Mark 15:16-23 | Session 62 | Mark Rightly Divided
Mark 15:16-41 | The Crucifixion
Mark 15:16–41 tells the story of Jesus’ crucifixion, the most important moment in His mission to save the world. The passage begins with Roman soldiers mocking Him, dressing Him in a robe and crown of thorns to ridicule His claim as King. From there, Jesus is led to Golgotha, carrying the burden of the cross, with Simon of Cyrene helping along the way.
At the cross, Jesus is nailed between two thieves and endures the insults of those who pass by. Instead of saving Himself, He willingly stays on the cross to fulfill God’s plan. As darkness falls, Jesus cries out and breathes His last, and the temple veil is torn, showing that His sacrifice has opened the way to God. Even the centurion watching declares, “Truly this man was the Son of God.”
Mark 15:16-20 | Jesus is Mocked by the Soldiers
Verse 16 -
The word "praetorium" comes from Greek, though its ending was anglicized from "-iun" to "-ium." It referred to the headquarters of a Roman military governor or high-ranking official like a procurator or praetor. In Jerusalem, the praetorium was likely either the governor's residence or Pilate's temporary lodging. Though Pilate normally lived in Caesarea, he stayed in Jerusalem during major festivals like Passover to maintain order. Scholars believe this praetorium was either in Herod's palace complex or the Fortress Antonia—both served as temporary quarters for Roman officials.
If we knew the exact location, we could stand where Jesus was tried. However, since Jerusalem was destroyed twice—in 70 AD and again in 135 AD—pinpointing the precise spot remains challenging. Herod's Palace, though described in detail by Josephus, has only recently had its infrastructure discovered by archaeologists (no superstructure remains). If the current site believed to be Herod's Palace is accurate, and if that was indeed where the praetorium was located, then the current via dolorosa would be entirely the wrong path—since it starts at the Temple area complex of Antonia's fortress, while Herod's Palace begins near the Jaffa Gate.
The word "band" in Mark 15:16 comes from the Greek term σπεῖρα (speira), which typically referred to a Roman military cohort. A full cohort would have consisted of around 600 soldiers, though in some cases, it could represent a smaller detachment. In this context, it likely describes a portion of the Roman garrison stationed in Jerusalem, present to maintain order during the Passover festival.
The soldiers who mocked Jesus were part of this force, accustomed to handling unrest and suppressing challenges to Roman authority. Their mocking was not a casual act by a few men but a coordinated effort by a significant group, turning Jesus into a public spectacle. By gathering an entire "band," the scene emphasizes the scale of the humiliation Jesus endured and the collective rejection of His claim as King. This mockery not only highlights Rome’s disdain for any perceived threat but also underscores the magnitude of Jesus' willingness to endure such scorn on His way to the cross.
Verses 17-20 -
While the specific form of mockery may not have been common practice, the Roman "band" was undoubtedly well-versed in such tactics. The Romans were well-known for using public humiliation as a means of asserting authority and deterring dissent. This extended to condemned criminals, particularly those accused of sedition or rebellion. Mockery was often integrated into punishments as a psychological and public display of dominance over the accused. This was called "infamia," which means public shame or disgrace in Latin.
They "honored" Jesus as "King of the Jews," following Pilate's lead—who had used the term hoping the Jewish crowds would seek Jesus's release. Now the soldiers employed it with utter derision.
Mark 15:21-23 | The Journey to Golgotha
Verse 21 -
The scene of Simon of Cyrene carrying Jesus's cross appears to be entirely circumstantial. Cyrene, a city in modern-day Libya, had a significant Jewish population (Acts 2:10 mentions Cyrenians at Pentecost), suggesting Simon was a Jewish pilgrim in Jerusalem for Passover. While he may have known of Jesus, it's unclear whether he was already a follower. Interpreting this event as a picture of "take up your cross and follow me" would be an overreach into spiritualization. Though church history later describes Simon as a follower, this cannot be verified. While Acts 11:20 mentions a believing Jewish community in Cyrene, Simon's connection to it remains uncertain.
The strongest hint that Simon might have later become a follower of Jesus comes from the mention of his sons, Alexander and Rufus. The casual reference suggests these names were familiar to first-century readers. In Romans 16:13, Paul mentions a Rufus who was "chosen in the Lord" and speaks warmly of his mother's kindness. While tradition often identifies this Rufus as Simon's son and suggests his family became prominent in the early Christian community, this too remains a matter of conjecture.
Simon of Cyrene is often depicted as black-skinned in art and cultural traditions due to Cyrene’s location in North Africa and its association with the African continent. While this depiction resonates with communities that see Simon as a symbol of shared suffering and perseverance, it is ultimately speculative, as the Bible provides no description of Simon’s physical appearance. Cyrene was a diverse region with people of varying ethnic backgrounds, including Jews, Greeks, and indigenous Africans, and Simon’s heritage and skin tone remain unknown.
