Session 29: February 4, 2023

Scripture Reading: John 19:31-42

31 Then because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies should not stay on the crosses on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was an especially important one), the Jewish leaders asked Pilate to have the victims’ legs broken and the bodies taken down. 32 So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the two men who had been crucified with Jesus, first the one and then the other. 33 But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and blood and water flowed out immediately. 35 And the person who saw it has testified (and his testimony is true, and he knows that he is telling the truth), so that you also may believe. 36 For these things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled, “Not a bone of his will be broken.” 37 And again another scripture says, “They will look on the one whom they have pierced.”

38 After this, Joseph of Arimathea, a disciple of Jesus (but secretly because he feared the Jewish leaders), asked Pilate if he could remove the body of Jesus. Pilate gave him permission, so he went and took the body away. 39 Nicodemus, the man who had previously come to Jesus at night, accompanied Joseph, carrying a mixture of myrrh and aloes weighing about 75 pounds. 40 Then they took Jesus’ body and wrapped it, with the aromatic spices, in strips of linen cloth according to Jewish burial customs. 41 Now at the place where Jesus was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden was a new tomb where no one had yet been buried. 42 And so, because it was the Jewish day of preparation and the tomb was nearby, they placed Jesus’ body there.

Main Themes

Breaking Bones

As we have discussed before, victims of crucifixion could survive for days while agonizing on the cross. This presented a problem for the Jews: this was against their law.

If a person commits a sin punishable by death and is executed, and you hang the corpse on a tree, his body must not remain all night on the tree; instead you must make certain you bury him that same day, for the one who is left exposed on a tree is cursed by God. You must not defile your land that the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance. (Deuteronomy 21:22-23)

Put simply, an executed man had to be buried the same day. To leave the body exposed for longer would defile the land. But in the case of Jesus’ crucifixion, the defilement would extend well beyond the land. The day following the crucifixion was Saturday, the Sabbath—a holy day on its own right. (Recall that the most offensive crime committed by Jesus was “working” on the Sabbath.) As if that were not enough, the day following Jesus’ crucifixion was not any Sabbath—it was the Sabbath of Passover, the most holy festival of the year. As Craig Keener points out, “Leaving the bodies hanging on any day would have violated Jewish custom; leaving them up on a Sabbath was worse; leaving them up on a festal Sabbath was unconscionable.”

Consequently, the Jews could not wait for all three crucified men to die painfully, painfully slowly. They request that the victims’ legs be broken. Such an injury would prevent the prisoners from holding their weight up, leaving them hanging from their tied or nailed arms. This would result in quick suffocation.

Three observations are noteworthy. First, the Roman acquiescence to the Jewish request shows the Romans were at least somewhat accommodating to the Jews and their customs. We see an inkling of this when Pilate comes out of the praetorium to meet the religious elite, since they could not enter the home of a Gentile without becoming unclean. Second, the request reinforces the recurring theme that Jesus’ execution is primarily the responsibility of the Jewish elite, not the Romans. The Jewish elite are even directing some of the details of a Roman execution. Third, and most importantly, Jesus “gives up” his spirit before the Jewish request is carried out. Jesus remains in control and purposefully directs the situation. And Jesus does so such that his bones not be broken.

The obvious follow up question is, “Why does it matter that Jesus’ bones were not broken?” As verse 36 tells us, “these things happened so that the scriptures would be fulfilled.” Which scriptures?

Primarily, Jesus’ unbroken bones fulfill the paschal lamb type. Before I cite the Old Testament, lets discuss what is a type. As a Christian website explains:

Typology is a special kind of symbolism. (A symbol is something that represents something else.) We can define a type as a “prophetic symbol” because all types are representations of something yet future. More specifically, a type in Scripture is a person or thing in the Old Testament that foreshadows a person or thing in the New Testament. For example, the flood of Noah’s day (Genesis 6—7) is used as a type of baptism in 1 Peter 3:20–21. The word for “type” that Peter uses is figure.

When we say that someone is a type of Christ, we are saying that a person in the Old Testament behaves in a way that corresponds to Jesus’ character or actions in the New Testament. When we say that something is “typical” of Christ, we are saying that an object or event in the Old Testament can be viewed as representative of some quality of Jesus.

While typology can sometimes be misused by careless theologians, it is a beautiful and powerful literary device. We can better understand the “real” thing by studying its “shadows.”

In this case, what is the type? As I stated above, it is the paschal lamb—the lamb that was sacrificed during Passover. (Recall, Passover is the very festival being celebrated when Jesus is crucified.)

