This is a study of Jesus being naked on the cross. It is believed that He was stripped completely but some disagree and so we look at both perspectives.

1. JESUS WAS NAKED ON THE CROSS
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Matthew 27:35 When they had crucified him, they divided up his
clothes by casting lots.
Mark 15:24 And they crucified him. Dividing up his clothes, they
cast lots to see what each would get.
Luke 23:34 Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know
what they are doing.” And they divided up his clothes by casting
lots.
John 19:23 When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his
garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each
soldier; also his tunic.
John 19:24 24"Let's not tear it," they said to one another. "Let's
decide by lot who will get it." This happened that the scripture
might be fulfilled that said, "They divided my clothes among them
and cast lots for my garment." So this is what the soldiers did.
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
B. Thomas
John 19:23, 24

2. Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made
four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat…
Notice this circumstance -
I. As ILLUSTRATIVE OF CERTAIN THINGS WITH REGARD TO THE
CRUCIFIERS AND THE CRUCIFIED.
1. With regardto the crucifiers.
(1) Their utter want of common delicacy. The first thing they did in executing
the sentence was to strip the culprit of every rag of clothes, and hang him on
the cross in a state of nudity. This reveals on the part of the patrons of this
custom utter lack of delicacy, and grossnessandbarbarity of taste. They were
willing to gratify the most morbid tastes, mostanimal passions, andlowest
curiosity of an excitedand thoughtless mob. The Romans were not the first
nor the last to manifest these qualities with regard to the executionof
criminals. Till very recently our executions were much of the same style.
Thousands went to see the last struggles ofa criminal with very much the
same feelings as they would go to see a bull-fight, and many of them very
much worse in the sight of God than he who was hung. But, thanks to our
advancedChristian civilization, this has passedaway. Our executions are now
performed in private, with as much decency, and as little pain to the culprit as
possible, thus recognizing the sacrednessoflife, even that of the meanest, most
worthless and injurious. It is to be hoped that life will soonbecome more
sacredstill in accordance withthe merciful spirit of the dispensationunder
which we live.

3. (2) Their refined cruelty. It was not enough for the Crucified to bear all the
torture of the cross, but also be had to bear all the shame and indignities of
nakedness. To some, doubtless, who were sunk in the deepestphysical and
spiritual debauchery, it was not so painful, but by the pure soulof Jesus it
must have been keenly felt. There was no considerationshown in his case. He
was not exempted from a single item in the catalogue ofindignities, nor from a
single ignominy in the program of shame; but rather to the contrary, these
were lengthened by the voluntary contributions of a servile crowd. The
crucifiers of Jesus were as refined in their cruelty as they were coarse in their
tastes, and as minute in their indignities as they were lax in their sense of
common delicacy.
2. In relation to the crucified One. It indicates:
(1) The simplicity of his dress. Only the common costume of a poor Galilaean.
Jesus did not go in for fashionand finery in dress anymore than for luxuries
in diet; but in all he was characterizedby simplicity. In one sense this was
strange, too, that he who paints the lily and rose in the richesthues, and the
bird's wing in the most fantastic colors, should be himself clothed in the
simple dress of a poor artisan! But, in anothersense, this is not strange;it is
generallythe case with true greatness. He was sufficiently glorious in himself.
It is not the garment, but he who wears it.
(2) The poverty of his circumstances. Whenhis worldly affairs were wound up
they consistedin a humble dress. When this was divided all was divided, he
possessedin this world, He had no houses, money, nor land to be confiscated
by the government, and to enrich the imperial treasury, only the robe and the
tunic, and these probably the gifts of some kind friend, the latter, perhaps,
woven by the tender hands of his mother, or by Magdalene, as the original
device and gift of love for an original and Divine kindness. This is very
affecting and significant, that he who was in the world, and the world was

4. made by him, should leave without any of it. He who made the world could
alone be satisfiedto leave it thus. He was.
(3) His more than human submissiveness in suffering. When deprived of his
garments he made no complaint, no request to be spared this indignity. One
would naturally expectthat he would ask this favor, and say, "I am willing to
suffer even unto death, but let me die in my clothes." But not a word or a
murmur. "As a lamb he was brought to the slaughter," and all for us. He was
stripped that we may be clothed, became nakedthat we may be robed in
spotless white.
II. AS AN ACT OF SELFISHRAPACITY. "The soldiers," etc.
1. They were inspired by the love of sordid gain. Every base principle in
existence was representedonGolgotha that day. All the vultures of hell
hovered over the cross ready to descendon their respective prey. And among
the dark groups was the love of gain ready for his garments. It caredfor
nothing else.
2. This was confirmed by habit and custom. The clothes ofthe victim were
their fee for the execution. It was not such a profitable job then as it is now.
But you will find people willing to do anything for a little worldly advantage.
They will hang you for your clothes;they will murder you physically or
morally, which is worse still, for the attainment of a little selfishend. His own
disciple sold him for thirty pieces of silver: why, then, should we wonderat
these rough and ignorant soldiers crucifying him for his garments? And this
demon of selfishgain was sanctionedby law.

5. 3. It was done with greathaste. As soonas he was crucified, before he was
dead, they hastenedto divide his garments under his very eyes. In this they
are typical of a good many more. The love of gain is ever in haste. The
votaries of selfishness are everin a hurry. As soonas the victim is safe in the
grip of affliction, they begin to searchfor the keys. The grave is opened before
almost he has breathed his last.
4. The division is just and fair. This is one redeeming quality in the affair.
Rather than spoil the vest, they castlots for it. This probably arose from
selfishness, eachone hoping it would be his; but, if selfish, it was wise, and an
example to many in dividing the spoil. It is better to castlots or leave a thing
alone, than render it worthless. There is some honor amongstthieves, yes,
more than among many men of higher standing. "The children of this world
are wiser," etc.
III. AS THE FULFILMENT OF SCRIPTURE."Thatthe Scripture," etc.
1. Christ was the greatSubjectof ancientScripture. His incarnation,
character, and many incidents of his life and death were foretold centuries
before he made his appearance. Manyof the prophets describedhim as if he
were really present to them. David, the greatanti-type of the Messiah, was
often so inspired that he personified him, and relatedfacts as if they had
actually happened in his own experience, whereas theyrelated entirely to the
coming King. Such was his reference to the parting of his garment.
2. In the life and death of Christ the ancient Scripture was literally fulfilled.
Even in the division of his garment.

6. (1) In this the soldiers were unconscious agents. Nothing could be remoter
from their knowledge and consciousness thanthat they fulfilled any Scripture.
(2) In this they only carried out their own contract, and fulfilled their own
designs. There was no secretand supernatural influence brought to bear upon
them, so that their actions may fit with ancient prophecy; but ancient
prophecy was a true reading of future events, and was proved by these events
as they occurred.
(3) Through these unconscious agents the Scripture was fulfilled.
3. This literal fulfillment of ancient Scripture was a remarkable proof of the
MessiahshipofJesus - that he was the Divine One promised of old, and with
whom the old dispensationwas in travail. Even the division of his garment
testified to his identity and the Divinity of his mission; and these soldiers bore
unconscious testimony to his Messiahship.
LESSONS.
1. Everything connectedwith true greatness becomes interesting. The
birthplace of a greatman, the house in which he afterwards lived, the chair in
which he sat, and the staff he carried. The garments of Jesus are full of
interest, especiallythe seamless vest. The disposalof even his garments is not
passedunnoticed.
2. The garments of Jesus fell into thoughtless hands. One is almostcurious as
to who had the pieces of the robe, and who had the seamless tunic. What an
exchange!The vest once worn by the Son of God was afterwards worn by a

7. thoughtless soldier. It was well that none of his garments fell to his friends; if
so, there would be a danger of idolatry.
3. The garments of Jesus losttheir virtue when he ceasedto wearthem. The
outer robe, the hem of which was so healing to faith, was so no more. The
virtue was not in the garment, but in the wearer. He gave greatnessand virtue
to everything connectedwith him.
4. Let us arrange our affairs as far as we can ere we die, and leave the restto
the lottery of events, which is ever under Divine control. It matters but little to
us what will become of our garments after we finish with them. If we have
them as long as we require them, we should feelthankful. - B.T.
COMMENTARIES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(23) On John 19:23-24, comp. Notes on Matthew 27:35-36;Luke 23:34. St.
John’s accountis againmore full than any of the others.
And made four parts, to every soldier a part.—The soldiers there who carried
the sentence into execution were one of the usual quarternions (Acts 12:4),
under the command of a centurion.
Also his coat: now the coatwas without seam.—More exactly, the tunic, or
under-garment. It reachedfrom the neck to the feet, while the outer
“garment” was a square rug thrown round the body. Ordinarily the tunic
consistedof two pieces connectedatthe shoulder by clasps;but that worn by

8. Jesus was made in one piece. This seems to have been the rule with the
priestly tunics. (Comp. the accountof Aaron’s tunic in Jos. Ant. iii. 7, § 4.)
MacLaren's Expositions
John
AN EYE-WITNESS’S ACCOUNT OF THE CRUCIFIXION
John 19:17 - John 19:30.
In greatand small matters John’s accountadds much to the narrative of the
crucifixion. He alone tells of the attempt to have the title on the Cross altered,
of the tender entrusting of the Virgin to his care, and of the two ‘words’ ‘I
thirst’ and ‘It is finished.’ He gives details which had been burned into his
memory, such as Christ’s position ‘in the midst’ of the two robbers, and the
jar of ‘vinegar’ standing by the crosses. He says little about the actof fixing
Jesus to the Cross, but enlarges whatthe other Evangelists tellas to the
soldiers ‘casting lots.’He had heard what they said to one another. He alone
distinctly tells that when He went forth, Jesus was bearing the Cross which
afterwards Simon of Cyrene had to carry, probably because our Lord’s
strength failed.
Who appointed the two robbers to be crucified at the same time? Not the
rulers, who had no such power but probably Pilate, as one more shaft of
sarcasmwhichwas all the sharper both because it seemedto put Jesus in the
same class as they, and because they were of the same class as the man of the
Jews’choice, Barabbas, andpossibly were two of his gang. Jesus was ‘in the
midst,’ where He always is, completely identified with the transgressors, but
central to all things and all men. As He was in the midst on the Cross, with a

