Yesterday’s post on the Gospel reading for the Liturgy of the Passion on Palm Sunday covered Matthew 27:11-25.

The full Gospel reading is available at that link.

Commentary for today’s verses comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.

Continuing with verse 26, Pontius Pilate released Barabbas for the irate crowd and, after flogging Jesus, handed Him over to be crucified.

John MacArthur tells us what eventually happened to Pilate. Like Judas, he committed suicide. The weight of our Lord’s death upon his conscience was too much to handle (emphases mine):

Pilate later on was taken out of Palestine, sent to Gaul and there he committed suicide. He committed suicide for the same reason that Judas did, because both of them couldn’t deal with the tremendous guilt of having betrayed and dealt unjustly with the only perfectly righteous person that ever lived. As I told you before, the primary cause of suicide psychologically is retribution. It’s self-inflicted punishment. And the ultimate crime demands the ultimate punishment. And we have little to wonder about in the suicide of Pilate as in the suicide of Judas. It really was inescapable.

Returning to verse 26, Matthew Henry’s commentary says this of Barabbas:

… if he had not been put in competition with Christ for the favour of the people, it is probable that he had died for his crimes; but that proved the means of his escape; to intimate that Christ was condemned for this purpose, that sinners, even the chief of sinners, might be released; he was delivered up, that we might be delivered; whereas the common instance of divine Providence, is, that the wicked is a ransom for the righteous, and the transgressor for the upright, Prov 21 18; 11 18. In this unparalleled instance of divine grace, the upright is a ransom for the transgressors, the just for the unjust.

Henry tells us how the scourging fulfilled prophecy. Recall that the Roman law enforcers — lictors — carried fasces (‘bundle’, pron. ‘fass-kees’), which was a bundle of rods with an axe hidden inside:

Jesus was scourged; this was an ignominious cruel punishment, especially as is was inflicted by the Romans, who were not under the moderation of the Jewish law, which forbade scourgings, above forty stripes; this punishment was most unreasonably inflicted on one that was sentenced to die: the rods were not to introduce the axes, but to supersede them. Thus the scripture was fulfilled, The ploughers ploughed upon my back (Ps 129 3), I gave my back to the smiters (Isa 50 6), and, By his stripes we are healed, Isa 53 5. He was chastised with whips, that we might not be for ever chastised with scorpions.

MacArthur has the full, horrific description of a Roman scourging, which was far worse than a whipping:

… on the end of that wooden handle were a series of leather thongs and in the end of those thongs were bits of lead and brass and bones sharpened to a razor’s edge.

The man was then taken, and in most cases, by the wrist, he was tied and hung from a post. His feet dangling so that his body was taut and stretched. Two men, one on each side, then whipped him across the flanks through here and the back, to the point where arteries and veins and entrails were gashed and exposed – very often brought death, was often done before crucifixion to speed the death on the cross. It is a torture beyond description …

We don’t know how long they pounded Jesus, tore and ripped His flesh. We do know that He couldn’t carry His own cross because He was so weak. And you can believe that if there ever was a man of strength, it was Him. Because a man without sin would be a man of strength.

Of a crucifixion, Henry says that merciful princes often had the condemned man strangled first to alleviate the pain. Also note that Moses’s healing bronze serpent on a pole was a type of Christ:

This was the death to which Christ was condemned, that he might answer the type of the brazen serpent lifted up upon a pole. It was a bloody death, a painful, shameful, cursed death; it was so miserable a death, that merciful princes appointed those who were condemned to it by the law, to be strangled first, and then nailed to the cross; so Julius Cæsar did by some pirates, Sueton. lib. 1. Constantine, the first Christian emperor, by an edict abolished the use of that punishment among the Romans, Sozomen, Hist. lib. 1. ch. 8. Ne salutare signum subserviret ad perniciem—That the symbol of salvation might not be subservient to the victim’s destruction.

Then Pilate’s soldiers took Jesus into his headquarters and gathered the whole cohort around Him (verse 27).

Henry says:

Observe, 1. Where this was done—in the common hall. The governor’s house, which should have been a shelter to the wronged and abused, is made the theatre of this barbarity. I wonder that the governor, who was so desirous to acquit himself from the blood of this just person, would suffer this to be done in his house. Perhaps he did not order it to be done, but he connived at it; and those in authority will be accountable, not only for the wickedness which they do, or appoint, but for that which they do not restrain, when it is in the power of their hands. Masters of families should not suffer their houses to be places of abuse to any, nor their servants to make sport with the sins, or miseries, or religion, of others …

If Christ was thus made a spectacle, let none of his followers think it strange to be so used, 1 Cor 4 9; Heb 10 33.

