John chapter 19 opens with a striking change of garments. Jesus had just endured a mock trial. The charge was blasphemy for saying he was the Son of God, that he was a king. Now he endured the contempt of common Roman soldiers. The arraignment was one of ridicule. The soldiers scorned him and braided for him a crown of thorns. And to further dress him like a king, they put on Jesus a purple robe. He was paraded before the people and Pilate asked “shall I crucify your King?” They cried out for his crucifixion. He was marched through the streets to the Place of the Skull, to Golgotha.

There he was hung on the cross and Pilate wrote an inscription in three languages, “Jesus the Nazarene, the King of the Jews.” The chief priests asked Pilate to add merely four more words: “He said I am …” Yes, this would reverse the charge from a fact to an assertion. But Pilate’s last recorded words in scripture are: “What I have written, I have written.” It was his mark of authority and it could not be changed.

Then (verse 23) “The soldiers therefore, when they had crucified Jesus, took his outer garments and made four parts, a part to every soldier ” So there were four soldiers. This is in harmony with Acts 12:4 where Peter was delivered to four squadrons of soldiers, literally, “four sets of four.” According to the Matthew, Mark and Luke accounts, one among them was a centurion. He was likely a fifth over the four, because a centurion was one who managed others and was not classed among the common soldiers.

By Roman custom the garments of the executed fell to the possession of the soldiers on duty. It was meager satisfaction for their grim business and numb conscience. One suggestion is the parting of the garments four ways consisted of four customary outer garments including the sandals. However we think the text specifically refers to parting or tearing the outer robe. This was not the purple robe given by Pilate’s soldiers, for that had been removed and his own garments were put on him before being led away (Matthew 27:31). This was Jesus’ own outer coat (Strong’s #2440), and it was somehow torn or cut along the seams. More than any monetary motive, this custom expressed their brutal power over the victim.

Now they came to another garment. Another Greek word is used, it is a tunic (Strong’s #5509). This was generally a linen garment worn under the outer clothing next to the skin, like a long shirt, mostly without sleeves and usually reaching to the knees. But this one was a work of great skill, wrought with loving hands. The unusual nature of this one was that it was woven as a unified piece, without a single seam, complete with the aperture for neck and arms. The soldiers had the common sense not to destroy it. But to whom should it go? For this they drew lots and it fell to one who then received the garment. So the only earthly vestments of the Redeemer passed not to his own people but to four Roman soldiers and a centurion.

John adds that this event, entirely a Roman custom, was so that Psalm 22 might be fulfilled. We might end the matter here and say, yes, the prophecy marked Jesus as the Messiah. Or is there a further reason that such a peculiar event should be part of prophecy nearly 1000 years before it took place? To answer this question, we need to observe that both the outer and inner garments leave a trail of symbolism throughout scripture.

Let us look at those outer garments. First we will consider the Hebrew word used in Psalm 22 for the outer garment that is parted. It is Strong’s #899. Consulting Strong’s Concordance we found this word in the following contexts:

• The clothing given by Eleazar for Rebecca.
• Rebecca provided deceiving raiment for Esau before the aging Isaac.
• Joseph’s garment torn from him in Potiphar’s house.
• The vesture Joseph later received from Pharaoh.
• The fine linen garment for Aaron and his sons with blue, purple and scarlet.
• The cloth coverings for the tabernacle furniture.
• David rent his clothes at the death of Saul and of Absalom. (Indeed all rending of garments use this word.)
• The Lord will put on garments of vengeance for clothing.
• God hath clothed me with the garments of salvation.
• Our righteousness is as filthy rags.

All these garments were the outward clothing as seen by others. They are the outer garments by which others know us, just as Elijah and John were known by their garments to be prophets. The profession of a doctor or general is first recognized by the attire. But they may be either the good and righteous marks of the person or his evil and bad reputation. So also the corresponding New Testament Greek word #2440 for the garments parted at the cross is found in the following contexts:

• The new cloth put on an old garment.
• Jesus was transfigured with white raiment.
• At his triumphant entry to Jerusalem, people spread their garments in the way.
• The Pharisees made broad their phylacteries and enlarged the borders of their garments.
• Let not the one in the field return to take his garments.
• Sardis had a few names who defiled their garments, but the overcomer is clothed in white raiment.

Here also the reputation by which a man is known is symbolized by the robe which the soldiers parted. They tore and divided his righteous reputation. It has mostly been the Roman Church which has torn and misrepresented the outward beauty of the Man Christ Jesus. Now, what of the garment that they would not part, that seamless inner one? First consider the Hebrew uses of word #3830 and #3831 and the related base #3801.

• The story of Joseph and his coat of many colors.
• My clothing was sackcloth. I humbled my soul with fast ing.
• The King’s daughter is all glorious within, her clothing is of wrought gold.
• Three Hebrews were put into a furnace with their gar ments.
• The Ancient of Days sat, whose garment was white as snow.