9. penitent on one hand and a rejecteron the other, He is still in the midst of
humanity, and His judgment-seatwill be as centralas His Cross was.
All the Evangelists give the title written over the Cross, but John alone tells
that it was Pilate’s malicious invention. He thought that he was having a final
fling at the priests, and little knew how truly his title, which was meant as a
bitter jest, was a fact. He had it put into the three tongues in use-’Hebrew,’
the national tongue;‘Greek,’the common medium of intercourse between
varying nationalities;and ‘Latin’ the official language. He did not know that
he was proclaiming the universal dominion of Jesus, and prophesying that
wisdom as representedby Greece,law and imperial power as representedby
Rome, and all previous revelation as representedby Israel, would yet bow
before the Crucified, and recognise thatHis Cross was His throne.
The ‘high-priests’ winced, and would fain have had the title altered. Their
wish once more denied Jesus, andadded to their condemnation, but it did not
move Pilate. It would have been well for him if he had been as firm in
carrying out his convictions of justice as in abiding by his bitter jest. He was
obstinate in the wrong place, partly because he was angry with the rulers, and
partly to recoverhis self-respect, whichhad been damagedby his vacillation.
But his stiff-neckedspeechhad a more tragic meaning than he knew, for
‘what he had written’ on his own life-page on that day could never be erased,
and will confront him. We are all writing an imperishable record, and we
shall have to read it out hereafter, and acknowledgeour handwriting.
John next sets in strong contrast the two groups round the Cross-the stolid
soldiers and the sad friends. The four legionaries wentthrough their work as
a very ordinary piece of military duty. They were well accustomedto crucify
rebel Jews, and saw no difference betweenthese three and former prisoners.
They watchedthe pangs without a touch of pity, and only wishedthat death
might come soon, and let them get back to their barracks. How blind men

10. may be to what they are gazing at! If knowledge measures guilt, how slight the
culpability of the soldiers!They were scarcelymore guilty than the mallet and
nails which they used. The Sufferer’s clothes were their perquisite, and their
division was conductedon coolbusiness principles, and with utter disregard
of the solemnnearness of death. Could callous indifference go further than to
castlots for the robe at the very foot of the Cross?
But the thing that most concerns us here is that Jesus submitted to that
extremity of shame and humiliation, and hung there nakedfor all these hours,
gazedon, while the light lasted, by a mocking crowd. He had set the perfect
Pattern of lowly self-abnegationwhen, amid the disciples in the upper room,
He had ‘laid aside His garments,’but now He humbles Himself yet more,
being clothed only ‘with shame.’ Therefore should we clothe Him with hearts’
love. Therefore God has clothed Him with the robes of imperial majesty.
Another point emphasisedby John is the fulfilment of prophecy in this act.
The seamlessrobe, probably wovenby loving hands, perhaps by some of the
weeping women who stoodthere, was too valuable to divide, and it would be a
moment’s pastime to castlots for it. John saw, in the expedient naturally
suggestedto four rough men, who all wanted the robe but did not want to
quarrel over it, a fulfilment of the cry of the ancient sufferer, who had
lamented that his enemies made so sure of his death that they divided his
garments and castlots for his vesture. But he was ‘wiserthan he knew,’and,
while his words were to his own apprehensionbut a vivid metaphor
expressing his desperate condition, ‘the Spirit which was in’ him ‘did signify’
by them ‘the sufferings of Christ.’ Theories of prophecy or sacrifice which
deny the correctnessofJohn’s interpretation have the New Testamentagainst
them, and assume to know more about the workings ofinspiration than is
either modest or scientific.

11. What a contrastthe other group presents! John’s enumeration of the women
may be read so as to mention four or three, according as ‘His mother’s sister,
Mary the wife of Cleophas,’is taken to mean one womanor two. The latter is
the more probable supposition, and it is also probable that the unnamed sister
of our Lord’s mother was no other than Salome, John’s own mother. If so,
entrusting Mary to John’s care would be the more natural. Tendercare,
joined with consciousnessthat henceforth the relation of son and mother was
to be supplanted, not merely by Death’s separating fingers, but by faith’s
uniting bond, breathed through the word, so loving yet so removing, ‘Woman,
behold thy son!’ Dying trust in the humble friend, which would go far to make
the friend worthy of it, breathed in the charge, to which no form of address
corresponding to ‘Woman’ is prefixed. Jesus had nothing else to give as a
parting gift, but He gave these two to eachother, and enriched both. He
showedHis own loving heart, and implied His faithful discharge ofall filial
duties hitherto. And He taught us the lesson, whichmany of us have proved to
be true, that lossesare bestmade up when we hear Him pointing us by them
to new offices of help to others, and that, if we will let Him, He will point us
too to what will fill empty places in our hearts and homes.
The secondof the words on the Cross whichwe owe to John is that pathetic
expression, ‘I thirst.’ Mostsignificantis the insight into our Lord’s
consciousness whichJohn, here as elsewhere,ventures to give. Not till He
knew ‘that all things were accomplished’did He give heed to the pangs of
thirst, which made so terrible a part of the torture of crucifixion. The strong
will kept back the bodily cravings so long as any unfulfilled duty remained.
Now Jesus had nothing to do but to die, and before He died He let flesh have
one little alleviation. He had refused the stupefying draught which would have
lessenedsuffering by dulling consciousness, but He askedfor the draught
which would momentarily slake the agonyof parched lips and burning throat.
The words of John 19:28 are not to be takenas meaning that Jesus said‘I
thirst’ with the mere intention of fulfilling the Scripture. His utterance was

12. the plaint of a real need, not a performance to fill a part. But it is John who
sees in that wholly natural cry the fulfilment of the psalm {Psalm 69:21}. All
Christ’s bodily sufferings may be said to be summed up in this one word, the
only one in which they found utterance. The same lips that said, ‘If any man
thirst, let him come unto Me, and drink,’ said this. Infinitely pathetic in itself,
that cry becomes almostawful in its appeal to us when we remember who
uttered it, and why He bore these pangs. The very ‘Fountain of living water’
knew the pang of thirst that every one that thirsteth might come to the waters,
and might drink, not wateronly, but ‘wine and milk, without money or price.’
John’s lastcontribution to our knowledge ofour Lord’s words on the Cross is
that triumphant ‘It is finished,’ wherein there spoke, not only the common
dying consciousnessoflife being ended, but the certitude, which He alone of
all who have died, or will die, had the right to feeland utter, that every task
was completed, that all God’s will was accomplished, all Messiah’s work done,
all prophecy fulfilled, redemption secured, God and man reconciled. He
lookedback over all His life and saw no failure, no falling below the demands
of the occasion, nothing that could have been bettered, nothing that should not
have been there. He lookedupwards, and even at that moment He heard in
His soul the voice of the Father saying, ‘This is My beloved Son, in whom I am
well pleased!’
Christ’s work is finished. It needs no supplement. It cannever be repeatedor
imitated while the world lasts, and will not lose its powerthrough the ages.
Let us trust to it as complete for all our needs, and not seek to strengthen ‘the
sure foundation’ which it has laid by any shifting, uncertain additions of our
own. But we may remember, too, that while Christ’s work is, in one aspect,
finished, when He bowed His head, and by His own will ‘gave up the ghost,’in
another aspectHis work is not finished, nor will be, until the whole benefits of
His incarnation and death are diffused through, and appropriated by, the
world. He is working to-day, and long ages have yet to pass, in all probability,
before the voice of Him that sitteth on the throne shall say ‘It is done!’

13. BensonCommentary
John 19:23-24. Thenthe soldiers, whenthey had crucified Jesus — That is,
erectedthe cross with him upon it; they took his garments, and made four
parts, &c. — Because foursoldiers only are mentioned in the division of the
clothes, it does not follow that only four were present at the crucifixion. Since,
if soldiers were necessaryat all, a greatnumber must have been present to
keepoff the crowds which usually press to see such spectacles as nearas they
can. From Matthew 27:54, it appears that the soldiers who assistedatthe
crucifixion were commanded by a centurion. It is therefore more than
probable that the whole band, which Matthew tells us expresslywas gathered
togetherto scourge Jesus,(John19:27,)was present at his execution,
especiallyas two others suffered at the same time. The four soldiers who
parted his garments, and castlots for his vesture, were the four who nailed
him to the cross, (eachofthem fixing a limb,) and who, it seems, forthis
service had a right to the crucified person’s clothes. Thatthe scripture might
be fulfilled, &c. — That is, all this was done agreeablyto an ancient prophecy,
wherein these circumstances ofthe Messiah’ssufferings were mentioned, to
show that he was to be crucified naked; and consequently, that he was to
suffer a most ignominious, as wellas a most painful death. The reader will
observe that the words here referred to, they parted my garments among
them, &c., are quoted from the 22dPsalm, where they seemto be spokenof
David. But the fact is, that no circumstance of David’s life bore any
resemblance to this prediction, or to severalother passagesin this Psalm. So
that, in this portion of Scripture, as also in some others, the prophet seems to
have been thrown into a preternatural ecstasy, wherein, personating the
Messiah, he spoke barely what the Spirit dictated, without any regard to
himself. These things therefore the soldiers did — Though with the utmost
freedom as to themselves, yetby the secretdisposalof Providence, which led
them to act in a remarkable correspondence to the divine oracle.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
19:19-30 Here are some remarkable circumstances ofJesus'death, more fully
related than before. Pilate would not gratify the chief priests by allowing the
writing to be altered; which was doubtless owing to a secretpowerof God

14. upon his heart, that this statement of our Lord's characterand authority
might continue. Many things done by the Roman soldiers were fulfilments of
the prophecies of the Old Testament. All things therein written shall be
fulfilled. Christ tenderly provided for his mother at his death. Sometimes,
when God removes one comfort from us, he raises up another for us, where
we lookednot for it. Christ's example teaches allmen to honour their parents
in life and death; to provide for their wants, and to promote their comfort by
every means in their power. Especiallyobserve the dying word wherewith
Jesus breathedout his soul. It is finished; that is, the counsels ofthe Father
concerning his sufferings were now fulfilled. It is finished; all the types and
prophecies of the Old Testament, which pointed at the sufferings of the
Messiah, were accomplished. It is finished; the ceremoniallaw is abolished;
the substance is now come, and all the shadows are done away. It is finished;
an end is made of transgressionby bringing in an everlasting righteousness.
His sufferings were now finished, both those of his soul, and those of his body.
It is finished; the work of man's redemption and salvationis now completed.
His life was not takenfrom him by force, but freely given up.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
His garments - The plural here is used to denote the outer garment. It was
made, commonly, so as to be easily thrown on or off, and when they labored
or walkedit was girded about the loins. See the notes at Matthew 5:40.
Four parts - It seems, from this, that there were four soldiers employed as his
executioners.
His coat- His under garment, called the tunic.
Was without seam- Josephus (Antiq., b. 3 chapter 8, Section4) says of the
garment or coatof the high priest that "this vesture was not composed of two
pieces, nor was it sewedtogetherupon the shoulders and the sides;but it was
one long vestment, so wovenas to have an aperture for the neck. It was also
parted where the hands were to come out." It seems that the Lord Jesus, the

