10. Several of the circumstances of Christ's passion (q. V.) are explained under Bloody Sweat, Cross, Li- THOSTROTON, Pi LATE, EcLiPSE, ctc. (comparc McriUii Notce in passion. ./. Chr. Par. 1G22, Frcf. and Lips. 1740; Walther, Jiiris/.-hi.<for. /!,/r,ir/if. iih. d. C, fchlrhte ii. d. Leid. u. Sterl,. c/n-i.^/i r.iv>laii, 17:;s, 1771; ///, Lcidens- gesch.Jesu cfaji lisi-h mid iirchunUiij. h, ,iil>i iti I, Stuttg. 1809; Hug, in tlie Ziilschr.f. d. ErrMsth. Fniburij, v, 1 sq. ; Friedlieb, Archdol. d. Leideiisqescli. Bonn, 1843). The question of the legality or illegality of the sentence of death pronoiuiced upon Jesus by the Sanhedrim and procurator has of late been warmlj' discussed (see, for the former view, Salvador, Ilistoire des institutions de Mo'ise, Bruxel. 1822, ii, c. 3 ; also, Jesus Christ et sa doc- trine. Par. 1838 ; Hase, Leben Jes. p. 197 sq. ; on the op- posite, Dupin, L'uine Jesus devant Ca'iphe et Pilate, Par. 1829 ; Ammon, Foi-tbild. i, 341 sq. ; B. Crusius, Opusc. p. 149 scj. ; Neander, p. 683 sq.; eomp. also Daumer, Syst. der specul. Philos. p. 41 sq. ; and Neubig, 1st J. mit roll. Rechte den Tod eines Verh-echers (jesturben? Erl. 1836). The Sanhedrim condemned Jesus as a blasphemer of God (Matt, xxvi, 65 sq. ; Mark xiv, 64 ; compare John xix, 7), for which the Law prescribed capital punish- ment (Lev. xxiv, 16); but he would have been guilty of this crime if he had falsely claimed (Matt, xxvi, 63 sq. ; Luke xxii, 67 sq.) to be the jMessiah (Son of God), and the fact of this profession was substantiated indi- rectly by witnesses (Matt, xxvi, 60 sq. ; Mark xiv, 57 sq.), and directly by Jesus's own declaration (Matt. xxvi, 63 sq. ; Mark xiv, 61 sq.). So far the transaction might seem to be tolerably regular, except that s^vear- inj; the prisoner as to his own crime is an unheard- of process in law. Moreover, there was more than a single superficial examination of witnesses (Slatt. xxvi, 60), and Jesus had really uttered (John ii, 19) what the deponents averred. But that Jesus could not be the Messiah was presupposed by the Sanhedrim on the ground of their Christological views ; and here were they chiefly to blame. IMore exact inquiries concern- ing the teachings and acts of Jesus would have sure- l_v corrected their impression that Jesus was a blas- phemer, and perhaps led them to a rectification of their expectations respecting the Messiah. Another point is entitled to consideration in estimating their judicial ac- tion. The Sanhedrim's broader denunciation of Jesus before Pilate as a usurper of royal power, and their charging him with treason {crimen lces(e majestatis) (ISlatt. xxvii, 11 ; Mark xv, 2 ; Luke xxiii, 2 ; John xviii, 33), is explained by the fact that the JNIessiah was to be a theocratic king, and that the populace for a few days saluted Jesus with huzzas as the Son of David (Matt. xxi : John xii). Jesus certainly did not aspire to roy- alty in the political sense, as he declared before Pilate (John xviii, 36 sq.) : this the Sanhedrim, if they had been dispassionate judges, must have been assured of, even if they had not previously inquired or ascertained how far Jesus was from pretensions to political author- ity. The sentence itself is therefore less to be repro- bated than that the high court did not, as would have been worthy itself, become better informed respecting the charges ; their indecorous haste evinces an eagerness to condemn the prisoner at all hazards, and their vindic- tive manner clearly betrays their personal malice against him. That Pilate passed and executed the sentence of death contrarj- to his better ju<lgment as a civil officer is beyond all doubt. See Pilate.
That Jesus passeil through a merely apparent deatii has been sup])osed by many (see especially Balirdt, Zwecke Jesu, x, 174 sq. ; Paulus, Comment, iii, 810 sq., and Leben Jesu, I, ii, 281 sq. ; on the contrarj'. see Kich- ter, Be viorte iServatoris in cruce, Gbtt. 1767, also in his Diss. 4 med. p. 1 st]. ; Gruner, JJe Jes. C. morte vera, nan siniuluta, Jena, 1805; Schmidtmann, A/ edic.-pMlos. Be- weis, dass J. luich s. Kreuzit/unff nicht von einer todtdhnl. Ohnmacht hef alien fjewesen, Osnabr. 1880). ' The pierc- ing of the side of Jesus by the lance of a Koman soldier (John xix, 34 ; his name is traditionally given as iMngi- mis, see Thilo, Apocr. p. 580) has been regarded as tho chief circumstance upon which (•^•c■rytllill.^■ birc depends (Triller,i>e mi'ni,id<, I,,/, ,■;.< rnnll.ofu, rhrisi; rNlmre.'m Gruner's Tract, di dn inoiiincis. ,]v]\:i. I77:i; ilMlinibach, Scripta med.-bibl. p. H'l scj. ; Bartholin!. iJe latere C/iristi aperto, Lugd. Bat. 1046), inasmuch as before this punc- ture the above cited physicians assume but a torpor and swoon, which might seem the more probable because crucifixion could hardly have caused death in so short a time (Mark xv, 44). See Crucify. But the account of the wound in the side is not such as to allow the question to be by that means fully and absolutely de- termined (see Briefe iiber Bationalismus,\x'236 sq.), since the evangelist does not state n-kich side (wXev()a) was pierced, nor ic/iere, nor Jioip deeply. It is therefore sure- ly a precarious argument to jjresume the lej't side (al- though the position of the soldier, holding the spear in his right hand and thrusting it opposite him, would strongly countenance this supposition), and eciually so to assume a very deep incision, penetrating the jiericar- dium and heart, thus changing a swoon into actual death ; nevertheless, comp. John xx, 25, 26, in favor of this last particular. The purpose of the stab — to ascer- tain whether the crucified person was still alive — also demanded a forcible thrust, and the issue of blood and water vouched for by the evangelist {iU]\^tv ev^vq alpa Kai vSiop, perhaps a hendiadys for bloody wafer) would certainly point to real death as immediately re- sulting. By this we must understand the clotted blood (cnior) in connection with the watery portion (sej-uni), which both flow together from punctures of the larger blood-vessels (veins) of bodies just dead (from the a7-te- ries of the breast, as supposed by Hase [Jeh. Jesu, 2d ed. p. 193], no blood would issue, for these are usually emjrty in a corpse), and the piercing of the side would tlierefore not cause, but only indicate death. See Bi.oon and Water. In fine, the express assertion of the evangel- ists, that Jesus breathed his last (ItitTri'ivae [Mark xv, 37; Luke xxiii, 46], a term exactly equivalent to the Latin expirarit, he expired, and so doubtless to be under- stood in its common acceptance of death), admits no oth- er hypothesis than that of actual and complete dissolu- tion. See Agony.