In fact Paul used his right as a Roman citizen to avoid such punishment… in fact there is no indication that any of the apostles received this form of punishment by the Romans see below Jesus was unique in his punishment… scourging is a way of execution and never was it used in combination with the crucifiction see below.
Deu 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. Isa But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed. Act And when they had tied him up with the thongs, Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?
I also! Israelites are they? Share this: Twitter Facebook. Like this: Like Loading Bookmark the permalink. April 4, at am. Onisemus says:. October 30, at am. November 10, at am. Thirty nine lashes was the legal limit, because 40 would kill a man. Because this was a "cat of nine tails" it was actually 39 times nine, or lashes.
Sometimes the prisoners were disemboweled by the beating. This was a society that had gladiators, men who fought to the death in the Coliseum for sport.
This society would later turn hungry wild animals loose on Christians in the Coliseum. These cruel and hardened soldiers made sport of the flogging.
The objective was to do the most damage without killing a man. Forty lashes would kill. I know this question is super old, then again, so is the topic thus it is timeless. Trying to not duplicate things said above, there are just a couple differentiating facts to consider to sort out this answer.
First, Mosaic Law, introduced through Moses, stated 40 lashes to be the max, if the crime deserved such punishment at all. Less was certainly likely and at the discretion of the judge and completely based on severity of crime.
No more than 40 was allowed, but the reason cited was because it would publicly humiliate and degrade the person, not because it would kill them, which in no way could the whips used do. Romans had something entirely different. They used a flagellum whip similar to the British cat-o'-nine-tails for their scourging punishment called verberatio. Many times arteries were exposed and skin hanging. It was insanely cruel and degrading by design. It was intended to bring someone up to the brink of death but often would kill the offender as there was no definitive of lashes.
But sometimes they used it as an outright method for a death sentence. Two entirely different methods and purposes. The Romans, let alone the flagellum used, didn't even exist when the Mosaic Law was given.
This is not to suggest that God does not heal our sickness but it is important to underscore the biblical significance of the atoning works of Christ and to put them into their appropriate theological perspective. Kelsi Mazzotta I don't believe that Pilate was thinking of the amount of known diseases when he sentenced Jesus.
That's symbolic conjecture. Scripture doesn't say how many stripes Jesus received. It was called 40 lashes minus one because it was assumed that 40 or more lashes would kill someone.
They were whipped with a cat of nine tails a whip with nine lashings embedded with bits of metal or bone. In Roman times, it was deemed that if a flogger were to appropriately administer a punishment, he should be able to kill a man with forty lashes.
Depending on the circumstances, if he failed to kill a man in forty lashes, the flogger would face death. This was to insure that the flogger would not hold back in meting out the punishment.
Using this same warped twisted logic, the Romans determined that 39 lashes shouldn't kill a person so that was the most you could give a person, without a sentence of death by flogging. Flogging is the only punishment mentioned in the Bible as a standard punishment. The maximum number of strokes to be administered in any one case is 40 Deut. The Jewish elders were so true to the letter of the law that they often ignored its spirit.
Remember that they chastised the disciples of Jesus for plucking corn on a Sabbath day. Stopping the whip at 40 would be OK, but could sometimes lead to a situation in which an onlooker might complain that the flogging had exceeded Just to avoid such a situation , the flogging would stop at 39 so that nobody would have the chance to complain.
Great conversation my Christian brothers and sisters here's the answer for those of you who read the story of jesus's crucifixion I would like to make three points. Passover Jewish holiday which forbidded the Jews from executing Jesus which is why they had to basically manipulate the Romans into doing it so Jewish law opposed on Jesus could not have happened it had to be Roman law even though the Jews were getting him condemned it was still the Romans that did the deed.
Flogging was not used for a sense of execution it was simply for torture and punishments but the end goal was the person would live hopefully there were some who did die from flogging but the ultimate goal was to inflict as much punishment on the person as possible without actually killing them so flogging was not necessarily deemed an execution. Roman law was 40 lashes to my knowledge that was the maximum given.
The crucifixion was the death sentence in the actual means of executing Jesus the flogging as pilots idea was he was trying to appease the Jewish people and convince them not to kill Jesus. He was dealing out a punishment to Jesus trying to get the Jews to see reason and not execute the man who by pilots own words had committed no wrong. So the flogging wasn't meant to kill Jesus it was meant simply as a punishment.
It was the Jewish people who accepted a murderer instead of Jesus which is why Jesus hung on the cross Pilate and the Romans actually tried to give Jesus plenty of opportunities to get out of it, but the Jewish people were stubborn and wanted him dead.
But Jesus received by Roman law 40 lashes. And furthermore upon going to Calvary to be crucified he was in such bad shape that someone actually had to help him carry his cross. So Jesus being the only one that I know of to survive 40 lashes was pretty beat up by that point if not on the brink of death.
Jesus being the only one that I've ever known that got the maximum 40 lashes thank you my brothers and sisters. Sign up to join this community.
The best answers are voted up and rise to the top. Stack Overflow for Teams — Collaborate and share knowledge with a private group. Create a free Team What is Teams? Learn more. Ask Question. Asked 1 year, 9 months ago. Active 4 months ago. Viewed 6k times. Flogging in Jewish Law Deuteronomy restricts lashes to be no more than 40 "but the judge must not impose more than forty lashes.
Thus, the Talmud states "How many lashes is he given? Forty less one" Mishnah Makkot , Talmud Makkot 22a Now, that helps perfectly explain where Paul says that "Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one.
Back to the Question I have yet to find any proof of any limit to the number of lashes that a Roman could or would place on a criminal, nor any mention of a limit being because of a concern for its deadliness. Improve this question. Community Bot 1. Alex Strasser Alex Strasser 1, 9 9 silver badges 25 25 bronze badges. Romans were not limited in the number of strokes they could mete out to a criminal. Some claim otherwise, but they never give sources.
If you haven't already, check out this site: asor. Helpful — Alex Strasser. Add a comment. Active Oldest Votes. This is a false assumption! For one thing, the Romans were not limited in the number of strokes they could mete out.
In Talmudic Law the number was reduced by one in case of miscounting. Roman Falgrum Torture Methods Written evidence from the time of Jesus reveals that torture was not only carried out but actually regulated under the Roman state. Improve this answer. Thanks for the answer. I'm not sure how a question can be a false assumption.
0コメント