15. greatHigh Priest of his people, had also a coatmade in a similar manner.
Compare Exodus 39:22.
Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
23, 24. Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments,
and made four parts; to every soldier—the four who nailed Him to the cross,
and whose perquisite they were.
a part, and also his coat—the Romantunic, or close-fitting vest.
without seam, wovenfrom the top throughout—"perhaps denoting
considerable skilland labor as necessaryto produce such a garment, the work
probably of one or more of the women who ministered in such things unto
Him, Lu 8:3" [Websterand Wilkinson].
Matthew Poole's Commentary
Both Matthew, Matthew 27:35, and Mark, Mark 15:24, mention this parting
of Christ’s garments amongstthem, which must be understood of his inward
garments; which some tell us might easily be done, because their garments
were made up of four parts. But his outward garment, which is called his coat,
was all of a piece.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus,....The crucifixion of Christ
was at the requestand solicitationof the Jews, was orderedby the Roman
governor, and performed by the Roman soldiers;the sinful men into whose
hands Christ was to be delivered:
took his garments; which they had stripped his body of, crucifying him naked;
as what properly belongedto them, it being usual then, as now, for

16. executioners to have the clothes of the persons they put to death; these were
his inner garments:
and made four parts, to every soldier a part; for it seems there were four of
them concernedin his execution, and who were set to watchhim:
and also his coat;or upper garment;
now the coatwas without seam, wovenfrom the top throughout: in such an
one the Jews say(b) Moses ministered: and of this sortand make was the robe
of the high priest, said to be of "wovenwork", Exodus 28:32 upon which
Jarchiremarks, , "and not with a needle";it was all woven, and without any
seam:and so the Jews say(c) in generalof the garments of the priests:
"the garments of the priests are not made of needlework, but of wovenwork;
as it is said, Exodus 28:32. Abai says, it is not necessary(i.e. the use of the
needle) but for their sleeves;according to the tradition, the sleeve ofthe
garments of the priests is wovenby itself, and is joined to the garment, and
reaches to the palm of the hand.''
So that this was an entire woven garment from top to bottom, excepting the
sleeves, whichwere wove separatelyand sewedto it; of this kind also was his
coat, which JacobIehudah Leon says (d),
"was a stately woollencoatof a skycolour, wholly woven, all of one piece,
without seam, without sleeves;''

17. such a garment Christ our greatHigh Priestwore, which had no seamin it,
but was a curious piece of texture from top to bottom. The very learned
Braunius (e) says, he has seensuch garments in Holland, and has given fine
cuts of them, and also of the frame in which they are wrought. What authority
Nonnus had to call this coata black one, or others for saying it was the work
of the Virgin Mary, I know not.
(b) T. Bab. Taanith, fol. 11. 2. Gloss in ib. (c) T. Bab. Yoma, c. 7. foi. 72. 2.
Maimon. Hilch. Cele Hamikdash, c. 8. sect. 16. (d) Relationof Memorable
Things in the Tabernacle,&c. c. 5. p. 23. (e) De vestitu Sacerdot. Heb. l. 1. c.
16. p. 346, 360, 361.
Geneva Study Bible
{7} Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and
made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat:now the coatwas
without seam, wovenfrom the top throughout.
(7) Christ signifies by the division of his garments amongstthe bloody
butchers (except for his coatwhich had no seam) that it will come to pass, that
he will shortly divide his benefits, and enrich his very enemies throughout the
world: but in such a way that the treasure of his Church will remain whole.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Meyer's NT Commentary
John 19:23-24. Οὖν]again connects the history, after the intermediate
narrative respecting the superscription, with John 19:18.
ἐσταύρωσαν]For they were the executioners ofthe crucifixion.

18. τὰ ἱμάτ. αὐτοῦ]His garments, with the exception, however, of the χιτών,
which is afterwards speciallymentioned, the shirt-like under-garment. The
accountof John is more exactand complete than that of the Synoptics
(Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34).
τέσσαρα] There were accordinglyfour soldiers, the ordinary τετράδιον
στρατιωτῶν(Acts 12:4).
ἐκ τῶν ἄνωθεν ὑφαντὸς διʼ ὅλου] From the top (where the button-hole was,
ἀπʼ αὐχένος, Nonnus)woven quite through, throughout, so that thus the
garment was a single texture, wovenfrom above entirely throughout, without
seam, similar to the priestly vestment in Joseph. Antt. iii. 7. 4. See Braun, de
vestitu Hebr. p. 342 ff.; Rosenmüller, Morgenl. V. p. 273 f. On the adverbial
διʼ ὅλου, comp. Asclep. 16; Nicand. 1; Plut. Mor. p. 695 f.; Bernhardy, p. 235,
also διʼ ὅλων, Plat. Soph. p. 253 C.
ἵνα ἡ γραφὴ, κ.τ.λ.]This casting of lots for the χιτών, after the division of the
ἱμάτια, was notan accidentaloccurrence, but was in connectionwith the
divine determination for the fulfilment of Scripture, which says, etc. The
passageis Psalm22:19, closelyfollowing the LXX. The suffering of the
theocratic sufferer, in this psalm, is the prophetic type of the suffering of the
Messiah. “Theyhave divided my garments amongstone another (ἑαυτ. =
ἀλλήλους, comp. Luke 22:17), and castlots over my raiment,”—this
complaint of the Psalmist, who sees himself as being already subjectedto the
death of a criminal, and the division of his garments among his executioners
therewith connected, has found its Messianic fulfilment in the corresponding
treatment of Christ, in so far as lots have also been castoverHis raiment (in
reality, over His under-garment). In this fulfilment the χιτών was that portion
of His clothing on which the ἐπὶ τὸν ἱματισμόνμου ἔβαλονκλῆρους was
historically carried out; but we are not, for this reason, to say that John took
τὸν ἱματισμόνas equivalent to τ. χιτῶνα (Lücke, De Wette.

19. οἱ μὲν οὖν στρατ. τ. ἐποί] Simple (reminding one of Herod., Xen., and others)
concluding formula for this scene ofthe soldiers’proceedings. On μὲν οὖν, see
on Luke 3:18.
ταῦτα]That relatedin John 19:23-24. A secretallusion,[244]in these closing
words (Hengstenberg, Godet), is arbitrarily forced upon them.
[244]Hengstenberg:“But the occupationitself stands under a secretdirection,
and sacredirony passesoverirony to the side of profane irony.” Here
Scholtencoincides with Hengstenberg, supplying: “who knew nothing of the
O. T., etc.”
Expositor's Greek Testament
John 19:23. “The soldiers, then, when they had crucified Jesus, took His
garments”—the executioner’s perquisite (Apuleius has the comparison
“nakedas a new-born babe or as the crucified”)—andas there were four
soldiers, τετράδιον, Acts 12:4, they divided the clothes into four parts. This
was the more easily done because the usual dress of a Jew consistedoffive
parts, the headdress, the shoes, the chiton, the outer garment, and the girdle.
The χιτώνremained after the four other articles were distributed. They could
not divide it into four without spoiling it, and so they castlots for it. It was
seamless, ἄρραφος,unsewed, andwoven in one piece from top to bottom.
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
23–27.The four Enemies and the four Friends
23. Then the soldiers]Better, The soldiers therefore. The ‘therefore’ looks
back to John 19:18.

20. his garments]The loose, outergarment, or toga, with the girdle and
fastenings. This was large enough to be worth dividing, and in some caseswas
the only garment worn.
four parts] A mark of accurate knowledge;a quaternion of soldiers has
charge of the prisoner, as in Acts 12:4; but there the prisoner has to be
guarded and kept alive, so four quaternions mount guard in turn, one for each
watch. The clothes of executedcriminals were the perquisite of the soldiers on
duty.
his coat]Better, the coator shirt: it fitted somewhatclose to the body,
reaching from the neck to the knees orancles.
without seam]Josephus tells us that that of the high-priest was seamless,
whereas in other cases this garment was commonly made of two pieces (Ant.
iii. vii. 4).
Bengel's Gnomen
John 19:23. Στρατιῶται, the soldiers)viz. four.—καὶ τὸν χιτῶνα, and the
tunic) [the inner vest] they took.—ἄραφος,without seam, not sewedtogether)
appropriate to the holy body of the Saviour. Weigh well what Fabricius, in the
Centifolium, p. 407, has collectedconcerning the mode of living of the
Saviour. Nordid He everrend His garments in sunder.
Pulpit Commentary
Verses 23, 24. - (c) The seamlessgarment. Verse 23. - Matthew 27:35, Mark
15:24, and Luke 23:34 all mention that the soldiers took his garments
(ἱμάτια), and divided them according to the ordinary customfollowedat
executions amongstthemselves. These were the head-dress, the large outer
robe with its girdle, the sandals, one taking one thing and another another,
and eachevangelistadded that the soldiers castlots upon the garments, as to

21. who should take which. As these garments may have been of varied value, the
lot may have been required; but John, in his narrative, throws fresh light
upon this latter and humiliating act. Then the soldiers, when they had
crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldiera
part. This shows that a quaternion of soldiers, and not the "whole band," had
been told off for the infernal deed. Pilate knew now that there was no need of
an army to keepthe people from popular insurrection. The restof the
garrisonwere not far off, should they be required; moreover, the servants of
the high priest were ready to act on an emergency;but John adds, And also
the coat(the χιτών, the ‫ּבְל‬ ‫;)ׁשו‬ the long vesture which clothed his whole person,
reaching from the neck to the feet, and which, when removed, left the sacred
body naked. This had probably not been removed by either tiered or Pilate
before, and the cursed indignity thus reachedits climax (Hengstenberg;cf.
Job 24:7-10). Now the coatwas without seam from the top - from the upper
portions - woventhroughout (δι ὅλου, an adverbial form) - woven, possibly,
by the mother who loved him, and corresponding with the dress of the priests.
Keim and Thorns see here "a symbolizing of Jesus as the High Priest" (see
Holman Hunt's celebratedpicture the "Light of the World"). Certainly John
saw the Lord in his glory with a garment of the kind (woven of radiant light,
and reaching to the feet, Revelation1.). The unity of the Savior's seamless
vesture has been variously treatedin patristic literature: as symbolic of the
unity of natures in his Person, by the Monephysites;and by Cyprian ('De
Unitate Ecclesiae,'§ 7) in his conflict with Novatianists, as symbolic of the
unity of the Church, and he actually builds on it his dictum, "He cannot
possessthe garment of Christ who parts and divides the Church of Christ."
This garment could not be conveniently divided.
Vincent's Word Studies
Four parts
All the Synoptists relate the parting of the garments. The four pieces to be
divided would be, the head-gear, the sandals, the girdle, and the tallith or
square outer garment with fringes. Delitzschthus describes the dress of our
Lord: "On His head He wore a white sudar, fastenedunder the chin and
hanging down from the shoulders behind. Over the tunic which coveredthe

22. body to the hands and feet, a blue tallith with the blue and white fringes on
the four ends, so thrown over and gatheredtogetherthat the gray, red-striped
undergarment was scarcelynoticeable, exceptwhenthe sandal-shodfeet came
into view" ("A Day in Capernaum").
Coat(χιτῶνα)
Or tunic. See on Matthew 5:40.
Without seam(ἄῤῥαφος, or ἄραφος)
Only here in the New Testament. Fromἀ, not, and ῥάπτω, to sew together.
Like the tunic of the High-Priest. Only John records this detail.
Woven (ὑφαντὸς)
Only here in the New Testament.
COMMENTARIES ON VERSE
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(24) That the scripture might be fulfilled.—Comp. Note on Matthew 1:22.