How does John inform us of the connection between Jesus and the paschal lamb? By pointing out no bones were broken. An informed listener of the Gospel would quickly realize that this was just like God commanded regarding the lamb:

The Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “This is the ordinance of the Passover. No foreigner may share in eating it. But everyone’s servant who is bought for money, after you have circumcised him, may eat it. A foreigner and a hired worker must not eat it. It must be eaten in one house; you must not bring any of the meat outside the house, and you must not break a bone of it. The whole community of Israel must observe it. (Exodus 12:43-47, emphasis added)

Ok, so the paschal lamb is a type for Jesus. Why does this matter? Because the “shadows” can inform us about the “real” thing. The paschal lamb tradition goes all the way back to the exodus of the Israelites from their Egyptian oppressors.

The Lord said to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt, “This month is to be your beginning of months; it will be your first month of the year. Tell the whole community of Israel, ‘On the tenth day of this month they each must take a lamb for themselves according to their families—a lamb for each household. . . . Your lamb must be perfect, a male, one year old; you may take it from the sheep or from the goats. You must care for it until the fourteenth day of this month, and then the whole community of Israel will kill it around sundown. They will take some of the blood and put it on the two side posts and top of the doorframe of the houses where they will eat it. . . .

“‘I will pass through the land of Egypt in the same night, and I will attack all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both of humans and of animals, and on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment. I am the Lord. The blood will be a sign for you on the houses where you are, so that when I see the blood I will pass over you, and this plague will not fall on you to destroy you when I attack the land of Egypt. (Exodus 12:1-13, edited for brevity, emphasis added)

Notice some of the key characteristics of the paschal lamb. It had to be perfect. It had to live among the people for a while. Then the whole community had to get together to slaughter it. And what was its purpose? Those who marked their household with its blood would be “passed over,” avoiding God’s judgment.

Notice how important is the connection between the paschal lamb and Jesus. John does not make the theology of Jesus’ sacrifice explicit. What he does instead is to make clear that the paschal lamb is a type of Christ. We can then connect the dots. Jesus was a perfect sacrifice. Just like the paschal lamb, he lived among the people until the entire community gathered to kill him. Not one of his bones was broken. And what’s the purpose? Whoever marks himself with the blood of Christ will avoid the judgment of God.

The connection between the unbroken bones of the paschal lamb and Jesus on the cross would not have been missed on first-century Jews. Early Judaism carefully observed the prohibition against breaking the lamb’s bones. One who violated this rule was liable to receiving the forty lashes!

Finally, the fact that Jesus’ bones were not broken would also remind John’s audience of Psalm 34:19-20:

The godly face many dangers, but the Lord saves them from each one of them.

He protects all his bones; not one of them is broken.

Pierced His Side

As much as the connection between Jesus and the paschal lamb informs us, John points to additional scripture. Jesus’ bones were not broken, but his side was pierced. John makes a connection to prophecy by quoting Zechariah, “They will look on the one whom they have pierced.” Let’s read the context of the passage in Zechariah:

“I will pour out on the kingship of David and the population of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication so that they will look to me, the one they have pierced. They will lament for him as one laments for an only son, and there will be a bitter cry for him like the bitter cry for a firstborn. On that day the lamentation in Jerusalem will be as great as the lamentation at Hadad Rimmon in the plain of Megiddo. The land will mourn, each clan by itself . . . . “In that day there will be a fountain opened up for the dynasty of David and the people of Jerusalem to cleanse them from sin and impurity.” (Zechariah 12:10-13:1)

Later Jewish rabbis would also interpret this passage in Zechariah messianically.

And what happens next? John tells us that when Jesus was pierced on his side, “blood and water flowed out.” This also happened such that “the scripture would be fulfilled.” (v. 36) The recurring question returns: which scripture?

Before we answer that question, let’s consider some history. Roman soldiers carried both a short sword and a lance, or pilum. Consequently, the claim that a prisoner would be pierced by a spear is historically consistent. The surprise is not the piercing but the blood and water. Technically, as Craig Keener points out, “a substance that appears like water could flow from the pericardial sac around the heart along with blood.” However, the biology of blood and water flowing from Jesus is hardly the point of discussion today. The question is, what does it mean?

In the piercing of Jesus, some view a further connection to the paschal lamb. The Passover lamb was also “pierced” as it was cooked. A pomegranate limb would run from its mouth all the way through its body. Additionally, the blood of the lamb would be collected and sprinkled on the altar. The argument is that the emphasis on piercing Jesus and observing his blood is similar to how the paschal lamb was treated. However, this misses the key point in the text: not only blood flowed out but water as well. Water is the key.