The soldiers stripped Jesus and put a scarlet robe on Him (verse 28).

Henry explains the robe and the relevant Old Testament prophecy:

They put on him a scarlet robe, some old red cloak, such as the Roman soldiers wore, in imitation of the scarlet robes which kings and emperors wore; thus upbraiding him with his being called a King. This sham of majesty they put upon him in his dress, when nothing but meanness and misery appeared in his countenance, only to expose him to the spectators, as the more ridiculous; yet there was something of mystery in it; this was he that was red in his apparel (Isa 63 1, 2), that washed his garments in wine (Gen 49 11); therefore he was dressed in a scarlet robe. Our sins were as scarlet and crimson. Christ being clad in a scarlet robe, signified his bearing our sins, to his shame, in his own body upon the tree; that we might wash our robes, and make them white, in the blood of the Lamb.

After twisting some thorns into a crown, they put it on His head, then put a reed in His right hand and knelt before Him mockingly, saying (verse 29), ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’

Henry offers this analysis:

(3.) They platted a crown of thorns, and put it upon his head, v. 29. This was to carry on the humour of making him a mock-king; yet, had they intended it only for a reproach, they might have platted a crown of straw, or rushes, but they designed it to be painful to him, and to be literally, what crowns are said to be figuratively, lined with thorns; he that invented this abuse, it is likely, valued himself upon the wit of it; but there was a mystery in it. [1.] Thorns came in with sin, and were part of the curse that was the product of sin, Gen 3 18. Therefore Christ, being made a curse for us, and dying to remove the curse from us, felt the pain and smart of those thorns, nay, and binds them as a crown to him (Job 31 36); for his sufferings for us were his glory. [2.] Now he answered to the type of Abraham’s ram that was caught in the thicket, and so offered up instead of Isaac, Gen 22 13. [3.] Thorns signify afflictions, 2 Chron 33 11. These Christ put into a crown; so much did he alter the property of them to them that are his, giving them cause to glory in tribulation, and making it to work for them a weight of glory. [4.] Christ was crowned with thorns, to show that his kingdom was not of this world, nor the glory of it worldly glory, but is attended here with bonds and afflictions, while the glory of it is to be revealed. [5.] It was the custom of some heathen nations, to bring their sacrifices to the altars, crowned with garlands; these thorns were the garlands with which this great Sacrifice was crowned. [6.] these thorns, it is likely, fetched blood from his blessed head, which trickled down his face, like the previous ointment (typifying the blood of Christ with which he consecrated himself) upon the head, which ran down upon the beard, even Aaron’s beard, Ps 133 2. Thus, when he came to espouse to himself his love, his dove, his undefiled church, his head was filled with dew, and his locks with the drops of the night, Cant 5 2.

(4.) They put a reed in his right hand; this was intended for a mock-sceptre, another of the insignia of the majesty they jeered him with; as if this were a sceptre good enough for such a King, as was like a reed shaken with the wind (ch. 11 7); like sceptre, like kingdom, both weak and wavering, and withering and worthless; but they were quite mistaken, for his throne is for ever and ever, and the sceptre of his kingdom is a right sceptre, Ps 45 6.

(5.) They bowed the knee before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews! Having made him a sham King, they thus make a jest of doing homage to him, thus ridiculing his pretensions to sovereignty, as Joseph’s brethren (Gen 37 8); Shalt thou indeed reign over us? But as they were afterward compelled to do obeisance to him, and enrich his dreams, so these here bowed the knee, in scorn to him who was, soon after this, exalted to the right hand of God, that at his name every knee might bow, or break before him; it is ill jesting with that which, sooner or later, will come in earnest …

… It is strange that the sons of men should ever do such a piece of villany, and that the Son of God should ever suffer such a piece of ignominy.