23. They parted my raiment among them.—The quotation is from Psalm 22:18,
closelyfollowing the Greek translation.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
19:19-30 Here are some remarkable circumstances ofJesus'death, more fully
related than before. Pilate would not gratify the chief priests by allowing the
writing to be altered; which was doubtless owing to a secretpowerof God
upon his heart, that this statement of our Lord's characterand authority
might continue. Many things done by the Roman soldiers were fulfilments of
the prophecies of the Old Testament. All things therein written shall be
fulfilled. Christ tenderly provided for his mother at his death. Sometimes,
when God removes one comfort from us, he raises up another for us, where
we lookednot for it. Christ's example teaches allmen to honour their parents
in life and death; to provide for their wants, and to promote their comfort by
every means in their power. Especiallyobserve the dying word wherewith
Jesus breathedout his soul. It is finished; that is, the counsels ofthe Father
concerning his sufferings were now fulfilled. It is finished; all the types and
prophecies of the Old Testament, which pointed at the sufferings of the
Messiah, were accomplished. It is finished; the ceremoniallaw is abolished;
the substance is now come, and all the shadows are done away. It is finished;
an end is made of transgression by bringing in an everlasting righteousness.
His sufferings were now finished, both those of his soul, and those of his body.
It is finished; the work of man's redemption and salvationis now completed.
His life was not takenfrom him by force, but freely given up.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
Let us not rend it - It would then have been useless. The outergarment, being
composedof severalparts - fringes, borders, etc. Deuteronomy12:12 - could
be easily divided.
That the scripture ... - Psalm 22:18.

24. Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
24. Let us not rend it, but castlots … whose it shall be, that the scripture
might be fulfilled which saith, They parted my raiment among them; and for
my vesture they did castlots—(Ps 22:18). Thata prediction so exceedingly
specific—distinguishing one piece of dress from others, and announcing that
while those should be parted amongstseveral, that should be given by lot to
one person—thatsuch a prediction should not only be fulfilled to the letter,
but by a party of heathenmilitary, without interference from either the
friends of the enemies of the Crucified One, is surely worthy to be ranked
among the wonders of this all-wonderful scene. Now come the mockeries, and
from four different quarters:—(1) "And they that passedby reviled Him,
wagging their heads" in ridicule (Ps 22:7; 109:25;compare Jer18:16; La
2:15). "Ah!"—"Ha," an exclamationhere of derision. "Thouthat destroyest
the temple, and buildest it in three days, save Thyselfand come down from
the cross"(Mt 27:39, 40;Mr 15:29, 30). "It is evident that our Lord's saying,
or rather this perversionof it (for He claimed not to destroy, but to rebuild
the temple destroyed by them) had greatly exasperatedthe feeling which the
priests and Pharisees had contrived to excite againstHim. It is referred to as
the principal fact brought out in evidence againstHim on the trial (compare
Ac 6:13, 14), as an offense for which He deservedto suffer. And it is very
remarkable that now while it was receiving its real fulfilment, it should be
made more public and more impressive by the insulting proclamationof His
enemies. Hence the importance attachedto it after the resurrection, Joh2:22"
[Websterand Wilkinson]. (2) "Likewise also the chief priests, mocking Him,
with the scribes and elders, said, He savedothers, Himself He cannotsave"
(Mt 27:41, 42). There was a deep truth in this, as in other taunts; for both He
could not do, having "come to give His life a ransom for many" (Mt 20:28; Mr
10:45). No doubt this added an unknown sting to the reproach. "If He be the
king of Israel, let Him now come down from the cross, and we will believe
Him" (Mt 27:42). No, they would not; for those who resistedthe evidence
from the resurrectionof Lazarus, and from His own resurrection, were
beyond the reach of any amount of merely external evidence. "He trusted in
God that He would deliver him; let Him deliver Him now if He will have Him

25. [or 'delight in Him,' compare Ps 18:19;De 21:14];for He said, I am the Son of
God" (Mt 27:41-43). We thank you, O ye chief priests, scribes, and elders, for
this triple testimony, unconsciouslyborne by you, to our Christ: first to His
habitual trust in God, as a feature in His characterso markedand palpable
that even ye found upon it your impotent taunt; next, to His identity with the
Sufferer of the twenty-secondPsalm, whose very words (Ps 22:8) ye
unwittingly appropriate, thus serving yourselves heirs to the dark office and
impotent malignity of Messiah's enemies;and again, to the true sense of that
august title which He took to Himself, "The Son of God," which He rightly
interpreted at the very first (see Joh 5:18) as a claim to that oneness ofnature
with Him, and dearness to Him, which a sonhas to his father. (3) "And the
soldiers also mockedHim, coming to Him and offering Him vinegar, and
saying, If thou be the king of the Jews, save Thyself" (Lu 23:36, 37). They
insultingly offer to share with Him their own vinegar, or sour wine, the usual
drink of Romansoldiers, it being about the time of their midday meal. In the
taunt of the soldiers we have one of those undesigned coincidences whichso
strikingly verify these historicalrecords. While the ecclesiasticsderide Him
for calling Himself, "the Christ, the King of Israel, the Chosen, the Son of
God," the soldiers, to whom all such phraseologywas mere Jewishjargon,
make sport of Him as a pretender to royalty ("KING of the Jews"), anoffice
and dignity which it belongedto them to comprehend. "The thieves also,
which were crucified with Him, castthe same in His teeth" (Mt 27:44;Mr
15:32). Not both of them, however, as some commentators unnaturally think
we must understand these words;as if some sudden change came overthe
penitent one, which turned him from an unfeeling railer into a trembling
petitioner. The plural "thieves" need not denote more than the quarter or
class whence came this lastand cruelesttaunt—that is, "Notonly did scoffs
proceedfrom the passers-by, the ecclesiastics, the soldiery, but even from His
fellow-sufferers,"a mode of speaking whichno one would think necessarily
meant both of them. Compare Mt 2:20, "Theyare dead which sought the
child's life," meaning Herod; and Mr 9:1, "There be some standing here,"
where it is next to certainthat only John, the youngestand lastsurvivor of the
apostles, is meant. And is it conceivable that this penitent thief should have
first himself reviled the Saviour, and then, on his views of Christ suddenly
changing, he should have turned upon his fellow sufferer and fellow reviler,

26. and rebuked him not only with dignified sharpness, but in the language of
astonishment that he should be capable of such conduct? Besides, there is a
deep calmness in all that he utters, extremely unlike what we should expect
from one who was the subject of a mental revolution so sudden and total. On
the scene itself, see on[1910]Lu 23:29-43.
Matthew Poole's Commentary
This made them choose ratherto castlots for that, than to divide it, as they
had done his inward garments. But there was something more in it than the
soldiers knew;Christ hereby proved a true Antitype to David, who said of
himself figuratively, Psalm 22:18, They part my garments among them, and
castlots upon my vesture; by which he meant no more, than that his enemies
loaded themselves with his spoils:those words which figuratively were true of
David, proved literally true as to Christ. Thus vile and wickedmen are
fulfilling the Scriptures when they little think of it.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
They said therefore among themselves,....Whenthey saw what a curious piece
of work it was, and that it was pity to divide it into parts: and besides, that it
would have been rendered entirely useless thereby:they moved it to each
other, saying,
let us not rend it, but castlots for it, whose it shall be, that the Scripture might
be fulfilled: not that they knew anything of the Scripture, or had any intention
of fulfilling it hereby, but they were so directed by the providence of God, to
take such a step; whereby was literally accomplishedthe passagein Psalm
22:18
which saith, they parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did
castlots. The whole psalm is to be understood of the Messiah, notof David, as
some do (f); many passagesin it cannotbe applied to him, such as speak ofthe
dislocationof his bones, the piercing of his hands and feet, and this of parting
his garments, and casting lots for his vesture: all which had their literal
accomplishmentin Jesus:nor canit be understood of Esther, as it is by some

27. Jewish(g) interpreters; there is not one word in it that agrees with her, and
particularly, not the clause here cited; and there are some things in it which
are manifestly spokenof a man, and not of a woman, as Psalm 22:8 nor can
the whole body of the Jewishnation, or the congregationofIsraelbe intended,
as others say(h); since it is clear, that a single person is spokenof throughout
the psalm, and who is distinguished from others, from his brethren, from the
congregation, from the seedof Jacoband Israel, Psalm22:22 and indeed, no
other than the Messiahcanbe meant; he is pointed at in the very title of it,
Aijeleth Shahar, which words, in what way soeverthey are rendered, agree
with him: if by "the morning daily sacrifice", as they are by the Targum; he is
the Lamb of God, who continually takes awaythe sins of the world; and very
fitly is he so calledin the title of a psalm, which speaks so much of his
sufferings and death, which were a propitiatory sacrifice forthe sins of his
people: or by the morning star, as others (i) interpret them; Christ is the
bright and morning star, the day spring from on high, the sun of
righteousness, andlight of the world: or by "the morning help", as by the
Septuagint; Christ had early help from God in the morning of his infancy,
when Herod soughthis life, and in the day of salvationof his people;and early
in the morning was he raisedfrom the dead, and had glory given him: or by
"the morning hind", which seems bestof all, to which he may be compared, as
to a roe or hart, in Sol 2:9 for his love and loveliness, and for his swiftness and
readiness in appearing for the salvation of his people; and for his being
hunted by Herod in the morning of his days; and being encompassedby those
dogs, the Scribes and Pharisees,Judas and the band of soldiers;see Psalm
22:16. The first words of the psalm were spokenby Jesus the true Messiah,
when he hung upon the cross, and are truly applied to himself; his reproaches
and sufferings endured by him there, are particularly and exactly describedin
it, and agree with no other; the benefits which the people of God were to
enjoy, in consequence ofhis sufferings, and the conversionof the Gentiles
spokenof in it, which is peculiar to the days of the Messiah, show to whom it
belongs. The Jews "themselves"are obligedto interpret some parts of it
concerning him; they sometimes say(k), that by Aijeleth Shahar is meant the
Shekinah, a name that well suits with the MessiahJesus, who tabernacledin
our nature; the Psalm22:26 is applied by Jarchi to the time of the
redemption, and the days of the Messiah;so that upon the whole, this passage