In the Gospel of John, water has immense symbolic significance. Recall the conversation with the Samaritan woman:

A Samaritan woman came to draw water. Jesus said to her, “Give me some water to drink.” (For his disciples had gone off into the town to buy supplies.) So the Samaritan woman said to him, “How can you—a Jew—ask me, a Samaritan woman, for water to drink?” (For Jews use nothing in common with Samaritans.)

Jesus answered her, “If you had known the gift of God and who it is who said to you, ‘Give me some water to drink,’ you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.” “Sir,” the woman said to him, “you have no bucket and the well is deep; where then do you get this living water? Surely you’re not greater than our ancestor Jacob, are you? For he gave us this well and drank from it himself, along with his sons and his livestock.”

Jesus replied, “Everyone who drinks some of this water will be thirsty again. But whoever drinks some of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again, but the water that I will give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up to eternal life.” (John 3:7-14, emphasis added)

Recall also Jesus’ concluding lesson at the Feast of Booths:

On the last day of the feast, the greatest day, Jesus stood up and shouted out, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me, and let the one who believes in me drink. Just as the scripture says, ‘From within him will flow rivers of living water.’” (Now he said this about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were going to receive, for the Spirit had not yet been given because Jesus was not yet glorified.) (John 7:37-39, emphasis added)

Water represents the Holy Spirit that will indwell the believers—but that would not come until Jesus were “glorified.” And what would be this “glorification”? Jesus spoke of the crucifixion with that exact word:

When Jesus had finished saying these things, he looked upward to heaven and said, “Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, so that your Son may glorify you—just as you have given him authority over all humanity, so that he may give eternal life to everyone you have given him. (John 17:1-2, emphasis added)

In short, now that Jesus has been glorified, now that his work is “completed,” the Spirit flows. The scriptures have been fulfilled.

Joseph of Arimathea

The Romans would prefer for the bodies of those crucified to remain exposed. Eventually, after the bodies had succumbed to rot and wild animals, they would be thrown in common burials. However, Jewish custom demanded burial by sunset (more on this later). So, is the account of Jesus burial historically reasonable? Pilate would have been aware of the Jewish custom concerning burial. Pilate shows his willingness to accommodate Jewish custom by meeting the Jewish elite outside the praetorium, he accommodates the execution of Jesus, and the Roman soldiers accommodate the breaking of the prisoners’ legs. Therefore, Pilate accommodating the burial of those crucified, particularly during one of the most holy festivals of the Jewish people, seems likely. Moreover, Pilate seemed to hold no personal animus against Jesus, and both Jesus’ enemies and his followers would have argued for Jesus’ burial. One could say that Roman law prohibited burying the executed. However, we know Romans sometimes surrendered the bodies to friends or relatives who sought to bury them. Since Pilate did not take seriously the charge of treason levied on Jesus, he had no compelling reason to withhold Jesus’ burial.

The man who requests the body of Jesus for proper burial is one Joseph of Arimathea. John provides no introduction. At most, one could presume Joseph of Arimathea must have been an important man to gain access to Pilate. Fortunately, the other gospels provide more information that confirm that presumption.

Joseph of Arimathea, a highly regarded member of the council, who was himself looking forward to the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. (Mark 15:43)

Perhaps the reason John does not provide information on Joseph of Arimathea is because Joseph had already become well known in the Christian community.

What is surprising about Joseph’s behavior is not so much the request to bury Jesus—even Jesus’ enemies wanted him buried before nightfall. The shock is that Joseph would bury Jesus in a family tomb rather than a criminal burial plot. (“Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut in the rock.” Matthew 27:59-60) Joseph was a secret disciple because of his fear of the Jewish elite. In a model act of courage, Joseph not only intercedes for Jesus (even if posthumously), but this intercession become undeniably public by honoring Jesus’ body with Joseph’s family tomb. Joseph acts in public defiance of the Jewish elite. Since technically Roman law prohibited the burial of the executed, one could also claim Joseph acts valiantly before the Romans by making his request. (We know that Pilate would grant the request, but Joseph would not have been so certain.)

Nicodemus, the Man Who Had Come at Night

Joseph of Arimathea provides the tomb. Nicodemus provides the remaining burial arrangements.

Much like Joseph, Nicodemus had been afraid to publicly support Jesus. John makes sure we remember.

When we first meet Nicodemus, he comes to Jesus at night, presumably to meet in secret. His conversation with Jesus is riddled with confusion, denial, or both.

