“...if Jesus suffered, it was from the taunts rather than from the blows, from the assault rather on his dignity than on his body." (Cohn, 1963, p. 202)

"The basic message transposed onto Jesus [in Mel Gibson's film "The Passion"] struck me as offensive. In this case it was something like "More pain, more gain": people have a lot of sins to atone for, so Jesus goes at it with full vigor, being beaten to a bloody pulp before our very eyes....This strikes me as at odds with how the Gospels portray Jesus' last hours, and I can't help but find the message a bit repulsive." (Ehrman, 2004, p. 187)

Mel Gibson notwithstanding, there is very little evidence that Jesus suffered from a severe beating before crucifixion. For example, Luke says that on the night before “the men who were holding Jesus began to mock him and beat him (22:63).” Matthew says that: “and after flogging Jesus, he handed him over to be crucified (27:26).” John notes that Jesus was “flogged” (19:1) and that the guards were “striking him on the face (19:3).” Mark’s description is the most harsh – “some began to spit on him, to blindfold him, and to strike him, saying to him, ‘Prophesy’. The guards also took him over and beat him (14:65).” Later, he notes: “So Pilate, wishing to satisfy the crowd, released Barabbas for them; and after flogging Jesus, he handed him over to be crucified (15:15).”

Needless to say, being struck in the face, beaten, and flogged is not very gentle treatment. But the issue is not whether Jesus was beaten (which he obviously was), the issue is whether the perception that he was severely beaten (ala The Passion) is true.  In those days there were two types of instruments used to flog hapless victims – the flagella which was an ordinary leather strap, and the flagra, which was an iron chain with spikes made of iron or bone.  The more severe instrument, the flagra, was not in general use and was reserved for slaves who committed heinous crimes. Most likely Jesus would have been punished with the flagella (or strap) since there is no indication that the punishment in this case was life threatening or even that he was seriously injured as a result [1]. Indeed, the Gospel of John indicates that Jesus was “carrying the cross by himself (19:17)” which clearly implies that he was not injured, and none of the other Gospel writers who claim that Simon of Cyrene carried the cross (Luke 23:26; Mark 15:21; Matthew: 27:32), indicate that he carried the cross because Jesus was unable to do so. Moreover, while on the cross, Jesus is conscious and sufficiently self-possessed to carry on conversations with the other two victims, address his mother and inquire after her future treatment, etc. Obviously his physical punishment had not incapacitated him.

In an extensive analysis of the laws and customs surrounding the trial and death of Jesus, Israeli Supreme Court Justice Haim Cohn concluded: “if Jesus suffered, it was from the taunts rather than from the blows, from the assault rather on his dignity than on his body (p. 202).” He continues: “no dependable tradition or information exists that there were any aftereffects, wounds, or other external injury…(p. 202).”

Had Jesus’ punishment been great, the New Testament writers would surely have noted it.  For example, compare those descriptions of Jesus’ treatment with the treatment of Polycarp: “…their skin was ripped to shreds by whips, revealing the very anatomy of their flesh, down to the inner veins and arteries…(2:2).” Clearly, Jesus’ punishment did not rise to these standards. Cohn affirms this position. He notes: “…if the evangelists did not describe the pitiable condition of a scourged Jesus, it was because there was none, and that he was in fact unscathed, his outward appearance unchanged (p. 202).”

While there is no evidence that Jesus was harshly treated, there is some evidence to the contrary, that his treatment was stellar. The Gospel of Nicodemus, dated to the Fourth Century [2], claims that Pilate instructed his soldiers: “Let Jesus be brought with gentleness (I, 1-2).” Most scholars dismiss the validity of this document, as shall we, however, it is worth noting. But Cohn (1963), in his exhaustive examination of the trial of Jesus, noted: “not only were Jesus’ hands not bound to the beams of the cross, but he had not even to bear it himself [3] (p. 201).” In addition, he noted: “not only was he not divested in nakedness, but he was given his own garments when led to the place of crucifixion…[and]…the usual beatings on the way were not his portion either (p. 207).”  He concluded: “the soldiers must have taken pity on him (p. 201).”