28. is rightly cited with respectto the Messiah, and is truly said to be fulfilled by
this circumstance, ofthe soldiers doing with his garments as they did:
these things therefore the soldiers did; because they were before determined
and predicted that they should be done: and therefore they were disposedand
directed by a superior influence, in perfectagreementwith the freedom of
their wills to do these things. The whole of this accountmay be spiritually
applied. The Scriptures are the garments of Christ; or, as a prince of Anhalt
said, the swaddling clothes in which the infant of Bethlehem was wrapped;
these exhibit and show forth Christ in his glory, and by which he is known
and bore witness to, and are pure and incorrupt, fragrant, and savory.
Heretics are the soldiers that rend and tearthe Scriptures in pieces, part
them, add unto them, or detractfrom them; who corrupt, pervert, wrest, and
misapply them; but truth is the seamless coat;it is all of a piece, is of God,
there is nothing human in it; though it may be played with, betrayed, sold, or
denied, it cannot be destroyed, but is, and will be preservedby divine
providence: or the human nature of Christ is the vesture, with which his
divine person was as it were covered, was put on and off, and on againas a
garment; is of God, and not man; is pure and spotless;and though his soul
and body were parted asunder for a while, this could never be parted from his
divine person: or else the righteousness ofChrist may be signified by this
robe, which is often compared to one, because it is put on the saints, and they
are clothedwith it: it covers, keepswarm, protects, beautifies, and adorns
them; this is seamless,and all of a piece, and has nothing of men's works and
services tackedunto it; is enjoyed by a divine lot by some men, and not all,
and even such as have been sinful and ungodly; it is pure, perfect and will last
for ever.
(f) R. R. in Kimchi in Psal. 22. (g) R. R. in Jarchi in Psal. 22. (h) Kimchi &
Ben Meleehin ib. (i) Vid. Kimchi & Abendana in ib. (k) Zohar in Lev. fol. 5.
4. & Imre Bina in ib.

29. Geneva Study Bible
They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but castlots for it,
whose it shall be: that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They
parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did castlots. These
things therefore the soldiers did.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Expositor's Greek Testament
John 19:24. The soldiers therefore said, Μὴ σχίσωμεν αὐτόνἀλλὰ λάχωμεν,
“let us not rend it but castlots”. λαγχάνεινis, properly, not “to castlots,” but
“to obtain by lot”. See Field, Otium Norv., 72. In this John sees a fulfilment of
Psalm22:18, the LXX. versionof which here quoted verbatim.
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
24. that the scripture] It was in order that the Divine purpose, already
declaredby the Psalmist, might be accomplished, that this twofold assignment
of Christ’s garments took place. S. John quotes the LXX. verbatim, although
there the difference, which both he and the original Hebrew mark betweenthe
upper and under garment, is obliterated. It is from this passagethat the
reference to Psalm22:18 has been inserted in Matthew 27:35; none of the
Synoptists refer to the Psalm.
my raiment] A capricious change oftranslation; the same word is rendered
garments in John 19:23.
Bengel's Gnomen
John 19:24. [Λάχωμεν, castlots for it) A rare event, and yet not unforetold.—
V. g.]—ταῦτα, these things) which they had spokenof among themselves.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 24. - They said therefore to one another, Let us not rend it, but let us
castlots for it, whose it shall be. How obviously we have the eye-witness again,

30. and the observationof one whose whole heart was bleeding with unutterable
anguish! Here is the true explanation of the "lot" referred to by the
synoptists, and moreovera subsequent reflection of the evangelist, who saw
once more a realization of the prophetic picture of the ideal Sufferer at his last
extremity of reproachand humiliation. He quotes almost verbally from the
LXX., That the Scripture might be fulfilled (which saith), They parted my
garments among them (to themselves), and for my vesture (ἱματισμόνμου)
they did castlots. If John had quoted accuratelyfrom the Hebrew, he would
have preserved more obviously the contrastbetweenthe ‫ב‬ ְּ‫ָג‬‫ד‬ ‫ו‬‫ּב‬ and the
‫ּבְל‬ ‫,ׁשו‬whichyet was clearlyin his mind. The χιτών was the portion of the
ἱματισμός upon which the lots were cast. Lucke and De Wette (though not
Meyer) regardit as certainthat John took the ἱματισμός as identicalwith the
χιτών. Strauss describes Psalm22. as the programme of the Crucifixion. He
styles it thus for the purpose of undervaluing the historicalcharacterof the
narrative, and of suggesting that it owedits origin to the prophetic picture
rather than to the actual fact(so Thoma). There is another sense in which the
statementis true. Unconsciouslythe various concomitants of the suffering of
the Holy One of God were being one by one realized by the Divine Lord. The
synoptists, without reference to the ancient oracle, recordthe fact imperfectly.
John adds what came under his own eye, explains their inadequate
representationof the "lot," and discerns the veritable fulfillment of the
prophecy. The reference in Matthew to this fulfillment of prophecy is
expunged from the text by Tischendorf(8th edit.), Westcottand Herr, and
R.T., on the authority of ‫,א‬ A, B, D, nine uncials and two hundred
manuscripts, numerous versions and Fathers. Thus the fourth evangelistis the
solitary authority for this fulfillment of the prophetic word, and he reveals a
feature which is sometimes denied him by those who try to establish the
Gentile origin of the Gospel. These things therefore the soldiers did. A graphic
and historic touch, corresponding with the method in which Herodotus closed
his accountof the slaughter at Thermopylae. In John's case more was
suggested. While Pilate had announcedto the world that Jesus of Nazareth
was "King of the Jews,"and Caiaphas had declaredthat "it was expedient
that one man should die for the people," the Roman soldiers, without any
knowledge ofHebrew oracles, hadall unconsciouslyfilled up the features of
the suffering Messiahin literal harmony with the ancient prediction. In a

31. commentary on John's Gospelwe cannot here discuss some of the other
impressive features of the Crucifixion, upon which the fourth evangelistis
silent. Matthew, Mark, and Luke all describe a revolting scene of brutal
mockerywhich ridiculed the dying Lord with his helplessness,and charged
him with hypocrisy, scoffedat his having boastedof his Divine Sonship, and of
powerto build the demolished temple in three days - an ominous charge,
which he was so soonto meet. They did not see that they were destroying the
temple of his body, and that he would verily paralyze all their power to crush
his kingdom by building it up at the predestined hour. The greatcry was,
"Come down from the cross, andwe will acceptthy claims, and believe that
thou art ' Son of God.'" This was even a greaterprovocative of his human
soul than that which the devil had suggestedin the wilderness, orwhich he
had endured on the Mountain of Transfiguration(Godet's 'Biblical Studies of
the New Testament'). He knew that he could at once have stepped upwards
from the high mountain on the shining way, and left behind him a perfect and
most gracious memorial and ideal of the blessedlife. But he had a "decease to
accomplish," and he came down to "give his life a ransom for many," to take
all our burden and all our care and all our sin upon him, to lay down his life
that he might take it again(cf. John 10:17). But the question does arise - Has
he not done enough to meet all the case? Has he not been offered up as
certainly as Isaac was when Abraham bound his son upon the altar? Could he
not, might he not, now come down from the cross, having perfectly
consecratedhimself? Would he not by this actmake converts of the
Sanhedrin? and would not tens of thousands at once turn their curses into
jubilant hosannas? The chief priests join in the same taunt, and, according to
Matthew and Mark, even the dying robbers castthe same reproaches in his
teeth. The specialtaunt was, "He savedothers; himself he cannotsave."
Sublimely true, the very hurricane of abuse, as it reaches him, is transformed
into the sweetnessand fragrance ofthe eternallove. He had power in the
desertto make the kingdoms of the world his own, if he would have bowed
down to the prince of this world. He had authority to vanish into the ethereal
home with Moses andElijah. He might have saved himself, but he could not.
He must drink the cup to the final dregs. He must bear the death-penalty
itself. If he had not done this, the sympathy with man had fallen infinitely
below the demands of his own heart. Sin and death would still have been

32. inseparably linked; the curse would not have been broken, nor the sacrifice
been completed. As before Pilate, Herod, and the rest, he was silent. No
murmur, no rebuke, broke from him. The breath of his mouth is as vet no
two-edgedsword. But the penitent brigand, overcome by his majestic
patience, pleads for mercy, and, after the long hours have passed, the cry of
the helpless suffererat his side meets with immediate response, while all the
cruel howling bigots around him could not prevail to draw from him one
syllable of remonstrance!The "To-dayshalt thou be with me in Paradise" is
the royalistof all the words from the cross. According to the hypothesis of the
Tübingen school, they ought unquestionably to have been selectedfor citation
by the author of the Fourth Gospel. The assumption of the existence and
reality of his kingdom, and the admissionin the other world of his conscious
Lordship over the souls of men, is the most explicit and unapproachable claim
that he ever made to Divine prerogatives. Johntakes notice of another most
impressive scene, in which himself had personalconcern, and which affected
the remainder of his own wonderful life. An incident this which the other
evangelists did not presume to touch. It was the Divine expressionof the true
humanity of the Son of God.
Vincent's Word Studies
Vesture (ἱματισμόν)
Clothing, collectively. Rev., garments, for ἱμάτια, is better than raiment,
which is collective, while the word is used of the separate pieces ofclothing.
PRECEPT AUSTIN RESOURCES
CALVIN