Now a certain man, a Pharisee named Nicodemus, who was a member of the Jewish ruling council, came to Jesus at night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs that you do unless God is with him.” Jesus replied, “I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is born from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter his mother’s womb and be born a second time, can he?” (John 3:1-4)

We later meet Nicodemus in chapter 7. As the Jewish elite seek to condemn Jesus for breaking the Sabbath and blasphemy, Nicodemus attempts to mount a legal defense of Jesus. He does so without exposing himself:

Nicodemus, who had gone to Jesus before and who was one of the rulers, said, “Our law doesn’t condemn a man unless it first hears from him and learns what he is doing, does it?” They replied, “You aren’t from Galilee too, are you? Investigate carefully and you will see that no prophet comes from Galilee!” (John 7:52-53)

Now, in chapter 19, John reminds us of this history. He introduces Nicodemus as “the man who had previously come to Jesus at night.” John also tells us the most important step in Nicodemus’ journey: he is finally willing to risk his reputation to follow Jesus.

We must notice the contrast between Joseph and Nicodemus on one hand and the disciples on the other. Joseph and Nicodemus remained secret because of fear, but in the darkest moment they displayed bravery and loyalty. The disciples followed Jesus openly, only to fall in the end.

If Joseph provides the tomb, what service does Nicodemus provide? The text says he brings “75 pounds” of spices. The Greek reads “100 pounds.” As the NET’s study note 115 explains:

The Roman pound (λίτρα, litra) weighed 12 ounces or 325 grams. Thus 100 Roman pounds would be about 32.5 kilograms or 75 pounds.

This is an extraordinary amount. If it is meant to be taken literally, according to Craig Keener, it would be worth tens of thousands of denarii (“was perhaps worth 30,000”). Recall that a denarii was a laborer’s compensation for one day’s work. Comparing such ancient currency to American dollars is difficult, but it would amount to tens of thousands or perhaps over a hundred thousand dollars. The amount is so extravagant, some believe it simply symbolizes a large, large amount.

Either way, whether the amount of spices is taken literally or not, the message is clear: Nicodemus comes bearing a gift befitting of kings, befitting of the “king of the Jews.” (Other ancient stories described kings being buried with huge amounts of spices. John’s audience would probably have understood the distinctly regal honor being bestowed on Jesus.) This is reminiscent of Mary the sister of Martha:

Then Mary took three quarters of a pound of expensive aromatic oil from pure nard and anointed the feet of Jesus. She then wiped his feet dry with her hair. (Now the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfumed oil.) But Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples (the one who was going to betray him) said, “Why wasn’t this oil sold for 300 silver coins and the money given to the poor?” (Now Judas said this not because he was concerned about the poor, but because he was a thief. As keeper of the money box, he used to steal what was put into it.) So Jesus said, “Leave her alone. She has kept it for the day of my burial. For you will always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me!” (John 12:3-8)

What was the purposes of the spices brought by Nicodemus? Jewish tradition, similar to customs throughout the ancient world, was to anoint bodies with spices. This brings us to the last theme of the night: Jesus’ burial.

Jesus’ Burial

Jesus had to be buried quickly. The Sabbath was fast approaching (remember the Sabbath begins at sunset on Friday), and some elements of burial could not be conducted on the Sabbath. For example, one could not move a corpse or its members on the Sabbath.

The few people at the gravesite take Jesus’ body and wrap it in linen cloth along with spices. Spices were important not to preserve the body as the Egyptians may have done, but to diminish the stench. Jewish custom was to wait for one year such that the flesh had rotted off the bones, then the bones were collected and buried in an ossuary. The linen shroud was part of honorable burial.

The burial preparations, however, remain incomplete (presumably because sunset catches up to the mourners). The day after the Sabbath (on Sunday) the women would return to the tomb to do what was left undone. Of course, they would encounter a surprise beyond their imagination.

According to John, Jesus is placed in a nearby tomb “where no one had yet been buried.” Only the Gospel of Matthew explicitly states that the tomb was that of Joseph of Arimathea’s family (“and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut in the rock” Matthew 27:60), however a keen reader would guess as much. Joseph would have had no time to purchase a tomb in such short a time. People where often buried in fields or gardens. The location of Joseph’s tomb (in a garden) is therefore not surprising.

Private family tombs in Judea were often caves with an opening covered by a large stone rolled in a groove. The rock would have been hard to move from the outside and nearly impossible from the inside of the tomb. Given the wealth of Joseph of Arimathea (which gives us a clue as to the probable size of the tomb), the rock covering his tomb may have measured approximately a yard in diameter, making it too large for one person to move. Notice that the kind of burial practiced by the Jews involved no shoveling of dirt or a coffin. As mentioned above, the body would simply rot in the antechamber of the tomb, and a year later the bones would be gathered in a box and buried in a niche in the wall.