MacArthur points out that the place where this happened is open to the public:

If you were to go to Jerusalem and to go into the old grounds of Fort Antonia, you would find that the gabbatha, or the pavement, is still there, the very same pavement. And on that pavement, you will see in those great massive stones where our Lord was brought before Pilate and these soldiers, there are little markings. And the little markings are a game the Roman soldiers played. And I remember the little Scottish nuns years ago who explained to me all about the game. The game was sort of like, “King for a Day.” And it was a game they played with the prisoners, the way they passed the time down there. As a prisoner was there they mocked him, and they played the game having to do with these little markings on the floor. It was also a game they played in the streets with idiot boys. They would find retarded children and they would set them up and mock them and dress them in certain ways and so forth. It was a game for idiots and prisoners. It was a game of mocking, of thoughtless inhumane cruelty. And that’s what they did to Jesus.

They spat on Jesus and struck Him on the head with the reed (verse 30).

Henry says:

They smote him, it is probable, upon the crown of thorns, and so struck them into his head, that they might wound it the deeper, which made the more sport for them, to whom his pain was the greatest pleasure. Thus was he despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief. All this misery and shame he underwent, that he might purchase for us everlasting life, and joy, and glory.

MacArthur has more:

… they spit on Him, smashed His head with sticks, a big long bamboo kind of reed. They would hit Him like a whip almost. And they played their game … a man whose face is beaten black and blue, whose head is crushed with a crown of thorns, whose literal back and sides are ripped raw so that His internal organs are visible, blood running down from everywhere, gaping gashes, open wounds, streaking blood, bruised swollen face, ugly appearance. No wonder Isaiah 53 says there’s no beauty that we should desire Him.

After mocking Him, they stripped Him of the robe and put His own clothes on Him; then they led Him away to be crucified (verse 31).

MacArthur makes this observation:

What are you going to do with Jesus Christ? That’s the question. Hate Him? Mindlessly reject Him because everybody around you does? Or maybe you just laugh at the whole thing. Or maybe you just say, “Well, look, I’m not interested in it. I really don’t want to have anything to do with this.” Or maybe you just choose what is and sacrifice eternity like Pilate did, and put Jesus away – get rid of Him. You will make a choice and it will be one of those. And it will be an eternal thing.

MacArthur has a description of what happens to the body and mind during a crucifixion from Frederic Farrar’s book, The Life of Christ:

“A death by crucifixion seems to include all that pain and death can have of the horrible and ghastly. Dizziness, cramp, thirst, starvation, sleeplessness, traumatic fever, tetanus, shame, publicity of shame, long continuance of torment, horror of anticipation, mortification of untended wounds, all intensified just up to the point at which they can be endured at all, but all stopping just short of the point which would give to the sufferer the relief of unconsciousness. The unnatural position made every movement painful. The lacerated veins and crushed tendons throbbed with incessant anguish. The wounds inflamed by exposure gradually gangrened. The arteries, especially at the head and stomach, became swollen and oppressed with surcharged blood, and while each variety of misery went on gradually increasing, there was added to them the intolerable pang of a burning and raging thirst. And all these physical complications caused an internal excitement and anxiety which made the prospect of death itself, of death, the unknown enemy at whose approach man usually shudders most, bear the aspect of a delicious and exquisite release.”

One thing is clear from what Ferrar said and what we know about crucifixion and it is this: That in crucifying someone, no one was concerned with a quick and painless death. No one was concerned with the preservation of any measure of human dignity. Quite the opposite. Crucifiers sought an agonizing torture of complete humiliation that exceeds any other design for death that man has ever invented. And such was the torture that our Lord Jesus Christ endured for us – for us.

MacArthur says that Matthew’s purpose in describing the trial and crucifixion is to demonstrate for posterity:

how evil men are and how much the death of Jesus Christ demonstrates the wickedness of the human heart. And I would say that as the death of Jesus Christ on the one hand is the single greatest revelation of the love and grace of God, on the other hand it is the single greatest and supreme revelation of the defilement and wickedness of the human heart … And so it is that in Acts chapter 2, when Peter preaches at Pentecost, he says God has ordained this but you by wicked hands have brought it to pass.

… It is wickedness unmatched. And if ever there is a place where the prophecy and the statement of Jeremiah 17:9 is seen, where he said, “The heart of man is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked,” it is here at this place. That is the single greatest proof of the truth of that statement.