33. 23. Then the soldiers. The other Evangelists also mention the parting of
Christ's garments among the soldiers, (Matthew 27:35;Mark 15:24; Luke
23:34.)There were four soldiers who parted among themselves all his
garments, except the coat, which, being without seamcould not be divided,
and therefore they castlots on it. To fix our minds on the contemplationof the
purpose of God, the Evangelists remind us that, in this occurrence also, there
was a fulfillment of Scripture. It may be thought, however, that the passage,
which they quote from Psalm22:19, is inappropriately applied to the subject
in hand; for, though David complains in it that he was exposedas a prey to his
enemies, he makes use of the word garments to denote metaphorically all his
property; as if he had said, in a single word, that "he had been stripped naked
and bare by wickedmen;" and, when the Evangelists disregardthe figure,
they depart from the natural meaning of the passage. Butwe ought to
remember, in the first place, that the psalm ought not to be restrictedto
David, as is evident from many parts of it, and especiallyfrom a clause in
which it is written, I will proclaim thy name among the Gentiles, (Psalm
22:22)which must be explained as referring to Christ. We need not wonder,
therefore, if that which was faintly shadowedout in David is beheld in Christ
with all that superior clearness whichthe truth ought to have, as compared
with the figurative representationof it.
Let us also learn that. Christ was stripped of his garments, that he might
clothe us with righteousness;that his nakedbody was exposedto the insults of
men, that we may appearin glory before the judgment-seat of God. As to the
allegoricalmeaning to which some men have tortured this passage,by making
it mean, that heretics tear Scripture in pieces, it is too far-fetched; though I
would not objectto such a comparisonas this, --that, as the garments of
Christ were once divided by ungodly soldiers, so, in the present day, there are
perverse men who, by foreign inventions, tear the whole of the Scripture, with
which Christ is clothed, in order that he may be manifested to us. But the
wickednessofthe Papists, accompaniedby shocking blasphemy againstGod,
is intolerable. They tell us, that Scripture is torn to pieces by heretics, but that
the coat-- that is, the Church -- remains entire; and thus they endeavorto
prove that, without paying any attention to the authority of Scripture, the

34. unity of faith consists in the mere title of the Church; as if the unity of the
Church were itself founded on any thing else than the authority of Scripture.
When, therefore, they separate faith from Scripture, so that it may continue to
be attachedto the Church alone, by such a divorce they not only strip Christ
of his garments, but tear in pieces his body by shocking sacrilege.And though
we should admit what they maintain, that the coatwithout seamis a figure of
the Church, they will be very far from gaining their point: for it will still
remain to be proved, that the Church is placed under their authority, of which
they show no sign whatever.
ADAM CLARKE
Verse 23
To every soldiera part - So it appears there were four soldiers employed in
nailing him to and rearing up the cross.
The coatwas without seam- Severalhave seriouslydoubted whether this can
be literally understood, as they imagine that nothing with sleeves,etc. canbe
woven without a seam. But Baun, de Vest. Sacer. Heb. l. 1, c. 16, has proved,
not only that such things were done by the ancients, and are still done in the
east, but himself gota loom made, on which these kinds of tunics, vents,
sleeves, andall, were woven in one piece. See much on this subject in Calmet.
The clothes of a Hindoo are always without a seam;and the Brahmins would
not wearclothes that were otherwise made. Besides,the Hindoos have no
regular tailors.
Our Lord was now in the grand office of high priest, and was about to offer
the expiatory victim for the sin of the world. And it is worthy of remark that

35. the very dress he was in was similar to that of the Jewishhigh priest. The
following is the description given of his dress by Josephus, Ant. b. iii. c. 7, s. 4:
"Now this coat(χιτων ) was not composedof two pieces, norwas it sewed
togetherupon the shoulders and sides, but it was one long vestment, so woven
as to have an opening for the neck;not an oblique one, but parted all along
the back and breast; it was also parted where the hands were to come out." A
little before, the same author says, that "the high priest had a long robe of a
blue color, which hung down to the feet, and was put over all the rest." It is
likely that this was the same with that upper garment which the soldiers
divided among them, it being probably of a costlystuff. I may just add here,
that I knew a woman who knit all kinds of clothes, even to the sleeves and
button holes, without a seam; and have seensome of the garments which she
made; that the thing is possible I have the fullest proof. For an explanation of
χιτων and ἱματιονwhich we translate cloak, and coat, see the note on Luke
6:29.
Verse 24
That the scripture might be fulfilled - These words are found in the common
printed text, in Matthew 27:35;but they are omitted by ABDEFGHKLMSU,
Mt. BHV, 150 others;the principal versions, Chrysostom, Titus Bost.,
Euthymius, Theophylact, Origen, Hilary, Augustin, Juven. See Griesbach's
secondedition. But in the text of John they are not omitted by one MS.,
version, or ancientcommentator.
The words are takenfrom Psalm 22:18, where it appears they were spoken
prophetically of this treatment which Jesus received, upwards of a thousand
years before it took place!
But it should be remarkedthat this form of speech, which frequently occurs,
often means no more than that the thing so fell out that such a portion of
Scripture may be exactlyapplied to it.

36. BOB DEFFINBAUGH
Loyalty and Lottery or Four Soldiers and Four Saints
(19:23-27)
23 Now when the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothing and made
four shares, one for eachsoldier, and the tunic remained. (Now the tunic was
seamless,174wovenfrom top to bottom as a single piece.)24 So the soldiers
said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but throw dice to see who will get it.”
This took place to fulfill the scripture that says, “Theydivided up my
garments among them, and for my clothing they castlots.” So the soldiers did
these things. 25 Now standing beside Jesus’cross were his mother, his
mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 So when
Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing there, he said
to his mother, “Woman, look, here is your son!” 27 He then said to his
disciple, “Look, here is your mother!” From that very time the disciple took
her into his own home.
It is John’s Gospelwhich most emphatically underscores the fulfillment of
prophecy in the events surrounding our Lord’s death. Three times in our text
John specificallyinforms his readers that prophecy has been fulfilled (verses
24, 36 and 37). When our Lord’s garments are divided according to lot, John
informs us that this fulfills the prophecy of Psalm 22:18:“They divided My
garments among them, And for My clothing they castlots” (NKJV).
Translators have a choice to make at verse 25. They must decide just how
many women John is referring to here. As you can see, the translators of the
NET Bible (like most others) have opted to identify four women, though the

37. mere movement of a comma could reduce this number to three. I believe that
John does mean to specifyfour women here. There are a number of reasons
for doing so, which we shall not belabor at this point. I am inclined to read
verses 23-27 in a way that contrasts the four soldiers at the foot of the cross
with the four saintly women who are also standing by their Lord.
JOHN GILL
Verse 23
Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus,....The crucifixion of Christ
was at the requestand solicitationof the Jews, was orderedby the Roman
governor, and performed by the Roman soldiers;the sinful men into whose
hands Christ was to be delivered:
took his garments; which they had stripped his body of, crucifying him naked;
as what properly belongedto them, it being usual then, as now, for
executioners to have the clothes of the persons they put to death; these were
his inner garments:
and made four parts, to every soldier a part; for it seems there were four of
them concernedin his execution, and who were set to watch him:
and also his coat;or upper garment;
now the coatwas without seam, wovenfrom the top throughout: in such an
one the Jews sayF2 Mosesministered: and of this sort and make was the robe

38. of the high priest, said to be of "wovenwork", Exodus 28:32 upon which
Jarchiremarks, ְ‫אׁש‬ ‫,טחמב‬ "and not with a needle";it was all woven, and
without any seam:and so the Jews sayF3in generalof the garments of the
priests:
"the garments of the priests are not made of needlework, but of wovenwork;
as it is said, Exodus 28:32. Abai says, it is not necessary(i.e. the use of the
needle) but for their sleeves;according to the tradition, the sleeve ofthe
garments of the priests is wovenby itself, and is joined to the garment, and
reaches to the palm of the hand.'
So that this was an entire woven garment from top to bottom, excepting the
sleeves, whichwere wove separatelyand sewedto it; of this kind also was his
coat, which JacobIehudah Leon saysF4,
"was a stately woollencoatof a skycolour, wholly woven, all of one piece,
without seam, without sleeves;'
such a garment Christ our greatHigh Priestwore, which had no seamin it,
but was a curious piece of texture from top to bottom. The very learned
BrauniusF5 says, he has seensuch garments in Holland, and has given fine
cuts of them, and also of the frame in which they are wrought. What authority
Nonnus had to call this coata black one, or others for saying it was the work
of the Virgin Mary, I know not.
Verse 24
They said therefore among themselves,....Whenthey saw what a curious piece
of work it was, and that it was pity to divide it into parts: and besides, that it

39. would have been rendered entirely useless thereby:they moved it to each
other, saying,
let us not rend it, but castlots for it, whose it shall be, that the Scripture might
be fulfilled: not that they knew anything of the Scripture, or had any intention
of fulfilling it hereby, but they were so directed by the providence of God, to
take such a step; whereby was literally accomplishedthe passagein Psalm
22:18
which saith, they parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did
castlots. The whole psalm is to be understood of the Messiah, notof David, as
some doF6;many passagesin it cannot be applied to him, such as speak of the
dislocationof his bones, the piercing of his hands and feet, and this of parting
his garments, and casting lots for his vesture: all which had their literal
accomplishmentin Jesus:nor canit be understood of Esther, as it is by some
JewishF7 interpreters;there is not one word in it that agreeswith her, and
particularly, not the clause here cited; and there are some things in it which
are manifestly spokenof a man, and not of a woman, as Psalm 22:8 nor can
the whole body of the Jewishnation, or the congregationofIsraelbe intended,
as others sayF8;since it is clear, that a single personis spokenof throughout
the psalm, and who is distinguished from others, from his brethren, from the
congregation, from the seedof Jacoband Israel, Psalm22:22 and indeed, no
other than the Messiahcanbe meant; he is pointed at in the very title of it,
Aijeleth Shahar, which words, in what way soeverthey are rendered, agree
with him: if by "the morning daily sacrifice", as they are by the Targum; he is
the Lamb of God, who continually takes awaythe sins of the world; and very
fitly is he so calledin the title of a psalm, which speaks so much of his
sufferings and death, which were a propitiatory sacrifice forthe sins of his
people: or by the morning star, as othersF9 interpret them; Christ is the
bright and morning star, the day spring from on high, the sun of
righteousness, andlight of the world: or by "the morning help", as by the
Septuagint; Christ had early help from God in the morning of his infancy,

