Think About the Cross

Nathan Family said...
Why the cross? The question isn’t “why did Jesus die”. I’m asking what was the need/relevance of the cross?

Monique.N said...
Great topic to ponder! Just recently, I came to a new appreciation about Jesus' death on the cross when dealing with a believer who was seriously contemplating suicide. The thought struck me that since Jesus came to give His "life as a ransom for many," could He not have appointed a time to stroll into the temple (the place of sacrifice) and supernaturally stopped His own heart or slit His own throat and offered up His life in a much less excruciating manner than death on a cross? NO! For many reasons, no! In relation to the suicidal person, it struck me that Jesus breathed every last breath that the Father gave Him and did not choose to avoid any ounce of the pain by taking a quicker way out. (What an incredibly courageous, fearless, buff Savior we have!) A depressed (even suicidal) believer should shrink from not following our Master's example, even in the midst of great difficulty and pain. We, too, should gratefully breathe every last breath the Father gives us.

Other implications of the cross:
- While it was a Jewish court that tried and condemned Jesus (with false charges), it was the Gentile Romans who carried out the execution - all humanity, both Jew and Gentile were involved in taking the life of Jesus (not just one or the other). Interestingly, while Rome did not allow the local Jewish authorities to carry out executions, forcing them to ask Pilate to carry out their death sentence, only a short time later the Jews spurned the law and carried out the stoning of Steven in spite of the Roman law. Couldn't they have done that with Jesus for so grievous a charge as blasphemy? But they didn't. I would think the Sanhedrin feared Jesus' popularity and didn't want to be seen by the people as His executioners, preferring to have the Romans carry it out. Perhaps they also wanted to dissuade Jesus' followers from continuing His movement by making them fear the threat of crucifixion if they aligned themselves with an executed 'seditionist.' (I say seditionist, since the high priest used the leverage of Jesus' claim to be king as a so-called threat against Caesar.)

- Since 'the servant is not greater than the master," and Jesus predicted that the 'world' would hate His followers as they had hated Him, He knew many would face torture and death. Yet I would wager than none of His followers could say that they suffered more greatly than their Master - the hours of unspeakable brutality and agony He endured is well documented and difficult to surpass, even though many dear brothers and sisters have endured (and are still enduring) almost as much. In our darkest moments we can know that our Savior bore more than we can imagine and His Spirit can enable us to endure the unimaginable. (read Foxe's Book of Martyrs, or Jesus Freaks)

- The cross is a vivid picture of what man's inhumanity did even to one in whom no evil was found. Human depravity and the evil Prince of this world threw their worst at the Son who graciously came to seek and to save that which was lost. And look what we did to Him.

- If there was ever a doubt that Jesus had truly died and not merely "swooned," execution on a cross after a brutal Roman flogging (which often was enough to kill a man) removes any such doubt. The evidence that His heart had stopped beating is proved by the separation of blood and water when He was pierced. His death on a cross gives more power to His incredible resurrection on Sunday morning. He was seen...a whole man without the flesh tears of the flogging or the torn muscles of the crucifixion, able to walk and talk on the way to Emmaus, no wounds making Him weak and limp, the only wounds still visible are the scars in His hand and side!

I'm sure there are more implications....but I offer these as a start!

Donavan said...
You bring up something I have never understood.Why did Jesus still have wounds on his hands?
January 29, 2008 12:58 AM

Monique.N said...
Do you think it could be because the wounds are a visible reminder of His great act of love - lest we forget?! I've always imagined that when we see Him face to face, the scars will still be there for all to see, yet I'm not sure if Scripture indicates that plainly. Other than Jesus' invitation to Thomas after the resurrection to see the wounds on His hands and side in His resurrected body, can you think of anywhere else that mentions wounds or scars?
January 29, 2008 10:42 PM

Nathan Family said...
What's fascinated me is to think of what this particular form of death meant within the context of Roman civilization. Romans reserved this type of execution typically for brigands and rebels, those who posed or tried to pose some sort of threat to the established power. They would use this very public display, one which took a longer amount of time and was particularly "excruciating" for the subject, for culturally symbolic reasons as much as militaristically strategic ones. If Rome, in its majesty, could take a professed rebel, stretch him out, stick him up high and let his followers watch his slow death, it was a very effective means of quelling any furtherance of whatever cause this rebel stood for. In a very real way, it was an emptying of this individual's persona and mythologized status.

Very much like the depiction of William Wallace's death in Braveheart, the established English crown aimed to show all who cared to see that this legendary figure wasn't in fact 10 feet tall, that he was made of flesh and blood and that he was ultimately subject to the English throne. But Wallace's valiant death, refusing to even scream in pain, let alone cry for mercy, was the ironic twist that his torturers didn't expect. In fact it further established Wallace's legend, substantiating that wonderful quote from the movie: "Every man dies. Not every man really lives."

It was this kind of death and even more that the man Jesus was put to. The Roman authorities, with the complicity of the established Jewish rulers, meant to empty the man of any supposed legendary, mythological status he had. They meant to empty him of his life. A death, according to the gospels, Jesus willingly went to.

Not sure if I've covered it all. But these are a few of the intricacies that have struck me as I pondered why it had to be death on a cross. Why specifically that time in history? Why not death by a camel stampede? Or an ugly death during the Renaissance? Only that sort of death at that time could have been the climax and centerpeice of history. I'm sure I'm missing something... the Resurrection? Yes, that could be something. A whole other post, to say the least...
February 1, 2008 7:28 PM