MacArthur tells us that crucifixion originated with the Persians:

Crucifixion originated in Persia and it originated from the strangest circumstance. The Persians had a deity by the name of Ormuzd, O-R-M-U-Z-D. And Ormuzd was the god who considered the earth to be sacred. And so anyone who was executed had to be lifted up above the earth lest that person being executed, by virtue of his evil, would defile the sacredness of the earth. And so the Persians devised a crucifixion as a way to suspend a person above the earth in execution. It passed from the Persians to the Carthaginians and somehow the Romans took it from those in Carthage and used it, and I mean the Romans used it extensively. From the best we could ascertain at the time of Christ and around the era of Roman occupation of Israel, the Romans crucified at least 30,000 Jews. And they did it all over the highways in order to warn people what happens to someone who violates Roman law.

As the soldiers went out, they came across a man from Cyrene named Simon, whom they compelled to carry the cross (verse 32).

MacArthur explains:

When Matthew says, “As they came out,” he’s referring to out of the city, because execution always had to be out of the city. The Jews would never tolerate it in their city. That was a part of Levitical Law …

Matthew doesn’t tell us what went on before they went out of the city. He just skips the part from leaving the praetorium to leaving the city. We want to understand that. And to understand that, we compare some of the other texts of the gospel writers. John 19:16, “Then delivered he Him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus and led Him away. And He bearing His cross went forth.” So we know from John 19:17 that to begin with Jesus carried His cross. And we know from how the Romans crucified people that Jesus would leave the praetorium and bearing His own cross – and by the way, there’s nothing in the Scripture to suggest that He carried a part of His cross. Some have suggested He carried only the crosspiece. Some, the long center piece. There is nothing in Scripture to suggest that He carried anything less than the whole thing. And I have no reason to believe other than that. And so Jesus would be carrying wood that would weigh in excess of 200 pounds on His back in the condition that He was in – absolutely inconceivable weight on someone in His circumstance. He went forth carrying His cross.

And He would go in this fashion: The prisoner would be surrounded by a quaternion, four Roman soldiers, one at each corner, moving Him through with other soldiers before and behind. And with the city of Jerusalem swollen with the populace of immigrants who had come in for the time of the Passover, pilgrims who had come to worship at this special time, and now this being the very Passover day and everything in motion, the place would be crawling with people. And they would parade the prisoner down the main streets. And hanging around the prisoner’s neck was a placard, or being held by someone walking in front of him, on which was the indictment for which the prisoner was to be executed so that everybody would know the price of the crime. And so Jesus, carrying His own cross, is paraded before the populace before He ever is able to leave the city, so that everyone is warned about how it is to violate Roman law, to be brought to execution by the Romans. So the procession moves through the streets.

And by the way, it was during that procession that Jesus gave His last public message. The last public sermon He ever gave was a very brief one. It’s recorded in Luke 23 as He was walking in that procession. It says in Luke 23 verse 27, “There followed Him a great company of people and of women who also bewailed and lamented,” they wept and cried at what was happening. “But Jesus turning unto them said,” and here came His last message, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for Me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. For behold, the days are coming in which they shall say, ‘Blessed are the barren and the wombs that never bore and the breasts which never nursed’” …

And then He gives a little proverb in verse 31, “For if they do these things in a green tree, what will be done in the dry?” What does He mean by that? He is the green tree and the populace of Jerusalem is the dry tree. If the Romans will do this to Him, who is innocent, what will they do to the Jews who are guilty? He is a green tree. He doesn’t even fit the burning process. You don’t even use Him to burn. The Jews are a dry tree; they should be burned. That’s His implication. You burn dry wood, not green wood. What He is saying is if the Romans will burn a green tree, that is an innocent one, one not fit to be burned, what will do to you who are guilty, who have been having insurrections after insurrections against them? When the time for your judgment comes, you watch and see what they’ll do to you. If they would do this to Me as an innocent man, what are they going to do to you as guilty ones? And we all know He’s referring to the destruction of 70 A.D. which was precipitated by their hostilities against Rome. Jesus’ last message to them on the way to His cross was a message of coming judgment, and it was coming very fast, within the lifetime of many of those people there – the holocaust of 70 A.D. from which the land of Israel has yet to recover.