40. when Herod soughthis life, and in the day of salvationof his people;and early
in the morning was he raisedfrom the dead, and had glory given him: or by
"the morning hind", which seems bestof all, to which he may be compared, as
to a roe or hart, in Song of Solomon2:9 for his love and loveliness, and for his
swiftness and readiness in appearing for the salvation of his people; and for
his being hunted by Herod in the morning of his days; and being encompassed
by those dogs, the Scribes and Pharisees, Judas and the band of soldiers;see
Psalm22:16. The first words of the psalm were spokenby Jesus the true
Messiah, whenhe hung upon the cross, and are truly applied to himself; his
reproaches and sufferings endured by him there, are particularly and exactly
describedin it, and agree with no other; the benefits which the people of God
were to enjoy, in consequence ofhis sufferings, and the conversionof the
Gentiles spokenof in it, which is peculiar to the days of the Messiah, show to
whom it belongs. The Jews "themselves" are obligedto interpret some parts
of it concerning him; they sometimes sayF11,that by Aijeleth Shahar is meant
the Shekinah, a name that well suits with the MessiahJesus,who tabernacled
in our nature; the Psalm 22:26 is applied by Jarchi to the time of the
redemption, and the days of the Messiah;so that upon the whole, this passage
is rightly cited with respectto the Messiah, and is truly said to be fulfilled by
this circumstance, ofthe soldiers doing with his garments as they did:
these things therefore the soldiers did; because they were before determined
and predicted that they should be done: and therefore they were disposedand
directed by a superior influence, in perfectagreementwith the freedom of
their wills to do these things. The whole of this accountmay be spiritually
applied. The Scriptures are the garments of Christ; or, as a prince of Anhalt
said, the swaddling clothes in which the infant of Bethlehem was wrapped;
these exhibit and show forth Christ in his glory, and by which he is known
and bore witness to, and are pure and incorrupt, fragrant, and savory.
Heretics are the soldiers that rend and tearthe Scriptures in pieces, part
them, add unto them, or detractfrom them; who corrupt, pervert, wrest, and
misapply them; but truth is the seamless coat;it is all of a piece, is of God,
there is nothing human in it; though it may be played with, betrayed, sold, or
denied, it cannot be destroyed, but is, and will be preservedby divine

41. providence: or the human nature of Christ is the vesture, with which his
divine person was as it were covered, was put on and off, and on againas a
garment; is of God, and not man; is pure and spotless;and though his soul
and body were parted asunder for a while, this could never be parted from his
divine person: or else the righteousness ofChrist may be signified by this
robe, which is often compared to one, because it is put on the saints, and they
are clothedwith it: it covers, keepswarm, protects, beautifies, and adorns
them; this is seamless,and all of a piece, and has nothing of men's works and
services tackedunto it; is enjoyed by a divine lot by some men, and not all,
and even such as have been sinful and ungodly; it is pure, perfect and will last
for ever.
RON TEED
John 19:23-24 NAS:
23 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took His outer
garments and made four parts, a part to every soldier and also the tunic;
now the tunic was seamless,wovenin one piece.
24 So they saidto one another, "Let us not tear it, but castlots for it, to
decide whose it shall be"; this was to fulfill the Scripture: "They Divided
My outer garments among them, and for My clothing they castlots."
At most Roman executions, the executionsquad included a centurion and four
soldiers to
assisthim. The soldiers were permitted to divide among themselves whatever
personal

42. belongings were seizedby the soldiers when the criminal was arrested. So
these soldiers
Village Church of WheatonJohn 19:17-30 February 1, 2009
©2009 Ronand Betty Teed www.villagechurchofwheaton.org 5
divided up the only things that Jesus possessed, His personalclothing, which
very likely
would have included an undergarment, an outer garment, sandals, a girdle,
and a robe.
The four men eachtook one piece of clothing, and then they threw the dice for
Jesus’
robe. This fulfilled the prophecy in Psalm22:18 when David wrote: “They
divide my
garments among them, And for my clothing they castlots.”
RAY STEDMAN
When the soldiers had crucified Jesus they took his garments and made four
parts, one for eachsoldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was without seam,
woven from top to bottom; so they saidto one another, "Let us not tear it, but
castlots for it to see whose it shall be." This was to fulfil the scripture,
"They parted my garments among them,
and for my clothing they castlots."
So the soldiers did this; (John 19:23-25a RSV)

43. Two others were crucified with Jesus to fulfil the word of Isaiah53, "He was
numbered with the transgressors,"(Isaiah53:12 KJV). John now quotes from
Psalm22, that amazing prediction of One dying upon a cross who had been
pierced and whose garments were divided among his murderers. John does
not saythis, but the clearimplication here is that when the garments of Jesus
were divided among the soldiers that meant that Jesus was hanging stark
nakedto the public gaze. The apostle remarks upon the factthat this was a
clearfulfillment of Scripture.
John's focus in this accountis not on these events, but on the words of Jesus
from the cross. Fromthe other gospels we learn that there were seventhings
he said, but out of them John choosesonlythree words that reveal
tremendous things about the heart of Jesus as he hung on the cross:
CHARLES SIMEON
CASTING LOTS FOR OUR LORD’S VESTURE
John 19:23-24. Thenthe soldiers, whenthey had crucified Jesus, took his
garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat:now
the coatteas without seam, wovenfrom the top throughout. They said
therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but castlots for it, whose it
shall be: that the Scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my
raiment among them, and for my vesture they did castlots. These things
therefore the soldiers did.
ON reading the history of our blessedLord, we cannotbut be struck with the
extreme simplicity with which the most important circumstances ofit are
related. The historians never go out of their way to impress things on our

44. minds; but leave truth to speak for itself. Even when they come to the last
scene ofhis life, where we might have expected them to dilate upon his
sufferings in order to affectour hearts, they pass over the whole transaction
without a comment, and contentthemselves with barely mentioning the fact,
that “he was crucified.” But, while they seemalmost unfeeling towards their
Divine Master, they specifyvery minutely those occurrenceswhichmarked
the accomplishmentof prophecy: and, as if indifferent about the agonies
which he was enduring, they descendto tell us, how the soldiers who had
nailed him to the cross occupiedthemselves in the disposalof his garments.
We should be ready to disregard this record as uninteresting and
uninstructive: but no circumstance that took place at that time should be
uninteresting to us; nor will this, if duly considered, be uninstructive. On the
contrary, this very record will give us an insight into some of the deepest
points that can be offered to our consideration.
It will give us an insight into,
I. The nature of prophecy—
[Prophecy springs not from man’s conjectures,but from a Divine revelation
[Note:2 Peter 1:21.]. The prophets, so far from being the source and authors
of their own predictions, could not even understand them, any farther than
they were illuminated by that very Spirit by whose immediate agencythey
were inspired [Note: 1 Peter1:10-11.]. In some cases they were not even
conscious thatthey foretold any thing [Note:John 11:49-52.]. Perhaps this
was the case much more frequently than is generally supposed. Through the
greatestpart of the psalm quoted in our text, David spake primarily
respecting himself, though in some parts he was “movedby the Holy Ghost”
to speak what had no reference atall but to the Messiah, whomhe typified.
That he did not understand his own expressions, we canhave no doubt. He
might perhaps be consciousthat he was uttering that which should, in some

45. way or other, have its accomplishment in the Messiah:but he had no clew in
his ownexperience to lead him to the interpretation of his own words: he
never had his “hands and feet pierced;” much less had he ever his garments
disposedof in the way he mentions [Note:Psalms 22:16;Psalms 22:18.]. Why
then, it may be said, did he so express himself, that nobody could understand
him, till the event had actually taken place? We answer, it is of the very
nature of prophecy to be obscure;yea, it is altogetheressentialto the designs
of prophecy: for suppose a prophecy to be perfectly clear, the friends of
religion would be ready to exert themselves to fulfil it, as the enemies of
religion would be to counteractit. Thus, if it were not accomplished, the
religion which it was to support would be calledan imposture; and, if
accomplished, its accomplishmentwould be consideredas the effect only of
human prudence. This is evident, from what actually took place in relation to
the prophecies respecting the kingly office of Christ, and his resurrection. The
people who saw that he could feedmultitudes with very small provision, and
heal the sick of whatever malady they had, and even raise the dead,
concluded, that he was the king whom they expectedto reign over the whole
world; and therefore soughtto make him a king by force:nor could he
prevent it, but by withdrawing miraculously from their presence. Onthe
other hand, his enemies, who had heard him say that he would rise againthe
third day, seta guard around his grave on purpose to prevent it. In this
manner persons would have actedin reference to all the prophecies, if all had
been equally clear:and thus prophecy, as a mean of establishing the true
religion, would be supersededby a continued series of miracles;and
Christianity would lose its strongestevidence and support.
The true nature of prophecy is not anywhere more clearly seenthan in the
passagebefore us:. for, till it was accomplished, no human being could
understand its import; nor after its accomplishment could any one mistake it.]
II. The origin of Christianity—

46. [Let any one who imagines Christianity to be a mere human contrivance, ask
himself, whether any person, or setof persons, wishing to impose a religion
upon the world, would be foolishenough to predict, that its founder’s clothes
should be disposedof in so strange a way? The event must he so entirely out of
their own power, that they would never subjecttheir imposture to such a test
as this. But this event was predicted a thousand years before it came to pass;
and the psalm in which it was contained was universally acknowledgedby the
Jews to refer to their Messiah.
How then can we accountfor its accomplishment? Is there any appearance of
contrivance in the matter? None at all. The Jews put Christ to death for
pretending to be their Messiah;and therefore would not at the same time
contrive a plan that should prove him the Messiah. Besides, the thing was not
done by Jews, but heathens;who were perfectly unconscious of doing any
thing worthy of attention. If Jesus had not happened to have a particular kind
of garment, which was woven without a seam, and had probably been made a
present to him by some of those womenwho ministered unto him, they would
have had no more reasonfor casting lots for that, than for the other which
they divided among them. And, after all, he had but just before been stript of
his clothing, not only to be scourged, but that, being arrayed in mock majesty,
he might be made an objectof universal derision; and in that dress had
sentence ofcondemnation been passedupon him: so that, if God had not
signally interposed to incline them to put his own garment upon him again,
this prophecy had never been fulfilled. See then how minute was the
prophecy, and how exactits accomplishment! If they had castlots at all, the
probability was that the whole would have formed but two lots, and that none
would be torn in pieces:but as God ordained it to be, so it was;and from
thence arises anindisputable evidence, that the religion which was to be
confirmed by it, was from God. Indeed, the more insignificant the transaction
itself was, the more decisive is the proof arising from it.

47. In confirmation of this statementwe would call your attention to the very
words of our text; where the fulfilling of the Scripture is said to be the
primary objectof that arrangement:and againit is added, “These things
therefore the soldiers did.” We are not to understand from this, that the
soldiers had this object in view; (for there was not any thing further from
their minds:) but God inclined their minds to it for that end. Every thing
which the Scriptures had spokenrespecting the Messiah, must needs be
fulfilled; and therefore this, as well as every other point, must be
accomplishedin him [Note:Luke 22:37. John 10:35.].]
III. The government of the universe—
[“Known unto God are all his works from the foundation of the world [Note:
Acts 15:18.].” Nothing was left to chance:but every thing was both foreseen
and foreordained.
It may be askedthen, are we mere machines? I answer, no. God leaves us free
agents;but makes use of our free agencyfor the accomplishmentof his own
purposes. This he did in reference to his Son. There was not any thing “done
to him, which God’s hand, and God’s counsel, had not determined before to
be done [Note: Acts 4:28; Acts 13:27;Acts 13:29.].” Nevertheless, allwho bore
any part in those transactions, were perfectlyfree in every thing they did.
None were compelled by any overbearing power; but all followedthe bent of
their own minds. Judas was actuatedby covetousness;the priests by envy;
Pilate by fear; and the soldiers, who castlots for one garment, whilst they
divided the other in four parts, actedfrom a regardto their own personal
interests. But God made use of their respective weaknessesforthe
accomplishmentof his own designs.