Here are the inner garments of true identity, whether appreciated outwardly or not. These garments were those worn, so to speak, next to one’s skin, on their flesh, where few look. So it is that the bride is glorious within and this garment is of divine gold.

The same import is carried in the New Testament Greek word #5509.

• Jesus’ counsel not to take two inner garments for a journey.
• The masterful inner coats crafted by Dorcas were displayed.
• Those with spotted garments are pulled from the fire.

In these instances it is the real person, but known truly by the creator who first formed the eye and the ear. This garment is as close as our flesh, as personal as the palms of our hands. It is the garment of the true person. For Jesus, this garment was one complete woven piece. It was not a patch work, not sewn with parts. His true person could not be measured by the consensus of public opinion, or in the synagogues, in the temple halls, nor even in the court of the Sanhedrin.

Now, why should such a prophecy be given concerning the parting of Jesus garments? Why should the lips and pen of David be touched to record such events and symbols and why should John be so prompt to remind us that the event was necessary?

It is similar to the prophecy of Psalms 34:20 that not a bone of his body would be broken, of which John also takes note in John 19:36. But why was it prophesied? It is because bones represent the promises and hopes upon which all flesh is based and hangs. So it was that the bones of the Passover Lamb were not broken. So Jacob arranged for his bones to be taken to Canaan. So the bones of Ezekiel 37 come together according to the promises and hopes of Israel. If there were no such symbolism, there would be no need for the prophecy.

So it is here. The reputation of Jesus, shown in the outer garment, could be torn and misrepresented, but never his absolute righteousness, shown in the singleness of the inner garment. It was predetermined and foretold. “He is despised and rejected of men.” Yet “shall my righteous servant justify many” (Isaiah 53:3, 11).

There is an instance where Jesus taught that our love should go beyond the requirements of justice. He used both the word for the outer cloak and inner tunic in the same verse. Matthew 5:40, “If any man will judge you at the law, and take away thy coat (inner tunic), let him have thy cloak (outer garment) also.” Peculiarly, Luke 6:29 reverses the use of these words. “Him that taketh away thy (outer) cloak forbid not to take thy (inner) coat also.”

The lesson was based on Exodus 22:26-27 and Deuteronomy 24:10-13. Under the Law, clothes were accepted as security for debts. If the borrower be poor, the lender should return his coat before evening, because it was the custom for many to use this for sleeping outside at night. The poor were not to be oppressed.

                                                                                        The Burial of Christ

For one under the law, the lesson is that we should yield more than the minimum which the court requires, and so demonstrate the sincerity of our pledge by exceeding the law. For Jesus, he offered both the outer and absolute requirements of the Law in the ransom as well as the inner heart and life in that aspect of the sin- offering.

SOLDIERS AT THE CROSS

Returning to the cross, the Roman soldiers had the common sense to recognize they held something of rare and complete beauty. If they parted the garment, then it could never be used again and something truly rare would be lost. So they cast lots for it. No one could demand his right to it. They would leave the possession to providence, and it fell to one of the Romans.

What is it that is not parted, something that will be treasured by only a few? Brother Russell says in two articles in 1898 and 1899 (R2316, R2474), “The seamless robe appears to symbolize the righteousness of Christ, which can be appropriated only as a whole … [it] so beautifully represented our Lord’s own personal perfection … perhaps a symbol of the wedding garment.” This is in accord with the idea that justification is as the robe of righteousness, his absolute righteousness, that covers our imperfect flesh. Does anyone have a claim to it? No, it is of divine direction and choice. He is not unrighteous to grant it to one and not to another.

To whom does it come? One could say the single Roman recipient represented the Gentiles and the opportunity for justification that would extend to the ends of the earth. But can we see something more?

Of all the relics claimed by Papacy, including bones, slivers of the cross, the holy grail or silver chalice from the last supper, the shroud of Turin, the scriptures say nothing of such things passing into hands for relic worship. The scriptures record nothing of our Lord’s personal possession that passed intact to anyone, except this robe, and that was to a Roman who received it by lot. Was this one of the four soldiers or was it the centurion?

There was another centurion who crossed paths with Jesus (Matthew 8:5, Luke 7:6). He solicited Jesus on behalf of his sick servant. He acknowledged that he was not worthy for Jesus to enter his house and understood Jesus could simply speak the word and the man would be healed. And it was so. When he said “speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed,” Jesus replied “I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.” This event illustrated that not every Roman soldier was cold and brutal.

