasizes in the record that
Joseph was a good man, and a just; a disciple, although secretly.
The grace of God shines through the whole record. Thus only Matthew
speaks about the suicide of Judas; the other three records are silent.
A human god would inevitably have stressed that the betrayer of
His Son went out in shame and took his own life. But the God of
all grace is higher than reflecting vindictiveness in His word.
If the Lord died at 3p.m. and sunset was at 6p.m., there were only
three hours for Joseph to find Pilate, gain a hearing, make his
request, for Pilate to verify that the body was dead, and then for
Nicodemus to buy the spices and for the burial to be done. Joseph
and Nicodemus must have decided almost immediately what they were
going to do. And the lesson for us: Beholding the cross makes us
see what we ought to do, it becomes urgently apparent, and then
we give our all, with the spirit of 'nothing else matters', to achieve
it as far as we can. But we can enter into their thoughts: I wish
I'd done more for Him while He was alive, and now, even now, because
of the pressure of time, I just can't bury and honour this body
as I'd like to. All these things are against me. The self hate and
loathing and regret would have arisen within them, mixed with that
love and devotion to the Lord of all grace. And there would have
been an earnest desire for God to accept what little they could
do, with time, the surrounding world, the Jewish culture, the unchangeable
past, and their own present natures, all militating against the
height of devotion they fain would show.
53 The body was sometimes granted to very close relatives. Joseph
is now showing his open affinity with this crucified man. At that
time, he didn't firmly believe in the resurrection. For sheer love
of this crucified man, he was willing to sacrifice his standing
in society, his economic position, risk his life, grovel before
the hated Pilate to beg (Lk.), crave (Mk.) the body. This was something
which only the close relatives of the crucified could presume to
do. But he felt already that new relationship to the Lord, and whether
or not He would ever be raised he wanted to show openly to the world
his connection with Him, come what may. This was the effect of the
Lord’s death upon him.
of the crucifixion of Jehohanan, crucified outside Jerusalem
in AD70. The position of the legs would have induced unbearable
54 Josephus records that victims usually lingered for two days
or so before death. The Lord died so quickly. And the legs were
broken so that the victims would die quickly (not, as has sometimes
been supposed, to stop them running away). These things are harmonized
by realizing that there was a support on which the victim could
seek temporal relief in order to keep himself alive. Werner Keller
(The Bible As History p. 356) explains: " There was
often a small support attached called a " sedile" (seat).
if the victim hanging there eased his misery from time to time by
supporting himself on this, the blood returned to the upper half
of his body...when the torture of the crucified man was finally
to be brought to an end, the " crucifragrum" was proceeded
with: his legs were broken. That meant that he could no longer ease
his weight in the footrests and heart failure quickly followed"
. It seems to me that in keeping with His refusal of the pain killer,
His not requesting a drink until the very end, His willing giving
of His life...that the Lord didn't press down on the seat, so that
effectively He tortured Himself to death. If the victim did not
press down on the sedile, the dead weight of the body would cause
the intercostals muscles that facilitate inhaling to become too
weakened to function. The lungs, unable to empty, would become full
of carbon dioxide and death would result from asphyxia. The fact
the Lord was making the effort to talk to people and yet, it seems,
not pressing down on the sedile…is simply an essay in His self control,
in His love, to bother to talk to others… which should inspire us
to rise out of our introspection and make the effort likewise to
connect with others. Seneca (Dialogue 3) writes: “Is it
worth to weigh down on one’s own wound and hand impaled on a gibbet
to postpone something which is...the end of punishment [i.e. death]?"
(1). In practice, the victim was only prolonging his
own agony by pressing down on the rest. If the Lord didn't do this,
He must have been extremely faint. Keller also comments: "
In the case of a person suspended by his two hands the blood sinks
very quickly into the lower half of the body. After six to twelve
minutes blood pressure has dropped by 50% and the pulse rate has
doubled" . The Lord must have felt His every heartbeat, and
therefore been able to sense when He was approaching death (see
38). Yet amidst the faintness, the knowledge that His heart was
about to give out, the Lord remained, I am convinced, completely
intellectually consciousness. Deep within Him, that perfect mind
was centred on the Father and His word. Several Psalms take on a
literal reference to the Lord's final agony: " My heart panteth,
my strength faileth me: as for the light of mine eyes, it also is
gone from me...my flesh and my heart faileth: but God is the strength
of my heart, and my portion for ever" (38:10; 73:26).
The physical sufferings of the cross were an especial cause of spiritual temptation to the Lord; just as physical pain, illness, weakness etc. are specific causes of our temptations to sin. Heb. 2:9 defines the Lord's 'sufferings' as specifically "the suffering of death", the sufferings associated with His time of dying. Heb. 2:18 RVmg. then goes on to say: "For having been himself tempted in that wherein he suffered". The sufferings of death were therefore an especial source of temptation for Him. Truly did He learn obedience to the Father specifically through the process of His death (Heb. 5:8). Let's seek to remember this when we or those close to us face physical weakness, illness and pain of whatever sort.
(1) Quoted in Martin Hengel, Crucifixion In The Ancient World
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977).