MacArthur tells us more about Simon of Cyrene, who was the father of Alexander and Rufus:

Cyrene was a Greek settlement. It was located west of Alexandria and directly south of Greece on the north African coast, about ten miles inland. I suppose today it would be located in Libya. There were many Jews there, because it was a trade center. Simon was a Jew from that Greek settlement on the north coast of Africa who, no doubt, was in Jerusalem because it was Passover. We do know from the book of Acts that there was in fact a Jewish synagogue for Cyrenians in Jerusalem. So he was there to worship at the season. His name is interesting. It is a Jewish name – Simon. So we believe him to be a Jewish man. Now we don’t know a whole lot about him but there are some very interesting insights. Mark chapter 15 tells us in verse 21 that they compelled Simon of Cyrene who passed by coming out of the country. This is most interesting. He’s just walking along. Jesus comes out of the city. Simon comes out of the country. Jesus is leaving Jerusalem. Simon’s coming into Jerusalem. He’s been out in the country perhaps seeing someone that he knew, perhaps just taking a walk, perhaps securing some things for the preparation of his own Passover that day. And some have suggested that he shouldn’t have been doing that because it was a holy day, but you must remember the Sabbath law did not apply on the feastday, necessarily. It applied on the Sabbath day. This is Friday the feastday. And so it would not have been wrong for him to be walking.

So, here’s a devout Jew come to the Passover. Simply passing along, runs into this procession coming out of the city. And for whatever reason, he is conscripted by the crowd of Roman soldiers to carry the cross of Jesus. No Roman would carry a criminal’s cross, certainly not a Jewish criminal, certainly not such a criminal as this strange and bizarre character. And so they get Simon. And then it tells us most interestingly in Mark 15:21 that he was the father of Alexander and Rufus. Now at first we think that may not have importance. We know that that’s an interesting designation, Alexander and Rufus, Greek names. He gave his sons Greek names. That’s not unusual, very common, especially if he lived in a region other than Israel, as he did on the north coast in a Greek settlement.

But who are these two and why are they identified? Well, you have to remember this. Mark wrote his gospel most likely from Rome and the first readers may well have been Romans and here may well have been two that the Romans knew. And so, he simply identifies Simon further as the father of two that they know, Alexander and Rufus. This is further developed in Romans 16:13 where Paul writing to the Romans says, “Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord.” Now here then you nave Paul referring to someone named Rufus, and Paul is writing to the Romans. You have Mark referring to someone named Rufus, who seems to be commonly known by the Christians, and Mark is also writing in Rome.

So in Rome there was an Alexander and a Rufus. Here we find Rufus identified as one chosen in the Lord. “And his mother and mine.” Now who would the mother of Rufus be? The wife of Simon. It’s not too difficult then to realize that it may well be that Simon, though inadvertently passing by and made to carry the cross of Jesus Christ, through that experience came to faith in Jesus Christ, raised two sons who became strong stalwarts in the church at Rome, his wife herself becoming like a mother to the Apostle Paul. So what started out as an enforced act became the means of his conversion. And I like to think that that is indeed the scenario, and then when we get to heaven we’re going to meet Simon of Cyrene along with his wife and his children. Wouldn’t that be a fitting way for the Lord to reverse things?

Henry posits the reasons why the Romans enlisted Simon of Cyrene’s help:

… either, (1.) In compassion to him, because they saw it was too great a load for him. We can hardly think that they had any consideration of that, yet it teaches us that God considers the frame of his people, and will not suffer them to be tempted above what they are able; he gives them some breathing-time, but they must expect that the cross will return, and the lucid intervals only give them space to prepare for the next fit. But, (2.) Perhaps it was because he could not, with the cross on his back, go forward so fast as they would have him. Or, (3.) They were afraid, lest he should faint away under the load of his cross, and die, and so prevent what their malice further intended to do against him: thus even the tender mercies of the wicked (which seem to be so) are really cruel. Taking the cross off from him, they compelled one Simon of Cyrene to bear it, pressing him to the service by the authority of the governor or the priests. It was a reproach, and none would do it but by compulsion. Some think that this Simon was a disciple of Christ, at least a well-wisher to him, and that they knew it, and therefore put this upon him. Note, All that will approve themselves disciples indeed, must follow Christ, bearing his cross (ch. 16 24), bearing his reproach, Heb 13 13. We must know the fellowship of his sufferings for us, and patiently submit to all the sufferings for him we are called out to; for those only shall reign with him, that suffer with him; shall sit with him in his kingdom, that drink of his cup, and are baptized with his baptism.

When they came to the Place of a Skull, Golgotha (verse 33), they gave Him wine mixed with gall to drink, but when He tasted it, He would not drink it (verse 34).