There is another Roman centurion recorded in the New Testament. That is Cornelius of the Italian Regiment. He is introduced to us in Acts 10. Some years after Jesus’ death, Peter found him in Caesarea. He was there along with his family apparently on an extended tour of duty from Rome. Another evidence of the extent of his residence is that he had become deeply devoted to Judaism and was acquainted with the new theology of Christians. Yet he was not accepted by the orthodox community. Nevertheless, his prayers were held in reserve for some time before being answered on that day with Peter. His family seem already to have been acquainted with the message of Jesus, and together they were baptized when Peter came to them. Brother Russell observes that the servant’s centurion and Cornelius may have been the same person. l

THE CENTURION AT THE CROSS

Who, then, was the centurion at the cross with such faith? Luke 23:47 records the centurion at the cross said, “Certainly this was a righteous man.” Matthew 27:54 and Mark 15:39 are even more emphatic: “Truly this was the Son of God.” This is a profound confession by a Gentile. We could conclude that he is an anonymous character not elsewhere mentioned and that he then disappeared from the pages of history. Or we could assume that he is one of the other mentioned centurions. Otherwise we may deduce that all three centurions may have been the same person. It is not unreasonable to envision Cornelius being called to Jerusalem for the added security during that dark Passover three years before his receiving the spirit. This last option has much appeal.

Brother Russell said of the servant’s centurion and Cornelius, “It is not probable that among the Roman soldiers of Palestine there were two centurions of such similarly exceptional character” (R1922). So the same may be said concerning the centurion at the cross. Furthermore, if Jesus said of the first centurion, “I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel,” this would be either a second example of such profound faith among the Gentiles or else it is the faith of the same individual.

We cannot be sure, but wouldn’t it be interesting if this Cornelius was the same centurion at the cross, the one to whom the lot and the robe fell? If so, it would only be appropriate to extend the symbol of justification to the same one, at the end of the 70 weeks of exclusive favor to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. With him the white robe of justification began to be extended to the Gentiles.

THE GRAVE CLOTHES

Now let us return to that dismal night following the cross. The body of Jesus was removed. Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus arranged to quickly and lavishly anoint the body with rare spices and wrap it in linen. These were his last earthly vestments. They were his grave clothes. This wrapping usually consisted of along continuous band of linen. These linens completely and tightly bound the body. From such bonds Lazarus had to be loosed even though awakened, for otherwise he was completely restricted and constrained.

John (20) records that on the first day of the week he and Peter went to the tomb. Verse 5 says John simply stooped down and looked in, saw the linen clothes, but did not go in. He saw the tomb was empty. But verse 6 says Peter went directly in, followed by John who now entered after Peter. Verse 8 says then he saw and believed. What was the difference? What did John see that convinced him of the resurrection at that very moment?

Verses 6-7 suggest the answer. He saw the grave clothes lying without the body. Then he saw the linen which wrapped the head, still wound in the form of the head. The other grave clothes that had wrapped the rest of the body were also untouched in the rolled form of the body. But there was no body! Some translations suggest the linens were carefully folded as if prepared for storage. But folding could suggest the tomb was intruded and the body taken. Yet this was not the case. The linen clothes lay exactly as they were when swathed, coiled round the body and the head. In John 20:7 the word for “wrapped” is Strong’s # 1794 and means “entwined, wound.” The Lord had passed out of them, not needing, as Lazarus, to be loosed. It was this sight that first convinced John as he entered the tomb after Peter. This linen was not taken with him, but left as the last token of his earthly apparel for their faith.

We have not seen such a sight, yet we have believed. Blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears for they hear. Like the centurion at the cross, we have acknowledged him as the Son of God and have received the single heritage from his earthly life, the robe of justification. What shall we do with it? We shall walk as he walked and take care that it not become spotted with the flesh. Soon it will be transformed into the righteousness of saints in glory.

If we would walk after him, we too will suffer our outer robes of this earthly reputation to be torn and parted. It is part of the sin offering. Yet we now have received, and walk with, his inner robe of his righteousness which covers the sins of our flesh. When our flesh is fully sacrificed, the bride will be given their own righteousness in glory.

Revelation 19:7-8, “Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honor to him; for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

– Jerry Leslie

 

---

1 “Impressed by the faith and goodness of this Centurion, so unexpected among Roman soldiers, we were considering that it would be “just like the Lord” to send the gospel to such a noble Gentile soon after the Jewish favor would end, when the doors of divine love and mercy would be opened to Gentiles as well as Israelites. Then the Lord brought to our memory Cornelius, the first Gentile to whom the gospel message was sent (Acts 10:1-8). We remembered that he also was a Centurion, and of him also it is recorded that he was `a devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God always.’ It is not probable that among the Roman soldiers of Palestine there were two Centurions of such similarly exceptional character. The residence of the Centurion mentioned by Luke is not stated but that of Cornelius is mentioned: it was Caesarea. Turning to Map No. 10 in a Teacher’s Bible we found with no little pleasure that the distance from Capernaum to Caesarea is only about 45 miles, and that Nain is on the way, a little to the East, about 20 miles from Capernaum. We note also the remark of Peter, when preaching Christ and his gospel to Cornelius (Acts 10:37), to the effect that Cornelius already knew the word which Jesus had preached throughout all Judea. In our judgment the circumstantial evidences are strong that the Centurion of our lesson was Cornelius. This would also explain why the holy spirit was poured out on Cornelius and his house even while Peter yet spake, and before it is even stated that Cornelius accepted Christ; for apparently he had already done so, as narrated by Luke” (R1922, “The Great Helper”).

 

---

Download PDF