Verse 22 -
As we have encountered before, the phrase “they bring him unto the place Golgotha” is written in the present tense, even though it narrates a past event. This use of the historic present is a rhetorical tool commonly employed in Greek writing to make the narrative more vivid and immediate for the reader or listener. By describing the action as if it is happening in real time, Mark draws the audience into the scene, heightening the sense of urgency and emotional engagement as Jesus is brought to Golgotha, the "place of a skull." This stylistic choice emphasizes the gravity of the moment and invites the reader to witness the events as though they are unfolding before their eyes.
Nearly all modern Bible translations change this to the past tense, which removes the impact of the rhetorical device used in the original text. While this shift doesn't affect the theological meaning, it distances readers from the original text—the opposite of what translation should accomplish.
The term Golgotha is described as "the place of a skull." The name originates from the Aramaic word גֻּלְגֹּלְתָא (gulgōltā’), meaning "skull." The Greek text transliterates this as Γολγοθᾶ (Golgotha). The Latin equivalent, Calvaria, gives rise to the English term "Calvary." The Hebrew word for "skull" is גֻּלְגֹּלֶת (gulgolet) (see Judges 9:53 and 2 Kings 9:35), displaying the fact that Aramaic is a dialect of Hebrew.
Golgotha is consistently described in the Gospels as being outside the city walls of Jerusalem (John 19:20; Hebrews 13:12). This placement was in keeping with Jewish law and Roman practice. Jewish law stipulated that executions and burials should take place outside the city (Numbers 15:35; Deuteronomy 21:22-23). Roman executions, which aimed to shame the condemned publicly, were typically carried out near main roads or gates, maximizing visibility.
The Gospel of John also notes that the site was “nigh to the city” (John 19:20), suggesting its proximity to Jerusalem’s walls, making it accessible to those passing by. Archaeological evidence supports this, as the city walls during the Second Temple period (Jesus' time) would have enclosed less of the modern Old City, leaving certain areas—including traditional crucifixion sites—outside the ancient boundaries.
Several locations have been proposed as the historical site of Golgotha, with the following being the most notable:
1. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre
Description: Located in the Christian Quarter of Jerusalem, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre has been venerated as the site of both Jesus’ crucifixion and burial since the 4th century.
Evidence: Emperor Constantine’s mother, Helena, identified this site in AD 326, and archaeological evidence suggests it was outside the city walls in Jesus’ time. The area was used as a quarry and later repurposed as a garden or tomb site, aligning with Gospel accounts (John 19:41).
Modern Debate: Critics point out that the site is now well within the modern city walls, but these walls were expanded long after the Second Temple period, meaning the location would have been outside the city in the 1st century.
Description: Identified by 19th-century British General Charles Gordon, this rocky hill north of the Old City is near the Garden Tomb, another proposed site of Jesus' burial. The hill's features resemble a human skull, lending weight to its name.
Evidence: Its proximity to a major road and its appearance as a skull-like formation have led many to view it as a plausible location. However, there is little archaeological evidence to confirm its use as a crucifixion site during the 1st century.
Criticism: While visually striking, the association with Jesus’ crucifixion stems more from tradition and aesthetics than concrete historical evidence.
Description: Some have speculated that Golgotha could have been located on the Mount of Olives, east of the Temple Mount.
Evidence: This view arises from its prominence and visibility from Jerusalem, as well as the prophetic imagery tied to the Mount of Olives in Scripture (Zechariah 14:4). However, this theory lacks strong archaeological or historical backing.
Criticism: The Mount of Olives was primarily used as a burial ground and is considered too distant from the city walls for a public execution site.
Verse 23 -
Myrrh, as you may know, was an expensive resin, a gift for kings, but also medicinal. Why would this expensive product be offered to a dying criminal? The offering of “wine mingled with myrrh” was likely Jewish tradition of expressing human kindness even to those who were dying. Proverbs 31:6 teaches, “Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts.” In the Talmud (Sanhedrin 43a) it is taught that “The prominent women of Jerusalem would donate this drink and bring it to those being led out to be killed.”
The Lord “received it not,” most likely in fulfillment of His statement during the Last Supper: “Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (Mark 14:25). This refusal highlights Jesus’ deliberate abstention from participating in celebratory or covenantal wine until the ultimate fulfillment of God’s kingdom. While Jesus later accepted “vinegar” in verse 36, this sour wine—though derived from grapes—did not carry the same connotation as “fruit of the vine,” a term traditionally used to refer to fine wine associated with joy, blessing, and covenant. His refusal underscores His resolve to endure the suffering of the cross fully, while the later acceptance of sour wine serves a different purpose: fulfilling prophecy (Psalm 69:21) and marking the completion of His redemptive mission.
----------
