In the recent discussion on business attire on Nine moons, Tim J. brings up a question that is often used in support of wearing very expensive clothes.
He says: "Why didn’t the Roman soldiers rent Christ’s robe after his crucifiction like they did his garment?"
This is an interesting question, one that I am definitely not qualified to answer. The first thing that one might think is that it was very expensive and they didn't want to ruin it. Therefore Jesus must have been wearing an Armani equivelant robe.
But this also brings a knee jerk reaction. Jesus was wearing expensive clothes, while telling others to "sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven." Something tells me that this isn't the case.
Doing some research on the net didn't really bring me any scholarly answers, just rhetoric and guesswork.
Looking at this occurance from a historical standpoint, why did they cast lots for his coat? Why was it valuable enough to keep?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
It probably wasn't his robe. Remember, they took his cloths and mocked him and put on kingly attire. Perhaps to mock him and the jews more they had him wear the "costume" all the way to the crucifixion. Then, because the robe was a fine Roman make, the guards cast lots. In some ways that is how the Romans dealt with the Jewish leadershop.
Who knows where to download XRumer 5.0 Palladium?
Help, please. All recommend this program to effectively advertise on the Internet, this is the best program!
Post a Comment