Here are some further thoughts on the accuracy of Mel Gibson's presentation of the scourging of Jesus in "The Passion of the Christ."
paltalk hacker bootI was challenged this morning regarding my questioning of the accuracy of Gibson's brutal scourging of Jesus. This person hadn't read the Scriptorium post on this issue, but picked up what I was saying in my class today on The Apostle's Creed.
Basically my contention can be outlined this way:
1. Acts 3:13 says that Pilate was determined to release Jesus. This follows what we read in John 19:1-16, where Pilate flogs Jesus and then brings him out to the crowd, hoping he can release Jesus. (It says that: "John 19:12 From then on Pilate sought to release him...") The crowd refuses, and Pilate orders Jesus to be crucified, but places the responsibility firmly on the crowd.
2. The beating was intended to be survivable. In Gibson's movie, the scourging is clearly NOT survivable. I believe this exaggerated, "worst case scenario" scourging owes more to Catholic piety and revivalistic enthusiasim for the suffering of Jesus using the violence for emotional impact than to good historical research.
3. Paul, in II Corinthians 11 says:
23 Are they servants of Christ? I am a better one---I am talking like a madman---with far greater labors, far more imprisonments, with countless beatings, and often near death. 24 Five times I received at the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one. 25 Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I was stoned...I contended in the original post that if Paul survived 5 floggings, then Gibson is surely exaggerating.
My challenger said that what Paul received were "Jewish" beatings, according to Deuteronomy 25:
25:1 If there is a dispute between men and they come into court and the judges decide between them, acquitting the innocent and condemning the guilty, 2 then if the guilty man deserves to be beaten, the judge shall cause him to lie down and be beaten in his presence with a number of stripes in proportion to his offense. 3 Forty stripes may be given him, but not more, lest, if one should go on to beat him with more stripes than these, your brother be degraded in your sight.In the challenger's opinion, this Jewish punishment was not the same as Roman scourging and explains why Paul survived five of them, but Jesus' received a scourging that led to a quicker death, once he was on the cross.
I didn't make a response at the time. I came home and checked my resources, and I feel a little more on solid ground. Two things...
A. Given what evidence we have in the Bible, we cannot say how bad the scourging of Jesus was, what instruments (precisely) were used or how it related to his eventual death. It would be impossible to say he would have survived it, therefore, without this information. All I can say is that Pilate- in John- intended for Jesus to survive it, and Gibson presents a scourging that could not be survived.
B. Paul's whippings were ordered by Jews, but we should be careful in equating it with Deut 25. These whippings occured, most likely, in Roman cities in Asia Minor. The pattern seems to be that Jews may have had Paul arrested, but the punishment was carried out by the civil authorities. Roman authorities, or at least Greek authorities in a Roman legal system. I have no reason to believe the Roman authorities would have administered a punishment according to Deut 25.
C. The Deut 25 passage would apply to Israel, but saying it is what happened to Paul is bringing that custom well out of context.
Therefore, I will stand by my statement that we have good reason to believe the whipping of Jesus may be exaggerated in the film, and the obviously survivable whippings Paul recalls may be similar to the scourging given to Jesus.
Posted by at February 15, 2004 09:36 PM