The Crown of Thorns

exchemist said:
St Luke's gospel does not in fact say it was blood.

Just that it fell to the ground "like" drops of blood. It may simply have been imagery, suggesting it was falling profusely in large drops, like somebody bleeding severely.
Click to expand...

Do the other gospels suggest the same, or is it only recorded in Luke? Why the crown of thorns?
 
Or it could be a case of uncertainty. The crown of thorns relevant, and the discrepancies of accounts told until they were written down in Luke...how ever many years it was after the event it was recorded.

Who saw Jesus in the Garden praying?
 
ThazzarBaal said:
Hematohidrosis? Interesting. Why the crown of thorns? Do you think maybe to claim credit for the blood from his head? His persecutors I mean. They apparently beat him beyond recognition.
Click to expand...
Jesus was labelled the king of the Jews by the Romans, so the torturers thought it would be a good laugh to make a crown fit for the king of the Jews.
 
Platted = Twisted

Does this suggest digging the thorns in as it was placed on his head or does it imply taking the time to braid up a crown of thorns just to simply place it on his head?
 
Last edited:
davewhite04 said:
Jesus was labelled the king of the Jews by the Romans, so the torturers thought it would be a good laugh to make a crown fit for the king of the Jews.
Click to expand...

I'd suggest they got a little sadistic with his departure party. From what I gather, no one was in the garden to witness the drops of blood like sweat, but it was written and witnessed (apparently) that a crown of thorns was twisted on his head, then left there before striking him on the head with a reed...possibly to induce bleeding. He apparently was counted among the dead, placed in a tomb to die (after losing consciousness) then came out of his tomb after an angel of the lord moved the stone from in front of it, this being counted as a resurrection from the grave and or his hell.
 
ThazzarBaal said:
Platted = Twisted

Does this suggest digging the thorns in as it was placed on his head or does it imply taking the time to braid up a crown of thorns just to simply place it on his head?
Click to expand...

It had to stay on his head while carrying a cross, then being crucified, so I think it would of been well dug in.
 
My brother was at a high school school concert and was clapping so hard to the music* that his hands bled right through his skin.

*Soul Man
 
ThazzarBaal said:
I'd suggest they got a little sadistic with his departure party. From what I gather, no one was in the garden to witness the drops of blood like sweat, but it was written and witnessed (apparently) that a crown of thorns was twisted on his head, then left there before striking him on the head with a reed...possibly to induce bleeding. He apparently was counted among the dead, placed in a tomb to die (after losing consciousness) then came out of his tomb after an angel of the lord moved the stone from in front of it, this being counted as a resurrection from the grave and or his hell.
Click to expand...

Jesus died on the cross. He got buried in a tomb. The third day the tomb was empty.
 
davewhite04 said:
Jesus died on the cross. He got buried in a tomb. The third day the tomb was empty.
Click to expand...

That kinda sums it up. They intended to kill him, placed him in a tomb after his crucifixion, placed a stone in front of it, then left him to rot. He was indeed counted among the dead. He came out of his tomb 3 days later after an angel moved the stone from in front of it. He had been beaten so badly his friends didn't even recognize him, so badly that Thomas required more proof that it was infact him....alive and standing in front of him. Incredible story really.
 
Last edited:
ThazzarBaal said:
Do the other gospels suggest the same, or is it only recorded in Luke? Why the crown of thorns?
Click to expand...
No. Only St. Luke.

This description relates to Agony in the Garden (of Gethsemane). The crown of thorns comes much later in the Passion story.
 
exchemist said:
No. Only St. Luke.

This description relates to Agony in the Garden (of Gethsemane). The crown of thorns comes much later in the Passion story.
Click to expand...

Cool ... Luke alone about the drops of sweat. So, he was praying to be able to avoid it, was extremely distraught, then submitted to it. After which he went back to camp to be apprehended by the authorities. The thorn story comes after apprehension and during the crucifixion processes, and after the trial sit down with Pilot.

An illustration of how badly he wanted to avoid the entire ordeal to come, so to speak. I can't say I blame him. It's one thing to speak about something so unpleasant and accept it, and quite another thing when it's staring you in the face.
 
ThazzarBaal said:
Cool ... Luke alone about the drops of sweat. So, he was praying to be able to avoid it, was extremely distraught, then submitted to it. After which he went back to camp to be apprehended by the authorities. The thorn story comes after apprehension and during the crucifixion processes, and after the trial sit down with Pilot.

An illustration of how badly he wanted to avoid the entire ordeal to come, so to speak. I can't say I blame him. It's one thing to speak about something so unpleasant and accept it, and quite another thing when it's staring you in the face.
Click to expand...
Pilate.
 
DaveC426913 said:
I don't follow.

Ostensibly, the crown was made by - and was placed on his head by - a real person, there with Jesus at the time. How can a real act by a real person be a representation of an abstract concept such as "all the false sins placed on the heads of mankind"?

That seems to be a form of category error.
Click to expand...
I think you may be misunderstanding what the OP is suggesting.
He seems to be suggesting (his theory) that those who placed the crown of thorns upon Jesus' head did so in order to represent the sins etc.
If this is what the OP is suggesting then it is no more a category error than a person choosing to dress in black in order to represent the depression he may be experiencing.
There is the what that occurred, and there is the why of those who did it - and this theory, to me at least, seems to be looking at the latter.

That said, if the OP doesn't mean this, then, sure, all bets are off. ;)
 
davewhite04 said:
Jesus was labelled the king of the Jews by the Romans, so the torturers thought it would be a good laugh to make a crown fit for the king of the Jews.
Click to expand...
I think there is decent documentation to support this.
Many Christians claim Jesus was killed by the Jews, he was not.
The Romans were a brutal empire and did not tolerate insurrection. A claim to the throne by a rebel would have been enough to arrest Jesus for treason. They did not care about the Jews blasphemy laws, they were pagans.
 
Baldeee said:
I think you may be misunderstanding what the OP is suggesting.
He seems to be suggesting (his theory) that those who placed the crown of thorns upon Jesus' head did so in order to represent the sins etc.
If this is what the OP is suggesting then it is no more a category error than a person choosing to dress in black in order to represent the depression he may be experiencing.
There is the what that occurred, and there is the why of those who did it - and this theory, to me at least, seems to be looking at the latter.

That said, if the OP doesn't mean this, then, sure, all bets are off. ;)
Click to expand...

Indeed. That is the kind of clarification I was hoping my comment would elicit, even if I didn't hit the nail directly on the head.
 
Pinball1970 said:
I think there is decent documentation to support this.
Many Christians claim Jesus was killed by the Jews, he was not.
The Romans were a brutal empire and did not tolerate insurrection. A claim to the throne by a rebel would have been enough to arrest Jesus for treason. They did not care about the Jews blasphemy laws, they were pagans.
Click to expand...
The gospel accounts make this rather arguable. The story they give is that Pilate offered them a choice of prisoners to release: Jesus or a robber by the name of Barabbas - and they chose Barabbas, thereby condemning Jesus. But there is no doubt that on the story it was the Romans who then actually put him to death.
 
exchemist said:
The gospel accounts make this rather arguable. The story they give is that Pilate offered them a choice of prisoners to release: Jesus or a robber by the name of Barabbas - and they chose Barabbas, thereby condemning Jesus. But there is no doubt that on the story it was the Romans who then actually put him to death.
Click to expand...
I thought they originally tried to release Wodger, or Woderwick, or Thimon the Thaduces Thtwangler? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top