Henry explains:

… Golgotha, near adjoining to Jerusalem, probably the common place of execution. If he had had a house of his own in Jerusalem, probably, for his greater disgrace, they would have crucified him before his own door. But now in the same place where criminals were sacrificed to the justice of the government, was our Lord Jesus sacrificed to the justice of God. Some think that it was called the place of a skull, because it was the common charnel-house, where the bones and skulls of dead men were laid together out of the way, lest people should touch them, and be defiled thereby. Here lay the trophies of death’s victory over multitudes of the children of men; and when by dying Christ would destroy death, he added this circumstance of honour to his victory, that he triumphed over death upon his own dunghill.

However, MacArthur says Golgotha was so called because it was the shape of a skull:

That is an Aramaic term transliterated really into Greek and then into English. It means skull place – skull place, the place of a skull. In Luke 23:33, Luke calls it a skull and uses the word kranion from which we get cranium. And the Latin Vulgate translated that Calvary which was the Latin term for cranium. So we get Calvary out of it because of the Latin Vulgate translation of the Greek word cranium or kranion.

We conclude then that this is a place not as some have suggested where skulls are lying all over everywhere, or it would have been called the place of the skulls, plural. Furthermore, you know this for sure, the Jews weren’t going to have any place where a whole lot of bones were lying around above the ground, which was the antithesis of their toleration. So it was called the place of a skull, or skull place, because it was shaped like that.

There is a place today, and I’ve been there on several occasions and some of you have been there as well, that is believed to be the place of the skull. It still looks like a skull, very much like a skull. It is right outside the north part of the city of Jerusalem. It is along a main highway. In fact, below it is an Arab bus station literally crammed with buses spewing out fumes that run and belch up against that very hill of Calvary. You can stand in the garden where the garden tomb is and throw a rock to the top of the hill, it’s not far at all. It looks like a skull, and I believe it’s an accurate indication of where Christ was crucified – not so much on top of it as in front of it, right along the road as everybody walking by would be able to see.

MacArthur explains the drink:

Actually the text in the Greek says wine, oinos. They gave Him wine to drink. “Mingled with gall.” Now gall, simply a general term referring to something that is bitter. And if you were to read Mark’s gospel, Mark says the bitter that they gave Him was myrrh. And myrrh is a sort of a vegetable narcotic that was put into the wine as a way to calm the person down. This is reminiscent of Psalm 69:21 in which the psalmist says they gave me also some gall. So here was a drugged wine. Mark tells us the drug they used was myrrh. It was supposed to stupefy the victim. And from the vantage point of the soldiers, no doubt, that the stupefaction wasn’t on their part an act of mercy. They really didn’t care whether the patient suffered – or the victim suffered or not. I mean, they weren’t trying to treat this person with kindness, or they were in the wrong business to start with. It accommodated them, because it might have been very difficult otherwise to hammer four nails through someone’s limbs if they weren’t stupefied to some degree. Consequently, at that very time, it would be propitious for them to have some way to stupefy the patient.

Now that’s from their standpoint. But watch this. Here’s a most fascinating thing. While from the soldier’s viewpoint it was simply an accommodation to the process of crucifixion, we know from history that it was done by an association of wealthy women in Jerusalem. They provided this from their viewpoint to ease the pain and they did it in a direct connection, according to what we know from ancient Jewish teaching, a direct reflection of Proverbs 31, wanting to fulfill what it says in Proverbs 31:6, “Give strong drink to him that is ready to perish and wine to those that are of heavy hearts.” They were wanting, I suppose, in a sense to be Proverbs 31 women. And out of the kindness of their heart to render that service required in Proverbs 31:6 to a victim who was in this direst of all situations. And so the wealthy women come out, the wealthy women try to give Jesus this in order that His pain might be alleviated. It says, “When He tasted it, He would not drink.”

He tasted it and He wouldn’t drink it. They put it to His mouth; He wouldn’t drink it. He spit it back. And the reason is He Himself had said in John 18:11, “Shall I not drink the cup My Father gives Me?” He was not going to drink this. He was not going to have any of His senses dulled. He was going to the cross to endure the full pain of everything.

And when they had crucified Jesus, they divided His clothes among themselves, casting lots (verse 35). It was customary for Roman soldiers to receive payment with the clothes of crucified people. The five items of clothing were sandals, inner cloak, headpiece, belt and outer cloak.