48. It is in this manner that God is carrying on his plans on the greattheatre of
the world. Ambition stimulates one; jealousyrestrains another; fear
paralyzes, or divisions distract, others: but by all, God works his sovereign
will, and renders all the dispositions and pursuits of men subservient to his
own eternal purpose. He uses the greatconquerors now, preciselyas he did
Sennacheribof old, for the effecting of his own unerring counsels. “Howbeit,
they mean not so, neither doth their heart think so;but it is in their heart to
destroy, and to cut off nations not a few [Note:Isaiah10:7.]:” but “they are
only his rod, and the staff of his indignation,” which he will break and cast
into the fire, as soonas they have executedtheir appointed task [Note:Isaiah
10:5-6; Isaiah10:15-16.].
It is thus also that God governs his Church. The very people who most labour
to destroy it, are sometimes made unwilling instruments of its enlargement.
This was particularly the case in the persecutionthat took place after the
death of Stephen; when God rendered the scattering ofthe Christians the
means of diffusing the knowledge ofthe Gospelthroughout the world [Note:
Acts 8:3-4.]. And every individual, if he could truce back all the events of his
former life, would find, that many circumstances, as little connectedwith
religion as the curiosity of Zaccheus [Note:Luke 19:2-9.], or the dishonesty of
Onesimus [Note:Phil. ver. 10–18.], have been overruled by a gracious
Providence for good.
How little did these soldiers think of being witnesses forChrist! As little do we
think that every thing, howeversmall or casual, is ordered of God, and made
a necessarylink in the chain of his eternal counsels. To everything he assigns
its proper limit; “Hitherto shall thou come, but no further.” Men devise their
way, “but the Lord directeth their steps:” he draws them imperceptibly, but
effectually; yet not as stocks andstones, but by means of their own
understanding and will: “He draws them with the cords of a man, and with
the bands of love [Note:Hosea 11:4.].”]

49. It is not howeverfor the formation of theories only that this subject is useful:
it is equally beneficialin a practicalview.
We may Learn from it,
1. To adore God for his mercies to us in times past—
[Who is it that has made us to differ from the most abandoned on earth, or the
most miserable in hell? Is it not the Lord? and have not many of the occasions
on which he has extended mercy to us been as much unsought for, and at the
time unnoticed, as if we had been utterly independent of him? Let us
remember then to whom we are indebted for all the temporal and spiritual
blessings we enjoy: and let every thing be improved by us “for the praise of
the glory of his grace” — — —]
2. To seek his guidance and protectionin future—
[Who can tell what consequencesmay ensue from one single step? perhaps the
eternal preservationor ruin of our souls. Assuredly, if left to ourselves one
moment, we shall fall and perish. But God sees effects in their causes;and in
his eyes eternity itself is but a single point. In his hands then we shall be safe.
Whateverenemies may menace our destruction, he will ride in the whirlwind
and direct the storm. Only let us not lean to our own understanding, but in all
our ways acknowledgehim, and he will “never leave us till he has fulfilled all
the goodthings that he has spokenconcerning us” — — —]
3. To submit with cheerfulness to any dispensations, howeveradverse they
may appear—

50. [Who that recollects the testimony of Josephafterall his multiplied afflictions,
will not be ashamedof giving wayto impatience under trials? “God sentme
here before you,” says he to his brethren, “to preserve life.” Above all, who
that reflects on the issue of our Saviour’s sufferings, will repine at being made
a partakerof them? We have the promises of God on our side, “and the
Scripture cannot be broken.” We have our appointed measure to fill up, as
well as he: and the termination of our trials will resemble his. Let us wait then
the Lord’s leisure. If we see not distinctly what his design is in this or that
affliction, let it suffice, that “what we know not now, we shall know
hereafter.” We have already seenabundant reasonin past times to say, “It is
goodfor me that I have been afflicted:” and the time is coming when we shall
say the same in reference to our present trials. We shall see, that they were a
necessarylink in the chain of Providence, for the advancing of his glory in our
salvation.]
A. W. PINK
"Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments and
made four parts, to every soldier a part" (John 19:23). "The soldiers having
now finished their bloody work, having nailed our Lord to the cross, put the
title over His head, and rearedthe cross onend, proceededto do what they
probably always did—to divide the clothes of the criminal among themselves.
In most countries the clothes of a person put to death by the law are the
perquisite of the executioner. So it was with our Lord’s clothes. They had
most likely stripped our Lord naked before nailing His hands and feetto the
cross, and had laid His clothes on one side till after they had finished their
work. They now turned to the clothes, and, as they had done many a time on
such occasions,proceededto divide them" (Bishop Ryle). There were four
soldiers;some think this emblemizes the four quarters of the Gentiles’world.

51. It seems clearthat they ripped His severalgarments to pieces, so as to divide
them in equal parts. How this, once more, makes manifestthe depths of
humiliation into which the Son of God descended!
"And also his coat;now the coatwas without seam, wovenfrom the top
throughout. They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast
lots for it, whose it shall be" (John 19:23, 24). The deeper significance ofthis is
not difficult to perceive. Garments in Scripture, speak of conduct, as a display
of character—cf. Psalm109:18;1 Peter5:5, etc. Now, the Savior’s "coat," His
outer garment, was of one piece—intimating the unity, the unbroken
perfection of His ways. Unlike our "garments," which are, at best, so much
patchwork, His robe was "without seam." Moreover, itwas "wovenfrom the
top throughout"—the mind of Him above controlled His every action!This
"coat" or"robe" was a costly one, so owned even by the soldiers, for they
declined to tear it to pieces. It spoke ofthe righteousness ofChrist, the "robe
of righteousness" (Isa. 61:10), the "best robe" (Luke 15) with which the
Father clothes eachprodigalson. Forthis "robe" the soldiers castlots, and we
are told in Proverbs 16:33 that "The lot is castinto the lap, but the whole
disposing thereof is of the Lord." Thus the actionof these soldiers declares
that the "best robe" is not left to the caprice of man’s will, but the Lord
Himself has determined whose it shall be! Note another contrast;the sinful
first Adam was clothed by God; the sinless lastAdam was unclothed by
wickedmen.
"Thatthe scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my raiment
among them, and for my vesture they did castlots. These things therefore the
soldiers did" (John 19:24). Three things come out plainly: First, that God
Himself was masterof this whole situation, directing every detail of it to the
outworking of His eternal counsels. Second, that no word of God’s canfail. A
thousand years before hand it had been predicted that these soldiers should
both divide the Savior’s raiment among them, and also castlots for His
vesture or coat. Literally was this fulfilled to the very letter. Third, that the

52. One who hung there on the Tree was, beyond a shadow of doubt, the Messiah
of Israel, the One of whom all the prophets had written.
PHIL NEWTON
John ties the prophetic words of the Old Testamentto the details of the
crucifixion by quoting Psalm 22:18, "They saidtherefore to one another,
"Let us not tear it, but castlots for it, to decide whose it shall be"; that the
Scripture might be fulfilled, "THEY DIVIDED MY OUTER GARMENTS
AMONG THEM, AND FOR MY CLOTHING THEY CAST LOTS."
Therefore the soldiers did these things." Obviously, the Roman soldiers had
no idea that they were fulfilling Old TestamentScripture! They just followed
the normal pattern of dividing the victims clothing among the executioners,
while John saw this fulfilling the prophetic description of a small detail at the
crucifixion spokenthrough David a thousand years earlier.
In studying the other Gospels, it is clearthat the writers saw the details of the
crucifixion prophesied earlierin the Old Testament. While the scope of our
study today is not to look at all these passages,it does point to a very
important truth. The problem of man's enmity with Godhas been present
since the fall in Adam. God Himself promised reconciliationand salvation
through His own provision. All of the attempts at self-righteousnessby the
Jews adherence to the demands of the Law was to show humanity that none of
us are savedby our own righteousness. Only GodHimself can save those
under His judgment. And He has accomplishedthis through the sufficiency of
the death of Jesus Christ.

53. THERE ARE TWO VIEWS OF THIS ISSUE
1. HE WAS NAKED
2. HE WAS COVERED
1. HE WAS NAKED
The RealReasonJesus Was Nakedon the Cross
Postedon July 16, 2018
Ethan RenoeEthanRenoe
naked
A couple years ago at my college, a student group put on an event to educate
students about pornography and the sex industry. I pacedthrough it, thinking
I had already seenall this before. The exhibit opened with scientific facts
about the chemicaleffects of pornography on the brain, showing how it
rewires our mental pathways to crave porn.
Heard them before.
Then there was a room of testimonies, people sharedhow porn had damaged
their lives and relationships. As sincere and moving as these stories were, I

54. had heard them before too. I mean, these addiction stories were basicallymy
own.
But then we moved to the last room.
On the wall was a painting. Eye level. About 4×3 feet. At first glance, it
seemedlike a typical crucifix painting. There hung Jesus on the cross,
bleeding and ashamed.
Become A Contributor
But then you lookeda little lower.
And then you realized that he was not wearing any garment to politely cover
the Savior’s genitalia. There was no loincloth to protect the Lord from
disgrace.
It was jarring to realize I was looking at Jesus’penis.
In many ways, the fact that artists have typically coveredJesus up while
hanging on the cross has done a disservice to our perception of His scope of
atonement. We are used to seeing Him, battered and bloody, yes, but at least
with a shred of decencyleft and a towelwrapped around his midsection.
One of my theologyprofessors wouldalways saywe postmodern people do
theologylike this: And then he would crouch and coverup his crotch, like an

55. embarrassedchild who had jumped out of the bath and been caught by the
babysitter. We will talk about God in relation to anything but our genitals.
We try to ‘clean up’ the crucifixion.
Today I got curious and checkedformyself. Sure enough, all four gospels tell
the same story:
Matthew 27:35 When they had crucified him, they divided up his clothes by
casting lots.
Mark 15:24 And they crucified him. Dividing up his clothes, they castlots to
see what eachwould get.
Luke 23:34 Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they
are doing.” And they divided up his clothes by casting lots.
John 19:23 When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and
divided them into four parts, one part for eachsoldier;also his tunic.
Historians have pointed out that a crucifixion was not only a torturous
execution, but also a shameful humiliation. That’s why victims would always
be crucified naked:One last insult to injury.
Now, why is it so important that Jesus was crucified naked?