Historical evidence and reasonable inferences support the tradition that Christians preserved the accurate site of the tomb, and it is probably located at the site of the Catholic Holy Sepulcher.

The Meaning of the Cross

Up to this point we have studied the passion narrative in detail, recalling any Old Testament references, and taking into account historical evidence that elucidates the text. But the million-dollar question is: What does it mean? Why is the cross so central to Christianity? Indeed, it is not central only to Christianity as some late invention, it is the focus of the New Testament authors.

To answer those questions my mind is flooded with terms such as “substitutionary atonement,” “ransom theory,” and “moral influence.” This time, and just this once, I wish to try a different approach. I want to explain the significance of Jesus’ death—what we call the “atonement”—in a way that will be more relatable. For that purpose I wrote a short story, an analogy, perhaps a parable, to explain some of the meaning of the atonement. If you find my analogy to be overly quaint or off the mark, feel free to disregarded it.

Imagine a kingdom. The land is soft and fertile. The rain is plentiful yet measured. The rivers are so clean one can drink from them. The trees provide fruit, and every bush gives berries. No thorns or weeds are found. No dangerous critters of any kind crawl on the ground or walk upon it. Yet no one lives there other than the King and his Prince.

The land was well suited for all the King’s subjects, and the King wished his people to enjoy it. However, the King was a very good one, who desired his people do good and rejoice. Yet, all the people committed crimes against each other, the Kingdom, and the King. Every single one was condemned to exile and eventually death.

One day, as the King patrolled the borders of the kingdom, one of the exiles approached him. The man said, “King, I have thought much about the condition of my countrymen and I. Grant me this request. Take my life here and now as payment for everyone’s crimes. May our debt be settled, and may my countrymen return to the Kingdom.”

The King responded, “You bargain with something that is not yours. You are a man on death row. You have forfeited your life already. Your crimes have taken it from you. You offer me something you do not possess.” The man walked away hopeless.

The next day, as the King prepared to patrol the borders once more, his son the Prince approached him. “King and Judge,” began the Prince, “do you remember the conversation you had yesterday with that man?” “Yes,” responded the King. “May I make the same offer?” asked the Prince.

A pause ensued. The gravity of the request was not lost on either man. Finally, the King nodded granting permission. The Prince added, “My life is mine for I have committed no crime. Indeed, I am the only one in the Kingdom who has held onto his life.” The King listened. “These are my people. May their crimes be my crimes. May their penalties fall on my head. And so may they return to the Kingdom.”

“Son,” the King responded, “if I spare them, I will not spare you. If there is to be justice in this world, a wrong must be treated as a wrong.” “I would have it no other way,” responded the Prince.

“Your life, the life of an innocent man, a regal life that can stand for the kingdom, is a proper and sufficient ransom,” said the King. Yet he added, “Be that as it may, that is not the only problem. They are criminals. They lie, cheat, and steal. They feel sorrow at another’s joy. They dream of calamities for their neighbor. Yet they forgive not the slightest iniquity if aimed at them.” He paused and then asked, “Shall I bring them to the Kingdom as they are? It will no longer be a perfect Kingdom, alas not even a good Kingdom.”

The Prince met the eyes of his King and responded, “Your words are true as always. May we therefore impose a condition.” The King retorted, “Any price on their part is sure to go unpaid. Cheap and fickle people they are.” “Oh no,” said the Prince, “nothing but the simplest of conditions. They must believe I paid for their crimes. That is, they must believe they have committed crimes and that they have been paid for by me.”

A kind smile crossed the King’s face. The King responded, “That is both the smallest and the greatest of all conditions. For a man to believe that he has done wrong is to give up everything. He would have to look outside of himself for a judge and a jury. Then what is left to him? His ways might not be the ways. His thoughts may not be the truth. He might be mistaken in this or that. He would need direction. A man who believes such a thing is a servant of another and dead to himself.”

“And to believe the Prince has paid for his crimes would be a return to life. The Prince would have to be one worthy of such a feat. One whose ways are right and whose words are true. One worthy of following and of the utmost gratitude. The Prince would be the one worthy to provide direction. And the death of the Prince would exclaim the first instruction, ‘I love you. You are accepted. Enter the Kingdom.’ A man who believed such a thing would be a man ever more alive than he ever was before.”

“You would have them die and live again?” asked the King rhetorically.

“May it be so,” said the Prince. “May it be so,” said the King.