Henry tells us:

The clothes of those that are executed are the executioner’s fee: four soldiers were employed in crucifying Christ, and they must each of them have a share: his upper garment, if it were divided, would be of no use to any of them, and therefore they agreed to cast lots for it. (1.) Some think that the garment was so fine and rich, that it was worth contending for; but that agreed not with the poverty Christ appeared in. (2.) Perhaps they had heard of those that had been cured by touching the hem of his garment, and they thought it valuable for some magic virtue in it. Or, (3.) They hoped to get money of his friends for such a sacred relic. Or, (4.) Because, in derision, they would seem to put a value upon it, as royal clothing. Or, (5.) It was for diversion; to pass away the time while they waited for his death, they would play a game at dice for the clothes; but, whatever they designed, the word of God is herein accomplished. In that famous psalm, the first words of which Christ made use of upon the cross, it was said, They parted my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture, Ps 22 18. This was never true of David, but looks primarily at Christ, of whom David, in spirit, spoke. Then is the offence of this part of the cross ceased; for it appears to have been by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God. Christ stripped himself of his glories, to divide them among us.

Then they sat and kept watch over Him (verse 36).

MacArthur says:

They had to stay on guard. With cruel mockery and morbid sensation, they stayed on their guard to make sure nothing happened beyond what had already happened.

Over His head, they put a sign with the charge against Him (verse 37): ‘This is Jesus, the King of the Jews’.

John 19 tells us that the Jews did not like the charge:

¹⁹ Pilate also wrote an inscription and put it on the cross. It read, “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.” ²⁰ Many of the Jews read this inscription, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and it was written in Aramaic, in Latin, and in Greek. ²¹ So the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate, “Do not write, ‘The King of the Jews’, but rather, ‘This man said, I am King of the Jews.’” ²² Pilate answered, “What I have written I have written.”

Henry observes:

Pilate, instead of accusing Christ as a Criminal, proclaimed him a King, and that three times, in three inscriptions. Thus God makes men to serve his purposes, quite beyond their own.

Two bandits were crucified with Him, one on His left and one on His right (verse 38).

Henry points out that this fulfilled another of Isaiah’s prophecies:

… the scripture was fulfilled in it (Isa 53 12), He was numbered with the transgressors …

He was, at his death, numbered among the transgressors, and had his lot with the wicked, that we, at our death, might be numbered among the saints, and have our lot among the chosen.

It is likely the two were from Barabbas’s gang, since Barabbas had been scheduled to die that day.

MacArthur says the men would have been violent, which would also fit with Barabbas’s crimes:

So, there He hangs with these two, the Greek word is lēstai. There are a couple of words in the Greek language that have to do with stealing. One is lēstai and the other is kleptai. Kleptai is a word from which we get klepto, kleptomaniac, someone who is a petty thief who snatches things, who grabs things. But lēstai is a different word. It is the word used here, and basically it means a bandit or a plundering robber, a brigand to use an old word, not a petty thief. These are robbers who kill, who are serious about what they do. They don’t sneak in and walk away with something. They come thundering through the door, guns blazing, if you will, the worst of criminals. And very likely they were associates of Barabbas who was intended for that middle cross before the crowd wanted Barabbas and Jesus crucified in his place.

They knew something of the claims of Jesus. They knew something about it as is evidenced by the future record of what they say … So they knew some of the claims of Jesus.

But they’re also wicked. They heap insults at Jesus. They revile Jesus … They have no concern for Messiahs and kingdoms. They’re just out for the loot.

There are still people like them. They know about Jesus. They may not know much, but they know a little, but for them life is all revolved around the loot. Life is all concerned with material things. They have little regard for righteousness, little regard for truth. They live for self‑indulgence and they pay a great price for it. And to show you how deeply committed they were to their life style, here they are hanging on a cross in the hours of their own death, and they’re still firing insults to one who claims to be the Son of God. They’re blasphemers of another sort who mock Jesus because they have a greater love for the things of the world than they do for the things of God.

My exegesis concludes tomorrow.

Good Friday readings are as follows:

Readings for Good Friday

• Good Friday — exegesis on the Epistle, Hebrews 10:16-25 (2022)
• Good Friday — exegesis on the Gospel: John 18 (2021)

Reign of Christ, or Christ the King, Sunday — Year C — exegesis on the Gospel, Luke 23:33-43 (a deep dive into the Crucifixion, forgiveness and the Repentant Thief)