Seven occurrences; AV translates as “scourge” seven times. 1 to scourge.

; “to whip,” “to beat with a lash or whip”

1. In Mt. 10:17 and 23:34 the disciples are told that with other persecutions they will have to face whippings in the synagogues. The sayings do not have to have been shaped by later experience in times of persecution.2 The fact that the tt. is used only in Mt. points to a Palestinian origin.

There is a thorough treatment of punishment by scourging in Sanh.-Makkot3 Three, and sometimes as many as 23, judges were needed to secure condemnation to whipping in the local synagogues

These had specific tasks during execution of the sentence. One recited

the second counted the blows, the third gave the command before each blow

4 Offences were calumniation of a woman (Dt. 22:13–19), wounding the body (cf. Dt. 25:1–3), false witness if not punished more severely, the cursing of a master by a slave, certain forms of incest, keeping Hellenistic customs, breaking Nazarite vows, performing holy functions in a state of cultic uncleanness, sacrificing outside the temple, transgressing certain laws of diet, esp. Lv. 3:17, breaking the bones of the paschal lamb, imitating incense or anointing oil, flagrant offences against the Ten Commandments.5 In the case of ordained scholars the punishment could be a substitute for expulsion. Dt. 25:3 limits the number of strokes to 40 as compared with 60 in the Code of Hammurabi6 and as many as 80 or even 100 in the Koran.

Acc. to Roman law the verberatio always accompanied a capital sentence, condemnatio ad metalla, and other degrading punishments with the loss of freedom or civil rights.17 In many cases it was itself fatal. It usually preceded crucifixion.18 It was so terrible that even Domitian was horrified by it.19 Women were exempted.20 We know little about the details. The number of strokes was not prescribed. It continued until the flesh hung down in bloody shreds. Slaves administered it, and the condemned person was tied to a pillar.

The synagogue scourge consisted of a strap of calf leather which was divided into four thongs and through which smaller thongs were plaited to make it stronger. In the handle there was a device to make the strap longer or shorter

The Roman scourge, the horribile flagellum,2 also flagrum, was a leather strap with interwoven bones and bits of metal.

The Soldiers Mistreat Jesus (19:1–3) The theme of kingship continues as we now see the Roman soldiers dress Jesus up like a king, revere him and greet him as king of the Jews. They are doing so in cruel mockery, but they speak the truth. This may be another example of John’s use of irony in having people speak truth that they themselves do not realize, providing “a sign that the Gentiles will ultimately confess the kingship of Jesus”

In addition to beating Jesus, as ordered by Pilate, the soldiers mocked him. The crown of thorns (v. 2) was most likely made from the date palm (Hart 1952), the same plant that had supplied the fronds laid on Jesus’ path as he entered Jerusalem a short time before (12:13). The spikes on this plant can reach twelve inches long and were notorious for inflicting pain (cf. Midrash Rabbah on Num 3:1). Such long spikes would give the effect of a starburst around Jesus’ head, in imitation of the likeness of deified rulers on coins of the period and much earlier.

2) and the greeting “Hail, king of the Jews!” (v. 3)—an imitation of the greeting to Caesar, “Ave, Caesar”—furthered the sick entertainment. As they lined up and came forward to greet him (cf. Bruce 1983:358), instead of giving him the kiss of greeting, they struck him in the face (v. 3).

This scene presents a powerful picture of Christ’s glory, since this caricature of Christian worship, as E. C. Hoskyns calls it 1940b:621), actually speaks of Jesus’ true identity as King of the Jews and, indeed, Lord of all. But throughout the story we have seen the chief characteristic of the glory of God revealed in Jesus to be his love. Jesus really is a king beyond the wildest imaginings of these soldiers. When we realize the power Jesus had we understand more of his humility and see God’s brilliant glory. “Thus the kingdom which was not of this world overcame that proud world, not by the ferocity of fighting, but by the humility of suffering”

Pilate went out to the Jewish opponents and said he found no basis for a charge against Jesus

This time he brings Jesus out with him—Jesus wearing the mocking signs of kingship and bearing the marks of the violence done against him. This very presentation of Jesus, with Pilate’s dramatic words, Here is the man! (v. 5), could itself be a continuation of the mockery, as though Jesus is coming forth to be presented to his subjects as on some state occasion. But while Pilate is mocking Jesus and his fellow Jews he is also making the point that there is no basis for a charge against such a figure. Jesus may be dressed up as a king and a god (Hart 1952:75), but in Pilate’s eyes he is only a man.

Once again we have an “unconscious prophet”

Several proposals have been made for the significance of Pilate’s calling Jesus the man

One of the more likely proposals is Jesus’ identity as the Son of Man, since Jesus had said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I AM”

Another possibility is an emphasis on Jesus’ humanity: Jesus is indeed man (anthrōpos), for the Word became flesh

Since the real reason his opponents are against him is his claim to deity (19:7), we would have in Pilate’s phrase references to both the humanity and the deity of Jesus.

Pilate’s bid to release Jesus is once again soundly rejected (v. 6a). The heart of the opposition to Jesus comes from the chief priests and their officials, and John singles these folk out as the ones crying, Crucify! Crucify! They want Jesus not merely dead, but crucified. The reason, most likely, is that this form of death was associated with the curse in the law against “anyone who is hung on a tree”

Pilate’s little plan failed, so in exasperation he tells the leaders to take Jesus and crucify him themselves, since, as he says for the third time, he finds no charge against Jesus (v. 6). Pilate is trusting in political games rather than standing in integrity for what he knows to be true. When such people cannot control a situation they get frustrated and angry.

Pilate and the Jewish leaders are very agitated, but the appeal they both make is to law. According to Roman law Jesus is innocent, as Pilate has now said three times. But the leaders now assert that according to Jewish law (v. 7), Jesus must die because he claimed to be the Son of God

The law they seem to have in mind says “anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death”

The claim to be a “son of God” is not necessarily a blasphemous claim to deity since the phrase was used in the Old Testament to describe beings other than God, in particular heavenly beings

Since “son of God” was used of the king, the opponents are not now shifting away from the charge that Jesus claims to be king

New Testament

ἐπανίσταμαι (epanistamai). vb. to rise up, to rebel. This verb literally means “to rise”; figuratively, it can describe the acts of revolting or rebelling.

The two occurrences of this verb in the NT occur within sayings of Jesus that seem to pick up the language of Micah

Jesus warns about the time of persecution when sons will rise up against their parents and kill them.

the crucifixion of two other people with Yeshua. One was hung on His right side and one on the other on His left side with Yeshua in the center, literally being “numbered with the transgressors,” in fulfillment of Isaiah 53:12

However, the word robbers is not an accurate word because stealing was not punishable by crucifixion under Roman law. A better translation would be “rebels.” These were people who, with Barabbas, had rebelled against Roman authority and were captured. But Barabbas was released in place of Jesus. These two were not so fortunate, they were guilty of the very crime of which Jesus was accused—sedition against Rome.

initially, both rebels participated in the mockery. But as one of them continued to look and reflect upon the scene, like Simon of Cyrene, he, too, realized that the One being mocked was indeed the Messiah. As he reflected and meditated, he developed a theology that contains four points. First, he recognized that he himself was a sinner; no one realizes his need for a Savior until he recognizes his own sinfulness. Secondly, he recognized that Jesus was sinless. Although Jesus was being crucified for a specific crime, this rebel realized that Jesus was not guilty of that crime nor any other sin. Thirdly, he recognized that Jesus could save him. Fourthly, he recognized that Yeshua, although now dying, would come into His Kingdom in the future. The rebel requested that he might be remembered when that